Michael Lewis' next book is about Sam Bankman-Fried
theankler.com
theankler.com
It's been a long time since I've read Flash Boys.
If he had sat on negative info it probably could have sold more books if he published some articles beforehand (controversy > puff pieces business wise). That's how that WSJ journo made his career off that Theranos book via posting negative stories well before the book was released. Although he was a WSJ journalist first, not a pop-finance author.
But, look: just wait and see what develops from this, and see if it acknowledges Lewis' role in building up SBF's profile, even after he announced to the world that he was literally in the Ponzi business.
Is it safe to say that the Gladwell bar is low and the Lewis bar is lower?
They are both fantastic story tellers.
Sadly, these stories more of than not seem to be creatively spun fiction (to be polite) more than anything else.
That plus his howler about "Igon Value."
A good storyteller, yes, but that is the limit.
But yes: I don't have any faith in Gladwell's reporting. I just think he's a supremely effective writer, and that's interesting to me. He is, like, the Yngwie Malmsteen of his profession, maybe.
There is a comparison I would have never expected.
Course, maybe not using an obscure hair-band reference would be better.
Like, what's the Gladwell equivalent of Yngwie as a youth getting kicked out of a band for trying to kill Graham Bonnet? Make something up. I bet it involves assaulting an editor! What's the fictional equivalent of Yngwie deciding he should sing? I bet it involves Gladwell deciding he doesn't need to talk to anyone who understands mathematics. Or maybe you could break the fourth wall and have Yngwie decide he is fully capable of playing Gladwell in the film, since how hard it can it possibly be, and he's already halfway there since they both have stupid hair.
You had me at "decide to sing" = "doesn't need to talk to anyone who understands mathematics".
I admire a person so deranged they think Yngwie breaking the fourth wall is a "maybe".
If you are going to look for excellent storytellers, I suggest Jerzy Kosiński, whose Painted Bird is a autobiography, that is pretty much known to be false, (but true in some sense) and probably not written by him. His books are far more interesting than anything Gladwell wrote.
Gladwell once said "If you don't like my writing, don't read it" (not sure if this quote is exact) or equivalent. I'm likely to go one better and recommend that friends don't read it as well.
If you are looking for compelling not-true but claimed-to-be-true, also consider Carlos Castañeda.
He seems to pick up a skewed and biased perspective from people who don't have the full picture, and just run with it as though it is the full picture.
Remember, a lot of these guys are huge narcissists. They will reveal their darkest secrets to a famous journalist, because a bit of fame overpowers their most basic survival instincts. It's like when Trump had Bob Woodward embedded in the White House.
“Flash Boys Not So Fast” is a comprehensive takedown.
https://smile.amazon.com/Flash-Boys-Insiders-Perspective-Hig...
But at the risk of coming across arrogant, I don’t care for crypto or anything related to its celebrity frontmen.
Crypto, it’s obsession, and entire culture, in my mind, is like “Keeping up with the Kardashians” meets tech culture.
The article says Michael Lewis hasn’t written a word of the book yet. Perhaps he’ll reconsider and write about something else entirely.
Lewis often writes about such topics -- things that are popularly misunderstood, swindlers, etc.
I think your dislike of crypto will make the end result more interesting to you, because Lewis is good at bridging that gap for people.
The whole idea of celebrities/reality shows/TV news/etc is that the audience thinks they are dumb and feels superior to them (see most Twitter outrage cycles like the current big one)... but when challenged they don't care since it's a "guilty pleasure".
They know it's vapid and dumb. People seek escape and fun.
Saying people watch them merely because they are being fooled is a bad take and often used in politics. It's basically dressed up satire that feeds into base desires. It's also an opportunity to hear things said that are socially taboo otherwise if the person is to be taken seriously.
The fact some segment buys into it (they would be buying into something equally dumb otherwise) doesn't mean the bulk of the audience does.
> I don't think she believes in falsehoods about the Kardashians.
I can't comment on your girlfriend. You're obviously correct about her. That doesn't mean she's a typical fan or typical media consumer.
The things most people don't realize about them are:
- they're intelligent, talented, and capable people;
- absolutely nothing on their shows is any more real than what happens on a scripted TV show, and Keeping Up with the Kardashians is literally scripted;
- they don't personally make many of the decisions about their brands (what they post on Instagram or Twitter, what products their brands release, etc.)
> They know it's vapid and dumb. People seek escape and fun.
I agree. I don't think most fans of reality shows think the shows are important or admire the people on them. That's partly my point: like crypto, we may look down on all the people involved without realizing that there is a lot more than meets the eye.
> Saying people watch them merely because they are being fooled is a bad take and often used in politics.
I agree.
(Or maybe it will be like War Dogs, pitching SBF as a lovable and quirky guy who somehow ended up on the wrong side of the law.)
> Perhaps he’ll reconsider and write about something else entirely.
Idk why people insist on authors only writing stories that they want to read. FTX is a monumental disaster and the story behind it desperately needs to be told precisely because it's such a big part of our culture. Based on Lewis' history with The Big Short, etc. he's perfectly positioned to write that account.
It's been so wild how many people I've met over the last 4-5 years who made the exact same kinds of comments about crypto that the bankers were saying about housing finance back in 2006.