job title: ceramicist / writer / tutor
company: freelance / royal college of art
based: london
website: n/a
bio: awarded an OBE for her achievements as an artist and writer in 1990 / tutor in the ceramics and glass department of the royal college of art / represented by the Marsden Woo Gallery

1. Can a person be talented in a field they have no interest in?

"I would like to answer 'no', that deep interest and commitment contribute to the development of talent and therefore it only applies in a field of interest. But I suspect that people will go on working in a field in which they have succeeded even if their interest in it has worn out."

2. Could you argue that every student you've tutored is talented in someway? Or are some just very able?

"When a student is accepted on to the course you know certain things about them but not really very much, and not how they will respond to the experiences of being in the department or how they will progress. I have often been surprised by what develops over 2 years - both positively and negatively. I don't have a finite definition of talent - it is a whole bag of things and the word is used as a euphemism for something hard to describe. Our teaching hopefully prods people towards the areas in which they will reveal some talent, or I would rather say achieve some really good work."

3. Do you see your skills with clay as a talent?

"No. Though apparently my pottery teacher when I was 14 thought I had 'aptitude' for it. I think that at that age that would have been mostly related to pleasure: enjoyment of the possibilities of the material, plasticity and colour and the relative ease of making. And the rhythm of consistent practice - an engagement with turning up to make things on a regular basis and staying late to finish them. Still about enjoyment therefore, and some satisfaction in what I was making, and the curiosity to do something slightly different next time, to move on and learn more. Good dialogue with my teacher was a big part of this - her encouragement."

4. Do you believe that talent can be, in part defined as a 'natural ability'? Or is it a label to describe someone who has a specific interest and through his or her approach, hones their skills to an outstanding level?

"I think both definitions are relevant - small children show certain characteristics, innate abilities for learning certain things easily, which can be encouraged towards something like a talent, though it is for me a dangerous word. The interest, engagement, and slog with the pursuit of an interest is much more important than the innate part which is just an indication of a possible direction. Patience, stubbornness, and determination and confidence and a work ethic that is not too chaotic all matter more than what you are good at as a child."

5. What is your definition of talent?

"It is a word used from the outside, a catch-all term for commenting that someone is very good at something and it bestows a kind of magical aspect to this which is irrelevant. It is a useful word for the press. I can't define it, I suspect it of being wallpapered over people who have a mixture of skill, a concentrated field of practice, stamina, luck and achievement."