Thursday, October 1, 2009

10,000 hours

What a great series of posts this week. If you haven't gotten a chance to read the last week under this, please do. They're excellent.

As for me, I only have a link to share. Recently I've finished reading Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers and some of the ideas in the book, like the 10,000 hours theory, made me put in perspective just how hard one needs to work in their art.

Of course, there's natural talent, but, as the above article shows, it only takes you so far. In fact, natural talent may not really be much of a factor at all.

What do you think? Is there such a thing as 'god-given talent'? Or could it all be done by obsession, focus, and repetition...and, well, luck?


  1. 10,000 sound like convenient number. I'm sure you could find as many exceptions to the rule as people who fit the rule of 10,000.

    I could buy the idea that people who quit before that amount of time are less successful than people who continue on past that amount of time. There is something about just putting your time in.

    I would add that there is something to the quality of the time you put in to. I think that if you are around talented people then you can learn from them and improve much more quickly than if you were around people who could not show you new tricks and push your ability level.

  2. I don't think that just anyone can become a great writer, but I do think with enough practice and time, most people can become good writers.

  3. I believe in formal training, but I know there were memorable writers way before formal training. Learning the craft of anything will only you better.


Join the conversation, add insight, or disagree with us! We welcome your thoughts.