A while back, and don't remember where, Kevin (where is that guy?) was making notes about writers (or maybe it was athletes), claiming to be able to spot the guy who became great through herculean effort-n-sacrifice, vs. the guy who easily just gets it.  Talent vs. experience is an old argument, and off and on, I've dwelled on it.  The person who has the gift still has to work to be great; the industrious type still has to have something inside to work from.

So here I am questioning aloud if it's even something that can be found with searching.  Any musical gift I have is very unspectacular, but I'm enjoying the quest. 

But as to what you said, if I were sacrificing everything for it, and if my performance were under the microscope, I'd probably find it as dispiriting as I find my day job.  (I may have been a contented science dabbler too, if the minimal obsession could make me happy.  I often wonder.)  With music, I can stop (I think), the second it stops making me happy. 

the talent vs. effort argument is as useless as nature vs. nurture.  it's both, in varying degrees, dependant on the individual.

what i was trying to get at is that, without the obsession, one can still enjoy the art and appreciate what happens when someone does devote themselves to it.  nothing wrong with dabbling.  i'm a confirmed dabbler myself: broad range of interests coupled with a natural inclination to laziness.  never quite been able to focus my mind on any one subject long enough to plumb any sort of depth.  but, i also enjoy knowing a little about a lot, instead of knowing a lot about a little. 

without the obsession, the insane passion, greatness is out of reach.  but, likewise, without it, one isn't reaching for greatness anyway.  just to enjoy and gather some knowledge or skill.  no matter how small it may be.