<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">In a message dated 26/02/03 17:21:54 GMT Standard Time, stridepiano@tesco.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Fame, like pregnancy, is an absolute condition </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
Sorry John, I dont think that statement is tenable. To make that stick you would have to apply `famous` only to someone who is known to everyone in the world. Clearly not possible.<BR>
What is generally assumed is `famous within a certain group`. Some of those groups will be larger than others so there are different degrees of fame involved. Therefore `fame` cannot be an absolute. <BR>
I would certainly agree that there are many purportedly `famous` people these days who do not deserve the accolade, indeed I am constantly amazed by the lists of famous people which appear in the news of whom I have never heard.<BR>
<BR>
Now Stanley Matthews was famous!<BR>
<BR>
Cheers<BR>
<BR>
PatL (World famous down our street)</FONT></HTML>