Susan Bono, publisher of “Tiny Lights” (www.tiny-lights.com), a local literary publisher, invited writers to submit a response to the question, “Which is better, fame or fortune?”

When I sat down to compose a reply, I realized that my response and rationale could push the barrier of the 500 word limit, and would still be pretty boring. So I decided on a different approach. Here is my submission:

Which is better, fame or fortune?

Define better.

I’ll rephrase the question. Which would you rather be, famous or wealthy?

Can’t I be both?

Of course, but the question is which would you rather be, given a choice between the two?

Oh. How famous and how wealthy?

Whatever you wish.

Well, there’s a difference between being famous locally and being famous world-wide. There is also a difference between being doctor or lawyer wealthy, and being Bill Gates wealthy.

This is true.

Can you be famous but not wealthy?

Certainly. The guys in New York City that caught a falling baby are famous, but not wealthy.

Can you be wealthy but not famous?

Can you name the guys who created and sold YouTube?

Point taken.

Your choice then?

Well, if I had to choose, I think I would choose fortune over fame.

Why is that?

Famous people lose their privacy, but wealthy people can buy it.

That makes sense. Thank you.

So, do I get to be wealthy?

That is entirely up to you.

But you’re a genie! Don’t I get my wish fulfilled?

It was a rhetorical question.

With a poof of smoke, the genie disappeared. Stupid genie.