A Trying to meet all your book preview and review needs.
to e-mail us: |
Moral Hazard general information | review summaries | our review | links | about the author
- Return to top of the page -
Our Assessment:
B : brisk, often solid style, but dark tale too simply told See our review for fuller assessment.
Review Consensus: - Return to top of the page - The complete review's Review:
Moral Hazard explores not one but two horrors of the modern world: international high finance and Alzheimer's disease.
The narrator, Cath, has an older husband, the artist Bailey (a designer and collagist), who succumbs to the dreaded disease.
This forces her to take a high-paying job, since her freelance writing gigs certainly aren't enough to support her and her ailing husband.
She winds up working for the fictional investment bank Niedecker Benecke as a speech- and other writer.
(Author Jennings has worked in a similar capacity, at Merrill Lynch and J.P.Morgan.)
(...) a powerful propellant. Not to be trifled with. Drink enough Pasqua coffee and you were orbiting.Ah yes, wonderful hyperbole. Isn't there an oversight committee that could fine authors for its inappropriate use ? Eventually Jennings gets on sounder footing (and in certain areas -- the ridiculous world of high finance -- hyperbole is the only lingo that rings true) -- but not before tripping up a few more times. Discussing "quants" -- the "math pointy-heads" -- Cath hazards on the origins of the term: "from the word 'quantum,' I'd guess." Why she would guess this is unclear. If she had at least invented a reason -- maybe some uncertainty-principle related one or something -- it might pass. But surely almost anyone who merely passes by Wall Street would guess that the root of the word lies instead somewhere in the quantitative analysis these pointy-heads do. Cath's tale of the dastardly and unworldly doings in high finance are also, too often, simplifications -- or flat out wrong. An early example suggests: Well, it helps to look at derivatives like atoms. Split them one way and you have heat and energy -- useful stuff. Split them another way, and you have a bomb. You have to understand the subtleties.These subtleties flew right over our head. For one, heat is energy (and nothing but energy). Second, "a bomb" is merely something that releases a great deal of energy (and -- this is the bomb-boom part -- does so very, very quickly; burning a pound of paper, for example, apparently releases more energy than exploding a pound of dynamite -- the difference being that the energy-release from the exploding dynamite is done within a fraction of a second, while it takes ages for the paper to burn). We are also unfamiliar with the different ways of splitting atoms she refers to. Does she mean a contained nuclear reaction as in a nuclear power plant, versus an uncontained one as in a nuclear bomb ? But in both these the actual process of fission (atom-splitting) is, of course, the same. And the amount of energy that is released is the same (at least if comparable amounts of fissionable material are "split"), etc. (There are differences -- but these have to do with other things: the type and amount of fissionable material involved, how much is allowed to "split" over any period of time, as well as the fact that nuclear bombs are usually set off through the use of a very large conventional explosive.) Derivatives and financial markets are complex things, and Jennings can't be bothered to go into details. Fair enough: it would probably unbearably bog down her narrative. Instead she offers quick sketches and simple impressions, easily skewering high finance -- but too often her imprecision is unacceptably vague and general. Which is too bad, because she is often right on target, too, and she expresses herself nicely and sharply. Post-Enron (and other recent debacles) many sentences hit nicely close to home: "It's midnight. Do you know where your retirement money is ?" Cath's view of the investment banking world is a properly critical one. She doesn't allow herself to become co-opted by it, and her often jaded and wry observations are fairly entertaining. The characters at her workplace are largely cartoonish -- in part because it is almost impossible for her to have any personal sort of relationship with these people -- but that is, for the most part, appropriate. Wall Street is a cartoon world. The clamouring by all the investment bankers for less government regulation, and their apparent complete faith in the great free market, are nicely countered by what, post-Enron, is obvious: some (and probably a great deal of) regulation is necessary in order for the market to be free (at least in this world). A few good examples are used: the default by Russia, for example, disappoints the investment bankers, with the CEO moaning: "What happened was inconceivable. It broke all the rules." This from a person who wants there to be no rules. The investment bank bozos are, like all bankers, not true laissez faire believers -- the philosophy they propose is only one of laisser moi faire. Jennings does a good job of describing the foolish investment practices that are so common. Hedge funds get some special treatment, but there are numerous other catstrophes-in-waiting that she points out (or at least points, in passing, to). The story isn't ideally balanced with the Alzheimer's-half, and Jennings doesn't do quite enough to combine the two -- in particular in pointing out how similar the situations are. Cath remains a devoted wife, and she shows readers also just how ugly and awful Alzheimer's quickly becomes. It is a difficult subject, and -- those with Alzheimer's afflicted loved-ones or sufferers themselves be warned -- Jennings is unsparing in her descriptions. Unlike at her workplace, in this sphere she is, ultimately, willing to take action. She talks ethics with a doctor, and she mentions her reading list: the first name on it is Peter Singer, and so readers know where this is headed ..... As she warned early on: "Bloody awful, all of it." The book is, in fact, very close to being too ugly to read. Jennings' style is often impressive: she tells a mean tale. But her choice of (and command over) subject matter isn't ideal. Perhaps she knows these two worlds well: she does nicely caricature Wall Street life, and she does convey the sheer awfulness of the rot of Alzheimer's. But she gets too many of the Wall Street details wrong and she oversimplifies too much of high finance -- and the Alzheimer's story is simply one of misery, finally brought to a very unpleasant and, for some -- us, certainly --, disturbing conclusion. A talented writer, perhaps simply trying to do too much here. - Return to top of the page - Moral Hazard:
- Return to top of the page - Australian author Kate Jennings was born in 1948. She moved to the United States in 1979 and has worked as a writer for Merrill Lynch and J.P.Morgan. - Return to top of the page -
© 2002-2021 the complete review
|