Ask: "Zhang, you are always dealing with those issues slowly. Do you think that if anyone other thinks you're slowly, he'll think you're stupid? Those who get achievements quickly are more easy to be famous!"

Recently, Chinese youth tend to believe a statement:"Those who can be famous very young is very intelligent!" And my peers are really faithful to it. They are eager to be successful as soon as possible, so as to let others think they're intelligent. Sometimes, they suggest that since I can be able to show my talents, I should try my best to let others know me. They said, "There are only few people can be famous when he or she was a kid!"

I can't share the point of view that speed has relation with ability. Corporations in European countries product their goods in a rather low speed. A pedestrian bridge can cost a German company 1 year to construct. But the quality of Made in Germany is undisputed. They can use 1 year to build a bridge which can stand there for 1 century. Does it mean German are stupid than other countries' people? If it is, why so many advanced weapons and high-tech devices are invented and produced in Germany?

For myself, I've my own words to answer my classmates. I'm just a common person like others. To finish my own work as perfect as I can, I've to employ a long time to consider the access to accomplishment. There are many ways accessed to the termination, however, the quality of each way is quite different. The routes determine the quality of your achievements. Sometimes, a man who wants to be successful fast gets down to run onto the way just in front of him, ignoring his direction; while another man may have a basic detection of each way, and then comes up with a result of which way should he select. I can't assert that the first man can succeed first. He might be skillful and he's a adept runner, however, he will run out his constitution when he reached his goal. The later one usually sets off some time after the former, but it is quite easy for him to finish the route because he's used some time to consider the best way to go.

The statement is pithy, "Life is a marathon rather than a spurt." In my opinion, what you can achieve is more important. Some people wants to be famous and then get into a wrong direction that they don't want at all. Warren Buffet got famous in his fifties, Michael Jackson got famous in his childhood. But Warren is much happier because he's discovered his interest, and then focused on it. Though much later, Warren is luckier, also more mighty.

Ask:"As a good student in China, it is very easy to receive various types of honors and rewards. Educators, especially teachers and school leader, give you rewards of their own accord. And that can make you admired by many other students. But as I know you, you've missed many chances to have honor or reward from school or other educators. That is the sourc of your obscurity. Do you think your tough process for making others recognize you current is caused by your devastating misfortune before?"

Here I say something about my "unlucky" school life before. I admit that my life in school is not so smooth like my fellows, who studied well like I did in primary school and high school. In primary school, my class were invited to have a interview by local newspapers. After a week, each member of my class were known by some local neighborhoods except me. Because I was left out, both from the interview and photos published. And the rewards afterwards depends on your honor gained before including those interviews. So I hadn't got anything until my graduation of primary school, though I was No.1 of primary school graduate exams in neighborhoods, 1,000 students taking part in.

After 2 month of summer holiday, I started my junior high school. 4 years later I began senior high school. In China, we call junior and senior high school as "middle school". At my time, primary school lasted 5 years and middle school lasted 7 years. I took part in 6 times of subject in the 7 years. But I was selected to take part in the higher level in none of them. I'd thought my study was quite poor. But when I was at the forthcoming graduation, a piece of information came to me and they it was confirmed: Judged by my ability, I should have been selected; but I was forgotten to be listed among candidates by teachers.

I was a keyboard & piano player since primary school. I love composing my own music. Not only performed by my own, I also allowed my friends and classmates to perform my works. And for the past several years, my mates who sang my pieces have been chosen by some record companies and invited to TV programs because of their performances of my works. Many of them are quite popular at my city. Some are being trained to be a star currently. Sometimes they told me, "Zhang, you're forgotten!"

The stories above are totally named as "devastating tragedy" by my friends and classmates. I acknowledge that I am "wonder" among my peers: It is hard to imagine a student who met with same type of disregard for over 10 years. And "any of his extraordinary talents haven't been recognized but his fellows who used his works are recognized". My classmates believe that I "should have succeeded many years ago as a teen star". And "devastating" is used to describe my school life. Nevertheless, as I see, I think those"devastating" issues make me as what I am today.

As I wrote in the Preface, my classmates give me so many exaggerating praise of my knowledge and skills. They think I can master various areas of knowledge, some ability of management and speak some languages. If they're willing to use their exaggerating words to describe me as that, they should owe it to those devastating bad lucks.

In school, being selected to do anything is bound to cost students many spare time. And I could fill those spare time with what I was interested in. In primary school, when my classmates were called for the interviews, I stayed in classroom and though about general relativity, which was an irresistible attraction. I tried to write short passages to explain my comprehension about time and space. Giving me a time to consider or imagine about it gave me a deeper understand. Without the time then to be an original fundamental, I can't assert whether I can give so many speeches on college physic classes about relativity. And I can't have written so many articles published on websites and newspapers on campus about it. Assuming that I had been invited to be interviewed just like my classmates and then got famous in neighborhoods and got more honors or praises based on the interview, I would lost my treasure of instinct about relativity and physics.

At school, being trained for subject competition means your creativity should be arrested. Of course, all of your spare time is occupied by boring courses for huge quantity of exercises. If I had been fortunate enough like my fellows, I think I would have lost my basic creativity, just like common Chinese students. Actions varying from music composing to scientific conjecture request a student to possess creativity.

Some of my classmates guess that if I'd been sent to international schools in Beijing when I was 15, I would have been recognized by those teachers from USA, UK or somewhere. And then, I might be introduced to some international organizations and then get well-known by many talent peers. They think that I'm feeling "lonesome" currently as my parents and I have missed to be praised by international teachers. But I don't agree that being well-known young is a type of success at school. I even can't agree that I should have been recognized as my fellows. To some extend, the earlier the man is recognized, the less he can achieved. In China, we often hear about such cases that a student used to be highly expected by the teacher then achieved nothing after decades. As far as I'm concerned, some people can be highly praised when they're children because their talents are simple. In China, teachers use exam grades as the standard. Besides, teachers, who only have touch with kids at school, have little idea about how society judge a man. My classmates argue that my thinking can't interpret why Michael Jackson was known as a child star but then kept on shining for 40 years. I hereby don't intend to offend Michael and the countless fans (including myself), but I have to acknowledge that talent of pop song is a comparatively simple talent, which can be recognized by a quick glance. That's why people often say being a star is a matter of fortune. The huge entertainment groups decide stars' fate. In addition, the achievement of a pop star has little comparability with that of Franklin Roosevelt or Barack Obama, both of whom were unknown at the age of those teen stars. We can't be sure that both of two politicians had no talent in music or art. We can only say that to be a star don't have to accumulate too much ability, but to govern a huge power do.

Bad lucks are not devastating, but to be a man with popular fame without enough ability to influence those important affairs are really devastating!

Ask: "Zhang, it is absurd to think those entrepreneurs and political leaders are more powerful than stars. Stars are genius! They can get famous when they're kids or teens. However, even the most powerful CEO and politicians can't be famous until they're in their forties. The remarks from a pop star my influence many people and most even know little about the CEO of Boeing. We know you respect those entrepreneurs and politicians a lot, but don't you think they're really too stupid to be popular among the public?"

Most of the time, we don't response to talk it with some of my classmates. I think it a stupid question. I've written in previous passages that fame is not a index of power of control, and age of success matters nothing with talent. Here I response part of their request: What is power?

Madonna is famous, perhaps in fans' mind, such as my classmates, she's really powerful. She's words of saying can influence some record companies or the trend of pop songs. However, what if all record companies and brokerages block her together? Some people may laugh at it as they think it is hard to converge all companies together to make it. But we can't rule out that those companies are under the mercy of a single capital giant? Since a monopoly giant, Murdoch for example, can govern 80% of transfer of images and text in the world, it is likely some giants control entertainment industry. I heard that a Hollywood star once had argument with Redstone, another media monopoly. And his result was that he was kept on disappearance from the vision of public until he found chance to restore his career from Redstone. Stars, for industry giants, are just tools for profit. In this perspective, who is more powerful?

Pop stars contribute a lot to our entertainment activities. They're influential to our screens and CD players. But it is not related to the word "powerful", a word with intensive connotation. Whether an actor can be a star depends on the choice of the bosses. The ability to decide who can be famous is power, which is also unrelated to fame or genius. Though Michael Jackson is super star, after he passed away, media controllers can still select another shining star to earn money for them. But those who're not super stars is the substantial forces to push the world going on. There is no doubt that if the CEO of Boeing changed the price of his product, countless airline companies have to find methods to deal with the new situation, and those transportation organizations are bound to adjust their price to carry articles. Later, because of the adjustment of charges, most of commercial activities can be influenced deeply, which means an economic wave can be surged. Most of the public don't know who's the CEO of Boeing, and we have no interest to know him neither. But he's really powerful. His counterparts like the leads of Siemens, GE, GM and Shell etc are all in this type. I was taught when I was a kid: Those who can't be seen on the stage are director. The law has never changed.

To be powerful cost far more than to be famous. That's why entrepreneurs and politicians are older than those pop stars. It is unfair to laugh at them based on their ages. Governors have to spend considerable time to confirm his authority. No one can be the president of PRC at the age of 20, neither no one can be the chief executive of a corporation like Mobil as a teenager. Because these positions are in need of philosophy of management to balance the interest among people. They are powerful at an old age because they use their youth to compile power and then use the resources they master to change the rules of game as they want. But stars can't. Media can refresh their figures because they need stars to make money. Talent of singing and dancing can be seen obviously on screen. And we learn that USA entertainment firms sometimes can make a common singer just like a super star. Nevertheless, the talent of management is hard to be recognized in a short period of observation. It is an issue about human's activity. Thus, entrepreneurs and politicians are old. And this fact just indicate that they have more subtle talent than pop stars.

I'm not aimed at diminishing pop stars. After all, they've done a lot to our iPod and cinemas. However, if somebody thinks that those young stars are the dynamic of the world and looks down upon the real governor, he's stupid enough!

Ask:"I heard that you wanted to be a leader of entrepreneurship or politics. But it is a waste of time and youth! If you can take the advantage of your talent in acting or music, perhaps you'll be famous soon -- You should have done that when you were 14 or even younger. However, the way you choose is rather time-consuming. And it is risky. If you can't be famous even in your 60s, is it a pity of you?"

Most young people say "I have my plan of future". But their only plan is to succeed or have fame. As for what type of career they want to be in, they're ambiguous about it. My friends are always telling me: "One should be famous as young as he can!" They believe that if one is staying unknown even though he contributes a lot to his dream, he is a failure. Thus, there is no wonder my friends are mostly interested in being a pop star just like I stated in previous chapters. For my part, I think those who're be famous but haven't contributed to the original dream are failures.

I am convinced that one who is in his career just for getting himself known by the public is a star, while the one who is in his career just for getting the public benefited from his cause is a great personage. Justin Bieber is a star while Steve Jobs is a great man. Even though Steve Jobs could still be in the shade until his death, he might still think that his career was worthwhile. However, if a pop star cuts no figure even in his 30s, he is sure to think his career a failure. It is simple: A man should consider that whether his action can benefit others, rather than whether his action can him a figure!