tait
Shared on Wed, 04/28/2010 - 00:50i think fame is actually more real looking into the past than we realize. the reason we are shocked when looking back at the kennedy tales is because, partly, we know how many people have been touched by the story SINCE then - not just because of what happened, and by that i mean that a head of state was murdered. it had happened before. it's happened since. we're most struck by that because of the sheer numbers of people that have seen it. We're part of the technology history that few of us comment on.
what's my point? my point, is that the impact of fame is diminishing and will continue to diminish back to at least 70's standards if not before. i believe that everyone saw the kennedy's live, but not everyone watched the first season of Survivor. So as "popular" as that first season was, it pales in comparison and the people that watched it will age and die, just as the people alive when JFK was killed. What differs is media and technology - with split attention spans and too many options, fame is more fleeting now than it was then (although we ironically had no idea what we were creating at that time), disappearing as the next YouTube click occurs. Then, fame was based purely on reality that happened to be shown everywhere. Now, I see fame created for the sake of itself every single day. Today's famous won't be nearly as famous in 40 years as 40 years ago famous is today.
Fame is a fickle thing. Make sure you know what you want before you chase down your dream.
-Tait
My muse was an article about 2 people attached to the JFK assassination that recently passed away: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/042810dnmetjfkrike.3f259b1.html
- tait's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
Comments