The word you want for your creative genius stereotype is:"Definition of THRAWNchiefly Scottish: lacking in pleasing or attractive qualities: asa : perverse, recalcitrant".Mind you, that Scottish genius James Clerk Maxwell was, on the contrary, a most agreeable chap - one of the few leading theoretical physicists who were.
@d - Thrawn is one way of being a genius - but there are others. Other Scottish geniuses such as Adam Smith and David Hume were not thrawn, were they?Agreeable people do find it very hard to be a genius, unless they happen to find themselves in a social mileu which does not disapprove of the antisocial aspects of genius-type behaviour.Maxwell was perhaps lucky in finding himself in a time and place where that was the case - where he could follow his own evaluations and disregard conventional wisdom without being regarded as arrogant, offensive, aggressive, carzy... but these times and places are exceptional. Geniuses ultimately have to ignore other people who disagree with them and wil not be convinced (ignore them as much as possible) and just get on with it. Often that necessary degree of autonomy goes with a number of antisocial/ egotistical traits.
Ah well, I have long espoused the idea that it may depend on what you are studying. Smith and Hume were interested in humans in society - if you are going to say genius-type things about that it must help enormously that you have lots of experience of human company, especially in circumstances where they are reasonably relaxed, uninhibited, reflective, talkative, and so on. Smith and Hume did.Sir Isaac, on the other hand, was interested (inter alia) in Physics, and the Maths necessary to pursue his physical interests. It didn't matter if he was thrawn - in fact it may have helped, since he presumably didn't linger over port.It's Jimmy Clerk Maxwell who needs explanation - unlike, say, Einstein, he appears not to have been a ruthless, selfish man pretending to be otherwise - he really does seem to have been good at rubbing along with people.
@d - could you recommend a biography of Maxwell which gives a good impression of his character (and work)?
The only one I've read is Basil Mahon's "The Man Who Changed Everything".Otherwise I've based my remarks on tales I've heard.
I should emphasise that I'm not saying that Maxwell was all hail-fellow-well-met. But he was capable of genuine, long-lasting friendships, took boyhood ribbing well, and did not get into any of those A-hates-B-and-it's-mutual stishies that litter scientific biographies.