fame OR fortune
 

I am aware that fame and furtune are intertwined and one begets the other, but if you hade to choose one with out the other, what would it be.

I honestly cannot decide, if I were famous, everyone would konw my name and I might even have fan clubs and stuff, but I would still have to work and conserve money and all that. If I were rich everything would be handed to me on a silver platter, but noone would know who I was.

I would absolutely choose fortune without fame, but then I'm an introvert. I wouldn't relish living in a fishbowl as fame would require. Plus, you can be famous without really being admired (witness Joey Buttafuoco, Kato Kaelin, Tonya Harding). Wealth can buy you many of the same perks that fame can (admission into exclusive places, access to power, etc.) without the downsides of constant scrutiny.

Fortune......
The answer is so easy to that question each and every time

Fortune.

Of course, if you're wealthy enough you'll generate a certain amount of fame by the very existence of your wealth. The eccentric aerospace billionaire Howard Hughes first welcomed publicity, but later spent 30 years trying to stay out of the public eye; in the end, he just made people more curious.

There are extremely wealthy, powerful people who are almost unknown. But they have to work at concealing themselves. If they didn't restrict information about themselve, they'd be famous. And usually they have reasons to want to avoid that.

If you choose fame then you are insecure in yourself and need the attention. Most confident people will choose 'fortune'.

This is a bit like the conundrum whereby you could : -

A - spend a week with Catherine Zeta Jones (or any fantasy female of your choice!) . . . . and have full sex with her as often as you liked but NO-ONE could know you were seeing her . . . OR

B - Spend the week with her and get to tell all your friends but NOT be allowed sex of any kind.

I would go for 'A' myself . . . .

Fortune for many of the above reasons. Also, fame doesn't last. You remember the names of those miners that were trapped some time ago? You know, the ones that were on all the talk shows and had a movie made about their lives? I didn't think so.

btw, what ever happened to Colleen from the first Survivor? She made The Animal and then dissapeared. She was cute, if not that great of an actor. Would have made a great porn star.

I probably wouldn't want either.

Fortune, easily.

Fortune usually lasts longer and you can do a lot more with money than fame.

Even if I could have both, I'd choose fortune, w/out the fame anyway. I don't want to be a household name

Fortune hands down.
Being famous would only complicate my life enormously (wacko fans, no privacy, wierd lawsuits, etc.). while having a fortune would make my life so sweet.

I could finally afford to get a nice sailboat to sail around the world...

it depends what the fame was for. Like Justin Timberlake might be famous, but i woudln't want to be anything like that. Then there are the great mathematicians and physicist etc. Basically intellectual fame would be good, over some kind of shallow pop star fame which i wouldn't want at all.

Fortune, no question.

I have no interest in fame.

I would prefer an anonymous life with my millions.

Fortune

Fame is a fickle thing.

Neither are worth pursuing in themselves.
Desiring, pursuing, and/or possessing fame and/or fortune pursued for their own sake invites destruction and ruin.
We should know this by now.
Do things because they are worth doing for their own sake and because they have intrinsic value to you and to others.

I COULD choose fame without wealth if it were the right KIND of fame.

By that I mean Gandhi/Nelson Mandela fame rather than Big Brother/Star Wars Kid type fame.

Wealth can be tricky too. I'd want to know where my money came from and if my wealth was directly responsible for something morally reprehensible in this world, I'd be unhappy.

If I were, for example, to go into academia, I would not be wealthy. But if, as an academic, I then got the chance to one day help draft or somehow attach my name to a new constitution for the future Republic of Australia, I'd be pretty damn happy.

I consider something like that to be a variety of fame, even if you don't hear about those kinds of people on the news.

Wealth is able to gain you fame.

Fame isn't necessarily able to gain you wealth.

Therefore... wealth would be the better option.

Fortune... fame can be brought forward by just having money...

I would HATE to be famous!

I would however love to be rich. Not that wealth is ultimately what I desire, just that not having to work to survive would allow me plenty of free time to spend on what is really important.

Definitely fortune. Although I could be happy without money, more money definitely wouldn't hurt.

Fame on the other hand I don't want at all. I can't see why anyone would want to be famous. Having the media and therefore half the western world scrutinizing your every word and action would totally suck.

Fame would make living a normal life impossible. Fortune would just make it easier. And at the end of the day, if you don't like your choice, you can give fortune away, but fame you're stuck with.

Fame gets the bastard photographers on your ass all the time. Do you want stalker fans to break into your mansion and steal your undergarments?

I'd choose to be rich and live the good life as a rich guy, but never reveal how rich I am so people think I'm just well off. All I would need is a nice house in a 80 000 population city near a big city, a Lexus or Volvo or something like that, some cool techno-gadgets like pocket PCs and Tablet PCs and I'd like a fairly normal, yet spoiled life.

I'm definately not the kind of person who would choose fame over fortune. I like to stay out of the limelight...it's not all it's cracked up to be.

id choose fame if it entailed acting, personally id enjoy that

fortune if it had to be only one, but that's not really true
otherwise i would choose fame cause if you're famous you can make money easy doing whatever you're famous for

fortune

fame is so overrated. Im not the type of person who likes to be the center of everyones attention :)

as far as fame is concerned the word infamous comes to mind... which then brings Monica Lewinsky, Gennifer Flowers, et. al. All famous, but not for anything but having a tryst with the President Clinton.

Fortune, the inventor of the barcode... he gets money for his little invention from a few decades ago, which BTW was standardized by Wal-mart.... now everyone uses them. Heck, I cannot even remember his name. But I've seen his house in Las Vegas.

I wouldnt want the fame at all. It would totally rob you of your privacy. I would be more than happy to accept the fortune though.

fortune cause fame will go away, fortune will too, evntually but you'll have stuff :)

you can control your fortune, not your fame.

Fortune.

I would not like to be famous. Famous people's lives are not just theirs, but everyone else's. There is no privacy. Fortune would be much better.

Definately have to choose fortune. Isn't that the whole point in being famous is so that you can aquire masses amounts of money ???

fortune, of course.