It's Better to Be Born Lucky Than Rich 7
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
7 It’s Better to Be Born Lucky Than Rich 7.1 The Proverb The proverb that this chapter orients to is unusual. The proposition that it is better to be born lucky than rich is one that can be mathematically tested ( Rosenthal n.d. ). But on the face of it, its meaning is straightforward. It claims that it is better to begin life as a lucky person than a person of wealth. The rea- soning behind the proverb is that if one is lucky, one will be able to earn or oth- erwise accumulate wealth, but that if one is simply born wealthy, such riches may be eroded in some way. A 1926 citation of the proverb in the Oxford Book of Proverbs articulates this understanding in one of the citations given 1926 D. H. Lawrence in Harper’s Bazaar July 97 ‘Then what is luck, mother?’ ‘It’s what causes you to have money. If you are lucky you have money. That’s why it’s better to be born lucky than rich. If you’re rich you may lose your money. But if you’re lucky, you will always get more money’. ( Speake 2015 , 22) The proverb thus links luck and money; being lucky means that wealth can repeatedly be generated. Leaving aside for the moment whether this is a robust or appropriate definition of ‘luck’, it is still necessary to find an appropriate data set with which the proverb can be investigated. In relation to the proverb, Vogel remarks, “Perhaps nowhere is the preced- ing sentiment [of the proverb] more appropriately expressed than in gaming and wagering, in which kings and queens play amid snake eyes and wild jok- ers, and horses run for roses”. He continues, “It has been said that ‘Whoever wants to know the heart and mind of the earth’s citizens needs to understand gambling’” ( Vogel 2016 , 185). In this chapter, therefore, I explore the practice of gambling, how people define it and whether they see it as connected to luck. 7.2 Gambling Before one can understand gambling in a social context, one needs to know what gambling is. ‘Gambling’ may refer to any number of activities. As Vogel’s lines suggest, people may play card games or bet money on horse It’s Better to Be Born Lucky Than Rich 165 races or the throwing of dice. Perhaps the most prototypical of gambling spaces is the casino. Indeed, the chapter from which Vogel’s remarks come considers the history and economics of casinos. Corpora tell a similar story. Among the top 20 collocates for ‘gambling’ in the British National Corpus (BNC), 1 one finds ‘casino(s)’, ‘dens’, ‘tables’ and ‘Vegas’ alongside ‘horses’ and ‘forms’. The top two collocates, ‘debts’ and ‘money’, make clear that gambling is an ideal site for the examination of the language of money and debt. But the activities indicated in the BNC by no means exhaust what people actually understand ‘gambling’ to mean. Moreover, in choosing a focus for this chapter, attention also had to be given to whether it was pos- sible to gather linguistic data for analysis. Casinos and online gambling sites clearly have linguistic dimensions. The vocabulary surrounding the playing of and wagering on card games, for example, is a specialised one, completely opaque to the novice (see Bjerg 2011 , 38 ff.). Other activities in casinos involve much less language, and some may include none at all. Of particular note here is Schüll’s work on how casino spaces and betting (or ‘poker’) machines in particular are designed to encourage play (2014; see also Statman 2002, 17). 2 Schüll’s work helps explain the ‘compulsive’ (BNC collocate rank number 3) nature of gambling. 3 Indeed, it also suggests that for those who gamble on machines the goal seems to be not about winning money but rather about entering (and remaining in) a pleasurable zone. This can also be applied to gambling more generally, as Reith argues “gamblers do not play to win, but play with money instead of for money” (1999 , 147 cited in Hedenus 2014 , 228; see also Bjerg 2011, 142). In short, gambling often involves money but this may not be the primary motivation of the players. While some gambling activities involve very little language by players (see Sypniewski 2004 ), linguistic questions still arise. Ponsford, Hollman and Siewierska (2013) for example, explore the origins of the word ‘bet’, while Butters (2004) explores the (ambiguous) semantics and pragmatics of an instant lottery game. And while some gambling practices take place in rela- tive silence, they may generate language in other ways. Advertising, instruc- tion forms, tickets, coverage of gambling events (lotteries, sporting events, professional poker tournaments) and the linguistic and semiotic landscapes of gambling establishments all produce a rich collection of semiotic mate- rial that can be analysed (see Gottdeiner 2011 ). Discourses about gambling are also rich areas of enquiry. For example, specific attention has been paid to the discourse around the legalisation of casinos in Singapore (Wee 2012) and to the identity construction of social and problem gamblers in the same nation ( Leung and Kong 2013 ). In the case of regulation, the stigmatisation of ‘gambling’ and the boundary between ‘gambling’ and ‘gaming’ are par- ticularly important (see Yoong, Hooi Kong and Choung Min 2013 ). Stigma and play appear to be the Janus faces of gambling and even lotteries are not immune to this. Gambling is stigmatised because it is seen as irratio- nal, immoral, wasteful and potentially addictive but it is also enjoyable at 166 It’s Better to Be Born Lucky Than Rich least in part because of the possibility of winning a prize and the dreams this may inspire. The stigma and disapproval that attaches to gambling activ- ity is managed linguistically, especially through the use of language play and the deployment of playful interactional frames (Haakana and Sorjonen 2011 ; Xiang 2012 ). In relation to the former, Xiang (2012 ) shows that talk about the lottery in a rural town in Southern China involves “mockery, verbal duelling, metaphor, rhetorical questions, parallelism, hyperbole, and hypothetical conditionals” ( 2012 , 287). The interactions show that lottery players are aware of and orient to the negative associations of the lottery ( Xiang 2012 , 287–8). The analysis also reveals idiomatic humour. One speaker, for example, concludes a gossiping evaluation of a suspected jack- pot winner as follows If he’s got ten thousand dollars or so in his pocket, he won’t share it (the money would) all be gone like a fart. ( Xiang 2012 , 282) Playful frames are also invoked during the purchase of lottery tickets. Haakana and Sorjonen (2011 ) show Finnish customers referring to their tickets as ‘investments’ or ‘applications’ invoking discourses and practices very different from those one might associate with gambling (though see Section 7.4.1 below). Purchasers may even invoke a food frame—one of the Finnish examples shows a customer asking for a lottery ticket ‘with all the spice’, using a formulation more usually associated with hot dog stands in Finland (where the phrase indicates the customer wants all the toppings available). This strategy, they argue, is a way of defeasing the negative moral associations that gambling has, even though lotteries are not often consid- ered ‘serious’ gambling ( Haakana and Sorjonen 2011 , 1299). Because they constitute gambling that many people participate in, the mundane gambling of lotteries offers an excellent site for the examination of the complexities of gambling. “Lotteries are by far the most popular games of chance, both in terms of participating frequency and expenditure” ( Beckert and Lutter 2012 , 1165). Lottery play is both common and socially acceptable ( Casey 2003 , 246). As the data examined below show, many people do not consider them gambling at all. But lotteries nevertheless allow us to explore themes of control, agency, chance and hope in a domesticated and accessible way. Further, unlike some other forms of gambling, play- ing the lottery requires no particular skill. In the case of ‘instant’ lotteries, it can be played by simply asking for a ticket. Indeed, when purchasing instant lottery tickets in Spain in the summer of 2016, I managed to do so simply by greeting the vendor in Spanish, saying ‘lottery’ with a rising into- nation and miming the activity of scratching such a card. This does pose a problem, however, in terms of linguistic data. Live lottery draws (broadcast on television in the UK) would make for an interesting study, even though there is little participation from individual lottery players (as opposed to It’s Better to Be Born Lucky Than Rich 167 contestants in the competitions that surround the draw). 4 Likewise, the pur- chase of lottery tickets might provide some linguistic data, but as Haakan and Sorjonen observe, there may be no language at all (2011 , 1290; see also Sypniewski 2004). Thus, rather than consider the point at which people play (either ticket purchase or draw), in this chapter I rely on data from the Mass Observation Archive. Specifically, I use a Directive (a kind of ques- tionnaire) developed in 2011 by Dr Emma Casey and the Mass Observation Project which asked a range of British residents about gambling. 7.3 Mass Observation The Mass Observation Project (MOP) collects material relating to the every- day lives of British people (see Hubble 2006 ; Jeffrey 1999 ). This material is held in the Mass Observation Archive (MOA). Started in 1937 and still collecting responses, the MOP elicits responses by sending out Directives to a number of individuals across the UK. The MOP has the goal of “recording hitherto hidden thoughts and dreams of the masses and believed that doing so, might help unlock their revolutionary potential” ( Casey 2014 , 2.2).