I like the points BTW, it’s just hard to relate EVERYTHING to cooking and french

The below are living examples that we all can continue to learn into their 60’s and 70’s and even 80’s.

- Martha Stewart, 70
- Warren Buffet, 81
- David McCullough, 78
- Barbara Walters, 81
- Clint Eastwood, 81
- Supreme Court: 6 of the 9 members are over 60 years of age.

My grandmother was a secretary until she got married. Then her job was raising kids and keeping house. She was always amazed at the opportunities I had to pursue my dreams that her generation didn’t.

I’m a homemaker who stopped work for several years to raise children and am now looking to start a new career. I’m in my early 50s and am encouraged by your post.

Thank you.

The thing is that people have to make that conscious choice– do I do what I love in spite of the risks? Am I willing to pay the price? Because success is not guaranteed anywhere in spite of one’s efforts. Even as a doctor or engineer, you might kill yourself.

Whatever you do, if you’re lucky, great, if you’re not lucky, it doesn’t mean you’re a failure. I’m sure Julia Child would have kept cooking happily even if her book sold just 200 copies and nobody ever saw her on TV.

My problem I guess is with the definition of success and with there being just one kind of success. I’ve never been attracted enough to that particular lure.

Personality aside, her cooking is vile. VILE. I don’t know about her daytime TV audience– if I did, I’d be a TV executive. Therefore I can’t explain her success– like I can’t explain Oprah or Dr. Phil. I can explain Jerry Springer, but he’s off topic.

What I can explain however is that PBS chefs that followed after Child (Jacques Pepin or Lidia Bastianich or that Spanish dude that owns Café Atlántico) haven’t reached cultural icon status and never will, in spit of being better cooks, because they arrived when the market had already been sold in parcels. Yes they are successful, and I am (benevolently) jealous of their lifestyles, but they won’t go down in history the same way as Julia Child.

To make it big now you not only have to be a real trained pro but also have the Murdochs as producers, like Gordon Ramsey and his 5,000 different TV shows (the British ones are actually quite nice, he appears human).

Anyway, I’ve been trying to make an Outliers kind of argument all along– personal traits are essential of course, but luck and environment play a huge part in success. That can be turned on its head of course when you get someone who is great at reading the environment and meeting unmet needs just slightly ahead of the curve, like Steve Jobs, and you have the formula for repeated success… though Jobs of course is a case study in Outliers (and here the serpent bites its tail).

I think you’re right that we have to temper our passions with realistic choices. A lot of people start with a day job and transition into another business or career without having to take a huge leap of faith. Some people can go “all in” and make a big sacrifice. I think it has to do with risk tolerance as much as talent.

As for the doctors, engineers, accountants, etc… I’d be curious to see how many people didn’t get into medical school or law school, or didn’t get accepted to an engineering program — or who flunked out. I have no doubt these professionals have skill set that are in demand, but how many people failed along the way?

The lady who runs the French bakery I frequent used to be an engineer.

Just because there are a lot of people doing something doesn’t mean there isn’t room for someone doing it really well–be better that your competition and stand out from the glut of cooks on cable TV.

I don’t agree with you on this point–how do you explain the enormous success of Rachael Ray? I’m not saying I’m a fan, but the woman has built an empire–she’s not even a chef and she didn’t start a cooking career at age 7. She’s a personality with a fan base.

I think I’ll pick up that book, it sounds like an inspiring read.