We all want it. Some of us have got it. But what is it? What drives us towards it? What does it actually mean?
OK, so I admit it, this is based on the assemblies given at school this week by my form tutor. Well, some of my own ideas, and definately my own words, so more... inspired, I think. Anyway, I'm going off on a tangent.
'I want to live forever... People will see me and cry "Fame!"'
That's how the song goes. I don't like it. I've got several bad memories of singing it in my primary school's choir. It seems just a set of lyrics. Or is it? 'I want to live forever'. Isn't that what we all want. I for one remember dreams, of not too long ago, where I lived forever. Everyone else died, just me, I saw what happened. Everyone wants to see what will happen in the future I think. Everyone wants to see how they are remembered. It would be 'fun'to read your own obituary, wouldn't it? To see what people think of you? But then you realise that you don't want it. If everyone else died you would know noone. You would be a stranger, and outcast. If you were talking to your great-great-great grandchildren, who themselves were now grandparents, could you cope? I don't think so. We need change, but not too much. We need to inhabit our own space and time and then leave. I think this is where the idea of an afterlife was born. we all knew it was best that we died. But we didn't want it to be the end. So is that what fame is about. The quest for an afterlife? To be remembered after you are long dead. By that reckoning Caeser is one of the most famous people ever. But is he? How do you define fame? The Chambers dictionary definition runs thus: public report or rumour, renown or celebrity, chiefly in a good sense - to report. I feel I should have chosen a more up to date dictionary. Does that satisfy me? No. It feels in part like a thesaurus, in part like they didn't know how to define it themselves. Let me have a go: to be known, to be recognised outside your immediate consequences. Okay, I don't think that Oxford will be employing that any time soon, I've used the word 'you' for goodness' sake! But it is good enough for me.
So, after all that, what actually is fame? Is it your face on the cover of all the tabloids and a women's magazine once a week, or is it a lasting contribution to society. Most people would say that Paris Hilton is famous. No she isn't. She's a celebrity. She hasn't done anything. Does this need to be added to my definition? To be remembered for a contribution, positive or negative, to society outside one's immediate social circles. See, I've even changed 'you' to 'one'. That's a bit long winded though isn't it? Surely something more short, sweet and succint is required. But I have diverged again. Back to Paris. I would say that if you wanted someone who was truly famous then you turned to Einstein or Hawkings. But, surely the original meaning of fame was to be widely recognised. So Paris, Channelle and all that lot truly are famous. But I don't agree. They haven't done anything. We have been changing and manipulating the definition, but so has society. The thing it is describing now comes in two forms as well. So is fame just an upshot of our modern, consumer-based society? No, I think it has always been around. But we now have so many ways to do it. With so many academic subjects it's easy to find your niche. The web is such an evolving medium that for a moment you can be held up in the limelight and clamed as famous for making a certain site that is forgotten completely five years later. 'Reality TV' allows anyone with absolutely no talent at all to get their 15 minutes. We plaster ourselves across profile pages. We add anyone and everyone to MSN and MySpace. I, for one, have a MySpace, Facebook and Bebo accounts, not that I use them much. I have created several websites, most of which have collapsed in a heap. I am on several forums. I'm on MSN. I'm on Yahoo. And goodness knows how many other sites. I keep a blog. That is fine for me. That is enough. The fame given by this. By knowing that someone, somewhere, outside my normal social circles may just have drawn an ounce of pleasure from reading my ramblings at some time or other. If this url is given to just one person I am famous. If just one person thinks about, or discusses what is here then I have got my fame. And I'm human. So I would love to be told!
-
- http://www.lordbothwell.co.uk
- Wednesday, Dec. 12, 2007 @ 01:48:28 pm
-
- Tuesday, Jan. 08, 2008 @ 04:55:52 pm
I want to be happy. I would like to be known. I would like to be comfortable money-wise. I could not do interviews. I could not be chased by paparrazi. I could not do that lifestyle. But I think that I want to be known. I am certain of it. I want to be famous. But I don't want to have everything that entails. And I know what I want to be famous for, but I'm keeping that under my hat!
I think what I meant was that if someone talks about my blog to their friends. If someone tells someone else that it's a good read. Then that is enough fame for me. It satisfies my definition. And it would be a nice feeling to know that I, a bog-standard teenager, in a bog-standard town leading a bog-standard life, had made that small impact. I think that would be so fun!
KarenF
Young people nowadays seem to confuse fame and love: they think that to be famous is to be loved (haven't they noticed what happened to Bog Brother's Charlie?). In a way that has always happened: people like Madonna have always sought validation through fame.
But nowadays everyone is so much more materialistic that they aren't able to see the downsides, don't think about what an empty existence it is etc. I agree with you that being famous for doing something (nobel prize or whatever) is different. But nowadays so many people want to be famous, rather than want to be a famous writer or whatever. I don't even want to be famous. I want to be happy!