Writing my
post on originality and coming up with the idea that knowledge might be more
important for creating art than talent made me see the necessity of a
definition of talent.
So what is
it? - This question gets even more interesting as many great artists insist
that they don't have much talent and that they acquired their skill through a
lot of hard work. At the same time, there are lots of people who are called
talented in their childhood, who can do something amazingly and still don't become professionals.
Please
allow me to put a link to such a story: A story told by Jazza, a professional artist and ... Let's put it this way: If you don't like
his art tutorials on YouTube and don't subscribe to his channel we're not friends anymore. I'm
serious. He's great.
Here's the link. The part I'm talking about
starts at 6:28, but I suggest you watch the whole video.
According
to Jazza, it's most important to be creative and to enjoy art, no matter how
talented you seem right now.
I agree
with him and believe that you need lots and lots of practice to become a
good artist. And if you really enjoy - or rather: love - the process
practising is what you'll use almost all of your free time on. Yet of course art isn't a learned skill only, since otherwise anybody
could become an artist, and it isn't the case in reality. So it seems you
actually need some mysterious thing called talent.
There are
people in this world who can make art without much effort. And
there are some very few people who draw or play an instrument amazingly when
holding a pencil or a violin for the first time in their life. I believe that
the majority of people can learn to make great art. And there are also a few who
are unlikely to ever learn it.
Me Drawing vs. Me Writing
My
personal story is
that I used to draw and paint very much when I was little. I wasn't bad for my
age by Russian standards, and I turned out to be quite good by German standards
when I came here. (Yes, Russian kids can draw better than their German peers.
I've seen it myself.) But little by little I stopped drawing and painting until
I revived this hobby in 2013.
On the
other hand, however, I was always making up stories. When I was younger all my
toys had a consistent character, the fictional world they lived in had its own
society and background story and all I did while playing was recreating the
stories I had in my mind. - Stories that even dealt with serious real world
matters (such as racism, war, personal responsibility and self-fulfillment) and
had a beginning, an ending and a moral. There were also stories I made into
comics. And at the age of 13 I started writing stories, and I still can't
imagine my life without writing.
I don't
know how good I am, but I'm pretty sure my writing isn't the worst. Sure my
first works are ... well, first works and contain Mary Sues, but there are also some good ideas in
them.
I've
definitely improved my writing over time. It happened through practice and
enjoying the process. Yet don't you think there's a reason why I stuck with
writing rather than drawing and painting? The reason for this must be something
that I was born with, since I create stories for as long as I can remember.
Yes, I did get approval for what I was doing, but no one ever encouraged me to
start it. Concerning drawing and painting I actually got lessons, I got the
materials, I got everything and I liked it. But when it comes to writing I did
everything by myself.
A Shot of Constructivism
My
opinion on how to define talent is inspired by radical
constructivism. The
general idea of this philosophy is that we can't perceive the world as it is.
What we believe to be the truth is only our interpretation of it, based on our
subjective perception. Radical constructivism is radical because it actually
says that objectivity is impossible. That everything we believe to be true is
merely a construction in our heads.
Since every
perception is subjective I believe that a human being can't perceive
anything than himself, his own subjectivity. When you look at a pencil you
don't see a pencil but only your perception of it, defined by such factors as
you being a human, your eyesight, your point of view, the way your brain works,
your former experiences with pencils and so on. What's most important here: Every
perception is unique. - And this is when we come to originality.
In my
former post I wrote: "So can we agree on one thing? That originality is
nothing more than a new combination of already known material? What makes such
a combination original and unique is the train of thoughts that led to this
combination. And it's nothing new that some people are better at creating new
combinations than others. And maybe it has to do with talent."
Every
person has a very individual train of thoughts when looking at a pencil. Everyone's mind is structured
differently. And different people would do different things with that pencil.
Some may just passively look at it while others will use it. Others may get
fascinated by how the shadows fall and analyze it. Someone may imagine the
pencil is alive. Some trains of thoughts may lead to artistic expression.
Defining Talent
So is
talent a special way of perception that leads to artistic expression? Let's add that the way of
perception isn't only inborn but also changes with experience. And experience
can be acquired. It can grow and lead to more extraordinary ways of perception.
I believe that these ways of perception can contain philosophical ideas as well
as just ideas for new techniques. Art is an idea put into action, and talent
is the mastermind behind it. Skill acquired through practice is the tool. Joy
is the motivation. And since practice and joy are part of gaining
experience they're all interconnected.
At this
point it's important to draw a line between talent and gift: You receive a
gift, but you can develop a talent. You can't question that our
abilities are influenced by genetics. As mentioned above, some people can do
some things better than others just by nature. The question is rather: What do
you make of your gift, no matter how great or tiny it may seem at the moment?
Do you make it a talent or will you just forget you have it?
Personally
I think that there are artists who are gifted and talented, non-artists
who are gifted but not talented, hobby artists who are a little gifted
and a little talented, artists who are just a little gifted but extremely
talented, pseudo-artists who aren't gifted or talented and non-artists who are
not gifted, not talented and happy with it. - Which type are you?
And what do
you think on this topic as a whole? Do I have some valid points or is this
article just nonsense? How do you define talent? And all false modesty
aside: Do you consider yourself talented? What is your story of
talent-development? Do you think there can be talent without at least a little
bit of gift? - Don't hesitate to use the comment section!
In joyful
anticipation of your precious opinion,
Feael
Silmarien
PS: Don't
forget to share this article!
Talent is way you process life expierences, I think.
ReplyDelete