-[Harpreet Singh Dhillon]
Nature vs nurture debate has been raging for generations and no clear-cut answer has come up thus far . Some think that artistic ability is inborn, whereas others say that such a talent are often acquired by training and diligence . This essay intends to analyze both perspectives. I personally believe that artistic knack may be a combination of both, talent and training.
On the one hand, there are evidences to prove that genes do influence the innate abilities of an individual . When you see 2-5 year olds in reality shows like,'lndia's Got Talent' and 'Dance lndia Dance', you are forced to believe that they have some inborn talent. They are gifted with that talent. They certainly have more natural aptitude than others in certain areas. Other well-known examples also can be cited here. Who has not heard of the achievements of individuals like Mozart and Einstein?
On the opposite hand, anyone can produce art by practice and training. Had this not been the case, there would be no schools for Art, and Art and art wouldn't exist as subjects. More often than not, the decision of somebody being naturally talented is skewed. For example, if we see a gorgeous painting or the other such work of art, we reach the conclusion that the person must be really gifted. We tend to ignore the very fact that the person may have travelled an extended journey of perseverance to succeed in that time .
ln my opinion, to succeed in the recognizable top, even those gifted with talent need to exerting and practice tons . Talented people may have less diligence to succeed in there, but they can't reach the pinnacles of success without sufficient practice. Even the foremost talented can lead a lifetime of oblivion if they do not polish their art by continued practice. Conversely, anyone with a passion and determination can achieve creating unique masterpieces of art.
To sum up, both talent and diligence have a task in creating art. Both are inextricably linked. The nature vs nurture debate has no clear-cut answer and can never have
On the one hand, there are evidences to prove that genes do influence the innate abilities of an individual . When you see 2-5 year olds in reality shows like,'lndia's Got Talent' and 'Dance lndia Dance', you are forced to believe that they have some inborn talent. They are gifted with that talent. They certainly have more natural aptitude than others in certain areas. Other well-known examples also can be cited here. Who has not heard of the achievements of individuals like Mozart and Einstein?
On the opposite hand, anyone can produce art by practice and training. Had this not been the case, there would be no schools for Art, and Art and art wouldn't exist as subjects. More often than not, the decision of somebody being naturally talented is skewed. For example, if we see a gorgeous painting or the other such work of art, we reach the conclusion that the person must be really gifted. We tend to ignore the very fact that the person may have travelled an extended journey of perseverance to succeed in that time .
ln my opinion, to succeed in the recognizable top, even those gifted with talent need to exerting and practice tons . Talented people may have less diligence to succeed in there, but they can't reach the pinnacles of success without sufficient practice. Even the foremost talented can lead a lifetime of oblivion if they do not polish their art by continued practice. Conversely, anyone with a passion and determination can achieve creating unique masterpieces of art.
To sum up, both talent and diligence have a task in creating art. Both are inextricably linked. The nature vs nurture debate has no clear-cut answer and can never have
Post a Comment