The main concept was that there are two types of genius in history, 'expressionists' and 'experimentalists'. The expressionists are born with an innate genius level of skill where their work just flows from them, typically at an early age. The example used is Picasso. The other type are people with skill who continue to get better through trial and error, which typically takes a long time. The example given is Cezzane.
Interesting to me was seeing how the experimentalists can seem to be floundering or even failures for much of their career lives, and also how luck, passion and a 'patron' (someone who is willing to fund the r&d) are typical ingredients to their eventual success.
Anyway, it was nice to be reminded that contrary to the typical portrayal of success and genius, it doesn't always happen at an early age :-)
Interesting to me was seeing how the experimentalists can seem to be floundering or even failures for much of their career lives, and also how luck, passion and a 'patron' (someone who is willing to fund the r&d) are typical ingredients to their eventual success.
Anyway, it was nice to be reminded that contrary to the typical portrayal of success and genius, it doesn't always happen at an early age :-)
