There’s something intriguing in someone having a talent; even more-so when the talent is meant as a getaway or form of expression. Do we only have “talents” because we were forced to find a way to express ourselves?
Often people have a hard time being up-front about how they are feeling, even if the common nature of people is to talk about themselves. It occurred to me today that I’ve met a multitude of people who have -what most people would regard as- not having any sort of specific talent to their persona; and it hit me that most of the time these human beings tend to be straightforward and sincere. They have no need for a personal outlet because they are their own personal outlet.
Yet the people that sit with an inner mind full of turmoil that always have thoughts flowing through their head that they either never speak of or never have the time too, have a way of expression. Music, laughter, writing, art, magic, beauty, crafting, creating, cooking, sports, all become ways for said person to say what they need to say when they can’t actually verbalize it.
However, what if it is just simply wrong to dote on the fact that talents need to be so grand? Why can’t a talent be wiggling your toes, or catching your phone when you throw it up? What if by making the word “talent” seem like such a big deal, you force the people who are usually forthright, to subject themselves to some sort of creative hobby in order to be heard?
In a world where creativity is all around us at the touch of our fingertips, it can be easy to skip over the people who have something to say, but you ignore their words because you’d rather interpret it through a “talent” rather than actually listen. Because why waste time, in a universe that thrives off of five second attention spans?
And even further, are we subjecting the ones with creative hobbies to constantly be posting and showing more of their “talent”? Those things were created by them for them, in order to be free of their thoughts, not so you could get a daily dose into the mind of them; we make them create in order for them to say something, but anyone can run out of words.
So I sit on the threshold of a question; is it better to be the talker who no one can hear, or to be the creator who creates for a puppeteer?