According to (perhaps a misunderstanding of) K. Anders Ericsson[1], it takes 10000 hours to become a master at something. 10,000 hours is a long time: 5 years at 40 hours per week (the average workload), or over a year without a break or rest of any kind. That takes tenacity, it takes commitment… but it also takes enjoyment.
I have been working 40-hour weeks (or more) for over a decade now, and I have done five full years in multiple fields. Am I an expert in those? You may be both relieved and unsurprised to hear that I do not see myself as such. Whilst it’s arguable that any career takes multiple tasks, and were I to spend my 10000 hours on (say) Excel only, rather than a bit of Excel and a bit of customer-facing and a bit of procurement, events planning, line-editing… you get the drift. Maybe I would be an expert in Excel by now had I focussed my energies, instead of being a middling events planner and a below-average Excel user and a competent-for-home-use graphic designer. Life, though, will not allow us to be so granular or so simple, and whilst I am a general expert in the field of ‘books’, with 10000 hours spent EASILY on aspects within the wide umbrella of the book trade, anything we might want to attain is really a series of skills rather than just one. Should we be breaking down our ambitions into skills we can practice?
I would argue that the missing ingredient is enjoyment. Examples you might see of 10000 hour-practitioners include Bill Gates, who got his first computer at 13 and spent his 10000 hours programming before college, or The Beatles, whose 1,200 Hamburg gigs allowed them to meet the 10000 hour rule. Yes, the tightness and unique sound of The Beatles allowed them to transcend their role as a pop act and help define the music scene of a generation, but they went to Germany in order to succeed at music, and surely it was the passion that lead them there that drove the practice, and made it seem worth it to be away from home? Bill Gates was a schoolkid who enjoyed programming so much he was going home to play on his computer instead of hanging out with friends. In the enjoyment of the subject, we find the unique path through for us – and, yes, we practice, but we are fulfilled by the act of practice.
To me, that becomes the basis for a value system: if you’d happily spend 10 000 hrs on your perfect home, think about what that looks like. Is it 10,000 hours at work to earn the deposit for a mortgage, or would you be better served doing up a shit tip yourself than saving? If you want to find success as an actor, should you practice directly for 10,000 hours, or will watching and reading and exploring set you apart just as powerfully? Ericsson’s paper says we must be out of our comfort zone for our hours to count, but he doesn’t tell us that practice should be in a particular direction. The joy inherent in the outcome can indeed guide the journey, and having your eyes on the prize does not mean that you lose the sense of joy in the process.
My whole life is about books. It is, often, exhausting: I work 60-hour weeks, I work on both private research and customer service (in a manner), I must create stimuli and respond to them, and I still carve out time to read for pleasure and write in a journal nobody sees. A life in books is – to me – not a life sat, stagnant, reading. A life in books is a life lived, and written, and in analysis of others’ work, and all of these create a more dynamic and rewarding expertise than were I focussed on any one aspect of my bookish life. My 10,000 hours are long gone, and I may even be on my third or fourth 10,000, but when I assume 10,000 hours of work are what is between my goal and the present me, I would choose the life I live. If we know that success takes 10,000 hours of practice, use that as a means to question what you feel is worth doing with your own life, and live as you mean to become an expert.
To get this article, and others, as physical media, subscribe now.
[1] The idea was in the cultural consciousness from around 1993, but gained traction when Ericsson was cited by Malcolm Gladwell in his 2008 book Outliers. The theory is often engaged with uncritically: Ericsson himself said 10,000 was the average number of deliberate practice hours that the violinists had achieved by age 20, at which point the violinists ‘were nowhere near masters’, but whilst the number of hours may be greater or lesser, the ultimate point Ericsson made – that practice is more significant than innate talent in determining success – is reflected in the theory and thus we find it useful.
On This Topic:
- Obviously, you should read either Outliers or Ericsson’s article
- Taylor Swift’s astronomical success is because she is an expert in unusual things for her career path – like business. Nobody could say that time was wasted, surely?
- OK so I’m behind on my StoryGraph goals for 2025. That doesn’t mean that what I have done is suddenly invalidated because I’m working on other things. That’s the great thing about seeing expertise in a portfolio – I’m growing in some other way, always.
To-Do:
- HY edits
- Choose new journal
- Connect e-reader to hotspot
Today’s Culture:
- Now that I have access to a vinyl player I am going to be a demon of a collector. I still prefer CDs, but does that mean I’ll need to double up?? Lord have mercy on my wallet and my lack of storage.
- I’m eating later in the day (ie, not at like 6am) and I do seem to now be missing a whole superfluous meal since breakfast is at a reasonable time.
- It’s almost time for my annual read of a Nutcracker book! Please let me know if you are aware of any new ones coming out.
Late Romantic 
Leave a comment