I often wondered if I should tell my life story. It has been one hell of a ride. I think I should start at some point. Perhaps my 51st birthday would be a good start. Now I put up my photo's and art on Fine Art America. It is interesting and fun to see what is out there. Joining groups get you art out there and you get feed back, which is inspiring. Look for more post from me.
<a href="http://fineartamerica.com/art/photographs/moon/all" style="font: 10pt arial; text-decoration: underline;">moon photos</a>

I have started in Fine Art America of my works. I will blog more about it soon.
<a href="http://fineartamerica.com/art/all/prince+edward+island/prints" style="font: 10pt arial; text-decoration: underline;">prince edward island prints</a>

Marijuana Out of the Closet

Marijuana, just the name brings up a myriad of emotions in people. It is constantly in the headlines should it be legalized or left behind closed doors where it has been for the last century. There seems to be such a stigma associated with the use of marijuana. I am a certified therapeutic herbalist, in my experience the use of it is wide spread. I have never met any people that are totally against it use. The people that I know who use are hard working, hold down jobs, and are good citizens. It is their form of medicine to relax and unwind. They are not plagued with suicidal thoughts and violent mood swings like others who are prescribe antidepressants. To some people it is just an illegal drug that gets people high, yet it is so much more than that. It is an herb that has been used for centuries not just socially but to cure many of man's ills. So why has this herb been so unfairly prosecuted?

The war on drugs particularly marijuana is relatively a recent event. In America between 1842 and the 1890's a powerful concentrated extract of marijuana was the second most prescribed drug. In the early colonies it was require that all that all farmers grow hemp. Hemp was used as legal tender from 1631 to the early 1800's. The US constitution, the Declaration of Independence, the original Levi jeans and Old glory were all made from hemp.

William Randolph Hearst reigned over the newspaper industry. He owned large tracks of standing timber. Harry Anslinger was appointed to the newly formed federal bureau of narcotics in 1931. Together they produced a smear campaign against marijuana and hemp. They used the prejudiced of the times, by attacking Mexicans and Negroes. They claimed that the evil weed was the most powerful violent inducing substance know to mankind. This led to the passing of the marijuana tax act in 1937 which made it illegal to grow, sell, buy, or distribute marijuana, hemp included. In 1970 the controlled substances act lumped together marijuana and hemp as schedule 1 drugs in the same category as heroin and LSD.

Marihuana comes from the family of herbs know as Cannabaceae. This family includes four varieties Cannabis indica, cannabis ruderalis, cannabis sativa. and humulus genus (hops). Hops is one of the main ingredients in beer. Cannabis sativa is the plant that most people are familiar with. The plant that produces hemp is a variation of c. sativa.

Marijuana therapeutic properties are divine. The plant is a tonic, intoxicant, stomachic, antispasmodic, analgesic, narcotic, sedative, and anodyne. Seeds and leaves are used to treat cancer and scirrhous tumors. The decoction of the root is said to help remedy hard tumors and knots in the joints. Today therapeutic use of cannabis is used for depression,glaucoma, nausea, pain, muscle, spasticity, multiple sclerosis, appetite loss associated with AIDS and cancer treatment.

When used properly there are virtually no side effect with Marijuana,except for the high of course. Not all people experience the pleasuring effect that most users do. If people don't experience the pleasure effect it has been my experience that they simple don't use it. Marijuana can be psychology addictive. Chronic users may suffer from asthma and withdrawal systems.

There is no reason that marijuana shouldn't be legalized for adults. I believe it is our right to use plants as medicine or recreationally whether or not they are cultivated or grown naturally. All herbs have a rightful place in our pharmacopeia. In Germany, Australia and other countries you can not use any natural growing plant with out a prescription from a Doctor. It is all goes back to control. We have the right to use what we want to heal ourselves, no one has the right to tell us otherwise. We should be able to be sovereigns of our own bodies. Marijuana and all herbs should continue to be medicine for common people like they always have been. It is time for Marijuana to come out of the closet.

http://www.spiritofchange.org/politics-community/high-ideals-the-story-of-industrial-hemp

http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Psychopharmacology_of_Herbal_Medicin.html?id=jZeaRiIFbhsC

Abstract Art What is it?

A key to understanding abstract art is to look at the word abstract itself. It is used in a myriad of ways. It is used as an adjective, noun or verb. As a noun it can summarize a text, as a verb it can remove or steal, as an adjective it is “difficult to understand.”(9) The adjective form of the word is the key that unlocks the beginning of the journey through the labyrinth that is abstract art.

Describing abstract art is akin to taking a journey through a labyrinth. Not the kind of labyrinth with an easy path to follow. The kind of labyrinth that has long slopping corridors, with twist and turns that double back on themselves. The artist have aligned the corridors with bright vivid color. The twist and turns are drenched in various forms of art expression. Yet there is a path here worn by countless artist and art followers, who have dared to enter the universe of abstract art.

“Abstract art uses a visual language of form, color and line to create a composition which may exist with a degree of independence from visual references in the world.”(1) Abstract art is a broad term that encompasses many different styles of art abstract or not. Abstract art began to flourish at the end of the 19^th century when artist were looking for a different way of expression. Impressionism, fauvism,surrealism, and cubism laid the foundation, by breaking the rules. Also included are expressionism, post-impressionism, and by the 20^th century we have abstract expressionism. Other terms that define modern abstract art are minimalism, post-painterly abstraction, and 21^st century pluralism.

Fauvism began in the 1900, it was all about color in it's pure form. It came forth from a group of French painters. The fauves created vivid paintings with globs of paint. It was more about the journey and emotion than painting a scene. The imprint of the brush became part of the painting. “The paintings of the fauves were characterized by seemingly wild brush work and strident colors, while their subject matter had a high degree of simplification and abstraction.”(6) They were inspired by the likes of Van Gogh and Gauguin. Fauvism paved the way for expressionism and cubism. Matisse became the leading artist of fauvsim. Matisse's Olive Trees, Collioure (1905) resulted from his collaboration with Andre Derain. This composition was created with daubs of pure color that is considered abstract. Germany in 1905 sprouted expressionism, during an era of discontent with the world and angst against impressionism and academic art. “Vincent Van Gogh, Edvard Munch, and James Ensor proved particularly influential to the Expressionists, encouraging the distortion of form and the deployment of strong colors to convey a variety of anxieties and yearnings.”(3) Art was moving away from analytical composition, now it was more about the inner depth of the artist. Art was becoming internalized. Social criticisms influenced expressionist art, as more of the world became urbanized. Urbanization produced separateness among it dwellers and the art world responded with figural drawings and bold colors. “Expressionist artists often employed swirling, swaying, and exaggeratedly executed brushstrokes in the depiction of their subjects. These techniques were meant to convey the turgid emotional state of the artist reacting to the anxieties of the modern world.”(3) “In Cubist artwork, objects are analyzed, broken up and reassembled in an abstracted form—instead of depicting objects from one viewpoint, the artist depicts the subject from a multitude of viewpoints to represent the subject in a greater context.” (4) Pablo Picasso is know well beyond the scope of the art world. His artwork titled , Les Demoiselles d'Avignon done in 1907,presented the foundation of cubism. “The movement has been described as having two stages: 'Analytic' Cubism, in which forms seem to be 'analyzed' and fragmented; and 'Synthetic' Cubism, in which newspaper and other foreign materials such as chair caning and wood veneer, are collaged to the surface of the canvas as 'synthetic' signs for depicted objects”(4) Cubism is the style of the art, with it geometric shapes and distorted prospective that coined the word cubism. Braque another well know cubist was a close associates of Picasso they often collaborated and there art can be hard to differentiate. Other artist would start subtracting and simplifying there work. This is when the term abstract art came into being. “Apollinaire supported these early developments of abstract Cubism in Les Peintres cubistes (1913), writing of a new "pure" painting in which the subject was vacated” (4) Surrealism another corner stone of modern abstract art. Founded in Paris in 1924, by a small group of writers and artist who believe the power of imagination laid in the subconscious mind.“Initially a literary movement, many Surrealists were ambivalent about the possibilities of painting, however, the group's leader, André Breton, later embraced and promoted painting.”(2) They believed in Freud's teaching that the conscious mind was a block to the imagination. It was more of a movement than an art style, yet it laid the foundation for different kind of expression. The surrealist were intent on exposing repressed parts of the conscious mind. They used dream imagery and archetypical symbols in the form of collage, which they believed came from the subconscious mind. With the advent of WWII surrealism found it way to America. “The American painters were uneasy with the overt Freudian symbolism of the European movement, but they were inspired by its interests in the unconscious, as well as its strain of primitivism and preoccupation with mythology.” (2) Today the modern art world owes much gratitude to the surrealists. “Peggy Guggenheim's 1942 exhibition of Surrealist-influenced artists (Rothko, Gottlieb, Motherwell, Baziotes, Hoffman, Still, and Pollock) alongside European artists Miró, Klee, and Masson, underscores the speed with which Surrealist concepts spread through the New York art community.” (2) After surrealism found it's way to New York, abstract expressionism gained a foot hold in the ample Museums and art gallery’s of the city. Following the war many European modernist artist found there way to New York. They brought with them the love of cubism and fauvism. Many artist were fascinated by the work of Carl Jung, who believed that the collect subconscious was represented by archetypical symbols. “In, 1947 Jackson Pollock found his way to the drip technique. The following year, de Kooning had an influential show at the Charles Egan Gallery; Barnett Newman arrived at his breakthrough picture Onement I; and Mark Rothko began painting the "multi-form" paintings that would soon lead to the signature works of his mature period.” (8) Eventually abstract expressionism itself became academic and the reductionism theme left little to be further explore. Yet it's legacy like Pollock left a lasting impression on the art world. It would help foster Japaneses Gutai and Vietnamese Actionist. It's themes and concepts supported Neo-Expressionism in the 1980's and left a standard against which to be measured. Abstract themes continue to weave a thread through many of the art styles. One term can not begin to describe what abstract art is. To some scholars of the art world it is a picture reduced to it's simple form. So reduced that it doesn't even resemble it original shape or colors. To other scholars abstract is the well of the subconscious brought to the surface in vivid colors, dripping across the canvas like Jackson Pollock pieces. Yet most will argue that is not paint thrown or brushed upon the canvas without thought. It is claimed that one must be a fervent student of art itself, before one can even begin to attempt the abstract. The scholars of art history have given an end date to the different movements of art. How could there be a defined end? Art is constantly changing and evolving. Styles merger and change into what at the moment is modern art. Only the master can be dated, the images they leave behind go on to inspire generations to explore their own inner labyrinth, reaching into the primal depths of creation. It is more than the sums of it parts of color, stroke and composition. It is the very core of who we are, our expression of our inner universe.

Resources

(1)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_art (2)http://www.theartstory.org/movement-surrealism.htm (3)http://www.theartstory.org/movement-expressionism.htm (4)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubism (5)http://www.theartstory.org/movement-cubism.htm (6)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fauvism (7)http://www.theartstory.org/movement-fauvism.htm (8)http://www.theartstory.org/movement-abstract-expressionism.htm (9)http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/abstract

Creativity Talent and Skill

One can detect many layers in the above image. It seems very chaotic, yet upon closer examination it is more about the sum of it parts than the whole. It is framed in a deep green that melds well into the whole of the image. There are four separate very blazing abstract colored pencil drawings. They are placed in the four corners. Each drawing is unique yet one can tell that they are similar in style. In the center is a oil painting, a landscape, with a water fall brook in the background. The main subject is a tree, that is shaped like a woman with her arms outstretched to the sky. If that is not enough overlaid on the image on either side of the tree painting are two poems. Lastly the words create, creative and creativity sweep across the middle and top of the image.

cre·ate: verb \krē-ˈāt, ˈkrē-ˌ\ to bring into existence (A)

A woman sits down in her easy chair. She makes herself comfortable and draws a coffee table up to her lap. On the coffee table she places a drawing pad, off to one side on a chair she sets a tin of colored pencils. In her mind she thinks of the word ayahausca, she says this over and over. She stares at the open drawing pad. She tells herself there are no mistakes, then she closes her eyes and picks a colored pencil from the tin and starts to draw. She keeps saying the word ayahausca over and over. She repeats this process of closing her eyes and picking a colored pencil over and over. She looks at it and highlights a few areas that have intrigue her. She uses this process to create many more drawings. She has created works of beauty that will lay a foundation for an image many years later.

The woman sat down at her computer. She couldn't think of one specific area of expertise that stood out to her. Than she remember how she had described herself in one word to a person. She told that person that the core of her being is creative. The proverbial light bulb went on, that is it. She is creative, whether or not it be a drawing, a poem, a photograph, an event,a clay sculpture or a garden. So she sat down and created the image for her writing. She layered it with art work and pose that she had done over the years and added the root word create in some of it forms. This image would lay the foundation for her argument of talent versus skill.

The Merriam Webster dictionary defines skill as : a learned power of doing something competently : a developed aptitude or ability.(B) Where as talent is defined as : a characteristic feature, aptitude, or disposition of a person or animal : the natural endowments of a person. (C)

The Separation between talent and skill is one of the greatest misunderstood concepts. Talent you have naturally. Skill is only developed by hours and hours and hours of beating on your craft. I don’t really view myself as particularly talented. Where I excel is ridiculous, sickening work ethic. While the other guys are sleeping, I am working. While the other guys are eating, I am working.” Will Smith (1)

“Good writers don’t rely on inspiration. They don’t use "talent" as a crutch. They don’t need luck. Instead, they develop skills.” Kami M McArthur 1/2/2013 (2)

In David Farlands Daily kick in the pants Talent vs Skill he starts of with the above quote.

In his article Farland acknowledges that all of us have talent. He describes that he didn't have the aptitude for the mandolin, yet when he work with clay, it came easy to him. He believes to prefect a craft, even if one is talent with it, that it takes practice through a learned set of skills. He notes that he spent fourteen hours a day for six months perfecting his writing skills. Farland concluded that skill is more valuable than talent. Mike Puglielli is a 5 year creative designer. In his article titled “Learning your Craft” Talent vs Skill. Mike writes about talent, but believes skill is equally and more important than talent like Farland. In his article Mike wrote the following about talent. “Your talent is innate. Innate in that, you are born to be artistic.” “You have that intrinsic, artistic identity that was there right after leaving the womb.” He writes about skill as: “Skill takes time and effort to develop and is not innate and skills are more likely measurable and technical.” (3) Puglielle goes on to explain in his article that talent will only get you so far. To excel with your talent you need to work at it. He explains that learning skills will perfect your talent. Talent can't be relied on for it has a fall off point. It is at this point that skill takes over, and it is also at his point that some give up because they can't relie on their talent. Puglielle believes you don't have to have talent to be a great designer. It will take lots of skills to become great at it. Talent will only take you so far.

To circle back around to Coyle's work of “The Talent Code” the first chapter “The Sweet Spot”.(4) In which Coyle postulate that talent is not born it is earned. Coyle explained that one needed to work on the edge of ones ability in “deep practice” to become talented. It would seem that Coyle was really explaining skill not talent. If he had titled his book “The Skill Code”. It may have not sold as many copies. The way it was written was a clever way to attract readers and skillfully explain skill disgusted as talent. So in that way Coyle is a skillful writer. The two articles by Farland and Puglielle point out to me that we all can have a certain talent for a certain craft. Yet is the skills that we learn around our talent that propels us forward to secede in the field that foster our talent. I am very talented at creating art. Yet that talent will only take me so far unless I build the necessary skills to enhance my talent. In someway the articles point to being successful with talent built by skills. Yet to enjoy your talent doesn’t mean you don’t' have to be successful or even skillful. Here we could start to argue about what success is. Is a person who only hangs his artwork in his home, any less successful than an artist with works in an art gallery? I think of myself as talented but not all that skillful. If I was successful would it mean that I could make a living from my talent? I think that my talent is a broad stroked concept. It is hard for me to pin it down to one venture. If I focused on just my writing than I could become skilled at it. If I focused just on my art work, it might take me places I have yet to imagine.

References

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/create (A)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/talent (B)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/skil(C)

http://ivanhoff.com/2012/08/23/skill-vs-talent-2/ (1)

http://www.davidfarland.net/writing_tips/?a=166 (2)

http://inspiredology.com/learning-your-craft-talent-vs-skill/ (3)

Coyle, Daniel (2009). The Talent Code New York:Bantam Books ( Chapter 1 The Sweet Spot.) (4)

Talent vs Skill

A woman sits down in her easy chair. She makes herself comfortable and draws a coffee table up to her lap. On the coffee table she places a drawing pad, off to one side on a chair she sets a tin of colored pencils. In her mind she thinks of the word ayahausca, she says this over and over. She stares at the the open drawing pad. She tells her self there are no mistakes, than she closes her eyes and picks a colored pencil from tin and starts to draw. She keeps saying the word ayahausca over and over. She repeats this process of closing her eyes and picking a colored pencil over and over. It takes several days for her to complete her drawing. She looks at it and highlights a few areas that have intrigue her. For this image she repeats the process three more times. The second word she focuses on is Peyeto, the third she is thinking of a friend, the fourth and final drawing focus is of herself. She has created works of beauty that will lay a foundation for an image many years later.

Long before the drawings, this woman sat at an easel with her oil paint at the ready. She stared at the canvas, she started with the sky and earth, a brook came out of the canvas. The final layer turned into a magnificent tree, that was shaped like a woman with her arm out stretched. Another layer of the image came into being.

At some point in this woman's life, words were forming in her mind. It was about thunder, she began to write out the words, they took shape and had their own unique form. The end of the pose poem was about horses, which had started the words forming in her mind. At another time she was thinking about Mother Earth. Words started to form in her mind about goddess and there link to the Earth, sure enough as she wrote the words they began to take form and they had a shape and design to them. The poem pose about “The Great Goddess” was born. Another part of the image came into being.

Lastly the woman sat down at her computer. She needed an image to write about expertise in the English Composition course she was taking on line. At first she thought she would write about the five generation family farm of her cousins that will soon be put up for sale, but that was not really her area of expertise. In fact she couldn't think of one specific area of expertise that stood out to her. Than she remember how she had described herself in one word to a person. She told that person that the core of her being is creative. The proverbial light bulb went on, that is it. She is creative, whether or not it be a drawing, a poem, a photograph, an event,a clay scuplture or a garden. So she sat down and created the image for her writing. She layered it with art work and pose that she had done over the years and added the root word create in some of it forms. This image would lay the foundation for her argument of talent versus skill.

The Merriam Webster dictionary defines skill as : a learned power of doing something competently : a developed aptitude or ability.(A) Where as talent is defined as : a characteristic feature, aptitude, or disposition of a person or animal : the natural endowments of a person. (B)

“The Separation between talent and skill is one of the greatest misunderstood concepts.” “Talent you have naturally.” “Skill is only developed by hours and hours and hours of beating on your craft.” “I don’t really view myself as particularly talented.” “Where I excel is ridiculous, sickening work ethic.” “While the other guys are sleeping, I am working.” “While the other guys are eating, I am working.” Will Smith (1)

In the above Will Smith feels that he has skills that he has worked on. If he hadn't work hard on developing skills than he would not have been as successful.

“Good writers don’t rely on inspiration. They don’t use "talent" as a crutch. They don’t need luck. Instead, they develop skills.”

Kami M McArthur

1/2/2013 (2)

In David Farlands Daily kick in the pants Talent vs Skill he starts of with the above quote. He goes on to start his point with the following.

As authors, we’ve all read stories by authors that make us think, “Wow, I wish that I had his/her talent!” We’re trained to believe that writing well is somehow . . . mystical. We’re taught that we have to be born with talent, or perhaps a muse must whisper into our ears. But good writers don’t rely on inspiration. They don’t use "talent" as a crutch. They don’t need luck. Instead, they develop skills.(2)

In his article David Farland acknowledges that all of us have talent. He describes that he didn't have the aptitude for the mandolin, yet when he work with clay, it came easy to him. He believes to prefect a craft even if one is talent with it, that it takes practice through a learned set of skills. He notes that he spent fourteen hours a day for six months perfecting his writing skills. Farland concluded that skill is more valuable than talent.

Mike Puglielli is a 5 year creative designer. In his article titled “Learning your Craft” Talent vs Skill. Mike writes about talent, but believes skill is equally and more important than talent like Farland. In his article Mike wrote the following about talent.

Your talent is innate. Innate in that, you are born to be artistic. You have that intrinsic, artistic identity that was there right after leaving the womb. Talent blossoms, grows, and reveals itself (and its intentions) early when you’re a child. What’s great about talent, is that it finds a way—doesn’t matter what opportunities you have, whatever you’re talented in eventually shows through, and in this case, designing. Talent, as some say, is “God-given”. (3)

His writes about skill as:

Having skill is nearly the opposite to having talent. That doesn’t mean it is a bad thing, I will argue it is the most important, but more on that later. Skill takes time and effort to develop and is not innate and skills are more likely measurable and technical. Some qualities that make someone skillful could, however, be innate; things like hard work, dedication, persistence, and etc, are all things that help foster great skill—you could be born with these qualities. But skill is developed. (3)

Puglielle goes on to explain in his article that talent will only get you so far. To excel with your talent you need to work at it. He explains that learning skills will perfect your talent. Talent can't be relied on for it has a fall off point. It is at this point that skill takes over, and it is also at his point that some give up because they can't relie on their talent. Puglielle believes you don't have to have talent to be a great designer. It will take lots of skills to become great at it. Talent will only take you so far.

These two articles by Farland and Puglielle point out to me that we all can have a certain talent for a certain craft. Yet is the skills that we learn around our talent that propels us forward to secede in the field that foster our talent. I am very talented at creating art. Yet that talent will only take me so far unless I build the necessary skills to enhance my talent. In someway the articles point to being successful with talent built by skills. Yet to enjoy your talent doesn’t mean you don’t' have to be successful or even skillful. I think of myself as talented but not all that skillful. If I was successful it would mean that I could make a living from my talent. As of yet I haven't found that. I think that my talent is such a board stoked concept it is hard for me to pin it down to one venture. If I focused on just my writing than I could become skilled at it. If I focused just on my art work, it probably would take me places I have yet to imagine.

To circle back around to Coyle's work of “The Talent Code” the first chapter “The Sweet Spot”.(4) In which Coyle postulate that talent is not born it is earned. Coyle explained that one needed to work on the edge of ones ability in “deep practice” to become talented. It would seem that Coyle was really explaining skill not talent. If he had titled his book “The Skill Code”. It may have not sold many copies. The way it was written was a clever way to attract readers and skillfully explain skill disgusted as talent. So in that way Coyle is a skillful writer.

References

(A)http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/talent

(B)http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/skill

1. http://ivanhoff.com/2012/08/23/skill-vs-talent-2/
2. http://www.davidfarland.net/writing_tips/?a=166
3. http://inspiredology.com/learning-your-craft-talent-vs-skill/
4. Coyle, Daniel (2009). The Talent Code New York:Bantam Books ( Chapter 1 The Sweet Spot.)

I decided my review was not finished, something was bothering me. I think I found it between Talent and Skill.

 Heidi Feather

Professor Denise Comer

English Composition I: Achieving Expertise

April 11, 2013

Review: Coyle, Daniel (2009). The Talent Code New York:Bantam Books ( Chapter 1 The Sweet Spot.)

The story is about the authors quest to find Everest size talent. His quest takes him on a journey for fourteen months. He travels from Brazil to New York's Adirondacks, to California and into the Caribbean. He embarks on this quest to find answers. He wants to know why the Brazilian Soccer team is the best in the world. He searches to find out why flight simulators are so accurate to train pilots. Daniel Coyle comes to the conclusion that when people are trained through “deep practice” they learn to excel.

The chapter starts of with a comment by Coyle's daughter; “Daddy's going on a treasure hunt.” (12) Coyle's main argument is that talent is not born it is earned by deep practice. He asked readers to recall words from two different list. One list is just a pair of words and the other is a pair of words with letters missing. He writes “that most people remember more of the words that contained fragments.” “Studies show that most people remember three times as many.” “This is the essence of deep practice.”(16) He continues that “ Deep practice is built on a paradox: struggling in certain targeted ways—operating at the edges of your ability, where you make mistakes—makes you smarter.”(18) He introduces Robert Bjork the chair of psychology at UCLA, who has spent most of his life delving into questions of memory and learning. Coyle quote's Bjork who said “Things that appear to be obstacles turn out to be desirable in the long haul.” “One real encounter, even for a few seconds, is far more useful than several hundred observations.” (18) He continues with Bjork who according to Coyle, concluded that there is a “Sweet Spot in learning.” “When you find that sweet spot, learning takes off” said Bjork “When you practice deeply,” the usual rules are suspended.” “You use time more efficiently.” “Your small efforts produce big lasting results.”(19)

Coyle gives the most compelling evidence to this theory starting on page twenty. Here he begins to tell the reader about Edwin Link's unusual device, as Coyle calls it. It takes several pages for Coyle to explain how Link learns to fly a plane.(20) He quotes Link about his flying lesson. “For the better part of that hour we did loops and spins and buzzed everything in sight.” “Thank heaven I didn't get sick, but when we got down, I hadn't touched the controls at all.” “It thought what a hell of a way to teach someone to fly”.(21) Coyle goes on and explains how Link built the Aviation Trainer. Coyle explains that it took a series of accidents in the Airmail system, before Link's invention became popular. Coyle explains how “ Links trainer permitted pilots to practice more deeply, to stop, struggle, make errors, and learn from them.” “During a few hours in a Link trainer, a pilot could “take off” and “land” a dozen times on instruments.” “He could dive, stall, and recover, spending hours inhabiting the sweet spot at the edge of his capabilities in ways he could never risk in an actual plane”. (24)

Coyle latter explains how the game of fustal played all over Brazil, teaches future soccer stars, by putting them into deep practice. The game fustal is played with a small and heavy ball, the play is more intense and the players move more quicker and handle the ball more than in soccer.

This reader feels that, what Coyle is referring to is a skill not talent. The online Merriam Webster dictionary describes talent as : a characteristic feature, aptitude, or disposition of a person or animal.(a) This dictionary also describes a skill as :a learned power of doing something competently : a developed aptitude or ability.(b) There is no question in this readers mind, that Coyle is describing a skill in his description of Link's trainer. This reader is a daughter of an avid aviator, who has heard it mentioned that many pilots are considered skilled. In this readers encounters only a few pilots have had the distinction of being called talented by fellow pilots. This may be the reason that Coyle failed to mention savants and children with unexplained extraordinary talents. There are many us that can become more skilled in an area of our choosing. There are those few that have that have the unknowable factor that is known simply as talent.

A treasure hunt could be the way to describe Coyle's writing. It took several pages for this reader to even figure out what Coyle was writing about. At first this reader thought the book was about the Brazilian soccer team. This made the reading slow and confusing. His arguments seem compelling enough, but it left this reader wondering how Coyle came to the conclusion that all talent is earned through deep practice. This reader found the Chapter hard to navigate, it came off as rather boring. There were a few nuggets of interesting stories, but overall no treasure. In closing, this reader wouldn't recommend Coyle's book.

References:

Coyle, Daniel (2009). The Talent Code New York:Bantam Books

(a) Merriam Webster online dictionary http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/talent

(b) Merriam Webster online dictionary http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/skill

Review: Coyle, Daniel (2009). The Talent Code New York:Bantam Books ( Chapter 1 The Sweet Spot.)

The story is about the authors guest to find Everest size talent. His quest takes him on journey for fourteen months. He travels from Brazil to New York's Adirondacks, to California and into the Caribbean. He embarks on this quest to find answers. He wants to know why the Brazilian Soccer team is the best in the world. He searches to find out why flight simulators are so accurate to train pilots. Daniel Coyle comes to the conclusion that when people are trained through “deep practice” they learn to excel.

The chapter starts of on page 12 with a comment by Coyle's daughter; “Daddy's going on a treasure hunt.” Coyle's main argument is that talent is not born it is earned by deep practice, which he explains on page 16. On page 16 he asked readers to recall words from two different list. One list is just a pair of words and the other is a pair of words with letters missing. He writes “that most people remember more of the words that contained fragments.” Studies show that most people remember three times as many. This is the essence of deep practice he explains. He continues on page 18 that “ Deep practice is built on a paradox: struggling in certain targeted ways—operating at the edges of your ability, where you make mistakes—makes you smarter.” Also on page 18 he introduces Robert Bjork the chair of psychology at UCLA, who has spent most of his life delving into questions of memory and learning, writes Coyle. Coyle quote's Bjork who said “Things that appear to be obstacles turn out to be desirable in the long haul. One real encounter, even for a few seconds, is far more useful than several hundred observations.” On page 19 he continues with Bjork who according to Coyle, concluded that there is a “Sweet Spot in learning.” “When you find that sweet spot, learning takes off” said Bjork

“When you practice deeply,” writes Coyle, “the usual rules are suspended. You use time more efficiently. Your small efforts produce big lasting results.”

Coyle gives the most compelling evidence to this theory starting on page 20. Here he begins to tell the reader about Edwin Link's unusual device, as Coyle calls it. It takes several pages for Coyle to explain how Link learns to fly a plane. He quotes Link about his flying lesson on page 21 “For the better part of that hour we did loops and spins and buzzed everything in sight.” “Thank heaven I didn't get sick, but when we got down, I hadn't touched the controls at all. It thought what a hell of a way to teach someone to fly”. Coyle goes on and explains how Link built the Aviation Trainer. Coyle explains that it took a series of accidents in the Airmail system, before Link's invention became popular. On page 24 Coyle explains how “ Links trainer permitted pilots to practice more deeply, to stop, struggle, make errors, and learn from them. During a few hours in a Link trainer, a pilot could “take off” and “land” a dozen times on instruments. He could dive, stall, and recover, spending hours inhabiting the sweet spot at the edge of his capabilities in ways he could never risk in an actual plane”. Coyle latter explains how the game of fustal played all over Brazil, teaches future soccer stars, by putting them into deep practice. The game fustal is played with a small and heavy ball, the play is more intense and the players move more quicker and handle the ball more than in soccer.

A treasure hunt could be the way to describe Coyle's writing. It took several pages for this reader to even figure out what Coyle was writing about. At first this reader thought the book was about the Brazilian soccer team. This reader found it confusing when he cited two people of different disciplines that seemed to have no connection to each other. His arguments seem compelling enough, but it left this reader wondering how Coyle came to the conclusion that all talent is earned through deep practice. In this opening chapter he failed to mention savants and children with unexplained extraordinary talents. There were a few nuggets of interesting stories, but overall no treasure. In closing, this reader wouldn't recommend Coyle's book. It came off rather boring, slow and not all that engaging.