I read the book a few weeks ago and my first reaction was how brave Belle was/is to share such a painful experience. I’m sure it was therapeutic to write about it - and she got a lot of flak from other “rich people” who thought that airing her dirty laundry was in poor taste, caused harm to her children, etc. It does take courage/guts to open yourself up like that. I agree that once you have money, there is a fear of losing it. And inherited money, even more so. As you said it is a gift - usually from the generation who worked very hard to make that money. The actual dollar amount of her trust is a moot point (to me) - the way her husband abandoned her and their kids was the most egregious part of the story. How do people turn on a dime like that? He did harm to the kids, not her (by telling the story). Anyway, great essay as usual - and I’m glad you called Kat out.
Winter picked the wrong no-longer-rich person to vilify as poor-little-rich-girl. Misrepresenting Belle's apparent inability to directly access the capital in her trust, is dishonest at best. Many legacy trusts--like Belle's--are very poorly managed, and earn 1-3% per year. Or even lose money. Or can be frozen due to pending lien attempts.
Hopefully, Belle has landed on her feet, and after her crash course in money management, can financially care for her children and her self.
If „bad“ things happen to every day people like an accident then most Americans may lose their cars, houses etc.. for example 57% to 59% of Americans report they do not have sufficient liquidity in savings to cover such a $1000 expense without taking on debt.. so when someone talks about their finances in relation to events that would cause most average Americans to go into debt and has the means to easily financially recover from said event then maybe there is no sympathy for that person from the „average“ American..
Fair, but the article offended me because it effectively said that Belle couldn't have had any financial worries in addition to the trauma of her husband leaving her. It also offended me for the manipulative way it handled financial details.
Excellent article as always. It’s just mean and silly to hate on this woman. It’s like if I said that your struggles have no meaning because your car has air conditioning and mine does not. Having known quite a few people who were well off financially on the surface, I know they often struggled with fear of being unable to keep up their wealth. I have a friend who would be penniless if god wife left him. Another who has two kids in elite colleges and is the sole provider. One who contemplated suicide when his business almost tanked while he had two kids in private schools and an expensive wife. I have approximately $3000 total to my name right now and I am so relaxed because it’s the most cash I’ve had in years, with more coming in from a steady wonderful lined up summer job. There are mice in the walls of my one bedroom apartment and I’ll deal with that, but my overall stress is low compared to my well off friends. More important:: I know I can survive. I’ve been fired from a job with no savings or healthcare and I bounced. I’ve been evicted from my apartment while I was on a ventilator in an ICU and lost my voice so I could not work. I bounced then climbed. (And got my apartment back so no legal eviction- my landlords at the time were a bit irrational and had no legal case but could have made life impossible for me.). Having survived a lot I know I can, which gives me the courage to try things that my friends can’t. Still, insecurity is horrible. At any level. The rich have burdens (no pun intended though it can’t be helped) that others choose not to try to understand. I’m now interested in reading the book and may see if the library has it.
Such a smart and thoughtful critique of Strangers through the lens of “wealth derangement syndrome.” I’ve just started this book and look forward to reading it with your added perspective. I love the way you point out the feints and the use of non-data in Winters’ article to make insinuations. If I were still teaching it would make for a great discussion in an advanced writing class!
This comment. Yes. Always someone more well better worse off. If we could find a way to help those at the bottom without skewering those at the top (except well maybe a select handful 🙃)
I haven't read the book but look forward to doing so. What I've read about the book and your article here reinforce my belief that most would be well served by parents, advisors, and schooling who educate all of us in what is essentially another language - money - while we are young. That education, basic at first, would grow in complexity with maturity. When any woman (and sometimes a man) gets to midlife with a typical amount of financial illiteracy, they are understandably confused and upset to have to learn it during a time of grief like divorce or widowhood. Girls in particular are not socialised to even speak about money meaningfully. I spent 34 years working out the financial piece of high net worth divorce settlements for mostly women. There is an insulting attitude that pervades most settlement discussions as recently as 2024 when I retired which includes, "she has enough" to determine what she gets from what they earn, owe, and own. But then there's still that other one that characterizes them splitting 'his' money. It won't change until we change the way we bring kids (and again, particularly girls) up to include a solid understanding of how money, business, and to some extent family law work. If you're going to get married, these are basics . . . . Also, many attorneys do not know money well especially when you're dealing with the merely rich or lower. Get a competent ethical financial pro trained in divorce divisions to articulate mathmatically other contributions to the marriage, to visually show how the settlement will or will not work for the person who has to live with it after and get them to testify if necessary. Thanks for an article that touches on these things!
Bonnie, I think one of the good effects of this book is to spur women from an early age to be educated in finance as you suggest. I have a daughter, a daughter-in-law, and two very young granddaughters so I have a vested interest in their knowing the financial details of their lives.
In my home it was vulgar to talk about money or even to think about it. Which is really stupid! But that's how it was back then. Part of the cuddly idea that money needful for survival just came to you under God's provision so if it didnt come it meant you didn't deserve it! To be proactive meant not trusting God! Now I need a lie down after these traumatic memories!!
This is so interesting to me, David, and very well written.
It’s amazing to me how us, “normal people” have vilified any one of wealth, inherited or, ahem, the new money set. (Note: I desperately aspire to be the latter; there’s no former.)
As someone on the other side, I think it simply boils down to jealousy. We modern day humans are not that dissimilar from our ancestors cheering the beheading of the elite in the town square… or the crabs that kill the single one for trying to escape the bucket.
I’m so fascinated by this rich vs poor mentality that nearly borders on violent, a year ago I started a quarterly seminar called, “Wine, Women & Wealth.” It’s exactly what it sounds like: I invite financial experts to offer tips and insights to women looking to empower themselves and their financial futures. It’s been a tremendous success, because, as I say only slightly tongue-in-cheek, being poor is boring. Anyway, I loved Belle Burden’s book, and wealthy or poor, or somewhere in the middle, the unravelling of a life is terrifying and no one deserves the pain of navigating betrayal. I highlighted many passages and plan to use it during the next WW&W event. Love her or loathe her, at the very least she has started an important conversation about women and financial control. I’m just sorry the townsfolk with the pitchforks and torches can’t see that.
Erin, your "Wine, Women, and Wealth" group sounds like a terrific way to improve financial literacy. I do think there is a lot of class resentment behind the critiques of Belle and her book.
Now that’s my kinda financial education lol - talking about budgeting and investing would be way more interesting if Chablis and charcuterie were involved lol
I am! Our next WW&W is September 23, and we have an in conversation with the Globe & Mail wine columnist at the end of June. If you’re interested, feel free to message me and I can send you more info so we don’t hijack David’s comment section. 😊
Hahaha! Very close, Jane. I’m Canadian (though my dad was born in London)… the truffle and mincemeat colony roots are never far behind our poutine and Nanaimo bars. 🥂
I read the book in one day. I am so glad she had the courage to tell her story. Set her privilege aside - she was abused by a man she fully trusted and whom she thought loved her. For any woman to criticize her is hateful and patriarchal. Her pain and story is real, and this abuse happens to women of all levels of wealth. Why aren’t these “journalists” jumping in with a “hit piece” on her ex-husband? Thank you, David, for your essay. I come from middle class, middle America, and I found her book compelling and your essay an informative peek into the financial fears of the wealthy. That being said, I do think it is easy and just to criticize the billionaire class in America when so many are struggling to pay for healthcare (this is a totally separate topic from Belle Burden’s book).
Thanks Jean. You make a great point about proportionality. Belle's husband acted disgracefully. He will forever be known as Belle's creep of an ex-husband.
Jeremy Ney and I had a good discussion about the "Giving Gap."
In the first Gilded Age, the richest gave away far more of their fortunes than the richest of our current Gilded Age. Carnegie wrote that it was a disgrace for anyone to die wealthy. We need more of that attitude.
As a person who spent his prime money making years caring for a son and making $32,000 per year, plus benefits, I just don't understand any of this. Even having the time to write a memoir is a luxury I do not understand, though I earned an MFA in nonfiction from a highly ranked university, won a major prize before graduating, signed with a New York agency, and was expected to write and only write by my mentors and peers. I do not understand how clueless a person has to be not to appreciate the leg up money gives them. We all have family issues. Divorces, neglectful or abusive parents, etc. Everyone in my income bracket who has ever hoped to write a memoir will never go through any life trauma without also having to earn (barely) a living wage, the process of which sucks time we will never get back, time that could be used to process trauma through writing. I will never pay off all of my student loans. I don't understand. I just can't. A fair number of students in my program came from money, and had I understood why, I would not have pursued the MFA. Money buys you time. Working steals your time. To be able to buy back what otherwise would be stolen through work would be heaven. To be able to feed yourself and anyone else in your orbit without working? I really don't want to indict all wealthy people--maybe--but a famous author asked for advice about how to find the time to write answered, quite frankly: "marry well."
Neither I nor Belle in her book deny that being born wealthy is a huge advantage. In my essay, I wrote this:
Those of us born with tremendous privilege feel some measure of guilt. We know some people will resent us for it, although we had no agency in choosing our parents. We also feel that whatever we may accomplish in life has an asterisk attached to it.
We’ve had advantages that few have had and it’s impossible to separate ourselves from those advantages. It’s who we are.
Thank you for your perspective, David! I was puzzled by all the claims that Belle 'lied', but most of all the one about the stepmother's trust, as that's easy enough to understand. If you don't get money until someone dies, and they are still alive... you don't have that money.
No one bought the book unaware that Belle comes from a famous and wealthy family. It was the fact that she thought that fame and wealth meant she was 'safe', and she wasn't, was the story.
Many have questioned why/how the New Yorker article was written, and that it was done with help from the ex, but the fact that you can't readily access the divorce docs is 'interesting'.
Also that a man with children would buy a new apartment without room for them is devastating.
Thanks Pam. I think it's good that the divorce docs are sealed and only available to the divorcing parties and their lawyers. It seems likely that whoever gave the docs to Winter was not team-Belle!
David, thank you for your article. Once again, you’ve grabbed me, which I like and respect, so I will respond. I have previously read and thought long about both Strangers and Ms. Winter’s article. I can’t fully agree with you. Yes, I agree we can all feel financially insecure no matter our level of wealth (although that would be a difficult sell to many understandably). However, I agree with Ms. Winter that the idea of being a victim is overplayed. Given the level of legal education and experience, either some naïveté or negligence was involved, and in the end she is left with more than most can even imagine. Sad, yes. Unfortunate, yes. Innocent, no. Victim, no. I think that’s what Ms. Winter is saying. And I agree with her.
Thanks Scott. I think the person who was most critical of Belle's own naivety and negligence was Belle herself in her book. I don't think Belle would describe herself as a financial victim or innocent of placing herself in that vulnerable position. But certainly she was a victim of her husband's cruelty.
Having had my first husband leave me unexpectedly and the person with the money has the power and thus I was powerless even to get an attorney or any assets in the divorce, I fully related to Belle’s struggle. My ex didn’t have that level of wealth but I do remember joking when I first moved from the US and back to the UK that my first full time salary was less in an entire year than my ex earned in a month. Such differences in lifestyle are a difficult adjustment.
I thought Belle was brave in sharing her story. It’s her story to tell. And despite her being wealthy, I thought it is absolutely despicable that her husband who benefited from her invisible labour and earned millions in their marriage was unwilling to share even a fraction of those assets to ensure she had a comfortable lifestyle, comparable of that she enjoyed in her marriage, for her and her children.
I’m lucky I didn’t have children with my first husband (and nor do I have any with my second in a thankfully, much happier marriage) but I think her story is deeply human. Being worth millions doesn’t, unfortunately, insulate her from heartbreak and shock.
Well done, David, for writing about Belle and doing her justice. 🫶🏻
Thanks Elaine. I thought she was brave as well. I'm sure she anticipated that other writers would criticize her. And people are free to express their opinions. But Jessica Winter played with the facts in a way I thought was unfair.
I think the world is filled with people, rich, poor, and otherwise, who live in the fear they will disappoint those who came before them. Or worse, the certainty that they have. A blessing and a curse.
I have not read the article in The New Yorker, but your piece reminds me of something I have often been bothered by-- the assumption that a New Yorker article must be "true" because we have all heard how meticulously their articles are fact-checked. Checking that certain facts contained in an article can be cited as true does not mean that the writer's premise or conclusions are wholly factual. I'm inclined to believe your thesis, that journalists and authors do not (cannot?) write about the very wealthy with true, dispassionate objectivity. And, as our society's economic disparity grows, I don't see that changing anytime soon. No wonder we all enjoy and learn from your posts.
Thanks Jennifer. You make such an interesting distinction between each "fact" bering true and the gist of an entire article pointing toward the truth. Context, then, and selection of which facts to include matter so much.
I adored Strangers and found Belle to be a trustworthy and sympathetic narrator. I also read the New Yorker piece. I appreciated your challenge to the essay, your generosity toward Belle, and your willingness to draw on your own generational privilege to offer some psychological insight. I’ve found some of the criticism of both her account and the book to be in good faith, but much of it has felt rooted in sexism and misogyny. Her story seems to be met with disproportionate skepticism and preconceived judgment, perhaps in part because of her privilege, rather than the kind of open-hearted curiosity that I felt she earned.
I was also struck by this line from the New Yorker essay: “The terms of the prenup might appear more questionable if one spouse leaves the workforce and loses their only source of income—but this scenario didn’t apply to Burden, who had inherited wealth.”
That argument feels somewhat beside the point. The fact that Burden inherited wealth does not seem to negate the reality that she was the primary caregiver and, as a result, was not participating in the workforce. Her labour yielded a shared benefit for Davis and their family and she thus played a role in his ability to accrue wealth and this should have been reflected in the prenup.
I agree Sophie. The prenup turned out to be very unfair. Belle made an error in not listening to her lawyer about the prenup and she is hard on herself for that. Eventually, it seems that Davis agreed to a decent settlement although every other aspect of his behavior to her seems indecent.
I read the book a few weeks ago and my first reaction was how brave Belle was/is to share such a painful experience. I’m sure it was therapeutic to write about it - and she got a lot of flak from other “rich people” who thought that airing her dirty laundry was in poor taste, caused harm to her children, etc. It does take courage/guts to open yourself up like that. I agree that once you have money, there is a fear of losing it. And inherited money, even more so. As you said it is a gift - usually from the generation who worked very hard to make that money. The actual dollar amount of her trust is a moot point (to me) - the way her husband abandoned her and their kids was the most egregious part of the story. How do people turn on a dime like that? He did harm to the kids, not her (by telling the story). Anyway, great essay as usual - and I’m glad you called Kat out.
Thanks! I went into the devilish details of the trust only because Winter was so selective in her handling of it.
Winter picked the wrong no-longer-rich person to vilify as poor-little-rich-girl. Misrepresenting Belle's apparent inability to directly access the capital in her trust, is dishonest at best. Many legacy trusts--like Belle's--are very poorly managed, and earn 1-3% per year. Or even lose money. Or can be frozen due to pending lien attempts.
Hopefully, Belle has landed on her feet, and after her crash course in money management, can financially care for her children and her self.
If „bad“ things happen to every day people like an accident then most Americans may lose their cars, houses etc.. for example 57% to 59% of Americans report they do not have sufficient liquidity in savings to cover such a $1000 expense without taking on debt.. so when someone talks about their finances in relation to events that would cause most average Americans to go into debt and has the means to easily financially recover from said event then maybe there is no sympathy for that person from the „average“ American..
Fair, but the article offended me because it effectively said that Belle couldn't have had any financial worries in addition to the trauma of her husband leaving her. It also offended me for the manipulative way it handled financial details.
Excellent article as always. It’s just mean and silly to hate on this woman. It’s like if I said that your struggles have no meaning because your car has air conditioning and mine does not. Having known quite a few people who were well off financially on the surface, I know they often struggled with fear of being unable to keep up their wealth. I have a friend who would be penniless if god wife left him. Another who has two kids in elite colleges and is the sole provider. One who contemplated suicide when his business almost tanked while he had two kids in private schools and an expensive wife. I have approximately $3000 total to my name right now and I am so relaxed because it’s the most cash I’ve had in years, with more coming in from a steady wonderful lined up summer job. There are mice in the walls of my one bedroom apartment and I’ll deal with that, but my overall stress is low compared to my well off friends. More important:: I know I can survive. I’ve been fired from a job with no savings or healthcare and I bounced. I’ve been evicted from my apartment while I was on a ventilator in an ICU and lost my voice so I could not work. I bounced then climbed. (And got my apartment back so no legal eviction- my landlords at the time were a bit irrational and had no legal case but could have made life impossible for me.). Having survived a lot I know I can, which gives me the courage to try things that my friends can’t. Still, insecurity is horrible. At any level. The rich have burdens (no pun intended though it can’t be helped) that others choose not to try to understand. I’m now interested in reading the book and may see if the library has it.
Thanks April. "Knowing" you from your comments, I think you would enjoy the book. And I liked your pun!
Such a smart and thoughtful critique of Strangers through the lens of “wealth derangement syndrome.” I’ve just started this book and look forward to reading it with your added perspective. I love the way you point out the feints and the use of non-data in Winters’ article to make insinuations. If I were still teaching it would make for a great discussion in an advanced writing class!
Thanks Ann. High praise coming from you as I know from KWH your high standards!
This comment. Yes. Always someone more well better worse off. If we could find a way to help those at the bottom without skewering those at the top (except well maybe a select handful 🙃)
Thanks for subscribing to my blog! It's about all sorts of things. I hope you like cats.
I could talk long and hard about my cat.
I haven't read the book but look forward to doing so. What I've read about the book and your article here reinforce my belief that most would be well served by parents, advisors, and schooling who educate all of us in what is essentially another language - money - while we are young. That education, basic at first, would grow in complexity with maturity. When any woman (and sometimes a man) gets to midlife with a typical amount of financial illiteracy, they are understandably confused and upset to have to learn it during a time of grief like divorce or widowhood. Girls in particular are not socialised to even speak about money meaningfully. I spent 34 years working out the financial piece of high net worth divorce settlements for mostly women. There is an insulting attitude that pervades most settlement discussions as recently as 2024 when I retired which includes, "she has enough" to determine what she gets from what they earn, owe, and own. But then there's still that other one that characterizes them splitting 'his' money. It won't change until we change the way we bring kids (and again, particularly girls) up to include a solid understanding of how money, business, and to some extent family law work. If you're going to get married, these are basics . . . . Also, many attorneys do not know money well especially when you're dealing with the merely rich or lower. Get a competent ethical financial pro trained in divorce divisions to articulate mathmatically other contributions to the marriage, to visually show how the settlement will or will not work for the person who has to live with it after and get them to testify if necessary. Thanks for an article that touches on these things!
Bonnie, I think one of the good effects of this book is to spur women from an early age to be educated in finance as you suggest. I have a daughter, a daughter-in-law, and two very young granddaughters so I have a vested interest in their knowing the financial details of their lives.
In my home it was vulgar to talk about money or even to think about it. Which is really stupid! But that's how it was back then. Part of the cuddly idea that money needful for survival just came to you under God's provision so if it didnt come it meant you didn't deserve it! To be proactive meant not trusting God! Now I need a lie down after these traumatic memories!!
This is great thank you.
The reporting on wealth mirrors the reporting on billionaires paying taxes.
This is so interesting to me, David, and very well written.
It’s amazing to me how us, “normal people” have vilified any one of wealth, inherited or, ahem, the new money set. (Note: I desperately aspire to be the latter; there’s no former.)
As someone on the other side, I think it simply boils down to jealousy. We modern day humans are not that dissimilar from our ancestors cheering the beheading of the elite in the town square… or the crabs that kill the single one for trying to escape the bucket.
I’m so fascinated by this rich vs poor mentality that nearly borders on violent, a year ago I started a quarterly seminar called, “Wine, Women & Wealth.” It’s exactly what it sounds like: I invite financial experts to offer tips and insights to women looking to empower themselves and their financial futures. It’s been a tremendous success, because, as I say only slightly tongue-in-cheek, being poor is boring. Anyway, I loved Belle Burden’s book, and wealthy or poor, or somewhere in the middle, the unravelling of a life is terrifying and no one deserves the pain of navigating betrayal. I highlighted many passages and plan to use it during the next WW&W event. Love her or loathe her, at the very least she has started an important conversation about women and financial control. I’m just sorry the townsfolk with the pitchforks and torches can’t see that.
Erin, your "Wine, Women, and Wealth" group sounds like a terrific way to improve financial literacy. I do think there is a lot of class resentment behind the critiques of Belle and her book.
Now that’s my kinda financial education lol - talking about budgeting and investing would be way more interesting if Chablis and charcuterie were involved lol
That’s the whole point, Sophie!
Wait, are you based in Toronto?! I live in London now but am from Toronto and always longed for more fun events like that when I did live there
I am! Our next WW&W is September 23, and we have an in conversation with the Globe & Mail wine columnist at the end of June. If you’re interested, feel free to message me and I can send you more info so we don’t hijack David’s comment section. 😊
Love that you two connected here.
You must be British in Britain as you've perfectly described the British psychotic attitude to wealth.
Hahaha! Very close, Jane. I’m Canadian (though my dad was born in London)… the truffle and mincemeat colony roots are never far behind our poutine and Nanaimo bars. 🥂
‘being poor is boring’ is not something I’d ever utter
I read the book in one day. I am so glad she had the courage to tell her story. Set her privilege aside - she was abused by a man she fully trusted and whom she thought loved her. For any woman to criticize her is hateful and patriarchal. Her pain and story is real, and this abuse happens to women of all levels of wealth. Why aren’t these “journalists” jumping in with a “hit piece” on her ex-husband? Thank you, David, for your essay. I come from middle class, middle America, and I found her book compelling and your essay an informative peek into the financial fears of the wealthy. That being said, I do think it is easy and just to criticize the billionaire class in America when so many are struggling to pay for healthcare (this is a totally separate topic from Belle Burden’s book).
Thanks Jean. You make a great point about proportionality. Belle's husband acted disgracefully. He will forever be known as Belle's creep of an ex-husband.
Jeremy Ney and I had a good discussion about the "Giving Gap."
https://substack.com/@jeremybney/p-195665571
In the first Gilded Age, the richest gave away far more of their fortunes than the richest of our current Gilded Age. Carnegie wrote that it was a disgrace for anyone to die wealthy. We need more of that attitude.
As a person who spent his prime money making years caring for a son and making $32,000 per year, plus benefits, I just don't understand any of this. Even having the time to write a memoir is a luxury I do not understand, though I earned an MFA in nonfiction from a highly ranked university, won a major prize before graduating, signed with a New York agency, and was expected to write and only write by my mentors and peers. I do not understand how clueless a person has to be not to appreciate the leg up money gives them. We all have family issues. Divorces, neglectful or abusive parents, etc. Everyone in my income bracket who has ever hoped to write a memoir will never go through any life trauma without also having to earn (barely) a living wage, the process of which sucks time we will never get back, time that could be used to process trauma through writing. I will never pay off all of my student loans. I don't understand. I just can't. A fair number of students in my program came from money, and had I understood why, I would not have pursued the MFA. Money buys you time. Working steals your time. To be able to buy back what otherwise would be stolen through work would be heaven. To be able to feed yourself and anyone else in your orbit without working? I really don't want to indict all wealthy people--maybe--but a famous author asked for advice about how to find the time to write answered, quite frankly: "marry well."
Neither I nor Belle in her book deny that being born wealthy is a huge advantage. In my essay, I wrote this:
Those of us born with tremendous privilege feel some measure of guilt. We know some people will resent us for it, although we had no agency in choosing our parents. We also feel that whatever we may accomplish in life has an asterisk attached to it.
We’ve had advantages that few have had and it’s impossible to separate ourselves from those advantages. It’s who we are.
Plus, there’s some extra work to manage what you have. Life becomes very complex when you have more.
Thank you for your perspective, David! I was puzzled by all the claims that Belle 'lied', but most of all the one about the stepmother's trust, as that's easy enough to understand. If you don't get money until someone dies, and they are still alive... you don't have that money.
No one bought the book unaware that Belle comes from a famous and wealthy family. It was the fact that she thought that fame and wealth meant she was 'safe', and she wasn't, was the story.
Many have questioned why/how the New Yorker article was written, and that it was done with help from the ex, but the fact that you can't readily access the divorce docs is 'interesting'.
Also that a man with children would buy a new apartment without room for them is devastating.
Thanks Pam. I think it's good that the divorce docs are sealed and only available to the divorcing parties and their lawyers. It seems likely that whoever gave the docs to Winter was not team-Belle!
David, thank you for your article. Once again, you’ve grabbed me, which I like and respect, so I will respond. I have previously read and thought long about both Strangers and Ms. Winter’s article. I can’t fully agree with you. Yes, I agree we can all feel financially insecure no matter our level of wealth (although that would be a difficult sell to many understandably). However, I agree with Ms. Winter that the idea of being a victim is overplayed. Given the level of legal education and experience, either some naïveté or negligence was involved, and in the end she is left with more than most can even imagine. Sad, yes. Unfortunate, yes. Innocent, no. Victim, no. I think that’s what Ms. Winter is saying. And I agree with her.
Thanks Scott. I think the person who was most critical of Belle's own naivety and negligence was Belle herself in her book. I don't think Belle would describe herself as a financial victim or innocent of placing herself in that vulnerable position. But certainly she was a victim of her husband's cruelty.
Having had my first husband leave me unexpectedly and the person with the money has the power and thus I was powerless even to get an attorney or any assets in the divorce, I fully related to Belle’s struggle. My ex didn’t have that level of wealth but I do remember joking when I first moved from the US and back to the UK that my first full time salary was less in an entire year than my ex earned in a month. Such differences in lifestyle are a difficult adjustment.
I thought Belle was brave in sharing her story. It’s her story to tell. And despite her being wealthy, I thought it is absolutely despicable that her husband who benefited from her invisible labour and earned millions in their marriage was unwilling to share even a fraction of those assets to ensure she had a comfortable lifestyle, comparable of that she enjoyed in her marriage, for her and her children.
I’m lucky I didn’t have children with my first husband (and nor do I have any with my second in a thankfully, much happier marriage) but I think her story is deeply human. Being worth millions doesn’t, unfortunately, insulate her from heartbreak and shock.
Well done, David, for writing about Belle and doing her justice. 🫶🏻
Thanks Elaine. I thought she was brave as well. I'm sure she anticipated that other writers would criticize her. And people are free to express their opinions. But Jessica Winter played with the facts in a way I thought was unfair.
I think the world is filled with people, rich, poor, and otherwise, who live in the fear they will disappoint those who came before them. Or worse, the certainty that they have. A blessing and a curse.
Great piece, by the way.
I have not read the article in The New Yorker, but your piece reminds me of something I have often been bothered by-- the assumption that a New Yorker article must be "true" because we have all heard how meticulously their articles are fact-checked. Checking that certain facts contained in an article can be cited as true does not mean that the writer's premise or conclusions are wholly factual. I'm inclined to believe your thesis, that journalists and authors do not (cannot?) write about the very wealthy with true, dispassionate objectivity. And, as our society's economic disparity grows, I don't see that changing anytime soon. No wonder we all enjoy and learn from your posts.
Thanks Jennifer. You make such an interesting distinction between each "fact" bering true and the gist of an entire article pointing toward the truth. Context, then, and selection of which facts to include matter so much.
Exactly!
I adored Strangers and found Belle to be a trustworthy and sympathetic narrator. I also read the New Yorker piece. I appreciated your challenge to the essay, your generosity toward Belle, and your willingness to draw on your own generational privilege to offer some psychological insight. I’ve found some of the criticism of both her account and the book to be in good faith, but much of it has felt rooted in sexism and misogyny. Her story seems to be met with disproportionate skepticism and preconceived judgment, perhaps in part because of her privilege, rather than the kind of open-hearted curiosity that I felt she earned.
I was also struck by this line from the New Yorker essay: “The terms of the prenup might appear more questionable if one spouse leaves the workforce and loses their only source of income—but this scenario didn’t apply to Burden, who had inherited wealth.”
That argument feels somewhat beside the point. The fact that Burden inherited wealth does not seem to negate the reality that she was the primary caregiver and, as a result, was not participating in the workforce. Her labour yielded a shared benefit for Davis and their family and she thus played a role in his ability to accrue wealth and this should have been reflected in the prenup.
I agree Sophie. The prenup turned out to be very unfair. Belle made an error in not listening to her lawyer about the prenup and she is hard on herself for that. Eventually, it seems that Davis agreed to a decent settlement although every other aspect of his behavior to her seems indecent.