Some people really do just crave attention, Yes-Men (and Women) and phony fawning. Just go into a really upscale clothing store. Many of their regular clients could just as easily buy their clothes online, but they want to be gushed over by the shop’s owner and sales assistants.
Rich and famous, please. Being a recluse is infinitely more interesting if I’m famous. Who would know or care about J.D. Salinger if he was just a Powerball winner?
I’d only prefer to be famous if I could use it to raise money and awareness for causes I care about. Social capital (aka fame and influence) can be effective in getting things done.
If I couldn’t do anything constructive with fame (promote science, fight global poverty, fight for human/civil rights, promote sustainability), I’d prefer to be rich and anonymous.
On the plus side the guy with 8 AIM handles could tell all his buddies about your torrid love affair from back before you were famous.
We are up to 9 now.
When I am thinking of ‘famous’ I am thinking of Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Jimmy Carter and people like that. People who have large amounts of influence and social capital with both domestic and international members of the business and political class and who use that influence to fight for human rights, civil rights, sustainability, medical advances, literacy, etc.
It would be a nice feeling to have enough fame and social capital to be able to talk to a billionaire for 30 minutes and end up having him devote a million dollars to promote primary education in Africa. Or be able to sit down with the Chinese president and talk with him on sustainability.
Even Rock Hudson coming out as a person with HIV brought the issue out of the closet and made it more mainstream. So fame is not always about ego. Fame can get things done.
Then again, it would suck to lose the ability to be anonymous. So I really don’t know. I’m probably half and half on fame. On one hand I’d like the influence and ability to promote causes I care about, but on the other I’d hate the lack of privacy.
Flame suit on. God I’m arrogant.
That really isn’t a fair comparison though. The most basic way to get wealthy is to work in business. You can either own a successful smaller business yourself or work your way up to be near the top of an established business at a job like Chief Operating Officer. Those people work extremely hard and sometimes make more money than the President of the United States.
One of my former bosses was a senior vice-president and cleared more than $500,000 a year and he was just one of a few in the lowly world of a super-market chain headquarters. There are tons of people that make many times that and are not famous in any real sense of the word and I am personal friends with a couple of them. They simply work all the time and have no interest in fame other than the occasional interview or speech that they have to give. I don’t even think they care about the money that much and while they live nice lifestyles, they don’t spoil their kids unduly and expect them to make their own way.
I wish I had some of their skills and admire them. I am a trust-fund baby myself which is a different thing and not admirable at all except for pride in the forethought of my great-grandfather but Forrest Gump said it best, "“That’s good. One less thing.” It is that simple. I really don’t want uninvited attention at any time and I think most people feel the same way.
I am really surprised that people here are so averse to fame. No one here wants to be one of the world’s best at something, internationally respected, groundbreaking in their field, or whatever? No one here would like to be an Einstein or a Darwin or a Picasso or a Mozart? Or, yes, even a Tom Hanks or a Michael Jordan? Is that kind of aspiration really so rare?
My dad is evidently one of the Top Men in his field (it’s a particular segment of physics that has suddenly become very important in the last ten years or so), he’s internationally respected (by those in that field), goes to conferences all over the place, wins awards and so on.
And if you saw him walking down the street tomorrow you’d never notice him except that he’s a bit on the tall side. Unless you’re in his field I’m sure you’ve never heard of him.
I’d be fine with that kind of fame.
On the other hand, when people say “Rich and famous” I think what leaps into most minds would be someone like Michael Jordan or Tom Cruise. I’m sure they are happy to have the respect and admiration of their peers but they’ve got a hell of a time trying to go out in public without being bothered by everyone who sees them and they need a lot of private security to keep their family safe. If I had something stupid to say about psychology, my friends would shake their heads and that’d be the end of it. When Tom Cruise runs his mouth it’s front page news for weeks. When some stripper wants to make herself some quick hush money or promote her upcoming porn flick she won’t claim she had sex with my dad, she’ll go after MJ.
All that kind of hassle would make me miserable. I have no desire for that kind of attention.
No thank you on the fame. I have no interest in the general public having a clue who I am. I’m a fairly private person and being able to be alone is a very precious thing to me.
The last thing I would want is someone following me around with a gas chromatograph to see what my farts are made of.
Is that… is that an active worry?
I agree, I don’t get it either (the lopsidedness against fame). On the other hand, I can see how asking people who heavily post on a messageboard vs hanging out in person with friends will skew the results towards options that minimize human interaction.
I’d rather have been, say, Picasso, than a millionaire that lived in the same period as him but nobody has heard of and never will.
I’m only using that as an example of an attitude of a dream for cost-free wealth. Surely most businessmen who earn high salaries also work long, stressful hours, with all the accompanying stress on their families and so on, but I seriously doubt that most people responding to the poll saying, “More money please! Just give it to me, no strings attached!” would be willing to accept significant tradeoffs for the wealth, whether it is notoriety, very long hours of work, a physical toll (like a football player coping with potentially life-long brain injuries), and so on.
And I went on to explain why I think having some fame would be better than being a relatively unknown rich businessman, in that I think the fame could be much more effectively leveraged for use in charity and political causes.
I’d also like to point out that the OP’s definition of fame specifically excludes Tom Hanks/Michael Jordan-like fame, which many posters have said they have no interest in.
I’m not surprised; this is a fairly anti-social board. I’m a social person, but idea of being bothered by strangers when I go out irks me. I understand the OP isn’t referring to Brangelina fame, but still, if I were known as “That one chick from that commercial” enough to get recognized regularly while out on the town, that would drive me into seclusion. I wouldn’t even want fame for doing something cool. I’d much rather be the unknown millionaire than Picasso. I wouldn’t mind being very well known in a small circle of people, though. I’d be fine with being some kind of uber-scientist. Nobody asks uber-scientists for their autographs at Target.
Ha! Speaking of the “Do I know you from somewhere?” line, someone used that on me at the bar last night! Gah.
Fame would be a drag. I’d like the wealth so I could travel and see the world (in comfort) with my wife, and fame would only be an impediment.