Besides, you are incredibly interesting, which lots of people aren’t.

And you’re a compelling writer. I’ve just spent 45 minutes reading your blog and enjoying your stories (even if I won’t be making artichoke stuff anytime soon).

I can’t speak to coding, but, unlike athletics, music and art are more a question of vision, style, and technique than talent and ability. Take folk music for example, which is hardly a measure of who strums the best or writes the most cliché lyric about heartbreak. So maybe I’m hanging out in a safer arena that’s more about expression than excellence. I like jazz because it seems like a genre with the value of each of those things is in balance.

I agree that there are probably a lot of people who can kick your ass on a bike w/ only a quarter of the training. But to be the best or near the best at something, you have to put in some effort, even for those people. There are still going to be people that can do better because they are equivalently innately abled, and put in more work, no? I.e., the amount of effort you inject is really the only thing you have control over, so you might as well make the most of that dimension. Oh and I guess you have some control over which domain you want to play in.

I think the argument I short circuited earlier is that if you only believe in talent as an innate ability then you’ll give up before you ever realize it, because even if you’re hugely talented, you’re still going to suck at the beginning. Which is maybe why so many of us just give up on trying more difficult/creative endeavours and watch TV, which everyone can be the best at.

The other thing I took away from the Tharp book (and I didn’t agree with everything in it either), is that by applying a shitton of practice at something, you will be in a better position to actually act on your talent when the time presents itself. The typical example for me is photography- I can think I have a good eye all I want, and some innate ability to see things better than everyone else. But if I don’t put the work in to learn the rest of the craft, the tools et cetera, then when an opportunity presents itself I won’t be able to take advantage of it to realize my vision (mechanically setting up correct exposure or whatever). Granted you could say that if you were a genius at something, then things like exposure don’t matter and the effect is intended….

Some musicians can’t develop the same technique in terms of rhythm or feel no matter how much they practice or who they study with. Other folks just can’t get the knack for improv. Some people don’t end up finding all that much success as even recreational musicians no matter what they do. Even the folks in my own jazz combo cut in various ways along these lines.

Abilities like this vary across all disciplines. Having the most reps and the best work ethic yields rewards in some areas, but there are different abilities, different strengths and weaknesses, different hands we’re all dealt. I must be misunderstanding something – I’m shocked that there is any serious consideration given to “hard work” as some uber trump card. Certainly hard work is required to be “the best you can be”, but everyone has limiters.

I’m the same height and weight as J.J. Redick and Usain Bolt. Would Tharp maintain that any of us could have been the fastest man ever to have lived? I have a friend who kicks my ass on the bike while not putting in a quarter of the training time I do. He’s just faster than me. Can’t play guitar worth a damn, either.

Doing things that are meaningful and rewarding, making a difference, celebrating and leveraging your strengths while exploring and undergirding your weaknesses – that’s your charge no matter what you’re good at or what you enjoy. But don’t tell me there’s no such thing as talent. Talent is all around us and appreciating talent, beauty, and elegance helps us stay open to possibilities in our own lives for growth and development.

The gist of it is that what we currently think of as talent boils down to having the interest and drive to practice long enough to have the accumulated experience to make it seem like you have talent. Kind of circular I know, but that is what you get from our current crazy definition of the word, where we prize an imagined innate ability when we see it in others because it lets us off the hook for being lazy ourselves.

Also I’d agree with David. Aside from nitpicky mechanical stuff that an editor could fix, I enjoy reading what you post here which in my books makes you a good writer.