Gladwell suggests that there are two kinds of creative people, those who come into their genius early and strong, and those who are, as the title suggests, late bloomers. The early geniuses already have a handle on their creative potential. They instinctively learn how to wield their abilities to great effect.

Late bloomers, however, often look like they've failed at their creative pursuits throughout their early careers. What might be going on, however, is that it takes a while for a late bloomer's ability to catch up to his or her vision. Gladwell quotes an English art critic saying, "More happily endowed and more integral personalities have been able to express themselves harmoniously from the very first. But such rich, complex, and conflicting natures as Cezanne's require a long period of fermentation." In other words, as Gladwell writes, "Cezanne was trying something so elusive that he couldn't master it until he'd spent decades practicing."

Twain himself didn't finish Huckleberry Finn until he was 49. True, he was already quite involved in writing, but few would argue that this one novel was his definitive. Gladwell informs us of Twain's process: "Twain fiddled and despaired and revised on gave up on Huckleberry Finn so many times that the book took him nearly a decade to complete." Twain wrote and rewrote, over and over again.

Of course, doubt haunts us: How do we know we will ever bloom at all? I think the answer to this is to follow your heart. Trite and fraught with insecurities as the notion is, I think it can be the only way. If Cezanne or Twain had given up, the world would be a less brilliant place, I think. They followed their hearts, they wrote or painted because there seemed to be nothing else they could do.

So, take heart, go forth, and write!

quote:

---

...rich, complex, and conflicting natures...

---

KaTi, I learned that percolating thing ages ago when I, too, was a practising software engineer. (Sometimes I think the process is more like infusing tea, more like soaking and steeping than running through once.) Designs were always cleaner, simpler, structured, when I let them sit. But the downside was that I became thoughtful and when I turned to writing, I lacked spontaneity--fine in designs and technical reports, but soulless in fiction. I shall be forever indebted to Ray Bradbury who says, in "Zen and the Art of Writing" that one should write the first draft of a short story in one session, to capture the passion, the essence of the story. That done, the percolating or infusion trick is essential to the revision process, because passion blinds me to my writing faults.

Back to the article and Ben Fountain. Is there a beautiful, rich Hatracker who would care to become my patron ... ?

quote:

---

does anyone even know what a percolator is anymore, LOL?

---

I was just going to suggest what TaleSpinner has already suggested:

quote:

---

the process is more like infusing tea, more like soaking and steeping than running through once.

---

It is a steeping process for many, and while coffee-making may change, a really good cup of tea (whether you drink herbal teas or the stronger types) needs to steep and may always need to, in spite of technology.

It has been my experience with really complicated stuff (like learning calculus or writing a story that works) that things need time to "sink in." While there are those stories that our muses may present to us fully-formed, and there are writers who can whip something out off of the tops of their heads, so to speak, most of it comes after "steeping."