Feb 02, 2010 23:05
Reading Malcolm Gladwell threw me for a loop. An entire book of very convincing essays, making all sorts of conclusions based on statistical correlations, that basically said that being born at the right time, to the right background, and being just-smart-enough and exceptionally passionate and hard-working within your chosen field is the way to become successful. It makes sense, even though correlation does not necessitate causation. It threw me for a loop because one can never really tell if one was born at the right time (although due to fact that I am most likely entering the job market at a less-than-optimal time, I have my suspicions about that one), one can't really change one's background (although I suspect that my background is plenty fine when it comes to the things that count- I had a rich, stimulating childhood for the most part, with lots of art projects and novels and music and a bit of dancing. I may lack the true upper-middle class upbringing he described, with lots of social protocol training and encouragement, but intellectually, my childhood was great. The lack of intellectual direction I sometimes experienced is rather disturbing now, but I also affected an independent air at a very early age. I don't blame people (much) for leaving me to my own devices.) I am definitely smart enough. I think the threshold that Gladwell mentioned for successfully entering (or was it completing) grad school was 115. Granted, the last time someone measured my IQ was in early middle school, and the New Yorker article I just read about the "Junior Meritocracy" says the the younger and more "gifted" the child is, the less stable the IQ. IQs can go down, because it's graded on the bell curve. If you stop working/learning as hard, relative to your peers, there's a large chance that you will will regress. So the only things I can control are being passionate and hard-working.
He mentioned two things, specifically, that kind of scared me. First, there was the 10.000 hours/10 years thing. That's approximately how long it takes to become an expert, according to his sources. What have I spent 10,000 hours over the past 10 years doing? Reading bad historical fiction, kvetching, daydreaming... not much. I was never serious enough about piano or cooking to reach the 10k mark, and I didn't start singing in earnest until sophomore or junior year of high school. I didn't even start shopping and being interested in current fashions, or traveling until high school. I don't have an expertise! I'm not passionate about any specific fields!
The other quality highlighted in that book, was doggedness. He had an example of someone who wasn't good at math, who didn't need to be good at math, but was playing around with a computer program that was meant to teach people how to calculate the slope of a line. She spent a long, long time playing around with it, refusing to give up or ask for the answer. This quality is important, because the people who don't give up on learning a concept are (surprisesurprise) more successful.
So all of this digital ink spilled- and for what? I suppose your mother could have told you to work hard and be persistent.