(no subject)
Mar. 25th, 2011 11:23 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cblj_backupSo, when my interest in 'In Broad Daylight' started to wane, I picked up another book I'd checked out of the library along with it: 'The Professional Thief'. It's a weird combination of true crime and sociology, published in the mid-thirties and not, apparently, revised since.
The book is "Annotated and Interpreted" by Edwin Hardin Sutherland, but the bulk of the book was actually written by a veteran professional thief in response to Sutherland's questions. If nothing else, it's a nifty look into how crime functioned in America in the early part of the 20th century, particularly during the Depression.
The book concerns itself exclusively with "professional" crime, which has a fairly narrow definition within the text. For example, while it doesn't necessarily rule out violent crime such as armed robbery, it does exclude rapists, paid killers, members of organized crime families, and casual thieves who don't earn their living by it. A major motivation behind the book is the study of how the criminal community defines a "professional thief" -- how status, skill, training, and life-habits play into that definition. For me, the social science of it was secondary to the firsthand account of the criminal underworld that takes up a majority portion of the book.
In terms of accuracy for the modern day it's probably not very useful. It was written during a very different era and perched on the far end of the industrial revolution, not to mention pre-WWII. There's a deep sense of history and the book talks a little about how many traditions have gone unchanged since the 15th century, but there were some pretty major upheavals in law enforcement and technology in the mid-20th century, so I'm not sure how much survives. As an example, pickpocketing as a skill is almost unknown in major US cities now, whereas in the 30s it was extremely commonplace.
The term "cannon" is used to designate the pickpocket and also the racket of picking pockets. The theory of the origin of this term is that the pickpocket some centuries ago was called a gonnif, which is the Jewish word for thief. This term was then abbreviated to "gun"; later someone in a moment of smartness referred to a pickpocket as a "cannon" to designate a big gun... --p. 44
The book doesn't seem to be terribly organized, though it's a fascinating read and the concepts don't build on one another so much as link loosely together, so I didn't mind. There's a lot about the code of ethics among professional crooks, and about how criminals relate to ordinary society, which strikes a sort of noir chord without really ever going there full-on.
The con, or confidence game, has many angles, but the central principle in all true con rackets is to show a sucker how he can make some money by dishonest methods and then beat him in his attempted dishonesty. --p. 56
Especially for someone who has an interest in this form of crime -- heists, nonviolent theft, con games, pickpocketing -- the book's a pretty awesome read. It's obviously what David Ward read before or during the writing of "The Sting", for example -- Gondorf (Paul Newman's character in the film) is actually mentioned as an example of a crook who ran a fake gambling establishment in Chicago, and shortly after his mention the book outlines the con used in the film.
Also there are some policemen in almost every city who cannot be fixed in any way. B and O (Byrnes and O'Brien) are the only ones on the Chicago force known to professional thieves who cannot be fixed. When they pick you up, they say, "Hello! Where are you going?" You reply, "It looks like I am going to [jail]." -- p. 84
A thief once tried to straighten out a case with a federal officer with the proposition, "I will pay you this," holding out a bunch of ten brand-new, beautiful hundred-dollar bills, "if you will keep one of forty people who were brought up to identify me from coming into this room, and you do not know which one of the forty it will be or whether the one I pick will have anything on me." He just smiled and said, "I am working for the government now. If I took this money, I would be working for you, and I would have to keep on working for you. I believe I would rather continue to work for the government." -p. 115 (I am totally using this in a fic someday.)
The thief fears the square copper rather than hates him. But the saving grace is that the copper who will not take your money will not lie about you in court. If he picks you up just standing around, that is exactly what he will tell the court. His attitudes and earnestness never vary... -- p. 125
I don't know if corruption was as incredibly rampant as the book makes out, but another angle the book presents is how criminals get off charges -- by using a Fixer, someone who, for a living, greases the palms that need to get greased in order to get someone out of a prison sentence.
The important thing is that the thief refuses to think seriously about his ultimate end. There is no serious discussion or consideration of the future. Thieves cannot consider the future, for that would bring them back to reality. They must refuse to face many questions... -- p. 182
What emerges from the book is a portrait of criminal life in the early part of the century: a code of ethics, a sense of isolation from society that leads into the formation of a second society amongst thieves, the rules of that society, and the skills and talents needed to enter into it. I've always thought it was rather nice if unrealistic to believe that there is a moral law among professional crooks, but I didn't really think there ever had been. This book goes pretty deep into it, and even if it's just a historical document it's kind of thrilling to read.
[Cooper] gives a detailed description of a conference of confidence men held in Chicago in which they attempted to formulate a code which would prohibit their colleagues from excursions outside their own field.
Footnote: A confidence man, when asked regarding this conference of confidence men in Chicago, said that Cooper's writings regarding it should have been entitled "Mythologies of 1935". -- p. 199 - 200
The book is "Annotated and Interpreted" by Edwin Hardin Sutherland, but the bulk of the book was actually written by a veteran professional thief in response to Sutherland's questions. If nothing else, it's a nifty look into how crime functioned in America in the early part of the 20th century, particularly during the Depression.
The book concerns itself exclusively with "professional" crime, which has a fairly narrow definition within the text. For example, while it doesn't necessarily rule out violent crime such as armed robbery, it does exclude rapists, paid killers, members of organized crime families, and casual thieves who don't earn their living by it. A major motivation behind the book is the study of how the criminal community defines a "professional thief" -- how status, skill, training, and life-habits play into that definition. For me, the social science of it was secondary to the firsthand account of the criminal underworld that takes up a majority portion of the book.
In terms of accuracy for the modern day it's probably not very useful. It was written during a very different era and perched on the far end of the industrial revolution, not to mention pre-WWII. There's a deep sense of history and the book talks a little about how many traditions have gone unchanged since the 15th century, but there were some pretty major upheavals in law enforcement and technology in the mid-20th century, so I'm not sure how much survives. As an example, pickpocketing as a skill is almost unknown in major US cities now, whereas in the 30s it was extremely commonplace.
The term "cannon" is used to designate the pickpocket and also the racket of picking pockets. The theory of the origin of this term is that the pickpocket some centuries ago was called a gonnif, which is the Jewish word for thief. This term was then abbreviated to "gun"; later someone in a moment of smartness referred to a pickpocket as a "cannon" to designate a big gun... --p. 44
The book doesn't seem to be terribly organized, though it's a fascinating read and the concepts don't build on one another so much as link loosely together, so I didn't mind. There's a lot about the code of ethics among professional crooks, and about how criminals relate to ordinary society, which strikes a sort of noir chord without really ever going there full-on.
The con, or confidence game, has many angles, but the central principle in all true con rackets is to show a sucker how he can make some money by dishonest methods and then beat him in his attempted dishonesty. --p. 56
Especially for someone who has an interest in this form of crime -- heists, nonviolent theft, con games, pickpocketing -- the book's a pretty awesome read. It's obviously what David Ward read before or during the writing of "The Sting", for example -- Gondorf (Paul Newman's character in the film) is actually mentioned as an example of a crook who ran a fake gambling establishment in Chicago, and shortly after his mention the book outlines the con used in the film.
Also there are some policemen in almost every city who cannot be fixed in any way. B and O (Byrnes and O'Brien) are the only ones on the Chicago force known to professional thieves who cannot be fixed. When they pick you up, they say, "Hello! Where are you going?" You reply, "It looks like I am going to [jail]." -- p. 84
A thief once tried to straighten out a case with a federal officer with the proposition, "I will pay you this," holding out a bunch of ten brand-new, beautiful hundred-dollar bills, "if you will keep one of forty people who were brought up to identify me from coming into this room, and you do not know which one of the forty it will be or whether the one I pick will have anything on me." He just smiled and said, "I am working for the government now. If I took this money, I would be working for you, and I would have to keep on working for you. I believe I would rather continue to work for the government." -p. 115 (I am totally using this in a fic someday.)
The thief fears the square copper rather than hates him. But the saving grace is that the copper who will not take your money will not lie about you in court. If he picks you up just standing around, that is exactly what he will tell the court. His attitudes and earnestness never vary... -- p. 125
I don't know if corruption was as incredibly rampant as the book makes out, but another angle the book presents is how criminals get off charges -- by using a Fixer, someone who, for a living, greases the palms that need to get greased in order to get someone out of a prison sentence.
The important thing is that the thief refuses to think seriously about his ultimate end. There is no serious discussion or consideration of the future. Thieves cannot consider the future, for that would bring them back to reality. They must refuse to face many questions... -- p. 182
What emerges from the book is a portrait of criminal life in the early part of the century: a code of ethics, a sense of isolation from society that leads into the formation of a second society amongst thieves, the rules of that society, and the skills and talents needed to enter into it. I've always thought it was rather nice if unrealistic to believe that there is a moral law among professional crooks, but I didn't really think there ever had been. This book goes pretty deep into it, and even if it's just a historical document it's kind of thrilling to read.
[Cooper] gives a detailed description of a conference of confidence men held in Chicago in which they attempted to formulate a code which would prohibit their colleagues from excursions outside their own field.
Footnote: A confidence man, when asked regarding this conference of confidence men in Chicago, said that Cooper's writings regarding it should have been entitled "Mythologies of 1935". -- p. 199 - 200
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 04:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 04:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 05:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 05:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 08:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 12:42 pm (UTC)But Neal got marks for writing it in cipher.
no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 06:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 05:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 06:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 07:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 12:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 01:12 pm (UTC)(In my head, this is totally part of your I Know A Guy 'verse.)
no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 01:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 01:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 06:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 09:23 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 12:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 06:31 pm (UTC)...nah, from what you describe it probably would have been better...
UNLESS IT'S ALSO A CIPHER.
no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 07:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 02:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 03:10 pm (UTC)Every generation, a Mozzie is born. He alone can stand against the establishment...
no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 03:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 04:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 07:22 pm (UTC)Mind you, she had a fair bit to whine about.
no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 05:36 pm (UTC)Possibly with June and/or El, but Mozzie was definitely the one who worked out how.
no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 01:02 pm (UTC)Speaking of sociological profiles, books, and crime, have you read Tokyo Vice by Jake Adelstein? If you haven't, you can find tons of new articles about it everywhere. The author was even on The Daily Show. It came out a couple of years ago, and is most touted for being about Adelstein's interactions with the Yakuza. He wrote this book, in part, to counter the death-threats against him after he reported on a particular boss's activities in America - specifically, making a deal with the FBI so that he could come into the country and get a liver transplant. It also deals with the realities of being an American reporter in a Japanese newspaper, as well as other interesting parts of living in Japan. I highly recommend it.
no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 01:09 pm (UTC)I have not read Tokyo Vice, but I'll put it on my reading list. :)
no subject
Date: 2011-03-26 05:04 pm (UTC)I'm not sure what that says about my town.
no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 02:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 01:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 09:36 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-27 02:02 pm (UTC)