179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← back to listing · view thread

From:
Ed Hall
To:
Introspection Derives Meaning
Date:
Fri, 26 Oct 2001 14:05:16 -0700
Subject:
Re: [idm] Rolling Stone on Drukqs
Msg-Id:
<200110262105.f9QL5Hs37788@screech.weirdnoise.com>
In-Reply-To:
<20011026163628.G9735@cs.umass.edu>
Mbox:
idm.0110.gz
Kyle Rawlins <rawlins@cs.umass.edu> wrote: : I think that the idea that the quality of an action (music making, acting, : writing, etc.) is what makes people famous is a little naive. In fact, I'd : tend to think that what makes most people famous is a combination of luck, and : being in the right place in the right time (which really just boils down to : luck). That's not to say that there's no overlap between the famous and the : good (at whatever they do), or between the unfamous and the bad. There is some truth, here, but I think that the main quality which makes people famous is the ability to form (and perhaps to exploit) the right relationships. That's pretty much it. Talent (at least enough to sustain celebrity) is abundant. The folks who "make it" are the ones who sell themselves the best, acquire the support of others who help sell them further, and so on. The ultimate "sale" is then made to the public... This is why there isn't a one-to-one relationship between "quality of an action" and fame. And it's why fame doesn't have much bearing on this discussion, and the challenge "If you really could do all you claim, why aren't you fuckers famous?" is irrelevent, at best (which I think was your point). -Ed --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org