Lucy is newly obsessed with fame. Yesterday was "Scottiewood Red Carpet Day" at school, which meant the kids dressed up (or dressed up like movie stars?) to build excitement for some kind of event this weekend that involves some of my money. An aside: Lucy's school doesn't cost anywhere near as much as private school, but what with all the boosting and raffle tickets and sales of various kinds of wrapping paper, we pay.

So I had to explain Hollywood. And being famous. Which I explained wrong because Lucy determined that she was famous for singing and for art. And I corrected her by saying she was talented at singing and art (and left out a snide remark about being famous for talking too much and bossing everyone around).

I said that famous was about being known by a lot of people. And she said, "I thought that was being popular." I said that they were very similar words. She asked, "Which has more value?" They are studying money in school, so this incisive question is not out of the blue.

I answered "famous." And she said, "Well, I am already popular, because a lot of people know me, but I guess I am not famous."

Then tonight, as we watched Olympic ice-dancing on TV and she twirled around the living room, she asked, "Can only famous people be on the Olympics?" Which brought us back to the discussion of fame vs. talent (to say nothing of the teeny tiny marketing window for Olympic athletes).

We watched the story of Apolo Ohno and his dad, who locked Apolo in a shed after he did badly in the Nagano Olympics when he was 15. His dad made him choose to be excellent.

I don't know how, or if, or when, to do that for Lucy. I want to be the kind of parent who helps her find Her Thing and supports her in the pursuit of it. Not for the sake of being Famous. For the sake of my beachfront retirement home.