<p>It seems that some of the most gifted 12-year old writers don't necessarily become great writers. why is that? it's often as if they don't have much room to improve when they're 12 - nor do they have much motivation to improve. so it often seems that they don't really improve their writing skills as much as those who still have a long way to improve. that said, there certainly is a correlation between good writing and picking up writing when young - but whereas most people who are good writers at 12 remain good writers, only a proportion of non-good writers at 12 eventually become good writers.</p>
<p>it seems that most people have a realistic natural potential, and don't improve much further once they approach such potential</p>
<p>have you noticed the same tends to hold true for a lot of other skills as well?</p>
<p>Where do you come up with this random theory? no. some people are good writers when they're young and then drop it, some continue, some get better. I used to be good at math, now i can't add and subtract without a calculator. it's not a theory, people are different. writing improves with age as people learn logic and reasoning better and gain a better vocabulary, but it also improves with how much practice you get.</p>
<p>This applies to some people, not all. There are so many variables to consider, such as initial training, rate of growth, how often one is exposed to books, family upbringing and native tongue, teacher quality, etc. Some of these change as time goes on, and as a result, people's writing skills change.</p>
<p>I myself was a horrible writer when I was young because English is not my native tongue (although now it is, hence why I am a decent writer). My friend who has been reading since the dawn of time is a phenomenal writer.</p>
<p>Well - the thing is - isn't it the case with MOST skills that skill level tends to saturate? (eventually?) The fact of the matter is that your writing can improve up to a certain point - but eventually there is only a difference of subjectivity. With writing, eventually "improvement" only becomes "improvement in the eyes of the beholder"</p>
<p>Well I quit reading because I got bored with genres at age 12. I had read enough stuff in my favorite genres of fiction that it was repeating and I figured that I should make my own stories. I also wanted to improve my abillity to create good content, independant of style, by writing whenever I felt like reading. The consequence is little improvement in my syle, and I'll never be an English major, but I still think I made the right decision.</p>
<p>Yeah, whatever. Actually, one of my teachers got a Ph. D. for educational philosophy, so I guess the University of Michigan agrees with me. Long words don't suit me too well.</p>
<p>this is a damn good theory. you know how i know? because it’s inquilinekea’s theory. INQUILINEKEA’S. to any doubters i just have one thing to say. actually i have no things to say to you. what i do have is a head im going to shake disapprovingly at you. you’ll never get it and because you won’t i won’t even waste any words on you. i’ll just continue to shake my head until you get the message, that you’re being disapproved on for your dismissal of this awesome theory that just happens to be inquilinekea’s theory. INQUILINEKEA’S!</p>