does natural talent exist?
Sergei Parajanov once gave an interesting response to that question.
There are two limiting factors with regard to greatness: talent and effort (let’s say intelligent effort). Possible scenarios:
1. Super talented individual+no effort=not great
2. no talent+great effort=not great
3. Super talented+great effort=great
1 and 2 could produce quite good results. Also, an individual with decent (not super) level of talent+a great or someone with quite a bit of talent+decent work ethic could both be great. But the greatest individuals in their field generally fall within #3 (e.g. Michael Jordan).
We are not blank slates.
@ Jazz
You forget "super talented + injury-prone =
"
I agree with Jazz on number 3. I tend to believe natural talent does exist and the trick for all of us is just to find what that talent is. Some people go their whole lifetime looking for their natural talent and never finding it. Some find it immediately, sometimes without even looking.
That isn’t to say you can’t learn how to be good at something. I think you can, especially with a lot of work and effort.
@Matt
Ha! I don’t know if Yao was super talented (I consider Shaq and Hakeem super talented), but he had potential. Sad.
Here’s another question for you guys: can we consider the passion for one particular thing as a kind of talent? I thinking of individuals who can do this one thing (say, play an instrument, or shoot baskets) for hours and hours every day and never seem to tire of it. I mean someone can do this—but necessarily by choice. I’m talking about individuals that can do this out of love.
My natural talent is math. That was obvious when I was two, and I set my career back years by fighting it in college and being a Psychology major instead of Computer Science.
I have enough creative talent to amuse and entertain people, but not enough to get people to give me money. So I draw a webcomic as a hobby which I do not profit from nor do I ever expect to, and I’m applying for programming jobs.
But yes, if I said there was no such thing as natural talent there’d be a line of people to punch me in the face, because I got A’s in math and science classes without studying where other people were working their asses off for B’s.
“But yes, if I said there was no such thing as natural talent there’d be a line of people to punch me in the face, because I got A’s in math and science classes without studying where other people were working their asses off for B’s.”
The reason people would punch you in the face is because they wouldn’t want to be told it’s their own fault they suck at math. People don’t like being held responsible for their shortcomings and faults.
To me it seems that masters (and one should never use this term lightly) are born with it, are naturally talented. But it’s their combination of that inherent talent AND hard work that makes them as esteemed as they are. By “hard work” I don’t exclusively mean formal training of any kind, no film school— none of that— simply trial and error on one’s own terms… learning experiences, a certain persistence. Someone who may be naturally talented but scarcely strains their self, intellectually and physically, doesn’t create anything particularly great or of the stature of a “masterpiece.” And someone without that natural talent but who works very hard will create something good, maybe great, but is usually missing that uncanny sense of understanding and execution that makes a “masterpiece.” They will, however, most likely create something more accomplished than the lazy one with all the natural talent.
Masters? Kubrick, Kieslowski, Tarkovsky, Kurosawa… you know, the usual suspects.
As for Parajanov’s opinion, unfortunately in this day and age one doesn’t have to be “born a director.” There are plenty of hacks. But to be a great director, a “master,” yes… he’s absolutely right.
I think passion can be a driver for effort, but I don’t think it can replace raw natural talent. You can love to something all you want but if you suck at it, you suck at it. I’m talking about people who shoot films with their buddies and love it; work on them for hours, days, months, etc. but all the films are terrible.
I think passion is important because it motivates you to pursue what you love. If you love to do something, you’ll do it no matter what, even for free. That’s a great motivator to get you to put in lots of effort, which has the potential for making you better and better.
. . . also Scampi, I want to point out that “being a director” is not a single skill of even a single set of skills. Different directors can have different skill sets and talents, be better and some apects of the job and not as good as others.
Deleted what I wrote
Yes, but it’s up to us to make the most of it. Directing is one of those things where you can become extremely good at, but those with the “natural ability” to direct, are often the “geniuses” of their era.
I think passion is important because it motivates you to pursue what you love. If you love to do something, you’ll do it no matter what, even for free. That’s a great motivator to get you to put in lots of effort, which has the potential for making you better and better.
Santino — so true! :)
Also what you said about finding your natural talent, or as Jirin put it — accepting it!
Thislife – I think that Jazz articulated perfectly that it’s not JUST natural talent that is needed. I think other factors exist.
I think this is like the question about whether comedy can be learned. Most comedians will say you’re either naturally funny or your not but that if you are naturally funny, you must hone your skill and ability.
My natural talent is shooting with a film/video camera.
From the moment I asked for and got my first Super-8 camera in 1975, it felt so natural to me that my thinking about what to do in college was solved years early.
Ultimately it became video which pays my bills. The feeling is still there.
Where I failed was with music. I could have had great chops today, possibly sight-read and such, but I was lazy. Didn’t want to practice. So, now I am an enthusiastic hack with a good ear, but I still love it dearly. The talent, but not the drive….
One thing: how about people who may be “good” but not “fantastic” and who have the wisdom to see it and work around it?
George Thorogood is, by his own admission in an interview, not a great guitarist, but he has produced more than 30 years of glorious, foot-stomping rock and boogie for people to enjoy. It has fire and soul, yet purists may quibble and drag out the usual guitar gods for comparison.
I’m sure we can quote examples of film directors who have been able to do the same.
Hmmm.. And I would add that it’s not just a love for what you do, or a passion to do it, but the NEED to do it drives you to work hard. It’s like you have to get it out of your system. Time passes, and you make things. When you turn around later, you’re amazed at how much you’ve made, but you’re never really satisfied, what you’ve made is just a consolation at the time you were making it. The act of doing what you do is where you slake your thirst. If you feel this way, I think you have found your talent in the sense of the outlet that most helps you feel a sense of satisfaction in life, that gives you some sort of tangible, if momentary consolation, that there IS something to life.
Hmmm.. And I would add that it’s not just a love for what you do, or a passion to do it, but the NEED to do it drives you to work hard. It’s like you have to get it out of your system. Time passes, and you make things. When you turn around later, you’re amazed at how much you’ve made, but you’re never really satisfied, what you’ve made is just a consolation at the time you were making it. The act of doing what you do is where you slake your thirst. If you feel this way, I think you have found your talent in the sense of the outlet that most helps you feel a sense of satisfaction in life, that gives you some sort of tangible, if momentary consolation, that there IS something to life.Talent without application however is like a plant whose growth is stunted. You might as well do anything else with your time.
Hmmm.. And I would add that it’s not just a love for what you do, or a passion to do it, but the NEED to do it drives you to work hard. It’s like you have to get it out of your system. Time passes, and you make things. When you turn around later, you’re amazed at how much you’ve made, but you’re never really satisfied, what you’ve made is just a consolation at the time you were making it. The act of doing what you do is where you slake your thirst. If you feel this way, I think you have found your talent in the sense of the outlet that most helps you feel a sense of satisfaction in life, that gives you some sort of tangible, if momentary consolation, that there IS something to life.Talent without application however is like a plant whose growth is stunted. You might as well do anything else with your time.The toughest is when your “talent” does not fall into a clearly defined category. It is an amalgamation of things. That’s been my problem, and when I found filmmaking, I finally had my “a-ha” moment.
Hmmm.. And I would add that it’s not just a love for what you do, or a passion to do it, but the NEED to do it drives you to work hard. It’s like you have to get it out of your system. Time passes, and you make things. When you turn around later, you’re amazed at how much you’ve made, but you’re never really satisfied, what you’ve made is just a consolation at the time you were making it. The act of doing what you do is where you slake your thirst. If you feel this way, I think you have found your talent in the sense of the outlet that most helps you feel a sense of satisfaction in life, that gives you some sort of tangible, if momentary consolation, that there IS something to life.Talent without application however is like a plant whose growth is stunted. You might as well do anything else with your time.The toughest is when your “talent” does not fall into a clearly defined category. It is an amalgamation of things. That’s been my problem, and when I found filmmaking, I finally had my “a-ha” moment.I really don’t know how to speak to the idea of loving something and not doing it very well (according to some pre-determined standard) no matter how hard you practice. Really the point is, you get something out of it, even if you don’t make it a career. You need to do it. So… you do it, no matter what.
Hmmm.. And I would add that it’s not just a love for what you do, or a passion to do it, but the NEED to do it drives you to work hard. It’s like you have to get it out of your system. Time passes, and you make things. When you turn around later, you’re amazed at how much you’ve made, but you’re never really satisfied, what you’ve made is just a consolation at the time you were making it. The act of doing what you do is where you slake your thirst. If you feel this way, I think you have found your talent in the sense of the outlet that most helps you feel a sense of satisfaction in life, that gives you some sort of tangible, if momentary consolation, that there IS something to life.Talent without application however is like a plant whose growth is stunted. You might as well do anything else with your time.The toughest is when your “talent” does not fall into a clearly defined category. It is an amalgamation of things. That’s been my problem, and when I found filmmaking, I finally had my “a-ha” moment.I really don’t know how to speak to the idea of loving something and not doing it very well (according to some pre-determined standard) no matter how hard you practice. Really the point is, you get something out of it, even if you don’t make it a career. You need to do it. So… you do it, no matter what.The question of finding one’s identity through finding one’s “talent” is a confusing one to me. People are so much more than that…
Whoa – and I have NO idea why what I just posted is looking like that! ^
“And I would add that it’s not just a love for what you do, or a passion to do it, but the NEED to do it…The act of doing what you do is where you slake your thirst.”
Totally! I feel this way a lot, particularly with writing. Writing is one of the most painful and least enjoyable experiences and yet I feel compelled to do – as if I don’t have a choice. Of course there are moments when it is immensely enjoyable, and that’s where “the act of doing what you do is where you stake your thirst” comes in. But by in large, sometimes I wish I didn’t have to write. It’s so difficult and a pain in the ass!
But alas, I don’t really have a choice.
And definitely, you shouldn’t define yourself by your talent. And you shouldn’t allow yourself to be defined by your talent.
how else could you explain John Holmes?
@Santino — yeah, don’t you love those times where you have to force yourself to work, it’s like you’re arguing with yourself — “But I don’t want to…” “Get your ass over there and start, you good for nothing, ‘cause once you get into it, it’ll give you what you need.” “Waaaaa….”
….. and you finish your work and you never want to look at it again, it tastes like dirt in your mouth, but miraculously, it gets through to people.
That’s what is interesting. People see something you beat yourself into making. But they never see the beating you endured to make it. That’s the only thing you can really keep for yourself. The experience of the beating.
I think all depends on the first 4-5 years in the life of the child. Our real personality is created there.
So, i would most definitely pick that there is no born-natural talent, it is created with the time, some need 4 years some others 30.
Odi – hahaha. Exactly.
"My natural talent is math. That was obvious when I was two, and I set my career back years by fighting it in college and being a Psychology major instead of Computer Science.
I have enough creative talent to amuse and entertain people, but not enough to get people to give me money. So I draw a webcomic as a hobby which I do not profit from nor do I ever expect to, and I’m applying for programming jobs.
But yes, if I said there was no such thing as natural talent there’d be a line of people to punch me in the face, because I got A’s in math and science classes without studying where other people were working their asses off for B’s."
woah. like reading my own autobiography, especially I have enough creative talent to amuse and entertain people, but not enough to get people to give me money. that was difficult for me to comes to terms with when i was younger
I’d dispute that, Alex, as I’m raising two children and they most definitely do have talents that are evident from an early age and not taught.
But the big question in my mind is, will they recognize those abilities as talents? And then, is there some other talent to discover later on that they’ll go for developing instead?
My brother and I both could have become musicians. But I rejected that path for a search that ended up with a bunch of different things that are hard to describe, but that having them all together makes me happy, and he instead took the path of the musician, straight and true.
Personality is discovered as you become aware of it, as are talents. Some people never develop that self-awareness, and some people know at a very early age who they are, who they want to be, and grab on to an early manifestation of talent and hang on to it for dear life. Then there are those more like me, who have to float for a long time gathering, as it were, “evidence.” :)
Odi: I think in that five paragraph post of an hour ago, you are channeling Gertrude Stein!
lol — it was only four, I think MUBI is channeling Gertrude Stein! :D
A post is a post is a post is a post is a post.
ha ha ha ha ha
Scampi
Do you believe that anyone can achieve anything, given enough training, practice, dedication and drive? Or do you think there’s no such thing as natural talent (by that I mean that you’re born with it and if you’re not born with it you can never achieve greatness in that particular field). Are great directors born with the talent required to be a great director. Are they destined to be a director from birth? Or can anyone be a great director?