Does experience always qualify over talent?

Earlier today, I spotted a link to a 'toddler fashion blogger'. Which is, of course, a huge publicity stunt. Racked National get a kid in, everyone thinks "awwww, isn't she cute?" and there's a bit of a buzz. Hardly inspired. But what irked me was this comment on the post:

Stop the madness! Enough with these children blogging about fashion: first teensy-pretentious Julia, then quirky-maven Tavi, and now a freaking toddler with make up? COME ON!

Can we please have bloggers and editorials by grown ups, real editors, with actual jobs, and, gasp, life experience. Maybe women and men? Over 20 years old? PLEASE?

Er, excuse me? It's the 'over 20 years old' line that gets me. This notion that the only thing that matters when it comes to experience is age. I'm not saying that that's not part of what's important. Of course it is. You learn from your experiences, and you improve when you've been doing something for years. You work your way up.

But it's not all about age.

Of course, a toddler blogging is ridiculous, but why the sudden backlash on young bloggers? Why is it so bad that young women (yes, young women, not kids) are suddenly writing? Tavi, to use one example, is a very talented writer. Way beyond her years when it comes to blogging, and her approach to both fashion and the industry itself. She's 13 years old and she's kicking ass. And not because she's so young. It's because she's good.

When Tavi is 20, she's going to have seven years experience behind her. Sure, it's a different experience to yours or mine, but it's experience. Why do people try to qualify everything by their own experiences? Surely it's much more open minded to just take people as they are and be impressed at what they've done. Not compare and judge it by what you've done. Either they're talented, and that talent is raw, or they've honed it in over the last few years, or even decades. Experience doesn't necessarily mean talent, just as raw talent sometimes doesn't mount up to hard experience. Both are admirable in my book.

My reason for this post is that bloggers are getting territorial. If someone has any kind of quick success, it's not good enough. They haven't earned it. They haven't paid their dues. I'm calling bullshit on that. Because unless you know someone personally, you have no idea of their experience. One of the most talented writers I know has only just started making a living from it. Does that make her any less talented than people who have been doing it for years? No. Sure, she has less experience in the industry but the two things are very different.

I went to University and worked hard writing about literature and reading Shakespeare. I only started seriously blogging three years ago. I was 24 then. And basically, fresh out of uni, I knew nothing. But I had balls, and that got me a long way. It sweet talked my way into a great job at British Airways. And those selling skills come in more handy in freelancing than people realise. Every day. My experience is different. But it's important to me.

You can't measure anyone else's experience. And you can really only have an opinion on their talent. Why pick an age out of the air and say that that's the age someone is qualified to write about your chosen field? I see it happening more frequently these days. Young bloggers don't get a look in. And they should. Because they're the people that we want to get involved in the industry, aren't they? Why do they have to prove themselves? If they're talented, and they're working hard, maybe that's something that should be put before experience.

We need to stop measuring people by our own experience. Because in doing so, we're missing out on so much talent.

Flickr image from lepiaf.geo's photostream.