The simple mathematics of contemporary life ensure that most people's abilities will be considered unremarkable.

In more traditional village times, anybody who was the best cook, athlete, musician, or whatever among 100 of his fellows was regarded as unusual, and therefore definitely a “somebody.”  If a person was better at something than 1,000 of his fellows, the odds were good that he would never in his lifetime encounter another human being of comparable proficiency.  (If he did, both parties were likely to be considered almost mythic figures.)

The whole picture has changed today.  In the realm of sports, being the best among 100 of your peers may be enough to get you onto your high school football team--although not necessarily as a starter--and that’s about it.  Beyond this point, being the best among 1,000 may not land you a spot on even an obscure college team.  And compared to our primary frame of reference, the “bigger world” of sports we see every day on our television screens, the vast majority of us are doomed from the outset never to be more than spectators.

If an individual’s prospects for recognition as an athlete are bad, as something like a musician they’re even worse.  People just don’t bother listening to live musicians in their own hometowns anymore.  We’re all plugged into the latest recordings by the same miniscule set of superstars everybody on the planet listens to.  What are your odds of becoming one of these?

The same pattern holds if you’re a cook, a painter, a teller of stories, a maker of clothing or furniture--or in virtually any other field where in past times, if you were good, your talents were known and valued, within an environment that was your primary frame of reference.