Do you think it is more interesting to watch famous people or ordinary people's shows?

Personally, I find ordinary people's shows more interesting than programmes about celebrities, because there is a stronger sense of discovery. Famous people are already polished and predictable, whereas an unknown singer, dancer, or painter can surprise the audience. That is also why talent shows are so popular: viewers enjoy seeing a normal person step onto a stage, overcome nerves, and possibly change their life in a few minutes. It feels dramatic, but also relatable. That said, I don't think we can confidently predict that a three- or four-year-old child will become a musician or painter. At that age, children may show early signs, like a good sense of rhythm or a love of drawing, but their interests can change many times. Talent needs time, training, and the right environment before it becomes a real career. So parents should encourage children, but not label them too early. As for talented artists, I think they should focus on their strengths, but not in a narrow or unhealthy way. If someone has a gift, it makes sense to develop it seriously, because natural ability without discipline often goes nowhere. However, they still need education, social skills, and a balanced life. Some parents probably do feel guilty when they push too hard, especially if their child becomes stressed or loses interest. They may have good intentions, but pressure can easily turn a talent into a burden.