Deception and the end justifies the means

Last night I watched the Netflix film The Woman in the Window with Amy Adams as a pill-popping, wine-drinking agoraphobic female psychologist who lives alone in a big house in Manhattan, except for a tenant who rents the basement apartment from her. The story revolves around her trying to get the police, her tenant, and a few others to believe that she has witnessed a murder in the apartment building across the way from hers. It's based on the book of the same name by A.J. Finn (pseudonym for Daniel Mallory). I haven't read the book, so I cannot comment on whether the film remained completely true to the book, or whether the film is better than the book, or vice versa. 

As I usually do once I finish a book or a movie (or both), I googled them to read more about them and the author. One thing led to another, and I came upon an excellent article in The New Yorker (A Suspense Novelist’s Trail of Deceptions | The New Yorker) about the author (book editor turned novelist) and his climb to the top of the publishing world. His debut novel, which was published in 2018, is The Woman in the Window, and it made him a millionaire. So far, so good, I thought. Kudos to those debut novelists whose books become best-sellers. It's the hope and dream of most novelists, however, most of them never realize the dream. Very few novelists write best-sellers. That's a statistical fact. 

But as I read further, I realized that for this author, the end justified the means. He used every means possible to get to the top, to become famous, to become a best-selling author. He essentially lied his way to the top and used the people he needed to use to get there. He lied about being sick, about family members being sick/dead, about his education/degrees, and his work experience. He made himself out to be much more important than he was. Some of you may be shrugging your shoulders saying, so what, many people do that. If you read the article, you'll realize that most people don't do what he did, and if they did, we'd be living in a very difficult world where you wouldn't be able to trust anyone, essentially. I don't know why he did what he did, or if he even understands that what he did hurt people, but if he does, he knows that what he did was morally questionable and wrong. When confronted, he ended up blaming some of his behavior on being bipolar. I don't know enough about bipolar disorder to comment on it one way or another, so I leave that to the experts. I do know something about narcissistic personality disorder, and this type of behavior is not uncommon in those who have that disorder. So I don't know. What I do know is that it struck me while reading the article how little the publishing world polices or punishes their own. And when their mistakes catch up with them, they go the 'no comment' route in order to avoid the bad publicity and embarrassment. 

It also struck me that the publishing world rewards their own. Editors know other editors and suggest books for perusal and publication. They take care of their own. It's who you know that moves you ahead. A.J. Finn the editor turned novelist may have gotten ahead just fine without all the lying; there were plenty of people willing to move mountains for him. The publishing world is another elitist profession that protects its elitism by keeping the common people--average ordinary authors--at bay. Traditional publishers do not accept manuscripts directly from authors; most go through literary agents who wield a lot of power in terms of acceptance/rejection of manuscripts. They work together with publishers to keep out the 'riff-raff'. It is strange to realize that most authors will never enjoy what A.J. Finn enjoyed--editors willing to promote his book. Most authors who behave honestly and who follow the traditional rules of publishing will never see their book published by a traditional publisher. 

This is why I am all for the rise of independent publishers and self-publishing, at the expense of traditional publishers. Yes, the market is now flooded with sub-optimal books by first-time self-published authors who think they are great authors, but eventually they find out that they are not, because no matter what they do, their books don't sell. It's hard to be a little fish in a huge ocean. Absolutely no one will notice you. And that is the current state of affairs for most self-published authors. But there is also a lot of poor writing published by traditional publishers; many books promoted by traditional publishers are just garbage. The same holds true for vanity publishers, who promise first-time authors the moon--a best-selling novel and a film script based on their books. Vanity publishers have no qualms about taking 20,000 dollars from authors to 'help them publish their books, to distribute them globally, and to initially promote them on social media'. These are all activities that the author can do himself or herself for less than 50 dollars on Kindle Direct Publishing (KDP); one need only use KDP to self-publish a book, arrange for global distribution, and sell the book on Amazon. I wrote a post about self-publishing already in 2010 (A New Yorker in Oslo: Publish Your Book using CreateSpace (paulamdeangelis.blogspot.com); just as an update, CreateSpace eventually became KDP for those who are interested. Once the book is out for sale on Amazon, it's easy to tweet about it or share the link on social media. So what are vanity publishers using the 20,000 dollars for? They're getting rich from taking advantage of first-time authors who don't know any better. They're also criminals for lying to authors. 

One sad thing about getting older is finding out how many people lie, or are willing to lie to get ahead, to make money, or to be successful. There are people willing to sell out their relationships and family in order to make money. There are people who were perhaps willing to cheat or be dishonest when they were young, who became cheaters and dishonest people as adults. It's disconcerting to read about them, and even more disconcerting to know them personally. I find it sad that most professions are built on the backs of honest hard-working people who never really found out how or even that they were taken advantage of until they were older, and by then the only feelings they can feel are disappointment and sadness. It's too late to do anything about it. It's hard not to feel sad when you realize that in many professions--academia, publishing, business, journalism, medicine--there are those who don't mind shamming others, who don't mind lying and cheating their way to the top, who don't mind stepping on others or holding them back, and who don't care what others think of them. Perhaps that is the way of the world, and perhaps that has always been the way of the world. Nevertheless, it is still quite jarring.  

A life of lies and deception--John le Carré's A Perfect Spy

I continue to be fascinated by books that deal with deception and lying, and with characters who use deceit as a means to an end, a means to get through life. I supposed that explains some of the fascination (my own and others) with a man like Trump. He is a pathological liar, and the media cannot get enough of him. Each of his lies is more outrageous than the last one. People eat them up. We wonder if he has any limits whatsoever. The answer appears to be no. His niece Mary Trump wrote a book about him, and even though she is a clinical psychologist, she still couldn't explain him satisfactorily. But she gave it a good try. I think these types of people defy description. And I wonder, are we so jaded and in need of stimulation, that we look forward to listening to a man like Trump spout his nonsense out into the universe? Is this what will awaken us to the world around us? But how many times can we put our hands into the flames before we no longer feel anything, before they are burned beyond recognition? Isn't that the risk we run if we don't deal with the impact of such behavior on ourselves and on society at large?

I wonder what it must be like to be the child or children of such an amoral man. It certainly cannot be easy. One absorbs a plethora of warped messages. "Make up your life. Don't tell the truth about yourself or about anything. Lie if necessary. Win at all costs and lie if you need to win. Winning is everything. Success and money are everything. Poverty is for losers. The ends justify the means. Using others to further your ambitions is acceptable. Lying will get you everywhere. Cheating is no big deal. Facts are not facts, but merely constructs to be adjusted at whim. There are no absolute truths". And so on. 

One of my favorite authors, John le Carré, who wrote 'A Perfect Spy', passed away a few days ago. 'A Perfect Spy' is a brilliant book by an incredible author, one of those books that will haunt you for a lifetime. I read it in my twenties and have never forgotten it. It is on my top-ten list of favorite books. I also watched the BBC series of the same name, with Peter Egan playing the role of Magnus Pym, that appeared on television in 1987. As I've grown older, I wonder--why was I and why am I still--so fascinated by the tale of Magnus Pym, a spy/double agent whose father, Rick Pym, was an amoral con man? Charming yes, but a criminal just the same, Rick Pym teaches Magnus that it's ok to live a life of deception in order to get what you want. Magnus Pym struggles his entire life to deal with his father's toxic influence but never really manages to escape it. He is psychologically damaged by his father, and that impacts on all aspects of his life--he betrays his country and those people in his life with whom he has close relationships. It is no surprise that he chooses to be a spy/double agent, but he struggles with that choice and with his inability to reconcile all of the 'different persons' he houses inside himself. The book is written in such a way that it is nearly impossible to not feel sorry for Magnus Pym. And that is because he pays such a high price for being the perfect spy. I won't reveal the ending for those of you who might want to read the book. I highly recommend it. Much of the book is autobiographical; le Carré's father was a con man, and he probably wrote 'A Perfect Spy' in order to deal with the negative impact on his psyche that having such a father had on him. It is the psychological exploration of one man's psyche and soul that creates empathy for the character of Magnus Pym. 

And that brings me back to Trump and his niece's book about him. Trump had a father who 'conned' him into believing that he had to lie and manipulate others in order to be successful and to be well liked. But Trump has no qualms of conscience about who he is. He has embraced the amorality of his life. He doesn't seem to suffer because of it. My empathy is in short supply when I look at his behavior and his life. Perhaps there will come a day when he begins to examine his life. As the saying goes--'the unexamined life is not worth living'. Perhaps Trump will realize that one day, adjust his life accordingly, and make amends to the people he has conned and manipulated. But I'm not holding my breath.