Anonymous wrote:Doubtful. The kind of person who pursues that sort of constant visibility and fame isn’t well adjusted with good values. I’m not sure why that isn’t obvious. It’s like running for president—the kind of person who thinks they should rule over everyone else isn’t well adjusted with good values. The megalomaniacs, narcissists, borderline personalities, and pathologically avaricious among us do better in the limelight. You don’t want those people hanging around the office and they typically cause chaos in normal settings. The well regulated, securely attached, high values people of the world do better in private and mundane pursuits. Both types of people have their place in the world.
You assume that they are in it for the visibility primarily. But consider that so many celebrities become who they are because they happen to be so gifted in something, so willing to work hard for it, and visibility comes as a result of this, not a primary goal. Like if you look at classical pianists, you get a sense that even if they were locked up in a room, they'd still play because there is an inner urge to play. Do you think David Beckham would want to keep playing if there was no one to watch him? Would Michelle Kwan keep skating in an empty rink? Maybe not but maybe they like the game so much that they would. Like do you think Paul McCartney became a global superstar because he was after the fame or because his music was so damn good? (and by all accounts he is normal ish).