Great Conductors: Strange People?

I just watched John Freeman's interview of the great Otto Klemperer, for the nth time. While the interview is mostly shallow and the questions sometimes downright silly (are you happy? Do you like American comfort...") it got me thinking.

Can a great conductor be a "normal" person in the conventional sense of the word - i.e. following a 9-5 or 6 job, going out with the kids, attending family lunches on Sundays, watching television and a movie at night, and reading (that's already stretching conventionality) a thriller or two?

Or is it that conductor like Klemperer or his mentor, Mahler, are something of a misfit in the conventional sense and losing much of the rites of conventionality gain that much more in energy, resilience, and brilliance to devote to their talent?

I think it is the latter, at least with many of the great conductors of the early and mid 20th century. There are the superstars of course: the pioneering maestro v Karajan springs to mind as does the younger and equally ubiquitous, Dudamel. The stardom -- which in and of itself is most welcome for having boosted the music and made it and its interpreters far more globally popular than ever before, is one thing,. But is there much more to it than that -- i.e. genius is an infinite capacity for hard work and a little extra.

And great conductors are great because they bring out that little extra extra, they exemplify what it is to take a work of genius and take it further.

That must be it, I think.

Or I wish to think...