The instinctual reaction is 'yes,' but let's take the question deeper. Here is one answer from an essay by Tom Bissell:
In On Writing, as I recall Stephen King takes the position that anyone can learn to be a good writer, but no one can learn to be a great writer - you either have the ability to transcend to that level or you do not."Can writing be taught?… Of course writing can be taught… All human activity is taught. The only thing any human being is born to do is survive, and even in this we all need several years of initial guidance.
Harder to judge is the possibility of teaching a beginning writer how to be receptive to the very real emotional demands of creating literature. To write serious work is to reflexively grasp abstruse matters such as moral gravity, spiritual generosity, and the ability to know when one is boring the reader senseless, all of which are founded upon a distinct type of aptitude that has little apparent relation to more measurable forms of intelligence. Plenty of incredibly smart people cannot write to save their lives. Obviously, writerly intelligence is closely moored to the mature notion of intellect (unlike math or music, the adolescent prodigy is virtually unknown to literature) because writing is based on a gradual development of psychological perception, which takes time and experience. Writing can be taught, then, yes—but only to those who are teachable."
What do you guys think? It seems clear to me that in any creative endeavor there is some kind of innate embodiment of "genius" that can't be replicated through learning and practice. At the same time, it seems clear that only a small number of artists in any creative endeavor have that genius, and that there is plenty of room for the rest of us to work as well.