Through an interesting synchronicity of events, I was inadvertently photographed shopping with Dr. Blessyl Buan at lifestyle clothing retailer Lole recently. The article featured in the Globe and Mail is quite interesting: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/montreals-lole-takes-aim-at-struggling-lululemon-market/article18116318/
A close friend joked that I was famous and my response was I would prefer to be infamous with her for having ridiculously positive, kaleidoscopic vision to share expansive energy. Later that week I unknowingly met someone famous at a fundraiser and the question of famous and infamous came to me again. I feel that fame is what you are known for and infamy despite the negative connotation (perhaps a bit of mischief is good!) is the effect you create. Would you prefer to be famous or infamous-is an interesting philosophical question to consider for what you may wish to create in your life.
Ps. It is possible to be famous and infamous at the same time, like the current mayor of Toronto, who is so notorious that there is no need to name him or his many spectacular deeds.