We begin with the ever so popular question, who is Anna Delvey? Considering the series is based mostly on this person, well, Anna Delvey is a Russian-born, German con artist who at the young age of 25, tricked the entire New York’s elite society. She posed herself as a German heiress, who was born rich with tonnes of trust funds back at her hometown when in reality, Anna Delvey is actually Anna Sorokin or Sorokina, born in Russia but her middle-class family moved to Germany when she was a teenager. In New York, Anna mingled with the many rich and elite of the high profile society and in turn were able to manipulate them to assist her in hopefully realizing her dream to open a social club for the rich and richer. Well, that was never to happen as she was arrested and convicted of eight charges which includes theft of services and a great few of larceny. Larceny; for those who don’t know, is an English law term that defines theft of property including tangible assets and in Anna’s case, cash.
So what is it about the series that makes the story of a young con-woman so invigorating? First, it is how the story was told. Shonda Rhimes is known to be a great story-teller, I mean, just watch Grey’s Anatomy. But in order to write a good storyline, you need an interesting character which is then complemented with great acting. Hence, Julia Garner who plays the main lead really brings out the essence of Anna Delvey, that I just love to hate. Together with Julia, there is Anna Chlumsky, the actress that I grew up watching and adore in My Girl and My Girl 2. However, as much as I want to further talk about ‘the acting’, I’m no expert in that subject. All I know, these two especially, sold the story to me because I caught myself wanting to keep watching till the end. I do find this Anna Delvey/Anna Sorokin person very interesting. As per what many reviewers have stated, Anna Sorokin, the real person herself, is fairly unknown to the masses. We have no clue the real person behind the black-rimmed glasses who insists she needs to dress well for her court trials as she has to uphold her brand. Other than Anna, her circle of friends, well some of them, really intrigues me too. Just like her friend Rachel, who is played by Katie Lowes - who we learned is the one that worked together with the police to capture her ‘friend’. We also learned that she was one of Anna’s scam victims but she got caught in a trap since she allows herself to benefit from her traumatic experience to gain more than what Anna owes her. Let’s talk about that shall we?
Rachel DeLoache Williams was a photo editor at Vanity Fair when she met Anna. In an interview with ABC News, Rachel stated she was captivated by Anna’s charming, impulsive and free-spirited personality and she is even more fascinated by her attitude to challenge boundaries. She further retold the story of how Anna would buy her luxury goods and take her to fancy outings which includes spas and lunches and that is what she was even more interested in Anna. Yes, I agree, her character in the Netflix series appeared to be more weak and sort of demonizing, like she was some sort of a money-grabbing or gold-digging socialite/heiress wannabe but let’s take a moment, shall we? When we live a normal life of making literally just above the annual minimum wage, a good friend buys us purses and clothes and takes us to eat good food…can we really complain? It doesn’t matter if you're a man or a woman, we are always spellbound to be charmed by money or objects that are of great quality and when given for free, who could refuse? And when you were showered with all these luxuries that were provided to you by your friend, when you were invited to a, say, all-expense trip beyond the border and noted for its beauty, again, who could refuse? And yes, who wouldn’t be traumatized when you assumed your trip was all paid for and ended up with you having to pay for EVERYTHING using the company credit card that was entrusted to you? Everyone will be traumatized especially when you know you could never afford to pay back the debt in less than three months. She was just a photo editor at the time and according to her, 60 grand is more than what she earns annually. Up till that point, I can empathize with Rachel considering I am too stuck with many debts under my belt but I also agree with the panel of jury who believe there is no case between her and Anna.
Supposedly Anna owes her USD62,000.00 but we later found out she sold ‘her side of the story’ and that is her trip to Marrakesh with Anna and how she was fooled by her friend to pay for the trip. First, she wrote her own personal story of her experience on Vanity Fair. She also received a book deal to write about her dear friend which was about USD300K and she later finished the book which was listed as Times’ 100 Best Books of the Year in 2019 and later she landed the movie rights for her traumatic experience with HBO which accumulates up to USD35K and if the shows aired, she gets additional USD300K (that’s what is noted in the series). On top of that, AMEX; the credit card company that she owes the 60 grand to, forgives her and cleared off the bulk of outstandings in relation to her expenses in Morocco. In total, Rachel earned approximately USD600K plus minus, which is more of what Anna owes her and on top that, she will not be bothered by the AMEX of her outstanding debts. I get the whole traumatic experience and that that can never be replaced or be substitute with money but when one gained literally 90% more of what one loss, and this does not include the sales profits from her book should she be entitled to it, I think one can just move on with their lives and enjoy the new luxury which is what she earned for herself. The book and movie deals that Rachel gained, there is nothing wrong with it. Her portrayal in the series as weak and spineless, fake friend (how ironic that Anna is also fake) is somewhat unjust. She didn’t deserve anything other than an apology from Anna and that’s it. She worked hard and she got what she worked for.
But that all happened after Anna was caught. Now, here’s my issue. It is known that Anna showers her friends, including Rachel, with fancy and luxurious items and outings. I may be a bit too overreaching but I don’t understand that when you are stuck with so much debt and knowing fairly well you have all these high-end goods that you could resell and gain that at least a portion of what you owe the company credit card, why can’t you do that? At least maybe just sell off the goods given to you by you con-friend. I hope she did that but if she didn’t, I wonder why she never thought of that? It is true that these high quality brands of products can be so dear to a person but truly when you are stuck in between a rock and hard place, you’ve got to sacrifice. It is also true that Rachel shouldn’t be the one working hard to look for that money, but it was her name on the card and she did offer it to the hotel. Rachel should just harass Anna for the payment but if she was able to sell off some of her branded goods, she could definitely make enough to settle a portion of her debt and maybe not be so stressed out about the company card calling her. This is the same issue I have with Anna but we’ll discuss that at a different time. The one reason I can think of why Rachel never thought of that would be because she didn’t have enough confidence to actually sell them. It could also be that she treasures them or that she may not think of the idea at all but she made it out alive and well.
Until recently, I wanted to feel sorry for Rachel but her recent remarks about the series threw me off a little bit. In her article which she wrote for Times, she stated how she is disgusted by the way the show depicted her character and how she finds the statement that Rachel was Anna’s greatest creation and not of her parents’ upbringing. She went on to state how Netflix celebrated Anna’s crimes instead of portraying Anna as the guilty con-artist she was or still is. She criticizes the producers for profiting off a story of a woman who had conned not only her but a bunch of other people as well. I’m sorry, didn’t the book deal and the movie deal be based of her personal experience with the crimes committed by Anna? Either way, or whatever way we see her latest article, personally for me it appears that Rachel has not yet let go of her past with Anna. What I get from Netflix is not that we should celebrate Anna’s intelligence to conning the many people around her but it was trying to show how a supposedly naive young woman was able to con the many intelligent New Yorkers into giving her money and access to the life of the rich. Which means, there are so many flaws in the process and the world of the elite in the great city of lights. I don’t think I am the only person who watched the show who emphasize on Rachel, I’m sure many did as we can understand the grave situation she had to endure but dear Rachel, as grave as the those dark times in your past, didn’t you proudly stand in interviews talking about the achievements you have gained from it. As much as Anna had earned from this Netflix deal, Rachel gained a lot more but I there is that nagging feeling inside of me that is telling me that maybe, just maybe, a smidge of what the show wrote of Rachel is true - that she is the person who feels validated by the public’s perceptions.
Since the release of Inventing Anna, one can only assume Rachel’s book, My Friend Anna, would increase in sales again which means, if Rachel has the rights of commission to the sale of her book, she might get something from it but this appears to be more than money. It feels like Rachel wants to be validated as a victim of Anna Delvey’s manipulation and she is and she was rewarded for it but I think Rachel wants Anna to settle it. She doesn’t feel right that she has to work hard to overcome her losses and her struggles, she wants Anna to take responsibility for it. I can understand that feeling as this was a friend or someone that Rachel had trusted. Then again, Rachel only knew Anna in such a short period of time and she needs to understand that she too made a mistake in judging people. She learned from it and I just wish she had moved on. What the world thinks of Rachel, is what the world wants to think but I don’t believe everyone who watched the show is that daft. If someone like me who lives miles away from New York City could understand and take into account that Rachel Williams had every right to do what she did when Anna was in trial, I am sure many would feel the same way. And if Rachel said that she did it only because she wanted the world to hear her truth, well she told her truth, in many forms, and we heard it. And we will continue to hear about it because after Inventing Anna, is HBO really going to tank Rachel’s movie deal? The story surrounding Anna Sorokin is still very fresh and people are salivating at the roller-coaster lives of the people involved that is painted like an adventure many can only dream of.
At the end of the day, it is just another story retold to entertain viewers. Will we hear another con artist story like Anna? She wasn’t the first and also not the last so yes, there will be more like her in the future but for now, she is all the juice and just like everyone who happens to be trending at the moment, Anna Sorokin story may be interesting but there is nothing compelling about it that can rock the world which means unless Anna makes a difference and really learned her lesson from her past mistakes, her star will not shine as bright as it does now. Rachel should have known this considering she is a journalist now but like I said, there is something about Anna that Rachel just can’t seem to let go of. Her success is her greatest comeback and should have set her further above than Anna. The best for Rachel is to bring awareness that could help victims similar to her and indirectly contribute to the decreasing the likelihood of crimes committed by people like Anna but with her recent lashing towards both Anna and Netflix, it’s hard not to see her as the person portrayed by Netflix…that is my personal opinion.
No comments:
Post a Comment