Re the expert vs. teacher discussion, one more small thing: in compiling a list of tips, not every tip is useful for everyone. Someone saying they know what's good for everyone would be like teaching a left-handed pool player and saying, "most successful players use their right hand; therefore you should switch to your right hand." Everyone is different, and everyone needs to work out for themselves what works for them. Most successful shooters have done that. Teachers only help, they don't dictate. Learning is ultimately up to the student.
A second point: proof's in the pudding, as they say. If you do everything wrong, but the work comes out right, then you're right. I or someone else might object to things you do—for instance, some people say you should not photograph other peoples' children, or you shouldn't be aggressive in a way that angers your subjects—but it's ultimately not up to me or them to tell you or other people what to do. As the Big Book of AA says on page 164, "Our book is meant to be suggestive only. We realize we know only a little." No one knows everything.
A related point is that a person (artist, photographer) might have dumb or wrong ideas and still make good work. Again, decide for yourself whether someone's ideas are worth listening to and might help you, or if you can learn more from simply looking at the work.
Generally, though, if you are eager and willing, there is almost always something more to learn. Personally I hope to never lose the attitude of willing learner.
Mike
CORRECTION: Okay, okay. The proof of the pudding is in the eating. That "as they say" was supposed to signal that I was lampooning the way people botch the saying and get it wrong, like knowingly saying "I could care less" on account of it's a common mindless distortion of "I couldn't care less." Don't you think...well, never mind. Also, to Sean's excellent point about outcome bias, I believe art is one area in which outcome bias is justified. As long as no one gets hurt. One of my father's favorite sayings was "if it works you're right, if it doesn't work you're wrong."
Original contents copyright 2023 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. (To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below or on the title of this post.)
Featured Comments from:
Sean: "Mike said: 'A second point: proof's in the pudding, as they say. If you do everything wrong, but the work comes out right, then you're right.' That way of thinking is known as outcome bias. Annie Duke, in her book Thinking in Bets, calls the error 'Resulting.'"
Mike replies: I like that book description: "Poker champion turned business consultant Annie Duke teaches you how to get comfortable with uncertainty and make better decisions as a result." Short, sweet, and to the point.
Although you have no right privacy in a place this wouldn't stop a large alpha male from reaching to a pushy photographer. And no jury convict you because entitled photographers are disliked by many/most people. What is the fun of angering people who do not their photo taken.
Posted by: c.d.embrey | Thursday, 22 June 2023 at 02:00 PM
Sorry, but the proof is not in the pudding. If "they" say that, they're wrong: the proof is in the eating of said pudding.
Posted by: Luis C. Aribe | Thursday, 22 June 2023 at 04:37 PM
Where in the pudding is the proof? Nowhere unless maybe it was ‘proved’ as a yeasted dough. If the proof were in the pudding no one would ever find it … unless of course they ate it! Ah, the proof of the pudding was in the eating all along!
Sorry to go on about this (not really) but it really is an asinine version of the saying. On a par with saying “second of all”meaning “secondly”. I mean, if something were “second of all” it would be last or maybe least wouldn’t it?
Posted by: Richard Parkin | Thursday, 22 June 2023 at 05:04 PM
“proof's in the pudding, as they say” - incorrectly…
Posted by: Jez Cunningham | Thursday, 22 June 2023 at 05:28 PM
Teaching is an essential component of some professions, one of three arms, the other two being the practice of the profession, and research. Those who do, as well as teach, also keep learning. And the questions of students are one of the sources of learning. But also the exploration of new problems and the shared quest for solutions, and the challenge of imparting insights and principles to students deepens the knowledge of the tutor. Teaching in front of the customer deepens their appreciation of the process, allots more time to their problem and often draws out essential new elements for consideration, improving the service to that willing participant in the circle of care, dispensing of expertise and development of skills in the next generation.
In this model I would refute the contention that experts don’t know what to teach because they find it so easy. True experts have deep insights into knowledge of their discipline and emphasise important principles in their teaching. Not everyone with such expertise is a good teacher. It does seem strange not to know what you know. But without that expertise and insight into it, you cannot be amongst the best teachers.
Posted by: Richard G | Thursday, 22 June 2023 at 05:28 PM
The left handed pool player example reminded me of an example my wife, a dental hygiene educator, often cited. When she started, many offices still used mechanical dental engines and left handed students were forced to operate right-handed. Once pneumatic instruments became common students stayed with their natural hands. As a leftie, I’m sure they did much better work that way.
Posted by: Bob | Thursday, 22 June 2023 at 08:02 PM
Eric kim is a prime example of someone who has promoted himself as.an expert "street photographer." He V-logs his "turbothoughts" while promoting unconventional eating habits.
Posted by: c.d.embrey | Thursday, 22 June 2023 at 08:41 PM
Hi.
I think we now need a detailed discussion on exactly what a pudding is...
:-)
Peace & stuff,
Dean
Posted by: Dean Johnston | Friday, 23 June 2023 at 12:39 AM
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned that dubious and much-quoted bit of pokerwork wisdom from the Analects of Confucius:
Confucius said: “I instruct only the passionate. I enlighten only the fervent. If a student cannot return with the other three corners of the square after I have shown them the first one, I will not repeat the lesson.”
(Book 7, ch. 8)
Hmm, tough homework assignment...
Mike
Posted by: Mike Chisholm | Friday, 23 June 2023 at 08:41 AM
Richard G. writes, "True experts have deep insights into knowledge of their discipline and emphasise important principles in their teaching." I would argue with that as a universal truth. Here's a counterexample from my own experience. My wife has many years of teaching special-education students. I vividly remember her painstakingly teaching a very delayed student how to subtract with borrowing. What she taught was process, and at that a process she had developed to simplify the operation even beyond what a 2nd-grader would learn. Her expertise was not math but teaching at a very granular level, and in a mode that that most of us will never need. She did not impart the principles of pedagogy, her expertise, nor even the foundations of arithmetic, which were clearly beyond the student's ability. So while I'd agree that for more advanced students who need to grasp the fundamentals of a subject, the instructor also needs a deep understanding. This is not true for every teaching situation or for every student.
Posted by: Bill Tyler | Friday, 23 June 2023 at 07:15 PM
Most of us are neither novices nor experts, but practitioners who would like to improve to reach goals that we haven't fully articulated. So any interaction that communicates intent as well as method can be valuable to both sides.
Posted by: scott kirkpatrick | Saturday, 24 June 2023 at 11:42 AM