- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
You can be famous, but not rich. But this is the exception rather than the rule, and it is unlikely that anyone will want to do this. Because this approach symbolizes a person's fiasco or an unfortunate moment in life. And most importantly, it will bring pain and discomfort to such a person. Because there will be an imbalance between its recognition and its actual capabilities. The life of a famous, but not rich person from a psychological point of view, is hell. For example, actors who are still famous but not rich are people whose career has come to an end.
As far as I can tell from my experience, the normal situation is:
As you can see, wealth and fame are somehow interrelated. Therefore, such a choice is impossible in principle.
Becoming rich, you can always become famous, and becoming famous, you always have a chance to become rich, so the words are not quite right))
This is a very strange question, because having a head on your shoulders, you can achieve the second, with the help of the first and vice versa. In addition, wealth and celebrity are mutually exclusive things.
All right, all right. I choose wealth. A rich person can become both “invisible” and a celebrity.
Wealth is associated with material well-being and comfort, which does not always accompany a celebrity. But how much poorer life becomes if its goal is to eat in three throats, have fun, and count the tugriks. How many of them have been like this throughout history, and who remembers them? Are there many of their names on Wikipedia? Celebrity is also different, often such that you don't need it for nothing, forcing you to be ashamed and hide from people, but sometimes it's like Yuri Gagarin. I choose the golden mean.