Moral Choice
Imagine doing dozens of interviews with a cross-section of 25 year-old guys across the country, guys from middle to lower-middle-class backgrounds who haven't benefitted from high-end university educations, and saying to them, "If you had to choose between (a) a modest, unexceptional, not-very-exciting life involving hard work, an annual two-week vacation and maybe a little quiet desperation in between, or (b) the life of Raffaelo Follieri, the 30 year-old Italian con man who was recently given 4 and 1/2 years for cheating investors out of millions but who ran with a very high-end crowd and got to enjoy the allegiance and creature comforts of Anne Hathaway before it all came crashing down, which would it be?"
Honestly -- what do you think most of them would say? Or rather, what would they say to themselves deep down? I'll bet that a very healthy percentage would choose the Follieri option. They might not admit this to an interviewer, but everyone wants the lah-lah life these days, and they're all willing to sacrifice and cut corners to get it. People are who they are, and want what they want. The idea that it's better to burn brightly and then fade to black rather than plug along and never know the perks and the highs has been around for a long time, and it's been gaining traction.
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on October 24, 2008 at 12:31 PM
comment #1
DarthCorleone
says ...
So what does that say about our society, and how - if it's possible - do we remedy it? I've always thought that public schooling should include more of a focus on secular ethics.
Anyway, when you phrase it like this, it makes me think that Follieri deserved a hell of a lot more of a sentence than four and a half years.
As for me, I don't fall into this category of hypothetical individuals that you describe, but Anne Hathaway and the lah-lah lifestyle sound extremely nice. Still, I would never compromise my personal morality if that's what it took. (In my case, though, the lack of Anne Hathaway and the lah-lah lifestyle probably has more to do with outright lack of ambition and laziness.)
Posted by DarthCorleone
at October 24, 2008 1:07 PM
comment #2
Joshua Mooney
says ...
Eh. Even 25-year-olds born in '83 know that life continues after 30. I'd be surprised if many of them would opt for the Follieri path. Dude's doing four years in the pen and has been stripped of his 15 expensive watches, among other assets. Loser. I assume he'll be broke when he's shipped back to Italy. So he had a few years of Hollywood pussy he couldn't afford. Big deal. If you know what you're doing as a man, you don't have to pay for it. And you certainly don't have to forge letters from the Pope! Loser.
Posted by Joshua Mooney
at October 24, 2008 1:15 PM
comment #3
actionman
says ...
Hmmm....let's see....get raped in prison for 4.5 years or get a regular job. Gee...lemme think 'bout that one...
Posted by actionman
at October 24, 2008 1:23 PM
comment #4
D.Z.
says ...
actionman: "Hmmm....let's see....get raped in prison for 4.5 years or get a regular job."
Considering the people running big business nowadays, isn't that the same thing?
Posted by D.Z.
at October 24, 2008 2:01 PM
comment #5
Sabina E
says ...
meh is right. When Scarface came out in 83, a lot of people wanted a lifestyle like that.
we've always had greedy morons running around in our society... since the dawn of mankind.
Posted by Sabina E
at October 24, 2008 2:20 PM
comment #6
Michael
says ...
There are women in every medium-sized town in this country who are as good looking or better than Hathaway. And I think she's beautiful.
But to choose that path, knowing that it ends in prison...? Are you serious? Knowing all of the details ahead of time, I'd guess no more than 20% would choose the douchebag route. And that's stretching it.
Posted by Michael
at October 24, 2008 8:12 PM