For possibly the first time since undergrad, I have actually
finished reading a book that I was reading for pleasure (i.e., had nothing to do with law) and that was unrelated to self-help, poker, or investing in stocks. A-MAZING
. Liar's Poker, Michael Lewis' (the
Moneyball guy) humorous first person account of Wall Street in the 1980s (focusing on his time at Salomon Brothers), is as engaging as it is witty. Most people have either read this book (published in 1990), or heard of it:
here's a wikipedia article about it that I did not read, but that I'm sure contains an adequate synopses.
Although the subject matter of the book is at times tedious, especially when Mr. Lewis is describing such esoteric matters as how mortgages are securitized and how junk bonds function, the matter-of-fact "newspaperish" storytelling style, and memorable, if not slightly exaggerated, characters (such as "the human Piranha" and "big swinging dicks"), pushes the story along in spite of the minutiae. To be fair, Mr. Lewis spends 90% of his time describing his characters and their actions and the other 10% putting them (both characters and actions) into proper historical context, which necessitates a little economic and financial background.
I liked nearly everything about the book, including the way the story diverged from Ranieri and the New York Salomon offices, to Milken and the London offices where Mr. Lewis worked. The divergence (occurring near the end of the book) provided a nice break from the more intense New York action, while allowing the later London events to be colored by the former New York events: sort of like the split in
Full Metal Jacket between the earlier Parris Island training scenes where "Joker" is merely observing others, such as Gomer Pyle, and the later Vietnam combat scenes where "Joker" plays a prominent role (fitting that both observers - Joker and Lewis - are journalists).
The only gripe I had with the book was the Epilogue, where Mr. Lewis takes all of the lessons he has learned (and taught) about the corrupting power of greed and the fleetingness of power/money, and in 2-3 pages basically tells us to forget everything he has just said. Lewis questions his decision to leave Salomon before turning into a full-fledged, money-hungry A-Hole like most of the people he has described up to that point. He says that he largely regretted leaving as staying would have provided him possibly the only sure path to becoming a multi-millionaire in his life. True, but would it not have also made Lewis, already having become a Wall Street power player (Big Swinging Dick) mostly by happenstance, an even bigger Dick, the type of person who relished screwing over customers and associates in order to leverage a higher end-of-year bonus? This is like Richard Simmons telling everyone in America to eat healthy and exercise and then publicly regretting that he missed out on the Big Mac.
In the end, Lewis is not a complete hypocrite. He does not tell us that unbridled greed is evil and then allow himself to fully succumb to that greed. He does manage to get out before it's too late to save his soul (although he has stepped on many "innocent" customers along the way and pocketed hundreds of thousands of dollars). But in regretting his ultimate decision, he reinforces the tempting nature of greed and power, and the addicting power of money. Perhaps this is his ultimate lesson: if even he, the faithful narrator foil throughout, the embodiment of rational thought in a world devoid of any thought other than that of the bottom line, cannot escape damnation without lingering regrets, then what chance do the rest of us have?
To quote someone I've never heard of:
"Money is in some respects life's fire: it is a very excellent servant, but a terrible master."
