Friday, December 12, 2008

What would you rather be, incredibly talented or ignorant of the need to be?

8 comments:

o'malley said...

this week: ignorant. those guys get out of the office around 5:30.

RICK said...

Good Christ, I'd love to be one of those genius creative savants. The kind with unending talent, no common sense (or fear), duct-taped Adidas, a Maserati, and ten Lions.

Dan said...

I must say, I love both of your answers. A lot.

Patio Action Pearson said...

Either way, I'd leave earlier than 4:30 in the morning like I did last night. But with the first option, I'd do it and then win awards and stuff.

marques said said...

Oddly I didn't take the idea of being "ignorant of the need to be" talented to mean you had no talent. Just that you were conscious of being talented.

To that point I totally choose ignorant, I think there's added pressure to being incredibly talented. I mean what if Juan Cabral wrote the Head On commercials? He'd be a failure, unless he didn't know he couldn't, then he wouldn't give a shit.

Dan said...

That's how I meant it, Marques. One can be talented and also ignorant of the need to be. That need is, like so many causes of angst, external. If one spends less time trying to be smart, they'll be way better off, IMHO.

Elizabeth said...

I'd take incredibly talented. Because everyday I think about how writing is really, really hard. I think loads of sheer God-given talent must ease up that feeling a bit.

Mr. Mind said...

"If one spends less time trying to be smart, they'll be way better off, IMHO."

I should be good to go in that case. Rarely does a day pass when I'm not actively becoming slightly dumber. I should be wicked smaht in no time at this rate.