Then could it not be argued that the barrier is discipline, ambition, and drive?
Yes, but also a handful of other things. For instance:
1.
Taste. Honestly, not everyone
wants to pull off that type of persona, probably even including some people who could. If it doesn't call to you, you aren't going to pursue it even if you do have the discipline and ambition to pull it off.
2.
Schooling. Honestly, to be done well, this persona would require a little more than your average background knowledge. To be done really well--in other words, to maintain the persona thoroughly--one would have to have a fairly deep schooling in several related disciplines (
i.e., reading one book on Giordano Bruno won't cut it, because you'll need to know how he fits in with the rest of the Renaissance).
3.
Income and Opportunity. These are derivative of the schooling point: some folks have a tougher time getting the level of schooling that would make this persona stand out because they have extra obstacles to getting into the schools. These don't necessarily make it impossible, but they do throw up obstacles.
The latter two, yes, can be overcome by drive and ambition, but those in turn are conditioned by the first: if it isn't something you want to do in the first place, manufacturing the drive to get it done is vastly more difficult. So I wouldn't just chalk it up to a lack of drive and ambition, though those are certainly factors.
To take a step back and focus not only on this particular persona but perhaps also some of the ramifications of the original question: yes, it would be interesting to see someone try to pull this off. But by the same token, not everyone will (or should) want to: people should be drawn to a persona that resonates with them, and this one is fairly specific. (It resonates with me to an extent--and frankly, as I've described it, I could probably pull it off, with some practice and refinement.)
That said, a boatload of people do seem to take a path of least resistance. "Street magic" and "underground" can most definitely be diluted and abused like cheap heroin. It is a valid tack to take, but, to my taste, not an interesting one for me. Is that "lazy" on their part? Perhaps so, but I don't have much invested in applying that label: their laziness doesn't really hurt me, or even affect me, so I don't feel much call to fault them for it.
On the other hand, however, exhorting someone to be a bit more original, praising originality and thoughtfulness when it does manifest, and demonstrating all of those qualities oneself go a long, long way toward making the path of least resistance less appealing. "Light a candle instead of cursing the darkness," etc.
But how to go about that?
Socrates led a slave to prove geometrical truths in order to demonstrate that even
hoi polloi--"the rabble," as the Greeks would have it--can reason (
Meno). He did it with skillfully framed questions and leading arguments (which, in other dialogues, admittedly, simply ticked people off). In doing so, he always portrayed himself as the dunce in need of education--after all, he was the one asking all of the questions. There are many ways to help people realize there might be a better way of doing things. This is one option, and you've also discussed others. As with the persona of the Renaissance wizard, how that occurs may ultimately be a matter of taste, style, and resonance.
A few random thoughts that obviously go astray by the time I reach the end. Sheesh, I even got back to Plato--shows you how far off track I went . . . .