One of the most radical things anyone who criticises or participates in any art form can think is that talent is not inherent.
Until very recently, the idea of talent wasn't something that I had spent an awful lot of time thinking about.
Of course, for many years I have looked at people, listened to people, and considered their work and assigned them to the talented and untalented binary that we all subconsciously subscribe to.
Then, like a breath of fresh air, artists and critics I admire started to suggest talent has almost nothing to do with the content we produce, and as a concept it might not actually have any intrinsic value, let alone exist as some sort of concrete reality.
One afternoon I was quietly browsing the internet when I saw an interesting blog post.
A fan of American musician Mitski had complained that she felt she didn't have a huge well of talent, and she wondered if that was going to impact upon her being successful in music.
Mitski's response was calm, reassuring, and inspirational.
She told this young person talent is just something people throw around, and all that really counts is how hard you work at something you think you want to do.
In fact, Mitski wasn't even sure that she could call herself talented, but to her that isn't a concern because she knows that she has consistently worked hard and she has succeeded in her field for that reason, not because record labels and concert promoters have some idea of her simply being naturally gifted.
To me, forgetting about talent is significant for a number of reasons.
Convincing people there are those who are going to be good at things and those who aren't is damaging and elitist, and carries us right back to pre-Romantic attitudes to art that function on the premise that divine inspiration and access to elite education and training are what make an artist.
In many respects we have moved past this and talent has become an insidious presence in the artistic market.
In starting research for my master's thesis, I came across an article about the Spice Girls and authenticity.
The article talks about how popular music is often thought to be inauthentic because it embraces artifice and rejects common narratives about traditional musical talent and ability.
What struck me the most in the article was a segment on the Spice Girls movie Spice World.
In the movie, we are shown scenes of the band undertaking gruelling rehearsals for their live shows.
The girls in the band were often criticised for not being exceptional musicians, and for not writing their own music.
In showing the hard work that goes into staging a live performance, the film shows that the root of this criticism is an idea that if you are inherently gifted, then writing, playing and performing music should be effortless.
But there is nothing about music that is effortless and propagating the myth that if you're talented then you're able to just pick up a guitar and get on stage and wow people is only discouraging to the millions of people who give it a go and find it really, really difficult.
Because art is difficult, it might be an innate instinct for many people, but being good at it takes time and effort.
Talent is a myth dreamed up by people who don't want others to participate, and I know that my life has been revolutionised by the idea that I don't have to be naturally adept at something to eventually be good at it.
Hard work isn't always fun, but neither is giving up on something you really want to do just because the necessary skills don't come to you all at once.
The sooner we give up on talent, the sooner we level the artistic playing field for the better.
Millie Lovelock is a Dunedin student.
