People often believe that people who are successful are successful because they have natural talent. However, Orwell, in the novel Outliers, makes it clear that natural talent has little to do with success. The successful are a product of lucky circumstances, extra practice, age, and family status. Many coincidental circumstances lead to other opportunities that allow someone to excel more than another. From there they continually excel and are considered successful over those that did not have the same opportunities.
However, I did learn one lesson that I will probably use in my future career. I addressed a boy in the class, which I later found out was actually a girl who just dressed like a tom-boy. This was something quite embarrassing not only for me but possibly for her as well when having to explain to me her gender. The saying really is true when they say not to judge a book by its cover. My time with the chess team has been great and I have tried to learn and grow as much as I can within my experiences.
In the stories, he explains the main factors of success, or the “recipe”. For Gladwell, he describes the “recipe” of success to include luck, practice, and opportunity. People in our world become successful through luck and chance. The decision between success and failure cannot be determined due to this factor. Gladwell composes a few examples on how people succeed because of luck.
If everyone was given amazing opportunities,the world would be ten times more successful. One’s cultural legacy and most of the opportunities that come along are merely by chance. One does not get to decide when they were born, what nationality they are, etc. The only controllable aspect is hard work. If one works hard at what they do and takes advantage of the opportunities that face them, they are on the road to success.
But later, they reached the biggest musical success of modern history in the world, in just a few years. Many social movements would have not done if The Beatles had not played songs against the war. They became in the most important influence in the sixties, both in music and in society. The Beatles phenomenon was called The Beatlemania and this lasted little more than three years, more than the time that fashions usually last. In this time, they marked the trends of the fashion and were an example to follow for their image.
Some people say that that people have to be born with natural talents or abilities to succeed, while others think that we have the ability to make ourselves successful with hard work. Who is right? The two authors, David Epstein and Malcolm Gladwell, take two different ideas on this subject.. Malcolm Gladwell, the author of Outliers: The Story of Success explains how he thinks that preparation and hard work is more important than talent. The author of The Sports Gene, David Epstein, he thinks that natural ability is an advantage over practice.Gladwell makes a more convincing argument with more evidence on his ideas then how epstein dose . In The Sports Gene, David Epstein describes how two athletes that there skill in athletics is the result of genes or their biology.
Have you heard of the 10,000 hour rule? The 10,000 hour rule, as explained in Malcom Gladwell’s “Outliers”, is when someone practices a total amount of 10,000 hours to achieve a skill. I agree with the rule because when someone practices a skill for that amount of time, they will more than likely be at the mastery level in said skill. As the author stated in the story,“Achievement is talent plus preparation” but does practice really make perfect? In the story there were a group of elite music performers.
It takes practice, teamwork, and many other factors. Learning to become successful is different for everyone, even you are famous are not. The book “The Outliers” by Malcom Gladwell will be “good news” for anyone to read, even if they are average. The book shows how people got famous people get successful in life. Achieving successful is based on three factors: ethnicity, luck and timing.
In Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell, discuss that “If intelligence matters only up to a point, then past that point, other things – things that have nothing to do with intelligence – must start to matter more,” (86). “To be a Nobel Prize winner apparently, you have to be smart enough to get into at least as good as Notre Dame or the University of Illinois. That’s all,” (Gladwell 83). The author is explaining that getting to the well-known university doesn’t means you’re likely going to win a Nobel Prize. As long as you’re smart enough, you can win a Nobel Prize by doing to other university.
The Beatles were one of the first artists to consider their albums more strongly, not thriving off of the success of key singles.10 Songs besides singles were not only filler, creating thematic songs that were consistently high quality, from beginning to end.11 Long before music videos’ popularity in the 1980s, The Beatles made full length films featuring their music, in essence being the first music videos. 12 They also pioneered the genre of Psychedelic Rock along with The Beach Boys, being some of the first to highly chart using guitar feedback and electronic effects within their music.13 It is estimated that hundreds of thousands of America’s young people began to play guitar and form bands from the influence of The Beatles, heightening the amount of garage rock bands forming in the US.14 “Beatlemania”, the term used to describe the intense fandom surrounding The Beatles, was clearly visible through their impact upon fashion.15 The hairstyle shared by each Beatle, the “mop-top”, was seen as messy and was often disdainfully looked upon by adults, yet it began to be widely imitated across youth.16 Their hair grew longer and longer, and other groups followed as longer hair became more socially accepted due to their influence.17 It is difficult to understand the extent to which The Beatles have affected us, transforming music, fashion, and culture in general. The Beatles remain one of, if not the most, influential band in
Malcolm Gladwell states in Outliers that 10,000 hours of practice in a sport or hobby or career, will propel one person over another. He tries to convince us with his argument by bringing up people like Bill Gates and the Beatles, stating that they spent more than 10,000 hours perfecting their craft. At first his argument seems pretty legit and holds merit, but then you begin to question. What if someone practices for 10,000 hours, but doesn 't put in much work? What if someone, who has spent few hours than 10,000 is excelling?
Living in the future may seem appealing, with its infinite options, but n reality it can 't hold a candle to existing in the moment and being involved with those around you. I would argue that being fully connected to one moment, person, or experience, is better than being partially involved with a multitude. People who are the most impactful in the world are sold out to what they believe in. They aren 't keeping their options open, waiting for something better. Committing to stick with something through thick and thin is an admirable trait we should all