Hello. It concerns me, that I may lack the creativity to persue my interests in Pure Mathematics. I do not believe I am any more intelligent than average, Yet for some reasong I love the deductive method and beauties I find in Mathematics. I was reading a short article http://journalstar.com/news/local/math-whiz-gives-lecture-at-unl/article_aacec19e-e75d-5537-9742-92efc517b3a7.html In which Michael Atiyah (Who I look up to very much as a mathematician) claims that Mathematicians are born rather than made. This dissapointed me greatly and for a few days I was considering giving up my goal of becoming a pure mathematician. The reason I do not believe I am creative in mathematics is that I cannot prove theorems presented In textbooks, without reading the proof in the text (Real and Complex analysis). This has led to a reduced confidece in my mathematical abilities, which was already quite low due to poor performances in mathematical competitios and olympiads. I am not striving to be a fields medalist or ground breaking mathematician (those were once my immature goals), but rather to contribute to research somehow, and present at least one creative proof in pure mathematics (It does not need to be a "proof from the book"). I really admire Raoul Bott, and would like to work in a field such as his, but I am unsure how to do this, if I lack creativity and insight at the undergraduate level. I can understand all parts of the mathematics I study (Real Analysis, Complex Analysis, Abstract Algebra) with enough head banging, but I can rarely do the harder exercises without looking at the solutions, seeking aid, or re-reading the text. Any advice?