Are people born with it?

>>24527844 (OP)
the answer is clearly yes, but at the same time, without dedication and luck, it doesn't matter. People waste their god given talent all the time in every way.

>>24527844 (OP)
>Is Writing Natural Talent
No. But the capacity to dedicate yourself to repetitively practicing learnt behaviour to perfection against external standards you can internalise as a *potential capacity* is a natural talent, and the use of that talent to repetitively test despite outcome to result is learnt behaviour.

Even then: you might end up writing werewolf porn.

>>24527844 (OP)
who tf come out the womb writing tight prose

>>24527844 (OP)
none of you really deserve to know because of how dumb and scummy you are

Of course your question iss meaningless... What is talent? Natural is an idealism and cannot be discussed...

Great writers have who knows how a great sensitivity to formalism, like how a painter knows how to play with his brushstrokes to play some form of image game, with thythmes, questions, answers, lack of answers... A game...
Great writers also do not create an artificial style. The style is rooted in guts and soil.
That's why stylists like Joyce really pales compared to Faulkner, and how the people of the nouveau roman suck in comparison to Céline. The style of soil anchors the art in the here rather than the there. It is life and emotion

>>24527930
woah... that's like... so deep... deep as fuck...

If there is such a thing as natural talent it is the talent of putting in the time and work on what ever your interests are.
>b b b but people put in the time and never get success!
And?

>>24527907
>man from woman born
I was arse birthed by my father and have never seen a woman in the flesh.

>>24527984
I've said this before whenever feminists get on my case about having mother issues. Good way to get them to shut up.

>>24527943
if you think art has to be deep that's because freud fucked your ass with his big 10 inch cock so many times you cannot separate art and intelligence...
Your ass is so beant that the only thing you expect from an aristocratic thought is depth...
Not at all. my thought is a movement, a overcoming

>>24527844 (OP)
No, and in fact it's the only thing where there are no savants because it is as close an art to life as possible. Language is the foundation of conscience and it's articulate formation is exposition of life itself. You must have lived and or thought correctly in order to be a truly relevant writer.
https://youtu.be/sag5GB0Wvjs

>>24527989
>people disengage when I spout retarded schizobabble
Useful tactics I'm sure.

>>24528118
Yet women masturbate to it when Trudy writes about Vikings doing it in Oglaf…

>>24527844 (OP)
>Are people born with it?
Yes
Which is why I laugh at mofo's getting multiple degrees in creative writing
No one can teach creativity or talent

>look up someone who is extremely "talented"
>they just worked hard and were slightly above average to begin with

>>24528170
Cope harder, Corey Copenheim

>>24528176
show me three people who are exceptional without hard work

>>24528191
It's not that they don't work hard, it's talent and God-given creativity
A no talent hack who wants to be a writer (most booktubers) can spend 20 hours a day trying their best, and no one will ever read their trash
But I doubt Shakespeare had much time to write his 4 plays a year yet they are mostly masterpieces
Mozart wrote his first symphony at 8 years old; I doubt he worked "hard" in writing it, it just came to life in his mind

>>24528209
there is no such thing as somebody who is five times, ten times, however many times more times naturally talented as everybody else
you have a base set of traits, some of those traits can be slightly or moderately better than everybody else's traits but unless you work hard every day to improve them constantly, you will only ever be slightly or moderately better than everybody else instead of an order of magnitude better
people without those slightly improved traits have a much harder time

we don't know enough about shakespeare's life in intimate detail to know how he achieved what he did and mozart was trained as early as possible and in addition, being born into a musically-oriented family improved his chances

to sum up, "talent" is just a collection of traits that are better than average but need to be nurtured to become fully developed into something amazing

A lot of those chess players aren't even that smart when it comes to non chess subjects.

Magnus doesn’t have godlike IQ he has a photographic memory. Fischer on the other hand had godly IQ but also weapons grade autism.

>>24527953
>>24528095

lol, what you both mean to say is
>yes writing talent exists but it must be realized through hard work and life experience

enough with this
>anybody can be a good writer
cope

>>24528241
>there is no such thing as somebody who is five times, ten times, however many times more times naturally talented as everybody else
yes there is lol
just because hard work is part of the equation doesn't negate talent.
you're clearly young and have never tried something you aren't talented in.

>>24528333
let me guess, your examples are going to be people who subconsciously nurtured their abilities without realising it
i've seen every single scenario that you can possibly think of and there is no exception to this idea

>>24528338
i think they cope by thinking eventually they will try some hobby that they discover they are a "natural" at, like i had tried painting, music, writing, investing, programming, sucked at all of it, but then one day i tried skeet shooting and turned pro cuz i'm a natural. yeah, no, that isn't going to happen. when i was teenager i was into skating and i remember there was this kid tangentially in our crew who was pretty crappy at skating and he was always like "you have to try as many sports as possible so u have more chance at turning pro at one" i'm like i don't think that's how professional level sports works. you have to pick one and go in. needless to say he sucked at everything he did. the funny part is his dad was a professional instrumentalist in some orchestra that doubtless took thousands of hours of practice.

>>24528241
there is no such thing as somebody who is five times, ten times, however many times more times naturally talented as everybody else because. . . BECAUSE THERE JUST ISNT OKAY!

you have a base set of traits, some of those traits can be slightly or moderately better than everybody else's traits but unless you work hard every day to improve them constantly, just like in a VIDEOGAME! You will only ever be slightly or moderately better than everybody else instead of an order of magnitude better guys. For example, I am what people would refer to as a "top," and when I first began having sex, and I may not be physically suited for the task, but through hard work I have become very good at what I do.

We don't know enough about shakespeare's life in intimate detail to know how he achieved what he did. Besides, several theories suggest that he was either a collection of people, or maybe even a woman! Mozart was trained as early as possible and in addition, being born into a white upper-class family improved his chances

to sum up, "talent" is just a collection of traits that are better than average but need to be nurtured to become fully developed into something amazing. Obviously privilege plays a role in this as well, as some people are born into better situations then others. This is why you don't see many Shakespeares coming out of Africa (because of war and lack of resources due to capitalism and colonialism, not for any other reason whatsoever)

Btw, I am trans if that matters.

>>24528338
I am 10x more talented than you at taking IQ tests

>>24527844 (OP)
No, what is needed is creativity in the sense of coming up with interesting ideas, I don't know if this is what people mean by talent? I don't at least. And it is not enough, there's tons of lazy idea people out there in every field.

The challenge is to actually commit and read tons and write and polish, write and polish and so on until it is not shit anymore. Most give up in the beginning because what they write is of course shit since they're beginners and piss and shit and cry and start whining about talent and luck and how the world is against them. The typical reddit stuff.

The ones who make it don't stop, they move forward, analyze why their shit is shit and adjust accordingly. And they continue to read and write and polish. Maybe takes a trip to Thailand and visit some ladyboys for inspiration.

>>24527844 (OP)
A good writer is simply someone who thinks and feels too much

>>24528329
That is not at all what I meant to say. Unless you are brain damaged you can be a good writer, good is not a particularly high bar.

You have to have a unique viewpoint on the world. This can be innate or developed deliberately.

You also need to be familiar with the major works before you, which cannot be innate.

>>24528495
>Unless you are brain damaged you can be a good writer, good is not a particularly high bar
So give some examples of people who are not brain damaged, are average Joes, who are good writers because they worked so hard at their craft.

>>24527844 (OP)
>Is Writing Natural Talent

It's the difference between a carpenter and an engineer (whom is also a carpenter, electrician, plumber ...): writing gives thought form. Just because someone natively knows how to use the tools is no guarantee of quality (or content). Stephen King is a paragon of this-- spins imaginative yarns - a storyteller - but is primarily engaged in entertainment, ephemera, and with self-admittedly middling to proactively indifferent prose-- Updike inverts this at the other end. If you make something worthwhile in literature through sheer effort, you had something capable of development toward that end.

>>24528170
>>24528176
>>24528191
>>24528209
>>24528241
>>24528333
>>24528338
>>24528446
>>24528463

>>24528605
That's true, just don't be a retard and it'll work

>>24528209
Mozart’s father was a composer and trained Mozart from a young age, then toured him around Europe introducing him to different styles. His first compositions were derivative and are seldom preformed these days. His first masterpiece wasn’t until he was about 20. Similarly, Shakespeare studied classics in detail at school, then started as a poet and an actor, and his work improved with time.

>>24528538
And have some wisdom to share too.

No, you have to know things in order to write. Which is why there aren’t any child prodigies in writing.

>>24527907
I don't think you know what talent means

>>24528605
>anyone who works as hard as I did can achieve the same results
>is arguably the greatest composer/musician, perhaps even artist of all time
What did he mean by this?

>>24528768
Not every quote posted online is genuine.

>>24528791
True, but that one seems legit: both Encyclopedia Britannica and Naxos Records have paraphrased versions it.

>>24527844 (OP)
>>24527850
>>24527854
>Tabula rasa theory
Find something you like and dedicate your time for autistically learning and perfecting the thing you like.

>>24528551
No one will. There are no good writers who aren't naturally talented or generally intelligent. There is no fine 90 IQ poetry. This is despite the probably hundreds of thousands or even millions who have devoted huge chunks of their life to it. If you can name someone notable, it won't be for the quality of their craft but for how distinct they are, like a mentally ill outsider artist is.

>>24528692
Lovely observation regarding child prodigies.

>>24527844 (OP)
Yes, some people are just genetic freaks. It is like bodybuilding, you need to dedicate a lot of time to it and get good by grinding, but for genetic reasons it just comes easier to some than others.

>find a niche
>dominate it
>amass international acclaim
He's the main character of his story. Can you say the same?

>>24528956
Yes, in the sense that I'm the only character in my story

>>24528170
you can't be talking about a chess player.

>>24527844 (OP)
Absolutely. You either have it or not. Good writing can't be trained.

>>24527907
You were clearly not born with the skill.

>>24528956
everyone is the main character of their story, genius

>>24528551
I never said anything about average joes and not really sure what makes someone an average joe, most people seem to use that to mean "someone like me!" or "everyone who is not me!" Feels like you will use that as a gotcha to find something about them which makes them not an average joe. But Sherwood Anderson probably would apply by most any standards, he even managed to push past good into great a few times. His letters collection shows he has no gift for language and was probably abit on the dim side but he put in the time and kept at it, probably wrote 100 pages that went into the trash for every page he got published. If you updated the slang to 2025 a good number of his letters would fit right in on /lit/ and people would call him a retarded zoomer.
>everyone lives an empty middle class life and only i see it, what the point?
>can't write because of the distraction of the modern world
>life hacks to get yourself to write
>can't write because no money
>is this /lit/?
>sit down to write, mind is a blank, get drunk instead
>no energy to write because wage cuck
etc etc etc. But he did it, he never gave up and never let all those failed novels drag him down, he tossed them in the trash and moved on to the next project.

>>24527844 (OP)
obviously.

>>24527907
many. that's why there are a lot of authors who wrote their masterpieces as early as their 20s.

>>24528897
it means Bach was humble. you need to be literally insane to think anyone can reach the result Bach reached by just hard work.

>>24529819
Lying to people about their abilities is being an ass, not being humble. Suspect Bach was smart enough to understand this.

>>24527844 (OP)
Yes, but it's rare. A "prodigy" in literature is someone who finds success in their mid to late teens, usually.
>Mishima
>Lispector
>Radiguet
>Rimbaud
>Keats MAYBE
are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head.

>>24528095
I like your style a lot, anon

>>24530076
Because you're a literal faggot

>>24530076
must be a samefag right? there’s no style to speak of

>>24529819
>as early as their 20s
>out the womb

>>24528605

Talent is potential and some people obviously have more potential than others. Yet you will still find retards debating this question a thousand years from now.

>>24529887
>>Lispector
What?

>>Rimbaud
true

>>Keats MAYBE
I don't think so. Not in his teens.
Pretty young anyway.

>>24529887
Yeah. Music is patterned sound. It takes a few years to hear a lot of different stuff and make something new. The genetics is good ear, good memory, mental focus, attention and stamina. For really great writing you also need life experience. And insight and then somehow convert that unique experience and insight into written expression. It's incredibly hard to write beyond one's years. Almost impossible. What's an 8 year old going to write about sex and lust and passion and loss, or war etc. And what's a 20 year old going to write that only 60 year old's can know? A 14 year old could be very technically competent. But they're not going to write great literature. Writing need more than music.

>>24527844 (OP)
norwegian here. i can tell you that magnus carlsen most likely isn't insanely intelligent. he has even said so himself several times in norwegian interviews. he works on speedy, dynamic intuition when playing chess. he doesn't like to sit and think too much about the game at hand. he just sees the patterns instantly and is able to infer what moves will look like way ahead in the future. he is just a regular dude and really sounds like it when you hear him speak.

>>24527844 (OP)
Like the IQ debate in general people misunderstand the difference between your genetic potential and getting everything out of it. You can be born with the potential for a high IQ and never develop it because your parents lock you in a closet and homeschool you about Jesus. That said, vocabulary tests and comprehension tests are part of university entrance exam systems (SATs or similar depending on system). They follow the usual curve of ability and are highly correlated with other intelligence tests.
If you’re born with the wrong end of the potential you will struggle to read a book let alone write one. Of course the best books aren’t necessarily written by the highest IQ, but pretty much all great writers would rank over average and into the highest percentiles.

For this discussion it might be most interesting to instead look at idiot savant type art, confirmed retards who create something beautiful anyway. Most of them are visual (art) or some specific skill (maps, counting, trivia). But low end people have made some “outsider” music and written books as well.
The skill group generally can’t do anything artistic with their ability. Savant artists can copy a skyline from a glance but make zero artistic choices depicting it. The trivia people can’t analyze all their facts into some conclusion. Similarly you might know and spell any word from reading a dictionary but be unable to compose a story for children.
The low end of IQ in outsider art is much more varied and you get things like that Tiger poem by the 5 year old. The simplicity and earnestness make up for a lack of talent or expressing some deeper meaning.