Lessons on money and relationships, from fiction
Published on - December 3rd, 2012 (by Sarah Gilbert) Saturday night — Sunday morning, really — I stayed up almost all night reading, in one mad dash, Gone Girl. I slunk through half the day like I had a hangover, kicking myself, trying to figure out why I liked it so much when I didn’t actually like it. I had to just press on through and get to the very last page, even though I didn’t believe any of the characters could exist in real life. They were as if real people with real problems had their natural inhibitions removed, so that the things we would imagine in the heat of anger or frustration or love actually happened.
That’s probably why I liked it so much. That and the money.
It’s always about the money
It seems like half of the TV crime shows I’ve ever watched include someone, at some point, saying, “It’s always about money.” (Life used that mantra as a thematic device in one of its episodes.) In Gone Girl, the two protagonists, a married couple, have a very complicated relationship with money; she has it, he doesn’t, really. At one point in the book (spoiler alert!) it is revealed that someone has opened several credit cards in the husband’s name and bought a boatload of stuff no one wants with the money. The husband borrows from the wife, the parents give money and take it away, the wife steals from the tip jar. Almost every relationship in the book, and most of the crisis points, are complicated by money.
You would keep reading, too, right? I had to know what happened with the credit cards! And the stuff no one wanted! Could they sell it on eBay? I wondered, so worried for the poor guy’s credit (when I think I was supposed to be worried if he’d go to jail).
The part that upset me was the fictional conversations about money
Magazine writer from lower-class roots meets trust-fund girl. That’s the way the book was set up. And when the couple started arguing a few years into their marriage, I felt the conversations were all contrived around this set-up. The husband would get huffy or defensive or resentful about the wife’s money. “You just don’t know what it’s like to have to work for a living!” he said, a few times. “You don’t understand what it’s like to worry about money!” She would roll her eyes, think him paranoid or overly sensitive. The fight would be over; one of them might say, “I’m sorry,” but no one would talk deeply about it. Fight resolved; money issues not resolved.
It’s never about the money, actually.
This was the thing about that episode of Life, too. Everyone kept saying it was always about the money. But it wasn’t, not for anyone. I think three people ended up murdered because the son was jealous that his mother was more nurturing and loving to another young man his age. Would you murder anyone over money? Of course not! You’re far too reasonable.
But can you imagine it? Probably only if there was a huge amount of emotion underneath it — anger, jealousy, fear, or despair.
Couples have bad money relationships all the time. We know that. But, in Gone Girl, I was particularly struck with how the money issues would come up as a device for a fight. “You are too good for me” (or “you think you’re too good for me”) is, “you don’t know what it’s like to be poor.” Maybe “you are lazy” or “you are taking advantage of my generous nature” comes out as, “why can’t you get a __ job?” (Safe, secure, professional, white collar, union, whatever the relationship may be.)
I think this is really, really typical. You fight about the money issues because they’re concrete, they seem as if they have solutions. They are a matter of dollars, adding and subtracting, carrying forward.
But what we don’t do is let them go.
I don’t finish up a fight about money and then, swipe my hands together in satisfaction. Made that unkind cut about how he bought a bunch of new suits for his non-existent job with my money! All done! Whether or not the resentment hangs on — it almost always does, in the book to disastrous results — the money part needs to be hashed out. And what’s more, it needs to be decoupled from the argument. Let me say that again: the discussion about money needs to be stripped away from other emotional arguments, over love, or relative privilege, or each partner’s happiness and fulfillment over their jobs, or what sort of leisure activities are appropriate, or addiction.
This is, while great advice, way harder than anything else we’ll ask you to do here. Way harder than bond math. (I should know. I can do bond math. I still haven’t managed to decouple my argument with my husband over the food budget from the underlying disagreement about values.)
To find a solution to money problems from Gone Girl is patently ridiculous. I won’t do more spoilers, but it seemed at the end that trust would never return to that relationship, let alone a neat parceling of financial worries and their emotional underpinnings. But I think the lesson we can take away is that we should always come out of a fight about money asking ourselves three questions:
- What was that fight really about?
- Is there any way we can resolve our disagreement — through counseling, or a calmer approach, or compromise — apart from the money issue?
- Now: have we resolved the money issue in a sustainable way?
Nick and Amy, after the fight over relative privilege in which he bought a whole bunch of suits (and, after getting to the end of the book, I question whether that suit-buying incident actually happened), should have found a way to discuss their differences and similarities without making it about money, and then returned the suits, or come up with a budget that might last them through the indefinite layoff period more reasonably, or something. It wouldn’t have done well for the arc of the plot.
But it sure would have made me sleep better at night.
We’ve talked a lot lately about money and relationships, and El Nerdo has a great mantra about not seeking external opinions on our relationship debates — about how bringing in a third person’s opinion only complicates the problem. I think this is right on, so I definitely don’t suggest that in the “resolving our disagreement” part — don’t ask your mother or friend what they think of your money woes, and bring that back as “evidence” you’re right. I do think sometimes it’s helpful to get counseling about a particular problem, not to find the “right answer” but to more calmly negotiate the disagreements. And maybe you can go into the sessions more efficiently if you’ve thought through a problem, separating money from emotion. I also think getting separate counseling, one for emotional struggles and one for finances, might make sense; but definitely don’t bring the emotions to the financial planner! That will be the worst money decision of all.
GRS is committed to helping our readers save and achieve your financial goals.Savings interest rates may be low, but that’s all the more reason to shop for the best rate.Find the highest savings interest rate from Ally Bank, Capital One 360, Everbank, and more.
This article is about Books, Relationships
Disclaimer: This content is not provided or commissioned by American Express. Opinions expressed here are author's alone, not those of American Express, and have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by American Express. This site may be compensated through American Express Affiliate Program.
Discover is a paid advertiser of this site. Reasonable efforts are made to maintain accurate information. See the Discover online credit card application for full terms and conditions on offers and rewards.
SEARCH FOR RECENT ARTICLES



Perhaps I’m just grumpy this morning, but this article makes me ask, “Is GRS now a book club?” If so, no one told me in advance that I need to read this book. It made little sense to me since I haven’t read the work of fiction in question, and most likely never will. One of the things I enjoy about GRS is reading about how real people handle money, not fictional psychopaths.
loading....
Good morning Marsha,
Check this out!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3391740/Novels-better-at-explaining-worlds-problems-than-reports.html
loading....
“Fiction – including poetry – should be taken just as seriously as facts-based research, according to the team from Manchester University and the London School of Economics.” (First line of cited article)
I’m sorry, but I just don’t accept this premise.
And good morning to you, too!
loading....
Thanks! I was up working all night, napped for an hour, and made johnnycakes for breakfast. Feeling pretty good at the moment…
Anyway, regarding this:
Why??
loading....
I agree with Marsha. I think the end of the article that summarizes why I’d prefer not to take my fiction seriously.
Here’s the quote:
But he warned: “There’s a problem. Fiction works by appealing to people’s emotions, not their intellect or rationality.” … issues like poverty and international development were “emotionally charged” and consequently solutions often failed to take into account hard, unpalatable facts. … Fiction absolutely can’t replace factual, evidence-based analysis.”
While the author of the book may be trying to make some points about financial literacy, they may also have just been trying to tell a story.
loading....
he trigger-happy spaminator ate my original reply so here is a copy:
–
Kevin– sure, but human life is made of such emotions. We have no mathematics that can explain why we do what we do, and that is precisely where literature can help– literature deals in human experience and things that are impossible to quantify.
Science, even where most advanced, deals in very simple things– it cannot even begin to grasp the complexity of our moral existence or what it means to be self-aware. How to live? How to act? How to understand others?
Quantitative research isn’t anywhere near a stage where it can help anyone deal with difficult people, or figure out how to raise children, or decide on the morality of an action, or how to deal with loss and mortality.
Poets and writers and thinkers, on the other hand, have been grappling with those questions for a very long time, and some can actually be very helpful when an equation just won’t cut it.
loading....
From the study’s abstract: “We find that not only are certain works of fiction ‘better’ than academic or policy research in representing central issues relating to development but they also frequently reach a wider audience and are therefore more influential.”
“Certain works” being the operative term here. Not all fiction is authoritative or accurate — we do have to be critical readers.
loading....
Hi El Nerdo–
I was away from my computer for many hours and I’m surprised about the discussion I started.
The reason that I don’t believe that fiction is as important as fact-based research is that fiction, by its very name, is not true. It is the product of an author’s imagination, biases, life experiences, etc. In the case of Shakespeare, there was also incredible political influence from the monarchy. I’ve loved reading and studying Shakespeare, but it’s not true history. I believe the true history (if it can be unearthed) is more important than the fictional works. And in many cases, much more interesting.
Yes, you can learn a lot from fiction. I certainly have. But I’ve also been mislead to believe things that aren’t true. So, in the words of Joe Friday (a fictional character!), “Just the facts, ma’am.”
loading....
This discussion has been way more interesting and helpful than the actual article (sorry Sarah!).
Anyway, I work in research, and statistics can largely be driven by emotion, because experimental designs and readouts can be influenced by the researcher. It’s supposed to be 100% objective, but it’s not. So I agree that fact-based science should always be taken for what it is: an extremely educated guess.
I think what’s most important in understanding something complex is having an intellectual framework or theory. I always use this example: statistics and facts show that people who carry matches in their pocket are at increased risk of lung cancer. Without the connection to smoking, all of the statistics supporting this fact are meaningless! This is an obvious one, but you should get the point.
I think fiction perhaps helps us understand the intellectual framework around our emotions. You may not understand why you still love your ex, even though they treated you like crap. Maybe you can’t figure out why you chased the wrong girl for so long. Fiction writers can help us understand this better than a researcher could.
For human emotions, I think it’s best to think about how we evolved. Robert Wright’s The Moral Animal is fantastic in how it explains why we think the way we think. Evolution can help explain our attitudes toward money. We evolved to garner resources, but also to take advantage of the present. It’s a tug of war.
loading....
A day late, but maybe you guys will check back:
@ Marsha – okay, but (as Jacq points out) “facts” are just narratives built with pieces cherry-picked out of reality. And fictions are built with bricks of reality. I’m not discounting reality of course, I’m just saying that art has a lot of truth and shouldn’t be discounted either.
@ Matt – you’re a scientist, you know that science can tell us what hormones and neurotransmitters take part in a fight-or-flight response, but science cannot tell us what is it like to experience terror or rage– only narrative and description can do that.
Moreover, science without a proper philosophical framework doesn’t know what questions to ask and it becomes blind experimentation (which plagues science today). I recently read news of a study that showed that research linking many foods to cancer is neither conclusive nor repeatable. See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/dec/01/cancer-food-scares
I love science and am very pro-science, but that means I see it for what it is: a powerful tool for the discovery of natural principles and mechanisms, not the answer to every question in life.
Anyway, back to the value of narrative and story– while I was in therapy, my shrink recommended I read “The Prince of Tides” (yes, there is a pretty bad movie based on that book, but don’t let it bias you against the book). A fiction, yes– but I haven’t seen a better depiction of a PTSDed, dysfunctional family ever.
There is a lot of human truth in good fiction.
loading....
@ Elizabeth – yes, the research was trying to match the understanding of certain problems with certain type of book. It didn’t say that all books are good for every purpose. That’s the research.
But I’d go much, much further than that. I’d say reading Shakespeare can give you a better grasp of human psychology than reading a bunch of peer-reviewed articles from journals. Reading Kafka will give you a better understanding of bureaucracies than any management study. Reading Borges will give you a better notion of the infinite than some equations on a blackboard. Reading Orwell will give you a much better understanding of Stalinism than any political pamphlet. Etc.
The reason for this is that writers of works of imagination deliver experiences, where scholars deliver mere ideas that are difficult to flesh out. And along the same vein, that is is why reading Joyce or Lezama Lima can show the way culture can illuminate even the most mundane moments in a way that my limited arguments can’t prove (except perhaps by alluding to such geniuses).
–
With regards to the novel in question discussed here: I hadn’t heard of this person before, but I started reading the book on Amazon and I’m enjoying her sentences. That’s a good thing. And any novelist worth their salt is going to have a grasp of character superior to most mortals. You want to look at the mirror and see what’s going on in the world right now, in terms of human experience, just pick up and read a contemporary novel. It’s all there for display.
loading....
I think we are creating a false dichotomy between “emotional” fiction and “factual” science. I’m not trying to imply that they don’t have their unique place, but to say that somehow statistics are void of emotion is just wrong. Perhaps the numbers themselves are completely unbiased (but really, not always), but emotions very often play into interpretation.
I think the point is that fiction can be extremely representative and a very powerful tool, even in the world of personal finance. There appeared to be a bias in the original comment that just because the article discussed a work of fiction that it was somehow less valid than a discussion of the content of a non-fiction work with lots of charts and numbers. I disagree.
loading....
El Nerdo, I’ve studied art, religion, philosophy and literature so you aren’t going to get many arguments from me
I write stories and take pictures because it helps me understand the world in a way that science can’t. I’m not trying to replace one with the other — rather, they’re complements.
I can’t help but think that Sarah’s insight into the book comes from her own experience and critical thinking rather than the author’s effort to instruct. I think we can learn a lot from fiction — but what we learn depends on our level of engagement. Some people can analyze comic books and romance novels, while others “don’t get” Shakespeare. Our engagement with a work is a highly individual experience.
As for the “mirror” part — I wonder what future generations will think of today’s obsession with Twilight and 50 Shades of Grey?
@Jane — literature and art is also a good tool of MISpresentation. I’ve studied works of propaganda. It’s quite scary, really.
loading....
Hi again Elizabeth–
Yes, yes of course this is Sarah’s reading. But I think she was able to read into it because the material had something that rang true and resonated with her. Good writers will create many of those “true” moments for their audiences.
I think that regardless of high-brow/low-brow there is a difference between good artists and hacks– hacks repeat stereotypes, artists find new things you never expected, regardless of medium.
ps- I haven’t read either of those books though I am predisposed to avoid them.
On the other hand, I did really like the openingof Girl Gone I read in Amazon– not sure it will hold up for me, sometimes books run out of gas after a while, but it seemed quite fresh– maybe it is really fresh, maybe it’s just that I haven’t slep a lot since I woke up yesterday morning, ha ha ha.
loading....
@El Nerdo — I’ve never read them either, and don’t plan to. Not my taste, that’s all (but I understand the “scientific” reasons behind their appeal).
I’ve never been a big fan of the “high brow/low brow distinction” myself. You can’t compare the Beatles to classic opera — but there’s something about both that engages audiences. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said good writers create things that resonate with people. I like that.
loading....
@Nerdo – as usual, I agree with everything you said. Your criticisms of science are right on the money, unfortunately.
I think music/lyrics can be a powerful tool as well. I’m not a big fiction reader, but I love music. Sometimes the lyrics and music of a great song can help you understand your own emotions better.
loading....
I also read that book, and had similar reactions to it, how funny. Finally, I realized that book wasn’t really all that good anyway- not worth all the consideration that I was giving it- the whole situation was way too contrived.
loading....
Just gotta say – I loved Gone Girl too, and had the same kind of ‘train wreck’ fascination with it. That stuff could never really happen to real people, but it was just so intriguing I had to get to the end to find out what happened. I liked your article
loading....
I feel like this kind of goes back to the old idea that the hard part of money is the emotional aspect, not the math. Of course that would hold true in a relationship: income streams aren’t always equal, money is a tool to get to live a life that represents your values, and money can be power.
loading....
Bummed that I can’t finish reading this post beyond the early “spoiler alert” because I am planning to read Gone Girl. If I can still remember by the time I finish the book, I’ll come back to compare reactions.
loading....
Wow, I have no interest in reading the book really, but I think your comments are spot on! It took me years and years (and I’m probably still not done) to sort out that the money challenges in my marriage were not about money. The money represented something solid, concrete and an always available subject to argue about, thus leaving me feeling emotionally battered feeling badly about myself and with no way to fix it and because I did not understand that it was never really about the money (or housework or weight, or whatever the issue du jour happened to be. However, one of us was left feeling very powerful, like, “There, I showed you!” and I think ultimately, this was what the argument was really about. My thoughts on money are difficult because I do attach feelings and emotions to it, something I am working on overcoming : ) This just hit a chord with me this morning. Great Post!
loading....
When I find myself invested in a book because I think its really good for one reason or another, I also can’t put it down until everything is resolved. But what I really do hate is when an author causes problems to happen simply for effect or to make the story go on seemingly unnaturally. Money and relationships really are an interesting and inevitably realistic topic though.
loading....
holy cow, the trigger happy spaminator ate my reply yesterday!
loading....
The book is on the TBR list and has been for awhile – thanks for not giving spoilers Sarah.
Money lessons in fiction can be very profound partly because we are totally free to judge fictional characters and put ourselves into their world to see how we would behave.
From Scarlet O’Hara and “as God is my witness, I’ll never go hungry again!”
To Walter White’s financial dependence calculations in Breaking Bad:
“adjusting for inflation… Good state college, adjusting for inflation… Two kids, four years of college:. $360,000. Remaining mortgage on the home: $107,000. Cost of living, food, clothing, utilities: say 2 grand a month. I mean that — that should put a dent in it anyway. $24k a year –provide for say 10 years. That’s $240,000. Plus $360. Plus $107. Seven thirty seven. $737,000. That’s what I need. That is what I need. You and I both clear about 70 grand a week. That’s only 10 1/2 more weeks. Call it 11. Eleven more drug deals… It’s doable. Definitely doable.”
We get to know a characters backstory in fiction in a way that you never will with “reader stories” or blogs. Real people’s stories are just that — what they choose to tell you — probably edited because they want to look like a good person. Not only that, there’s your story, my story, and the facts. We fictionalize our own stories all. the. time.
For a couple of good mysteries / novels tangentially related to money, I highly recommend David LaBounty’s Affluenza and Tana French’s “The Likeness”.
loading....
YES.
loading....
I read the book yesterday and it was great and my above comment was sort of psychic in hindsight. If you think people like Nick and Amy don’t exist in real life… you haven’t met someone like my ex. It’s rather surreal to be having a good talk over a nice breakfast with someone who says “life would be so much easier for me if you were dead” in the same voice that you’d say “pass the pancake syrup please.”
The money aspect of the book didn’t really occur to me while reading it – it wasn’t about the money at all or very, very little. Many people with NPD aren’t particularly materialistic and don’t worry about budgets and whatnot – someone always comes along for them to feed off. It’s the winning and control that matters.
loading....
Wow, Gone Girl. Reading that book was like taking a mad, crazy rollercoaster ride. By the time I was done, I was looking for a big bowl of frozen yogurt and saying repeatedly how glad I was that I was no longer married. I think the husband’s passiveness really got to me.
Why? I know a couple who remind me of them. Passiveness, manipulation, spending money right and left–overspending on status symbols, and then worried about how to cover everything. They really seem to love each other, have been married for years! but are headed for disaster and it’s like they’re watching it happen and seem unwilling to do anything to change it. It’s like they’re in this fatal dance. It leaves me asking, WTH?? and finally, Why? I just don’t get it.
Maybe some people can never separate the issues from the money. Maybe it’s all a part of who they think they are and whatever they choose to do. And maybe the big question for them is why we can’t see it the same way they do.
Interesting post, Sarah.
loading....
I like the crux of this post, although I feel that readers would be able to relate to it more if we had read the book beforehand. Marriages nowadays are very complicated and business-like. There seems to be no simple, unconditional love between spouses. Money is also a very important element and it has the power to make or break a relationship. I feel that financial independence is of utmost importance to women and women should strive to achieve it even if their family is their first priority. Just my two cents.
loading....
For these matters I prefer real life stories.
Fiction is good to me like a sort of evasion, of course you can learn from that too.
If reports were more atractive & funnier it would be easier to learn from them, but reports are static and boring most of the time.
One saying “I’m sorry” but not really changing things mean there is NO communication and that is the real danger to any couple that can apply to ANY other important matter like children, sex or education.
Money is not the only thing to focus on here.
loading....