What is the opposite word of famous

I can’t believe I’m an ESL teacher and I’m asking this question. What is an antonym for famous? Doesn’t «infamous (pronounced IN-fa-mous) mean very famous? None of the other negating prefixes seem to work — «nonfamous, unfamous…».

I’m thinking of just going with «unpopular». The question for my students is, «Make a list of the good things and bad things about being an __________ musician.»

I would say unknown, or maybe in the context of speaking about an artist, undiscovered.

Infamous is used for something well known for some negative reason.

Good luck

Denise

I like «unknown», and how about «unsuccessful»?

I can’t believe I’m an ESL teacher and I’m asking this question. What is an antonym for famous? Doesn’t «infamous (pronounced IN-fa-mous) mean very famous? None of the other negating prefixes seem to work — «nonfamous, unfamous…».

I’m thinking of just going with «unpopular». The question for my students is, «Make a list of the good things and bad things about being an __________ musician.»

I think that «unknown» works best here.
Infamous — having an exceedingly bad reputation; «a notorious gangster»; the tenderloin district was notorious for vice (from the WR Dictionary)
JD

I like «unsuccessful» but «obscure» also seems great.

Oh, and, to the best of my knowledge, «infamous» means very famous, but in a bad way.

Oh, and, to the best of my knowledge, «infamous» means very famous, but in a bad way.

Yeah, just like «notorious»

Well yeah. That’s true. Rank-and-file could be opposite of «famous», but….. hm. Does «rank-and-file» refer to the normal, everyday people that work in a certain institution, though?

Interesting……….

Well yeah. That’s true. Rank-and-file could be opposite of «famous», but….. hm. Does «rank-and-file» refer to the normal, everyday people that work in a certain institution, though?

Interesting……….

E.g.: «rank-and-file» party activists rather than the heads of one. The example has been taken from our Soviet past . By the way, «rank-and-file» seems to me synonymous with «ordinary», which can also replace the antonym of «famous» sometimes. Another word is «common» but it sounds more humiliating than «ordinary» when used to talk about people.

I don’t think words such as ‘unpopular’, ‘unsuccessful’, ‘a nobody’ or ‘obscure’ are right at all. And absolutely not ‘infamous’. Just because a musician may not be high-profile does not mean s/he’s not popular or successful. It could be a session musician for example, who’s happy not being in the limelight; an unsung hero if you will (no pun intended!).

The best suggested so far have to be ‘little-known’, ‘unknown’ or ‘anonymous’.

I don’t think words such as ‘unpopular’, ‘unsuccessful’, ‘a nobody’ or ‘obscure’ are right at all. And absolutely not ‘infamous’. Just because a musician may not be high-profile does not mean s/he’s not popular or successful. It could be a session musician for example, who’s happy not being in the limelight; an unsung hero if you will (no pun intended!).

The best suggested so far have to be ‘little-known’, ‘unknown’ or ‘anonymous’.

As far as I am aware, «anonymous» is more about someone who tries to hide their results, achievements or even heroic deeds from others. That is, they do it intentionally. But maybe we need a word describing a person who is just not very famous but not because they have always tried to conceal it from others but because either other people are better or because one is unsuccessful. Sometimes, however, indeed a person may die having created something outstanding, years have passed and descendants observe a masterpiece but do not know its great creator.

As far as I am aware, «anonymous» is more about someone who tries to hide their results, achievements or even heroic deeds from others. That is, they do it intentionally. But maybe we need a word describing a person who is just not very famous but not because they have always tried to conceal it from others but because either other people are better or because one is unsuccessful. Sometimes, however, indeed a person may die having created something outstanding, years have passed and descendants observe a masterpiece but do not know its great creator.

You’re right Dmitry, ‘anonymous’ does perhaps have this slant (but not exclusively I would argue). Perhaps we could find out the context in order to offer better suggestions. Is it intended to be an impartial description of the musician’s non-celebrity status, or loaded to be either positive or negative? Is it a description which the musician would happily give themselves that you need? Has the musician shunned fame deliberately?

I must strongly object to «unsucessful» as antonym to «famous». How on Earth did anyone get that idea? Everybody who is famous is successfull, thus who is not famous is has no success, ist that it? As if the only kind of success worth striving for included being famous. There is probably lots and lots of people that are highly succssful and completely unknown to the general public. Even in highly visible arts like pop music.

As far as I am concerned, I agree that «unsuccessful» can be a synonym for «someone who is not famous». Yes, sometimes people are not famous for some of their achievements but at the same time they are well-to-do (affluent, solvent) because they earn enough, have families, cars, luxurious cottages, etc. The other situation is when they are not famous and hence unsuccessful because, for example, they consider themselves so since they have not achieved the objectives they have set themselves. These two are possible!!!

As far as I am concerned, I agree that «unsuccessful» can be a synonym for «someone who is not famous». Yes, sometimes people are not famous for some of their achievements but at the same time they are well-to-do (affluent, solvent) because they earn enough, have families, cars, luxurious cottages, etc. The other situation is when they are not famous and hence unsuccessful because, for example, they consider themselves so since they have not achieved the objectives they have set themselves. These two are possible!!!

Absolutely not. I am not famous Dmitry, yet does that automatically mean that I am unsuccessful also? This is wrong!

Absolutely not. I am not famous Dmitry, yet does that automatically mean that I am unsuccessful also? This is wrong!

No, it does not. But it can mean this and I have written about this possibility above.

No, it does not. But it can mean this and I have written about this possibility above.

Ok. I’m in danger of getting into a debate off-topic regarding the vacuous views of fame being a symbol of success, so I’ll quit while I still can! I’d welcome some more context to know the intention behind the question in order to get back on track….

As far as I am concerned, I agree that «unsuccessful» can be a synonym for «someone who is not famous». Yes, sometimes people are not famous for some of their achievements but at the same time they are well-to-do (affluent, solvent) because they earn enough, have families, cars, luxurious cottages, etc. The other situation is when they are not famous and hence unsuccessful because, for example, they consider themselves so since they have not achieved the objectives they have set themselves. These two are possible!!!

With the greatest of respect, this is completely and utterly ridiculous.

Unsuccessful is not, and cannot be, an antonym of famous.

The primary meaning of «successful» is to achieve what one is striving for. That can be done in complete privacy. Successful isn’t a synonym for «Famous», so «unsuccessful» can’t be its antonym.

To my mind, «famous» is a synonym for «(very) well known», so «unknown» is the best antonym.

I agree with those who say we need more context. I think we’re having a problem, not so much with the adjective as with the noun.
What sort of musician are we talking about? A classical musican, a pop musician, an instrumentist, a singer, a composer?

For many people, a pop musician must appear on TV to be considered famous. I’m not sure the same criterium applies to classical musicians.

With the little info available, I’m looking for an adjective that would mean «not in the limelight«. The problem is am I the only one? In other words, are we all searching in the same direction?

In the absence of a better option, my preference goes to little-known.

I agree, but how do you fit it into the original sentence?

Make a list of the good things and bad things about being a __________ musician.»

I agree, but how do you fit it into the original sentence?

I agree with everything you said in post 25. My advice would be not to try to shoehorn in a word that we can’t even agree on () just in order to retain the original structure of the sentence. With no more direction or context forthcoming, I still think ‘little-known’ or ‘unknown’ are the best bets. Not great though.

Infamous is used for something well known for some negative reason.

This is true, so as it’s been pointed out, not the word you’re looking for.
My suggestions are unheard of, less well-known — you might also consider unnotable and insignificant, but these seem a bit demeaning.

The problem I’m having with unknown is that, for some reason, I sense an atmosphere of mistery or fantasy around it

My thoughts exactly. I always attach a sense of mystery to unknown, which is why alternatives may be better.

Shadowy and sub rosa come to mind.

I’m often amused by the police (or news media) when they refer to «un-named sources». Someone gave birth and failed to name their offspring?

I can’t believe I’m an ESL teacher and I’m asking this question. What is an antonym for famous? Doesn’t «infamous (pronounced IN-fa-mous) mean very famous? None of the other negating prefixes seem to work — «nonfamous, unfamous…».

I’m thinking of just going with «unpopular». The question for my students is, «Make a list of the good things and bad things about being an __________ musician.»

I can’t believe I’m an ESL teacher and I’m asking this question. What is an antonym for famous? Doesn’t «infamous (pronounced IN-fa-mous) mean very famous? None of the other negating prefixes seem to work — «nonfamous, unfamous…».

I’m thinking of just going with «unpopular». The question for my students is, «Make a list of the good things and bad things about being an __________ musician.»

Unfortunately, I haven’t quite read through alllll of the responses to this question…so my apologies if I’m repeating previous answers. Here’s what I’ve got on this…
Infamous is actually defined as having a reputation of the worst kind. The word to be used, although I know it seems odd is actually -unfamous! It’s a word!!! I didn’t want to believe it myself, but I double checked it and it really is! I’m attaching a screenshot of where I found it online in case you wanted to see for yourself! It’s in the dictionary.
Hope this helps someone somewhere! Lol… P.S. I get extremely irritated when people use infamous incorrectly because my middle school English teacher drilled us on that one and when they say iMfamous on top of that…woooweee … I could swear the top of my head blows off like a whistle on a steam engine 🚂 Take care y’all!

A couple of other word-choices: Incognito and unsung.

«Incognito» means intentionally unknown, often by use of a false name or disguise. «Unsung» means unknown but deserving to be known. Both definitions from Collins Dictionary

Welcome to the forums, Welcome2Lauraland, and thank you for your post 41.

That Merriam-Webster definition really doesn’t work for me. I would expect a teacher seeing «an unfamous actor» in a piece of schoolwork to put a big red against it.

Maybe it is just because you are not used to speaking out this word.

But the word just isn’t commonly used. Seriously.

Like Loob, I’d put a cross next to «an unfamous actor», unless there’s some context to justify this innovation. The other example about «going through the unfamous stage» seems fine to me. The word seems to be used jokingly.

a magazine article with the title «Famous and unfamous feminists».

«Unfamous» is opposed to «famous» there. It catches the readers’ attention. The title «Famous and little-known feminists» would be boring and would seem like the title of a 500-page monography on the subject!

Not to worry. If the original poster didn’t find out what he* wanted to know during the 14 years that have passed since he asked this question, he’s probably forgotten that he asked it.
_________________
*Gender inferred from the Spanish and English parts of the username.

I did indeed forget that I asked this — and yet here I am 14 years later getting a notification about this. Interesting.