being vs. doing
A cloak of experience implies an inherent wisdom. A constant, relentless repetition suggests a polished refinement of craft. But, the question of when someone "becomes" something is elusive. Am I a photographer the moment I pick up a camera? Arguing for the moment that the definition implies instantaneously, ie, at any one given moment in time as opposed to over a larger interval, then the moment that I am holding my camera I am a photographer in that instant.
Being something, though, implies something greater. First, it implies a larger time interval such that, continuing with the photographer allegory, that someone can put down the camera and still be a photographer. Being something implies that a commitment exists, more specifically, to the discipline and to the craft prerequisite for that discipline.
A commitment involves a strong temporal component, but most importantly, the commitment to a discipline is tethered by an ethos. Becoming someone or something is more than just holding a tool or repeating a motion, it involves a profound connection between the holder and the act. That intercourse occurs on almost a spiritual level, where the marriage of technical skill and intimate understanding of the discipline lead to a bilateral discourse between the act and actor. This discourse, and no less, is the fundamental provision for the process of 'becoming' to properly transform to 'become'. It is something far greater than simply just 'doing'.