Monument of Peter the Great in Saint Petersburg.

Greatness is a concept of a state of superiority affecting a person, object or place. Greatness can also be referred to individuals who possess a natural ability to be better than all others. The concept carries the implication that the particular person or object, when compared to others of a similar type, has clear and perceivable advantage. As a descriptive term it is most often applied to a person or their work, and may be qualified or unqualified. An example of an expression of the concept in a qualified sense would be "Winston Churchill was one of the greatest wartime leaders". In the unqualified sense it might be stated "Winston Churchill achieved greatness within his own lifetime", thus implying that "greatness" is a definite and identifiable quality. Application of the terms "great" and "greatness" is dependent on the perspective and subjective judgments of those who apply them.^[1] Whereas in some cases the perceived "greatness" of a person, place or object might be agreed upon by many, this is not necessarily the case, and the perception of "greatness" may be both fiercely contested and highly individual.

Historically, in Europe, rulers were sometimes given the attribute "the Great", as in Alfred the Great and Peter the Great. The Latin equivalent "Magnus" was also used, as in Albertus Magnus and Carolus Magnus. The English language uses the Latin term magnum opus, (literally " Great work") to describe certain works of art and literature.

Since the publication of Francis Galton’s Hereditary Genius in 1869, and especially with the accelerated development of intelligence tests in the early 1900s, there has been a vast amount of social scientific research published relative to the question of ‘greatness’. Much of this research doesn’t actually use the term ‘great’ in describing itself, preferring terms such as ‘eminence’, ‘genius’, ‘exceptional achievement’, etc.^[2] Historically the major intellectual battles over this topic have focused around the questions of ‘nature vs nurture’ or ‘person vs context’.^[3] Today the importance of both dimensions is accepted by all, but disagreements over the relative importance of each are still reflected in variations in research emphases.^[4]

Genetic approaches[link]

The early research had a strong genetic emphasis and focused on intelligence as the driving force behind greatness.

[edit] Hereditary Genius – Galton (1869)

The earliest such research, Hereditary Genius by Francis Galton (1869), argued that people vary hugely in “natural ability” which is inherited biologically. Those at the very top end of the range, i.e., geniuses, become the leaders and great achievers of their generation. To prove this thesis Galton collected data showing that genius clusters in what he termed “Notable Family Lines”, such as those of Bernoulli, Cassini, Darwin, Herschel, and Jussieu in science, or Bach in music.^[5]

Galton then calculated the odds of eminent people having eminent relations, taking into account the closeness of the biological connection (e.g., son vs grandson), and the magnitude of achievement of the eminent parent. His findings were as anticipated: the more famous the parent (i.e., the greater level of presumed “natural ability”), the greater likelihood there would be illustrious relatives; and the closer the blood tie, the greater those odds.^[6]

[edit] Early Mental Traits of 300 Geniuses – Cox (1926)

Catharine Cox’s book on The Early Mental Traits of Three Hundred Geniuses (1926), was similar to Galton’s in its orientation. Using the method that her mentor, Stanford Psychology Professor Lewis Terman, had developed for differentiating children in terms of intelligence, Cox coded records of childhood and adolescent achievements of 301 historic eminent leaders and creators to estimate what their IQs would have been on the basis of intellectual level of such achievements relative to the age at which they were accomplished. For example, John Stuart Mill reportedly studied Greek at 3, read Plato at 7, and learned calculus at 11. As such, what he was doing at 5, the average person couldn’t do until 9 years, 6 months of age, giving Mill an estimated IQ of 190.^[7]

Cox found that the perceived eminence of those with the highest IQs was higher than that of those attaining lower IQ estimates, and that those with higher IQs also exhibited more versatility in their achievements. For example, da Vinci, Michelangelo, Descartes, Benjamin Franklin, Goethe, and others with IQs in the mid 160s or above were superior in their versatility to those attaining lower scores, such as George Washington, Palestrina, or Philip Sheridan.^[8]

While no one today doubts the role of genetics or intelligence in the attainment of greatness, both Cox and Galton have been criticized for failing to take account of the role of nurture, or more specifically socio-economic and educational advantage, in the achievements of these historical greats.^[9]

Cultural approach[link]

There was one major anthropological study of genius, and it was triggered specifically by the author’s contentions with Galton’s work.

[edit] Configurations of Cultural Growth – Kroeber (1944)

Alfred Kroeber’s Configurations of Cultural Growth (1944) looked at many of the same historic greats as did Galton and Cox, but from a completely different orientation. As a cultural anthropologist, Kroeber maintained that, in Simonton's words, “culture takes primacy over the individual in any account of human (behavior), and that historic geniuses are no exception…” ^[10]

To prove his thesis, Kroeber collected “long lists of notable figures from several nationalities and historic eras”, and then grouped them within a field and a shared cultural context, e.g., “Configuration for American Literature”. Then within these groupings he listed his notables in “strict chronological order”, identifying the most eminent figures by using capital letters for their surnames (e.g. EMERSON, LONGFELLOW, POE, WHITMAN, etc. in above configuration).^[11]

Kroeber found that genius never appeared in isolation, but rather, in Simonton's words, that “one genius cluster(ed) with others of greater and lesser fame in adjacent generations”. He also found that there were historical “crests” and “troughs” in every field.^[12] These fluctuations in the appearance of genius were much too rapid to be explained by the simple mechanism of genetic inheritance along family lines.^[13]

Kroeber argued, in Simonton's words, that his “configurations” were due to “emulations”: “Geniuses cluster in history because the key figures of one generation emulate those in the immediately preceding generations… (until) it attains a high point of perfection that stymies further growth”. At this point the “tradition degenerates into empty imitation, as most creative minds move on to greener pastures”.^[14]

Recent research is consistent with these explanations;^[15] but many aspects of the developmental process from birth to the attainment of greatness remain unaccounted for by Kroeber’s anthropological approach.^[16]

Developmental approaches[link]

Retrospective studies, involving extensive interviews with individuals who have attained eminence, or at least exceptional levels of achievement, have added much to our understanding of the developmental process. Two studies in particular stand out.

[edit] Scientific Elite – Zuckerman (1977)

Harriet Zuckerman’s Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States, is based on many sources of research evidence, including a series of forty-one extended interviews with American winners of the Nobel Prize for science.

Zuckerman reported her results around two main topics: How the Prize is Awarded, and Career Development of the Scientific Elite. Her findings on the first topic are briefly overviewed in the Wikipedia article regarding the Nobel Prize

In relation to the question of the career development of the scientific elite Zuckerman uses the phrase "accumulation of advantage" to describe her findings. In her words: “Scientists who show promise early in their careers (are) given greater opportunities in the way of research training and facilities. To the extent that these scientists are as competent as the rest or more so, they ultimately will do far better in terms of both role performance and reward… rewards (which) can be transformed into resources for further work.. (and hence over time) scientists who are initially advantaged gain even greater opportunities for further achievement and rewards.”^[17]

To see if ‘accumulation of advantage’ was operating in the career development of the scientific elite, Zuckerman compared the careers of future laureates with those of “members of the United States National Academy of Sciences and the scientific rank and file” along a number of dimensions including socioeconomic origins, status of undergraduate and graduate education, the process of moving into the scientific elite, and first jobs and professorships.^[18]

She also interviewed forty-one Nobel laureates extensively about their "apprenticeships" to "master" scientists while they were doing their doctoral research, and other aspects of their career development related to the above topics.^[19]

Zuckerman concluded that evidence of "accumulative of advantage" was clearly present over the course of development, with result that her research “… cast(s) considerable doubt on the conclusion that marked differences in performance between the ultra-elite and other scientists reflect equally marked differences in their initial capacities to do scientific work”.^[20]

[edit] Developing Talent in Young People – Bloom et al (1985)

Benjamin Bloom and five colleagues conducted extensive interviews with 120 “young men and women (as well as their parents and influential teachers)… who had reached the highest levels of accomplishment” in six fields – Olympic sprint swimmers, Top 10 rated professional tennis players, concert pianists, accomplished sculptors, exceptional mathematicians, and outstanding research neurologists.^[21]

They report many findings relevant to the “talent development process", including:

• Development was tied throughout to the values, interests, resources, and personal investments of the family of origin. In most families “introduction to the field and initial… skill development occurred” because the “(p)arents (or other family members), in pursuing their own interests, created situations that intrigued, interested, or involved the child… The child’s interest was rewarded or encouraged…” and the parents then provided other ways to extend this interest.^[22]
• The “work ethic” is central to talent development. It is developed by “the home environment” and “…directly related to learning and participation in the chosen talent field”.^[23]
• “Each group of parents strongly encouraged their children’s development in a particularly highly approved talent field (related to the parents’ own “special interests”) and gave much less support to other possible talent fields and activities.”^[24]
• “Families and teachers were crucial at every point along the way to excellence… what families and teachers do at different times and how they do it clearly sets the stage for exceptional learning in each talent field”.^[25]
• “Few… (of the) individuals (included in this study) were regarded as child prodigies”; and, as a result, this research “raises (serious) questions about earlier views of special gifts and innate abilities as necessary prerequisites of talent development”.^[26]

Recent approaches[link]

A 1995 book by Hans Eysenck argues that a “personality trait” called Psychoticism is central to becoming a creative genius; and a more recent book by Bill Dorris (2009) looks at the influence of “everything from genetics to cultural crises”, including chance, over the course of development of those who attain greatness.

Hans Eysenck's book, Genius: The Natural History of Creativity (1995), "construct(s)... a model of genius and creativity" whose "novelty lies in (its) attempt to make personality differences central to the argument".^[27]

In particular Eysenck is interested in a personality trait called “psychoticism … chief among (whose) cognitive features is a tendency to over-inclusiveness, i.e., an inclination not to limit one's associations to relevant ideas, memories, images, etc."^[28]

He considers a massive range of experimental psychological research in order to establish the underlying genetic, neuro-chemical mechanisms which may be operating to influence levels of creativity associated with fluctuations in “the tendency towards over-inclusiveness indicative of psychoticism..."^[29]

Eysenck's assessment of his overall argument is as follows: "There is no hint that the theory is more than a suggestion of how many disparate facts and hypotheses can be pulled together into a causal chain, explaining… the apogee of human endeavour - genius. If the theory has one point in its favour it is that every step can be tested experimentally, and that many steps have already received positive support from such testing." ^[30]

[edit] The Arrival of The Fittest - Dorris (2009)

Bill Dorris' book, The Arrival of The Fittest: How The Great Become Great (2009), attempts to address a number of issues which remain unanswered in the work discussed so far. These include the role of chance over the course of development, the importance of the development of unique personal characteristics to achieving greatness, and the influence of changes in the wider worlds surrounding the person - from interpersonal to societal - on the course of an individual's development.^[31]

Dorris argues that those who attain ‘greatness’ are credited with solving a key generational problem in a field and/or society (e.g., Einstein resolving the conflict between Newton and Maxwell in physics at the outset of the 20th century; or Woody Guthrie providing a voice for the outcasts of the Great Depression of the 1930s).^[32]

Dorris’ core argument is that those who become ‘great’ are those start out with sufficient genetic potential and then are able, over two or more decades, to obtain matches / fits with “The Right Kind of Problems” to extend the development of these genetic biases into what Dorris terms, “Key Characteristics”. These are the intellectual, personality, and self characteristics which eventually turn out to be required to solve a key generational problem in their field and/or society.^[33]

Dorris argues that there are four types of Matching Processes which occur over the course of such development. These refer to matches between the developmental needs of the person and the opportunities and resources essential to engaging in problem solving activities that stimulate further development of those aspects of intelligence, personality, and self which eventually become key characteristics.^[34]

Two of these matching processes are covered extensively in the existing research literature: Continuous Matching, and Cumulative Matching.^[35]

The other two of the matching processes described by Dorris are completely new to this book: Catalytic Matching and Chaotic Matching.

Dorris’ argument in relation to Catalytic Matching is that anyone who eventually becomes a ‘great’ will have experienced one or more sustained periods of exceptionally accelerated development of their key characteristics, accelerations which serve to massively differentiate them from their former peers both in terms of development and in terms of visibility within the field.

This acceleration occurs because the person becomes the focal point (star) of a self-reinforcing system of expertise and resources (catalytic system) which thrives off this person’s accelerated development and visibility.^[36]

Dorris' argument in relation to Chaotic Matching is that access to the resources and learning opportunities essential to the development of key characteristics of an eventual ‘great’ often occurs not due to the efforts / planning etc. of the individual, but simply due to chance events in the interpersonal, institutional, societal worlds around the person, who – unlike perhaps millions of equally capable peers – becomes the beneficiary of these chance events, events which Dorris argues can change a person’s entire future in much the same way as, e.g., a “lottery jackpot” or a “Titanic ticket”.^[37]

Dorris documents his theoretical arguments with extensive case studies of a wide range of individuals, including Izzy Montemayor, Einstein, Elvis, Monet, Mozart, da Vinci, Abraham Lincoln, Watson and Crick, basketball great Bill Russell, Louis Armstrong, Bill Gates, Alfred Hitchcock, Woody Guthrie, and Norma Jeane / Marilyn Monroe.^[38]

See also[link]

• Great man theory
• Narcissism
• Superiority complex

Notes[link]

References[link]

• Albert R. S. 1980. Family position and the attainment of eminence: a study of special family position and special family experience. Gifted Child Quarterly, 24, 87-95
• Albert, R.S. 1983. Genius and Eminence: The Social Psychology of Creativity and Exceptional Achievement. New York: Pergamon Press.
• Bloom, B. S. (ed). 1985. Developing Talent in Young People. New York: Ballentine Books. ISBN 0-345-31509-X
• Cox, C. 1926. Genetic Studies of Genius, Vol 2. The Early Mental Traits of Three Hundred Geniuses. Stanford, Ca: Stanford University Press.
• Dorris. B. 2009. The Arrival of The Fittest: How The Great Become Great. (Lulu Url in Note 38 above)
• Eysenck, H. 1995. Genius: The Natural History of Creativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-48508-8
• Galton, F. 1869. Hereditary Genius. London: Macmillan.
• Kroeber, A. L. 1944. Configurations of Cultural Growth. Berkeley, Ca: University of California Press.
• Martindale, C. 1990. The Clockwork Muse: The Predictability of Artistic Change. New York: Basic Books.
• Simonton, D.K. 1994. Greatness: Who Makes History and Why. New York: The Guilford Press. ISBN 0-89862-201-8
• Simonton, D.K. 2009. Genius 101. New York: Springer
• Walls, Jerry L. 2007. The Wizard versus The General. in Jerry L. Walls, Gregory Bassham, and Dick Vitale. Basketball and philosophy. University Press of Kentucky. pp. 129. ISBN 0-8131-2435-2.
• Zuckerman, H. 1977. Scientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States. New York: The Free Press. ISBN 0-02-935760-8
• Herzog, B. 1994. "greatness was created"

Further reading[link]

• Hans J. Morgenthau (1995). "The Nature of Greatness". In Kenneth W. Thompson. Great American presidents. Lanham, MD: University Press of America. ISBN 0-8191-9885-4. 
• Voltaire (1838). "Grand, Grandeur". Dictionnaire philosophique. Paris: Imprimerie de Cosse et Gaultier-Laguionie. pp. 563–564.  — available in translation as:
  • Voltaire (1843). "Great — Greatness". A Philosophical Dictionary from the French of M. Voltaire. I. London: W. Dugdale. pp. 596–598. 

External links[link]

• The Wiktionary entry for greatness
• Quotations related to Greatness at Wikiquote

Will Smith
Smith in 2011
Born	Willard Christopher Smith, Jr. (1968-09-25) September 25, 1968 (age 43) Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
Other names	The Fresh Prince
Occupation	Actor, producer, rapper
Years active	1985–1993, 1997–2005 (rapping), 1990–present (acting)
Spouse	Sheree Zampino (m. 1992–1995) «start: (1992)–end+1: (1996)»"Marriage: Sheree Zampino to Will Smith" Location: (linkback:http://en-wiki.pop.wn.com/index.php/Will_Smith) Jada Pinkett Smith (m. 1997) «start: (1997)»"Marriage: Jada Pinkett Smith to Will Smith" Location: (linkback:http://en-wiki.pop.wn.com/index.php/Will_Smith)
Children	Trey Smith Jaden Smith Willow Smith
Website
www.willsmith.com

Willard Christopher "Will" Smith, Jr. (born September 25, 1968),^[1] also known by his stage name The Fresh Prince, is an American actor, producer, and rapper. He has enjoyed success in television, film and music. In April 2007, Newsweek called him the most powerful actor in Hollywood.^[2] Smith has been nominated for four Golden Globe Awards, two Academy Awards, and has won multiple Grammy Awards.

In the late 1980s, Smith achieved modest fame as a rapper under the name The Fresh Prince. In 1990, his popularity increased dramatically when he starred in the popular television series The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air. The show ran for nearly six years (1990–1996) on NBC and has been syndicated consistently on various networks since then. In the mid-1990s, Smith moved from television to film, and ultimately starred in numerous blockbuster films. He is the only actor to have eight consecutive films gross over $100 million in the domestic box office and the only one to have eight consecutive films in which he starred open at #1 spot in the domestic box office tally.^[3]

Fourteen of the nineteen fiction films he has acted in have accumulated worldwide gross earnings of over $100 million, and four took in over $500 million in global box office receipts. As of 2011, his films have grossed $5.7 billion in global box office.^[4] His most financially successful films have been Bad Boys, Bad Boys II, Independence Day, Men in Black, Men in Black II, I, Robot, I Am Legend, Hancock, Wild Wild West, Enemy of the State, Shark Tale, Hitch and Seven Pounds. He also earned critical praise for his performances in Six Degrees of Separation, Ali and The Pursuit of Happyness, receiving Best Actor Oscar nominations for the latter two.

Family and early life[link]

Born and raised in the Wynnefield section of West Philadelphia, Smith also lived in Germantown in Northwest Philadelphia. His mother, Caroline (née Bright), was a school administrator who worked for the Philadelphia school board, and his father, Willard Christopher Smith, Sr., was a refrigeration engineer.^[5][6] He was raised Baptist.^[7] His parents separated when he was thirteen,^[8] and did not actually divorce until around 2000.^[9]

It is untrue, though widely reported, that Smith turned down a scholarship to attend the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT); he never applied to the school,^[10] although he was admitted to a "pre-engineering program" there.^[9] According to Smith, "My mother, who worked for the School Board of Philadelphia, had a friend who was the admissions officer at MIT. I had pretty high SAT scores and they needed black kids, so I probably could have gotten in. But I had no intention of going to college."^[11]

Recording and acting career[link]

Smith at the Emmy Awards in 1993

Early work (1985–1995)[link]

Smith started as the MC of the hip-hop duo DJ Jazzy Jeff & The Fresh Prince, with his childhood friend Jeffrey "DJ Jazzy Jeff" Townes as turntablist and producer,^[12] as well as Ready Rock C (Clarence Holmes) as the human beat box. The trio was known for performing humorous, radio-friendly songs, most notably "Parents Just Don't Understand" and "Summertime".^[12] They gained critical acclaim and won the first Grammy awarded in the Rap category (1988).^[12]

Smith had a line in "Voices That Care", a 1991 Persian Gulf War song by a celebrity group. Smith spent money freely during his early career and underpaid his income taxes.^[12] The Internal Revenue Service eventually assessed a $2.8 million tax debt against Smith, took many of his possessions, and garnished his income.^[13] Smith was nearly bankrupt in 1990, when the NBC television network signed him to a contract and built a sitcom, The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, around him.^[12]

The show was successful and began his acting career. Smith set for himself the goal of becoming "the biggest movie star in the world," studying box office successes' common characteristics.^[8] His first major roles were in the drama Six Degrees of Separation (1993) and the action film Bad Boys (1995) which he starred opposite of Martin Lawrence.

Breakthrough (1996–2000)[link]

In 1996, Smith starred as part of an ensemble cast in Roland Emmerich's Independence Day. The film was a massive blockbuster, becoming the second highest grossing film in history at the time and establishing Smith as a prime box office draw.^[14] He later struck gold again in the summer of 1997 alongside Tommy Lee Jones in the summer hit Men in Black playing Agent J. In 1998, Smith starred with Gene Hackman in Enemy of the State.^[12]

He turned down the role of Neo in The Matrix in favor of Wild Wild West (1999). Despite the disappointment of Wild Wild West, Smith has said that he harbors no regrets about his decision, asserting that Keanu Reeves's performance as Neo was superior to what Smith himself would have achieved.^[15] Though in interviews subsequent to the release of Wild Wild West he stated that he "made a mistake on Wild Wild West. That could have been better."^[16]

2001–present[link]

Smith in September 2009

In 2005, Smith was entered into the Guinness Book of World Records for attending a record breaking three premieres in a 24-hour time span.^[17]

He has planned to star in a feature film remake of the television series It Takes a Thief.^[18]

On December 10, 2007, Smith was recognized at Grauman's Chinese Theatre on Hollywood Boulevard. Smith left an imprint of his hands and feet outside the world renowned theater in front of many fans.^[19] Later that month, Smith starred in the film I Am Legend, released December 14, 2007. Despite marginally positive reviews,^[20] its opening was the largest ever for a film released in the United States during December. Smith himself has said that he considers the film to be "aggressively unique".^[21] A reviewer said that the film's commercial success "cemented [Smith's] standing as the number one box office draw in Hollywood."^[22] On December 1, 2008, TV Guide reported that Smith has been selected as one of America’s top ten most fascinating people of 2008 for a Barbara Walters ABC special that aired on December 4, 2008.^[23]

Smith is currently developing a film entitled The Last Pharaoh, in which he will star as Taharqa.^[24]

President Barack Obama has stated that if a film were to ever be made about his life, he would have Smith play his part, because "he has the ears". Obama stated that the two have discussed a possibility of a film based on the 2008 election, but this may not happen until the end of the Obama presidency.^[25]

Men in Black III opened on May 25, 2012. In it, Smith will play Agent J for the third time, being one of his more popular earlier roles coincides with the fact that it will be his first major starring role in four years.

On August 19, 2011, it was announced^[26] that Smith had returned to the studio with producer La Mar Edwards to make a new album. Edwards has worked with artists such as T.I., Chris Brown, and Game.

Smith and his son, Jaden, are currently filming After Earth, which is set for a 2013 release.

Personal life[link]

Nobel Peace Prize Concert December 11, 2009, in Oslo, Norway: Smith with wife Jada and children Jaden and Willow

Smith was raised by his parents in West Philadelphia. Smith credits his father's dedication when discussing his involvement in the lives of his own children: "I look at my father and how he was able to keep four kids fed and clothed and still managed to find time to spend with us."^[27] Smith married Sheree Zampino in 1992. They had a son, Willard Christopher Smith III, also known as "Trey", but divorced in 1995. Trey appeared in his father's music video for the 1998 single "Just the Two of Us".

Smith married actress Jada Pinkett in 1997. Together they have had two children: Jaden Christopher Syre (born 1998), his co-star in The Pursuit of Happyness, and Willow Camille Reign (born 2000), who appeared as his daughter in I Am Legend. Along with his brother, Harry Smith, he owns Treyball Development Inc.,^[28] a Beverly Hills-based company named after his first son. Smith and his family reside on Star Island in Miami Beach, Florida and in Los Angeles, Stockholm, Sweden^[29] and Philadelphia.

Smith was consistently listed in Fortune Magazine's "Richest 40" list of the forty wealthiest Americans under the age of 40. He donated $4,600 to the presidential campaign of Democrat Barack Obama.^[30] On December 11, 2009, Smith and his wife hosted the Nobel Peace Prize Concert in Oslo, Norway, when Obama had won the prize.^[31]

Smith has said he has studied multiple religions, including Scientology, and he has said many complimentary things about Scientology and other faiths. Despite his praise of Scientology, Smith said "I just think a lot of the ideas in Scientology are brilliant and revolutionary and non-religious"^[32][33] and "Ninety-eight percent of the principles in Scientology are identical to the principles of the Bible.... I don't think that because the word someone uses for spirit is 'thetan' that the definition becomes any different."^[34] He has denied having joined the Church of Scientology, saying "I am a Christian. I am a student of all religions, and I respect all people and all paths."^[35]

Smith gave $1.3 million to charities in 2007, of which $450,000 went to two Christian ministries, and $122,500 went to three Scientology organizations; the remaining beneficiaries included "a Los Angeles mosque, other Christian-based schools and churches, and [...] the Yitzhak Rabin Memorial Center in Israel".^[36] Smith and his wife have also founded a private elementary school in Calabasas, California, the New Village Leadership Academy, which uses Study Technology, a teaching methodology developed by L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology.^[37] Federal tax filing showed that Will Smith donated $1.2 million to the school in 2010.^[38]

In 2012 he expressed support for the legalizing of same-sex marriage, in an endorsement of president Barack Obama's declaration to adopt this stance on the issue.^[39]

Discography[link]

With DJ Jazzy Jeff[link]

• Rock the House (1987)
• He's the DJ, I'm the Rapper (1988)
• And in This Corner... (1989)
• Homebase (1991)
• Code Red (1993)

Solo[link]

• Big Willie Style (1997)
• Willennium (1999)
• Born to Reign (2002)
• Lost and Found (2005)

Filmography[link]

Television[link]

Film[link]

Box office grosses[link]

References[link]

Further reading[link]

• Iannucci, Lisa (2009). Will Smith: A Biography. Greenwood. ISBN 0-313-37610-7. 

External links[link]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Will Smith

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Will Smith

• Official website
• Will Smith at the Internet Movie Database
• Will Smith at Yahoo! Movies
• Will Smith on Charlie Rose in 2002
• Will Smith at People.com
• Will Smith discography at MusicBrainz

LeBron James

James with the Heat
No. 6 – Miami Heat
Small forward
Personal information
Born	(1984-12-30) December 30, 1984 (age 27) Akron, Ohio, United States
Nationality	American
High school	St. Vincent – St. Mary High School
Listed height	6 ft 8 in (2.03 m)
Listed weight	250 lb (113 kg)
Career information
NBA Draft	2003 / Round: 1 / Pick: 1st overall
Selected by the Cleveland Cavaliers
Pro career	2003–present
Career history
2003–2010	Cleveland Cavaliers
2010–present	Miami Heat
Career highlights and awards
3× NBA Most Valuable Player (2009–2010, 2012) NBA Rookie of the Year (2004) 8× NBA All-Star (2005–2012) NBA scoring champion (2008) 6× All-NBA First Team (2006, 2008–2012) 2× All-NBA Second Team (2005, 2007) 4× NBA All-Defensive First Team (2009–2012) NBA All-Rookie First Team (2004) 2× NBA All-Star Game MVP (2006, 2008) Naismith Prep Player of the Year (2003)
Stats at NBA.com
Medals Men's Basketball Competitor for the  United States Olympic Games Gold 2008 Beijing Team competition Bronze 2004 Athens Team competition FIBA World Championship Bronze 2006 Japan Team competition FIBA Americas Championship Gold 2007 Las Vegas Team competition

LeBron Raymone James (/ləˈbrɒn/; born December 30, 1984) is an American professional basketball player for the Miami Heat of the National Basketball Association (NBA). Nicknamed "King James", he was a three-time "Mr. Basketball" of Ohio in high school, and was highly promoted in the national media as a future NBA superstar while a sophomore at St. Vincent – St. Mary High School. He was selected with the number one pick in the 2003 NBA Draft by the Cleveland Cavaliers. Listed as a small forward, James has set numerous youngest player records since joining the league. He was named the NBA Rookie of the Year in 2003–04, was named the NBA Most Valuable Player in 2009, 2010, and 2012^[1] and has been both an All-NBA selection and an All-Star every season since 2005. In 2010, a much-publicized free agency process ended with James signing with the Miami Heat.

James led the Cleveland Cavaliers to consecutive playoff appearances from 2006 through 2010. In 2007, the Cavaliers advanced to the NBA Finals for the first time in franchise history, but lost to the San Antonio Spurs. In 2011, James and the Miami Heat advanced to the NBA Finals but lost to the Dallas Mavericks. James has been a member of the USA national team, winning a bronze medal at the 2004 Olympics and gold at the 2008 Olympics.