top | item 46648745

(no title)

officehero | 1 month ago

I'm surprised at how few parents understand what it takes to create a great artist. You need to start when they're 5 (or preferably younger), put them in a workshop with great artists/pedagogues etc. (costly!) where they work full time (forget school), evaluate potential and there is a tiny chance they themselves will become great. Annoyed by parents talking about their 5 year olds as "too young" or when they recommend their teenager to 'pursue their dream' when they don't provide a fraction of above. It's still possible but odds go down dramatically.

discuss

order

watwut|1 month ago

Contrapoint is that you do not need to pressure kid ever since they are 5 for them to be good artist as adults.

And the second point ... why should parents to do that with their random kid before that kid even shown interest? It is not like art represented some kind of career or lifetime security or even happiness in life.

roadside_picnic|1 month ago

Many of the comments here are expressing disbelief that this could have been created by a 12 year old, but people fail to recognize that, not only did Michelangelo have tremendous natural talent, but grow up in a world where, as a child, he was allowed to spend enormous amounts of his time and energy studying with professional artists.

He wasn't being dropped off a school at 7am, squirming in a chair until 3pm, playing video games before dinner and then doing homework until bed all while squeezing in a bit of time for sketching.

The vast majority of people probably benefit more from our current structure, but it does make it much less likely to have "genius" of the type we see in Michelangelo, Mozart, etc.

watwut|1 month ago

> at the age of 13, Michelangelo was apprenticed to Ghirlandaio. The next year, his father persuaded Ghirlandaio to pay Michelangelo as an artist, which was rare for someone that young

He was literally getting education in art. It is not like there was no structure.

lazyasciiart|1 month ago

This sounds like a strongly held opinion with no evidence.

officehero|1 month ago

Burden of proof is on the other party. In one sentence the opinion can be summarized as "if you want increased probability of child becoming a great artist you need great commitment." That's a null hypothesis.

wellthisisgreat|1 month ago

Can you recommend any reading for that methodology ? Sounds intuitively correct, but would love to get more context

officehero|1 month ago

Don't have a book but here's some quick thoughts: 1. Biographies on, e.g., Chinese pianist Lang Lang. When he was ~9 he 'retired' (it's an extreme case but telling, can recommend). 2. If you want formal/mathematical/CS perspective, study Reinforcement Learning (e.g. Rick Sutton).