Can we select all of the above? Thank you for this personal, agonizing story. And while it is cowardly to select all three, I wonder if Trump is an anomaly. How did such a gross, lying, despicable man attract enough voters to give him two terms? Certainly not his policies. Does he have any? Not his stature in the world. Our former friends believe Americans must now have our heads examined. Not his intelligence. Recently he rhapsodized over a fountain pen. Wait, I have it. His followers mirror his greed, his callousness, his mental decline. Can they ever wake up? Look in the mirror and say, What the fuck (87 and allowed to swear) was I thinking? We can only pray.
Even having watched it only on airplanes, I've seen enough episodes to agree with you that it is indeed a good show (despite your family member's mockery).
I offer a fourth option: we can be so seduced by the degree of collaboration/cooperation between the fraudster and victim that we no longer recognize it as a threat to our society. It becomes invisible, the “new normal”. To me that is the most troubling outcome.
"She tells me they have powerful imaginations that enable them to spin up a fantasy world consisting of increasingly improbable contingencies. They convince themselves that this fictional world they’ve created is the reality."
AND, right this minute, we are in the midst of a triumphant victory over Iran!
What an awful way to learn a lesson. It happened to my ma too— within a phone call! It’s rampant still. Small time and big time. This essay had all the intrigue of a novel. 👏👏
I’m a retired federal criminal defense attorney. I’ve represented many “white collar” fraudsters. Every one of them believes in their own lies. Also, remarkably, many were also caught up in a fraud perpetrated by someone else. So I represented a man who defrauded people by claiming he was a fish factor, and with his loot he was investing in a ridiculous currency exchange scheme. Most of these guys were as dumb as a box of rocks, could not logically explain how their scheme would make money, but hundreds of (greedy unsophisticated) investors went along with it. I think often of the fraudsters and their victims as I read the daily news.
Also incredibly modern is Melmotte's attempt to shelter his assets by placing them in a trust for Marie, making for a great tension between the two and resulting in Marie's ultimate and unintended exit as a wealthy woman.
Trollope loves a contrast between the nobility of land-based wealth and the new, financialized economy and this is one of the best examples. It very much speaks to the fear and dislike of new economies and new tools that appear in every generation. But Melmotte is not the only scammer, who has a bad ending. There's always Felix too!
Yes, I love that trust plot and Marie’s outcome 😅. And Felix really is so awful, his poor mother. But the novel is a great one. The Beargarden Club and its members really took a hit with Melmotte (although somehow Dolly came out ok, shockingly). Trollope at his finest!
Thanks for these insights and for the summary of Trollope’s novel. Have you read Dreiser’s The Financier? It’s been a while since I have…sorry I am not answering your question—but keep up the good writing, please!
This reminded me of the moment in Jakob Wasserman's biographical novel, The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser, when Kaspar learns how to lie:
"Suddenly he got up and stepped in front of a mirror. He gazed steadily at his own face to see whether a lie dwelt in it. In spite of the uneasiness which it caused him, he was tempted to lie once just to see how his face would look afterwards. Anxiously he looked around, then looked again into the mirror, and said softly, 'It's snowing.' He thought this was a lie, because the sun was shining.
There was no change in his face; one could therefore lie without any one's noticing it. He had thought that the sun would grow dark or would hide, but it simply continued to shine."
Mr. Roberts acknowledges his part in the deception. To do so requires a certain level of maturity and self-esteem. To acknowledge one's actions fell short can trigger shame. Many people cannot handle this shame, especially when they have lost the family fortune. As a lawyer helping consumers in a past life, I have met many a victim of an easily discerned con who cannot bring themselves to admit they were duped. It is a delicate dance to help them recover their losses while not triggering their shame. If you trigger that, they will kill the messenger (you), begin defending the fraudster and storm out, thus compounding their problems.
The best technique I found was to never mention the big picture, nor to express any judgment, especially pity, about how absurd the fiction they bought into was. Rather, it is best to simply focus on the here and now with concrete, neutral steps to take in the present. I think of this a lot when people contemplate the MAGA cult and conclude the voters who fell for it must be publicly excoriated. I believe excoriating voters we do not actually know* is a formula to perpetuate Trump's power. Trump depends on the fact that shaming people for liking him will drive them right back into his arms.
We need votes in the here and now. If some voters want to tell themselves they didn't "vote for this", it is unnecessary to pop that bubble. Allow people to keep their dignity. Don't trigger their shame. Give them a set of actions they can take which allow them to rebuild their pride. I know there is a powerful human impulse to confront someone with their transgressions. However, in the case of fraud, it helps control that urge by remembering that fraud is theft by deception. Theft is theft. It is a crime. We wouldn't scold the victim of a mugging.
*Dealing with someone close to you who is part of the MAGA con job is different and beyond the scope of my comment.
I'm sure Trollope had his eyes on the controversial railroad building (or not building) practices in the U.S. in the 1870s when he had Melmotte get involved in that.
What a page-turner of a post! I was pacing the kitchen right there with you.
Same! A modern day intrigue!
Thanks Carissa.
Thanks Diana!
Can we select all of the above? Thank you for this personal, agonizing story. And while it is cowardly to select all three, I wonder if Trump is an anomaly. How did such a gross, lying, despicable man attract enough voters to give him two terms? Certainly not his policies. Does he have any? Not his stature in the world. Our former friends believe Americans must now have our heads examined. Not his intelligence. Recently he rhapsodized over a fountain pen. Wait, I have it. His followers mirror his greed, his callousness, his mental decline. Can they ever wake up? Look in the mirror and say, What the fuck (87 and allowed to swear) was I thinking? We can only pray.
I loved that show! It needed more seasons.
Can't wait to tell Andrew!
Not cowardly at all. I think all three choices have some validity.
Thanks for the shout-out for "Lie To Me" .. I've recently re-watched it and am enjoying it again. Tell Andrew he is wrong ...
Thanks for joining me on Team-Lie To Me!
Even having watched it only on airplanes, I've seen enough episodes to agree with you that it is indeed a good show (despite your family member's mockery).
Thanks Jim. So far getting solid Lie to Me support!
I offer a fourth option: we can be so seduced by the degree of collaboration/cooperation between the fraudster and victim that we no longer recognize it as a threat to our society. It becomes invisible, the “new normal”. To me that is the most troubling outcome.
Jane,
Great point. Acceptance of fraud is the worst option. Thankfully we still have working journalists and working minds that speak out.
"She tells me they have powerful imaginations that enable them to spin up a fantasy world consisting of increasingly improbable contingencies. They convince themselves that this fictional world they’ve created is the reality."
AND, right this minute, we are in the midst of a triumphant victory over Iran!
Thanks Kathleen.
What an awful way to learn a lesson. It happened to my ma too— within a phone call! It’s rampant still. Small time and big time. This essay had all the intrigue of a novel. 👏👏
I’m a retired federal criminal defense attorney. I’ve represented many “white collar” fraudsters. Every one of them believes in their own lies. Also, remarkably, many were also caught up in a fraud perpetrated by someone else. So I represented a man who defrauded people by claiming he was a fish factor, and with his loot he was investing in a ridiculous currency exchange scheme. Most of these guys were as dumb as a box of rocks, could not logically explain how their scheme would make money, but hundreds of (greedy unsophisticated) investors went along with it. I think often of the fraudsters and their victims as I read the daily news.
After the facts became clear, I had suspicions that Anne was a victim of a larger fraudster. It is amazing how the mind can self-decieve.
Also incredibly modern is Melmotte's attempt to shelter his assets by placing them in a trust for Marie, making for a great tension between the two and resulting in Marie's ultimate and unintended exit as a wealthy woman.
Trollope loves a contrast between the nobility of land-based wealth and the new, financialized economy and this is one of the best examples. It very much speaks to the fear and dislike of new economies and new tools that appear in every generation. But Melmotte is not the only scammer, who has a bad ending. There's always Felix too!
Allison, that trust plot is so in your "wheelhouse!" I suppose too much time has passed to prove Fraudulent Conveyance.
Marie has a great arc in the novel.
Trollope was satirical about pretty much every class. The few scenes in Parliament are so funny.
Felix is truly awful!
Yes, I love that trust plot and Marie’s outcome 😅. And Felix really is so awful, his poor mother. But the novel is a great one. The Beargarden Club and its members really took a hit with Melmotte (although somehow Dolly came out ok, shockingly). Trollope at his finest!
Hollywood should be on this right away! Thank you for bringing these threads together for me in your beautifully written piece.
Thank you Jane.
Thanks for these insights and for the summary of Trollope’s novel. Have you read Dreiser’s The Financier? It’s been a while since I have…sorry I am not answering your question—but keep up the good writing, please!
This reminded me of the moment in Jakob Wasserman's biographical novel, The Enigma of Kaspar Hauser, when Kaspar learns how to lie:
"Suddenly he got up and stepped in front of a mirror. He gazed steadily at his own face to see whether a lie dwelt in it. In spite of the uneasiness which it caused him, he was tempted to lie once just to see how his face would look afterwards. Anxiously he looked around, then looked again into the mirror, and said softly, 'It's snowing.' He thought this was a lie, because the sun was shining.
There was no change in his face; one could therefore lie without any one's noticing it. He had thought that the sun would grow dark or would hide, but it simply continued to shine."
Mr. Roberts acknowledges his part in the deception. To do so requires a certain level of maturity and self-esteem. To acknowledge one's actions fell short can trigger shame. Many people cannot handle this shame, especially when they have lost the family fortune. As a lawyer helping consumers in a past life, I have met many a victim of an easily discerned con who cannot bring themselves to admit they were duped. It is a delicate dance to help them recover their losses while not triggering their shame. If you trigger that, they will kill the messenger (you), begin defending the fraudster and storm out, thus compounding their problems.
The best technique I found was to never mention the big picture, nor to express any judgment, especially pity, about how absurd the fiction they bought into was. Rather, it is best to simply focus on the here and now with concrete, neutral steps to take in the present. I think of this a lot when people contemplate the MAGA cult and conclude the voters who fell for it must be publicly excoriated. I believe excoriating voters we do not actually know* is a formula to perpetuate Trump's power. Trump depends on the fact that shaming people for liking him will drive them right back into his arms.
We need votes in the here and now. If some voters want to tell themselves they didn't "vote for this", it is unnecessary to pop that bubble. Allow people to keep their dignity. Don't trigger their shame. Give them a set of actions they can take which allow them to rebuild their pride. I know there is a powerful human impulse to confront someone with their transgressions. However, in the case of fraud, it helps control that urge by remembering that fraud is theft by deception. Theft is theft. It is a crime. We wouldn't scold the victim of a mugging.
*Dealing with someone close to you who is part of the MAGA con job is different and beyond the scope of my comment.
37 you say ??Blame it on your youth . Once fooled never again deceived .
I deeply appreciate your post, at this moment in time. Sadly I think the third choice is our shared reality.
Having known of the Great Deceiver long ago, as did every New Yorker, I assumed we were safe from him. How wrong I was.
I'm sure Trollope had his eyes on the controversial railroad building (or not building) practices in the U.S. in the 1870s when he had Melmotte get involved in that.