Daniel W. VanArsdale
©1998, 2002, 2007
442 kilobytes
Abstract: Apocryphal letters claiming divine origin circulated for centuries in Europe. Around 1900 shorter and more secular letters appeared that demanded the reader distribute copies. Billions of these "luck chain letters" have circulated since then. During thousands of generations they have accumulated remarkable methods of getting themselves copied. For example, complementary testimonials developed, one exploiting perceived bad luck, another exploiting perceived good luck. Using a sample of over 600 dated letters, predominant types are identified and analyzed for their replicative advantage. Key events in chain letter history are examined in detail, including the puzzling origin of money chain letters. A reconstruction of uncollected intermediate forms suggests that around 1932 a luck chain letter actually brought unexpected money in the mail to some who lived in small towns. In 1935 the first money chain letter appeared, the infamous "Send-a-Dime," which was copied over a billion times worldwide within a few months. Newly discovered sources are used to argue that the unknown author of Send-a-Dime was a Denver woman motivated by charity.
The collection of letters is presented on-line in HTML format in the Paper Chain Letter Archive. An Annotated Bibliography on Chain Letters and Pyramid
Schemes contains over 350 entries. A Glossary
facilitates the independent reading of sections.
2. Luck Chain Letters
2.1 Predecessors
2.2 The Mainline
2.3 Outliers
3. How Chain Letters Work
3.1 Population
Dynamics
3.2 Distribution
Networks
3.3 Evolution
3.4 Retention
3.5 Compliance
3.6 Mainline
Testimonials
3.7 Effective Copying
3.8 Effective
Distribution
4. Events in Chain Letter History
4.1 Origin of Money Chain Letters
(1922 - 1935).
4.2 Divergence of Luck and Money Chains
(1935 - 1939).
4.3 Luck Follows
Money (1952).
4.4 Origin
of Copy Quota Twenty-Four (1959 - 1973).
4.5 The Media
Chain Letter (1948 - 1995)
4.6 The "It Works" Blitz
(1979 - 1982).
4.7 The Mainline
Since 1982.
I could not have conducted this study without the assistance and friendship of Dr. Michael J. Preston, University of Colorado English Professor and folklorist. He obtained scores of letters, gave me copies of his files and put me up in his home while I worked in the CU Boulder library. The help of Dr. William F. Hansen, folklorist and Head of the Department of Classical Studies at Indiana University was also indispensable. He provided many useful chain letters and translations, and his interest and encouragement have been sustaining.
Special thanks also go to Alan E. Mays, who sent many chain letters, his bibliography on chain letters and the Himmelsbrief, and archived chain email. Paul Smith also provided scores of letters and an extensive bibliography. Anna Guigne sent a stack of chain letters and answered questions. Steve Glickman helped with microfilmed Denver Post articles at UC Boulder. Carol Petty copied local newspaper articles in Springfield, Missouri, where chain letters rampaged for a few days in 1935. John Burkhardt shared his thoughts early in the project and emailed digitized letters. James H. Patterson has provided photocopies of many rare chain letters from his collection of "unmailable" items. Sandy Hobbs recently sent photocopies of every chain letter that has appeared in the publications Dear Mr. Thoms and Letters to Ambrose Merton.
I have received much needed help with foreign language chain letters. Sarah Winter translated several chain letters and an entire article from French into English. Dr. Yana VanArsdale found several Russian chain letters and articles, and translated published letters in Polish and Russian to English. Dr. Jean-Bruno Renard has sent chain letters from France and Brazil, and a bibliography of French publications. Natalia Kasprzak sent two Polish articles on chain letters and translated a Polish letter into English. Bill Clark translated some chain letter Tagalog. Recently Martinovich Vladimir Aleksandrovich provided Russian chain letters he collected, and has translated a Russian version of the Romance Game chain into English.
Though I am solely responsible for the approach and presentation here, this effort was sustained because a few people expressed interest. I am especially thankful for the encouragement of Richard Dawkins, who suggested I write "a book on chain letters, with all your detailed examples and analyses." This is not a book, but likely it is enough detail for most readers.
A list of those who provided one or more paper chain letters appears on the information page for the archive.
1.1
Introduction.
Seeking paper
chain letters. Overview.
Files and Conventions.
Seeking paper chain
letters.
If you have any information on where we may obtain more paper chain
letters please email. Chain letters
can be sent directly to D. VanArsdale, 1404 W. Guava Ave., Lompoc, CA
93436. Include the date you received the chain letter and its method of delivery,
as by enclosing the postmarked envelope if the letter came in the mail. Letters
nearly identical to one already collected are very useful. Foreign examples, clippings, obscure or foreign references, beliefs
and rumors about chain letters, stories of receiving unexpected money in
the mail or other personal experiences with chain letters are also welcome.
Your comments and suggestions for this article are appreciated.
Overview.
Texts that appeal to superstition to encourage their copying or publication
have circulated for over a thousand years. Beginning around 1900, copy quotas
and deadlines were added, and claims of divine authorship and magical protection
were removed. The resulting "luck chain letters" still circulate, and in
over four thousand generations of copying (with variation) they have accumulated
ways to increase replication that challenge our understanding.
Using a collection of over 600 dated paper chain letters, we have identified types and variations that appear and disappear over the years. Unexpectedly, it was discovered that, repeatedly, a single letter bearing some new innovation will propagate so abundantly and rapidly that within just a few years its descendants replace all similarly motivated letters in our collection.
Subtle methods that increase replication include:
Files and Conventions.
Here are the directories (folders) and files in directory /chain-letter/,
all pertaining to paper chain letters.
evolution.html ("Chain Letter Evolution" - this file)The Annotated Bibliography contains over 350 entries and was designed for the author's use in preparing this treatise. Since it may be of use by other researchers I have placed it on-line as a single HTML file and linked citations here to internal targets in the Bibliography. We have chosen terminology that is easily remembered. However many concepts, such as "circulation," have a specialized definition here. Such terms are given in bold when first introduced and defined; some later appearances are linked to a Glossary where formal definitions are given. This facilitates reading sections independently. All paper chain letters cited appear in the /archive/ directory as separate HTML files (archive Information). Errors in the original texts are preserved in the archived versions, and when feasible, each keystroke is preserved. Paper chain letters are our principal focus - email chains are mentioned only incidentally. Those several that are cited appear in the /e-archive/ directory as separate HTML files.
bibliography.htm (Annotated Bibliography on chain letters and pyramid schemes)
glossary.htm (Definitions of terms used for paper chain letters)
/archive/ (Filenames in the Directory containing The Paper Chain Letter Archive - system generated - does not work for some browsers)
/archive/!information.htm (Information on The Paper Chain Letter Archive)
/archive/!search.htm (Search through the /chain-letter/ directory. Provided by FreeFind.)
/e-archive/ (Filenames in the Directory containing the Chain Email Archive - system generated)
When chain letter text is given in-line it may be slightly edited. Complete texts are indented and may be reformatted. Hypothetical letters and events are given in red. In a sequence of in-line letters, changes over the prior letter are in italics. Italics are also used for text within a paragraph.
The following conventions help the reader decide whether
to pursue a link.-
1.2 Motivational Categories
Piety. Luck. Charity. Petition. Money. Exchange. Parody.
"World Record." Chain
Email.
A chain letter explicitly directs the recipient to make and distribute copies of itself. Examples reveal that the form and content of a chain letter are highly correlated with the principal motive for its replication. For paper chains the following seven motivational categories apply to almost all the examples one encounters.
Piety.
The Letters from Heaven claim to have
been written by God or some divine agent. They often command Sabbath observance
and promise the bearer magical protection from various misfortunes. They have circulated in Europe and elsewhere for centuries
and were reprinted during World War II. The Letters from Heaven do not quite
fit our definition of a chain letter since most do not ask that copies be
made. However many ask the bearer to "publish" the letter, and threaten those
who disbelieve. We discuss them later (> Heaven) as predecessors
to luck chain letters. The filenames for the Letters from Heaven begin with
the letter "h" in the Paper Chain Letter Archive.
Luck.
Luck chain letters appeal primarily to superstition,
promising good luck if the letter is replicated and bad luck if it is not.
They are often called "prayer" chains because many prior types started with
a prayer or Bible verse. They may have developed from a requirement to distribute
a prayer in a Roman Catholic Novena devotion [1898], or as a secularization of
promises and threats in the Letters from Heaven. The English language paper
luck chain letters of the twentieth century will be our principal topic.
Most examples in the last few decades are highly traditional, having gradually
accumulated varied devices to promote propagation. Luck chains have also
been common on the Internet. Though originally these were simply digitizations
of paper letters, they subsequently specialized to the email medium [e1995]. Filenames for
paper luck chain letters begin with the letter "l" in the archive.
Charity.
A charity chain letter requests money or some item
be sent to a fixed address, ostensibly for charitable, political or memorial
purposes. An 1888 letter solicits dimes for the education of "the poor
whites in the region of the Cumberlands." This letter states it is an
adaption of a previous solicitation, and asks that four copies be sent to
friends. For compliance ". . . you will receive the blessing of Him who
was ready to die for us" [1888]. This is the earliest
known chain letter. In an 1889 example an American college student solicited
dimes and ten copies [Martin].
This letter claimed to be self-terminating: recipients were asked to
increment a generation count at the top of the letter until it reached some
preset maximum at which time the chain was to stop. This practice continued
at least through 1916 [Billy].
But a few years after a letter was launched, only those circulated which had
inflated the maximum (NYT 1917).
We have two examples of a solicitation for used postage stamps to build a
children's ward in Australia (OED).
The first is from [1900]
and is number 173 of 180 maximum. The second, highly modified, was still in
circulation ten years later [1910] and is number 375 of
480 maximum. Many charity chain letters exaggerate the loss if there is a
single failure to comply [1895].
Apart from intimidating recipients to comply, this may have been influenced
by certain mail frauds of the time (Thomas 1900). Recent charity chains
are "endless" and some do not ask for money. The Craig Shergold appeal requested
get well cards for a dying child (since recovered), intending to break a Guinness
world record that existed at the time. It was launched in September 1989 by
FAX, email and chain letters. By December 1990 a record 33,000,000 cards had
been received (Guigne). Despite
efforts to stop the appeal, hundreds of millions have now been sent. Charity
chain letters were an influence on early luck chain letters and, 40 years
later, enabled the beginning of money chain letters. They are common on the
Internet but most are hoaxes {Jessica Mydek}. We
include in this category a single example of a request for prayers for missionaries
[1905], this in form being
very similar to the charity letters of the time. Archive filenames for charity letters begin with "c".
Petition.
In their modern form, chain petitions request their
own reproduction, circulation and delivery of signatures. Earlier examples
did less. A 1903 letter asks that recipients send their name and address
to the "U.S. Moral Society" to be added to a petition to Congress to prohibit
the sale of cigarettes to minors [1903]. Subsequently the initial communication
is itself a petition, as in an attempt to draft Calvin Coolidge as the Republican
nominee for President [1927].
The use of chain letters in political campaigns goes back at least to 1912
(NYT, 1927). Other chain petition
causes include Czech independence [1949],
nuclear disarmament [1985], protests of apartheid [1988], and a misinformed boycott of Proctor & Gamble [1986]. Chain
petitions also appear on the Internet, including a perennial appeal to support
National Public Radio [e1996]. Paper
chain petitions have filenames beginning with "p" in the archive.
Money.
Money chain letters urge the recipient to send money
to one or more prior senders, claiming that one can likewise benefit in the
future. A managed list of names and
addresses is provided. Money chain letters originated in the United States
in the spring of 1935 with the "Send-a-Dime"
letter, also called "Prosperity Club" [Denver]. We show how a
prior luck chain letter [1933]
was used as a model for Send-a-Dime (> Origin $). Money chain
letters have influenced the content and distribution of luck chain letters
up into the 1950's and possibly beyond (sections 4.2 and 4.3). They continue
as an omnipresent nuisance to this day, both in paper [2002] and as E-mail [2001]. Money chains and pyramid schemes violate Federal {USPS}
and State (West's CA) laws. If filenames in the Paper Chain Letter Archive are ordered
by name, money chain letter filenames will appear in a block, all beginning
with an "m."
Exchange.
The exchange chain letters ask that an item small
value, such as a recipe or postcard, be sent to one or more prior senders,
promising that if the chain is not broken the sender will in turn receive
many such items. They first appeared in 1935, modeling the infamous Send-a-Dime
money chain letter [1936]. Within several years they had diverged in form, usually reducing
the list of senders [1937].
Unlike luck chain letter types, the copy quota on exchange chain letters varies
considerably, as does the number of names present. Exchange chains continue
to circulate in paper [1996],
but only one example in email form has been collected (a used paperback book
exchange). Filenames for exchange chain letters begin
with an "x" in the archive.
"World Record."
In the 1980's a certain postcard exchange chain letter specialized
to circulate among children and falsely claimed that its faithful continuation
would soon result in a Guinness world record
for chain letters [1985].
By the new millennium the request for postcards had been deleted and the
letter is now motivated solely by its promise of a world record (crediting
each sender!) and the threat that anyone who breaks the chain will spoil this
effort and be identified [2000].
Judging from ISP hit reports on my chain letter files, this chain is still
circulating in considerable volume [2005]. Though extremely objectionable
for its threatening exploitation of children, this chain bears curious features
such as lists of names on the back of the envelope, stampless mail delivery
and year of origin claims that sporadically progress. Most of its successful
innovations are likely accidental or unintended. If you have received a copy
of this letter, I will send you a self-addressed stamped envelope for it
plus the postmarked envelope it came in. Just email me your postal address
(email). Such examples will assist
preparation of a WWW page that informs recipients and their parents about
the letter's false promises and meaningless intimidation. As for all
chain letters here, children's names will be obscured in online versions.
Filenames for the "world record" chain letters begin with a "w" in the archive.
Parody.
Very soon after the first publicity (April 19, 1935) of the Send-a-Dime
craze, parodies appeared that mocked both the language and the geometrical
progression of Send-a-Dime. Examples mentioned in the press include "Send-a-Pint"
and the "Drop Dead Club" (shoot the first person on the list). We have obtained
complete texts of three early parodies [1935]. The
next known examples are the familiar "wife exchange" [1953] and
"Fertilizer Club: "go to the top address on the list and crap on the front
lawn" [1971]. Perhaps these had circulated, uncollected, since 1935. Parodies
are often published, but still circulate in different versions like photocopied
office humor. There is no serious request for copies, thus technically they
are not chain letters. Parodies have probably served to educate the public
on the fallacies of money chain letters, and have influenced the content of
luck chain letters. They are very common on the Internet [St. Paul]. Paper parodies of
chain letters appear in the archive with filenames beginning with "j" (for
joke).
Chain E-mail.
For "chain e-mail" (frequently forwarded e-mail) there are
a large and growing number of motives for replication. Hoaxes, humor and expressions of friendship are prominent. The following is an
alphabetic list of some of the many topics observed since 1993: admonitions
(duty to friends, sobriety, safe sex), anti chain letters, aphorisms, ASCII
art and scrollers, communication experiments and demonstrations, consumer
warnings, friendship, hoaxes (virus warnings, charity, giveaways, false quotations),
human rights alerts, humor (single jokes and lists, office humor items, stories),
inspiration, Internet protection (modem tax, phone charges, anti-censorship),
good luck (often in sex or romance), missing children, money chains, number
guessing tricks, parodies, patriotism, personality tests, petitions, poems,
political commentary, practical jokes (especially April Fools Day), prayer
requests, protests, rumors, school & exams, seasonal (Christmas, St.
Valentine's Day, Halloween, Thanksgiving Day), speeches, surveys, tag (snowball
fight, mooning), urban legends (warnings, humor), Web page suggestions and
voting recommendations. Many of these topics appear in combination, such
as a humor item with a short luck chain attached.
Though some e-mail chains begin as digitizations of paper
chain letters [e1994]
or office humor items [e1995],
their subsequent history in the electronic medium, and the chain e-mail
genre as a whole, differ significantly from paper chain letters. The main
reasons for this are that email is usually reproduced exactly, and can be
distributed in great numbers with little effort or cost. Another difference
is that e-mail chains are often posted on various lists and group venues,
and likewise if there are any denunciations and refutations these may also
receive the same exposure. In comparing e-mail to paper letters, let us disregard
the many "fun and friendship" type emails which have no counterpart in paper
chain letters, and focus on superstition and deception. We then find that
for chain e-mail: (1) few minor variations are present and virtually no accidental
variations, (2) initial propagation is accelerated but items have a shorter
life span, (3) readers replicate messages for a greater variety of motives,
(4) motives for innovation are dominated by hoax and vandalism, (5) probably
no innovations are introduced by believers, (6) the e-mail genre through
time progresses by large jumps rather than modifications within an identifiable
lineage. Though there are some "traditional" themes in chain e-mail, such
as virus warnings, there is very little traditional text. Nor is there a
future for tradition in e-mail replicators. Increasingly, incorporation of
traditional text in chain e-mail makes it vulnerable to automated detection
and deletion by screening programs.
Most genres of chain email are reviled by veteran Internet users for their dishonesty and "waste of band width." On the last point, by reading denunciations one would judge that chain letters are far more despised than pornography. But a typical chain email, including some forwarding statements, uses about 2 kilobytes, whereas a typical color picture uses about 50 kilobytes.
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
1.3
SOURCES
The collection
of letters . Table
1 - Contents of the Paper Chain Letter Archive. Foreign language letters.
Publications. Web Sites. Interviews.
The Collection of letters.
I began collecting chain letters in 1973 with the hope they
would reveal an evolutionary sequence. This effort was renewed several years
later after discovering the folklore literature, particularly Michael Preston's
1976 article "Chain Letters" (Preston).
This documented chain letters in a state of flux. Subsequently I placed ads
for chain letters in collectibles magazines. Collecting large numbers of
more recent letters began in June 1995 when Dr. Preston solicited chain letters
for me from folklorists. In recent years I have also purchased old chain
letters on Ebay, the immense on-line auction. Sometimes copies were provided
free by the seller or buyer, or a transcript could be made from auction photographs.
All of the datable letters (except for some foreign examples and recent money chain letters) have now been digitized in HTML format and each is accessible on-line as a separate file in the Paper Chain Letter Archive. The archive directory also contains an information page. The entire /chain-letter/ directory can be searched, including the text of all the letters in the archive, using a site search engine provided by FreeFind. Transcriptions in the archive preserve the errors in the original letter unless otherwise noted. The medium of the letter, its date of circulation, how it was delivered, the provider and other information is documented after the text.
Table
1 - Contents of the Paper Chain Letter Archive.
Chain letters presently in the Paper Chain Letter Archive
are tabulated below by year of circulation and motivational category. The
Letters from Heaven (13 in number) and foreign chain letters (25), though
present in the archive, are excluded from the table.
| Years | Luck | Charity | Petition | Money | Parody |
Exchange | World Record |
| 1885 - 89 | 3 | ||||||
| 1890 - 94 | 1 |
||||||
| 1895 - 99 | 1 |
4 |
|||||
| 1900 - 04 | 1 | 3 | 1 | ||||
| 1905 - 09 | 7 |
4 |
|||||
| 1910 - 14 | 26 |
1 | |||||
| 1915 - 19 | 15 |
7 |
1 | ||||
| 1920 - 24 | 11 |
1 |
|||||
| 1925 - 29 | 8 |
1 | |||||
| 1930 - 34 | 3 | ||||||
| 1935 - 39 | 3 |
1 | 1 | 42 |
6 |
18 | |
| 1940 - 44 | 4 |
1 | 10 |
20 |
|||
| 1945 - 49 | 4 | 1 | 6 |
||||
| 1950 - 54 | 5 | 1 | 6 |
3 | |||
| 1955 - 59 | 5 |
4 |
2 | ||||
| 1960 - 64 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
1 | |||
| 1965 - 69 | 5 | 1 | 1 |
2 | |||
| 1970 - 74 | 11 | 1 |
3 |
||||
| 1975 - 79 | 27 | 6 (a) | 2 |
6 | |||
| 1980 - 84 | 35 | 3 | 2 |
4 |
|||
| 1985 - 89 | 36 | 1 (b) | 11 | 2 | 6 |
7 | |
| 1990 - 94 | 51 |
1 | 1 | 3 |
1 |
4 | |
| 1995 - 99 | 50 |
1 | 3 | 16 | |||
| 2000 - 04 | 6 |
1 | 5 |
||||
| 2005 - 08 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
7 |
|||
| TOTALS | 317 |
32 (b) | 17 | 72 (a) | 31 |
93 |
12 |
| Luck | Charity | Petition | Money | Parody |
Exchange | World Record |
(a) Over 150 money chain letters have been collected since 1975 but most
have not been digitized..
(b) The Craig Shergold appeal circulated widely beginning in 1989 (Guigne). Only two are archived.
The numbers in the table are not reliable measures of relative circulation.
An exception are the numerous money chain letters from 1935-1939, all from
the 1935 "Send-a-Dime" craze. However the gap afterwards in this column means
in part that I did not start saving money chain letters until after 1975.
These can be collected by the bushel by answering sucker ads and thus getting
on "opportunity seekers" mailing lists.
Foreign Language Letters.
Because of the ease with which letters are transmitted
internationally, chain letters are, and have always been, an international
phenomenon. Only by the extensive collection and classification of foreign
language examples can an accurate genealogy of chain letters be constructed.
It is also revealing to see how chain letters vary from one culture to another.
There are some foreign language examples presently in the archive, but it
is hoped that at some time in the future many more will be collected and
subsequently translated into English. To highlight this nascent effort, subdirectories
have been established in the archive for chain letters in some other languages.
In 2006 I was contacted by Martinovich Vladimir Aleksandrovich, head of the Center of New Religious Movements Studies in Belarus. He has collected many chain letters in the Russian and Ukrainian languages. Transcriptions of these are currently being entered in the Paper Chain Letter Archive in the subdirectory /archive/russian/.
Publications.
Of the over 600 letters in the Paper Chain Letter Archive,
over 80 were found in publications, mostly from folklore sources and newspapers.
The New York Times Index located a few older texts [1916] and a mention of a McKinley
Memorial chain before it was collected (NYT 1906). Some French (Le Quellec) and Polish (Robotycki) publications contain
many chain letters that have yet to be entered into the archive or translated.
The Annotated Bibliography currently contains
over 350 entries, many of them newspaper articles on money chain letters
or pyramid schemes.
Web Sites.
There are many thousands of WWW sites that match a search on "chain letter."
The vast majority of these are about email chains, which are not our topic
here. A useful list of annotated links appears in Watrous,
and we will not duplicate this. To find the texts of luck chain letters, paper
or early email versions, one can search for traditional text such as "Dolan
Fairchild" or "Dalan Fairchild." A few transcriptions of paper
luck chain letters found this way have been entered into the Paper Chain
Letter Archive [1998]. Others
are present on the WWW, but it is difficult to judge if they are complete
and unedited. An entertaining survey of chain letters appears in "Meditations
on the Chain Letter" by John Burkhardt (link not available, 1/7/07). Included
is a typical paper luck chain letter in which many variant readings have
been added in parentheses. An article by Charles Bennett, Ming Li and Bin
Ma, titled "Chain Letters & Evolutionary Histories" appears in the June
2003 issue of Scientific American (Bennett). This uses phylogenetic
inference algorithms to construct a cladogram for 33 DL type chain letters. The 33 chain letters used,
and 8 additional foreign and outlier types, are available online {chain.html}.
Interviews.
I have obtained some information about chain letters and people's attitudes
toward them by informal questioning of acquaintances. Several inquiries about
foreign circulation have been made on USENET newsgroups. Much more could
have been learned by systematic interviewing. However, people who send out
chain letters, for luck or money, are often reluctant to reveal their activities
and motives. Nevertheless, some interview material in newspapers and popular
magazines has been very useful for understanding replication (Marilyn Bender,
New York Times, 1968).
< Start of above section < Start of Chain Letter Evolution - Contents
2.1 PREDECESSORS
Ancient documents that advocate
their own perpetuation. The
Letters from Heaven. Transitions
to chain letters.
Ancient documents that advocate
their own perpetuation.
Many ancient texts survive which provide diagrams, incantations or prayers
that claim to benefit those who learn them. Some come close to our definition
of a chain letter by urging that a personal copy be made. The Ancient Egyptian
"Book of that which is in the Underworld" states (of a picture it
provides):
Another Buddhist text, the Diamond Sutra, is the oldest (868 AD) extant book printed by wood block reliefs. It promised great merit to those who "observe and study this Scripture, explain it to others and circulate it widely . . ." (Goddard, p. 96)
The Surangama Sutra states:
The Letters from Heaven.
The "Letters from Heaven" (often
called by the German "Himmelsbrief")
claim to have been written by God or some divine agent. Many authors restrict
the term to apocryphal Christian letters. These often claim miraculous delivery
to Earth, magical protection for the possessor, blessings to those who "publish"
them and divine punishment for disbelief of their claims. The original copies
are often claimed to have been written in gold letters, or with the blood
of Jesus. Many published versions were illuminated. An early and frequent
feature is the command for extreme Sabbath observance, as in the Madgeburg
Himmelsbrief [text].
A German authority on the Himmelsbrief, H. Stube, said the letters long predated Christianity (Oda). Examples in Greek, Arabic, Armenian, Syrian and Ethiopic have been published with German translations. Jewish and Islamic Himmelsbrief are also reported (Hand). These may all derive from an early Greek source (Bittner). A letter which was said to have fallen from heaven existed in the third century AD (Hippolytos, Refutation of All Heresies). The oldest Letter from Heaven for which we have a full text is the Latin "Letter from Heaven on the observance of the Lord's day," the original of which dates from the close of the sixth century (Priebsch). St. Boniface denounced this as a "bungling work of a madman or the devil himself." Eckehard (1115 AD) wrote that it had spread over the whole globe then known to man. It has circulated in English in many versions [1795, image available at link].
Jacob, organizer of the Crusades of the Shepherds, claimed (ca. 1251) the Virgin Mary appeared to him and gave him a letter. While in public he always carried it in his hand. A cult of uniformed flagellants appeared in Germany in 1261 claiming to possess a heavenly letter that had descended upon the altar of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem before a multitude. The text has survived: God, angry at human sin, has decided to destroy all life, but the Virgin intercedes and God grants humanity one last chance to reform. Any priest who refused to pass on the divine message to his congregation would be eternally damned. During the Black Death (1348-9) the same letter, with a paragraph on the plague added, was used as a manifesto by a revived flagellant movement. At gatherings the manifesto was read publicly, the audience being "swept by sobbing and groaning." (Cohn)
Some Letters from Heaven specialized in protection, and accumulated long lists of weapons by which the possessor could not be harmed. The Count Philip Himmelsbrief [1895] granted protection against "spear, sword, sabre, cutlass, knife, tomahawk, rapier, helmet, burdon, . . . , and everything prohibited by holy writ, that is from all kinds of weapons, artillery, cannon, musket, rifle, gun or pistol." A preamble mentions its use in the American Revolution and claims that Count Philip of Flanders sponsored it after he was unable to execute a condemned prisoner who had secreted a copy on his person. Various Letters from Heaven in German were printed in Pennsylvania during the 19th and early 20th century (Oda), [1887 image1 & image2]. American forces carried English language versions during World Wars I and II.
Letters claiming divine authority are also reported from India. Chain letters circulated in Shahabad in 1864 that condemned the breeding of pigs and consumption of alcohol. They were said to be from Heaven. In North Tirhut, 1872, cow protection was advocated by "strange papers" which "warned that Jaganath (Lord of the World) would curse any one who did not pay heed to this message and would burn down the house of any one who failed to pass it along to other people." Letters advocating cow protection in 1893 mandated recipients "make and then issue copies to at least five villages" - a very early example of a copy quota. (Yang)
An email chain posted to an Islamic coins mailing list [1999] consists of: (1) an Islamic "Letter from Heaven," which likely first circulated in paper, and (2) a reduced version (testimonials only) of a paper luck chain letter we call the Lottery24 type.
Transition to chain
letters.
Edwin Fogel, writing in 1908, assumed that a luck chain letter [1908] was a new version of a Letter
from Heaven (Fogel). There is little
similarity in the texts, but perhaps Fogel was familiar with transitional
forms now lost. Speaking of the apocryphal Letter from Jesus Christ [1915], Edgar Goodspeed wrote "it
is sometimes sent through the mail with a request that the recipient send
copies of it to three others, as some great misfortune is likely to befall
him if he does not" (1931).
Such a practice must have long predated 1931. Thus luck chain letters may
have evolved from the preambles and postscripts to Letters from Heaven. At
some stage the divine communication may have been replaced by a less pretentious
"prayer," followed by entreaties to copy it. This is the form of the "Ancient
Prayer" type (1905
- 1925) discussed in the next
section. Some versions of Ancient Prayer promise deliverance "from all
calamities" and threaten "eternal punishment" [1906] - as do some Letters from
Heaven [Madgeburg]. Folklorists
have generally followed Fogel in presuming that luck chain letters derive
from the Himmelsbrief tradition (Ellis), though transitional examples
have yet to be found.
More collecting, and examination of European sources, should clarify the
transition to chain letters. The first luck chain letters may also have been
influenced by early charity chain letters [1888], which likely introduced
the idea of a copy quota.
< Start of above section < Start of Chain Letter Evolution - Contents
2.2 THE MAINLINE
Features of 20th century luck
chain letters. The succession
of types. Table 2 - Mainline
Types.
Ancient Prayer. Good Luck. Prosperity.
Luck of London . Luck by Mail. Death20.
Lottery-Death. Death-Lottery.
Features of 20th century
luck chain letters.
Around 1900 chain letters were influenced by increasing literacy, international
mail and postcards, and changing attitudes about religion and miracles. Also
chain letters themselves accumulated new technologies of increasing replication.
Whereas the prior Letters from
Heaven often urged the reader to "publish" the letter, chain letters gained
more exposure by relying on individual copying with specific copy quotas
and deadlines. The following features characterize luck chain letters of
the 20th century.
(1) Brevity. The Letters from Heaven typically had over 500 words and were often elaborately printed. By contrast, a widespread luck chain from 1905-17 had about 100 words and was usually distributed by handwritten postcards.The succession of types.(2) Secularity. Luck chains originating in the 1900's dropped claims of divine authorship, delivery from heaven to earth, granting protection from fire or weapons, divine punishment for disbelief, and miracles generally. A Saint, missionary or military officer may be attributed as the author of the letter, but never Jesus. Promises of good luck and threats of bad luck exploited vague popular superstitions rather than naive piety.
(3) Copy quota. Chain letters state a minimum number of copies that the recipient is encouraged to distribute.
(4) Deadline. This task is to be completed within a stated period.
(5) Waiting period. But according to most letters, one must wait a certain number of days before receiving good luck.
(6) Testimonials. All English language luck chain letters since the 1930's contain accounts of fortune and misfortune allegedly experienced by prior recipients of the letter. These testimonials are told in the third person, usually of a named individual.
(7) Circumnavigation. Almost all luck chains since 1910 have either (1) declared they are to go "all over" or around the world, or (2) claimed a certain number of completed circumnavigations.
(8) Lists. When someone signs their name on a chain letter, a recipient may faithfully copy this name. And another person may sign on, and both names may be copied. The growing list suggests to others that they in turn sign on. Thus chain letters often accumulated long lists of senders [1922]. Initials, names of couples [1975], dates received [1982], and company letterheads [1990] have similarly accumulated. Lists may reach fifty or more names and become a burden to copy (Lardner). Some chain letters avoided this by instructing, for example, "Copy the above names, omitting the first, add your name last" [1933]. If obeyed, this maintains an escalating list of fixed length which we call a managed list. Other chain letters forbade "signing on" - notably postcard chains [1911] and Internet luck chains [e1994]. The presence of a senders list on a chain letter may change the motives for sending it and the choice of recipients.
Successive mainline types are listed in the table below. Note that there is little temporal overlap except for the 1960's when both quota five and quota twenty letters circulated. Nor is there any significant regional variation within the U.S., nor even between North America, Australia and England. For the standard example of a type we use the oldest letter that does not have a major deletion. These standard letters are needed to define exactly what we mean be a variation within a type. The word counts in the table are for the standard examples, and exclude names in any list that may be present. The deadline and waiting periods are measured in days.
| No. | Type | Sample | Years | Standard | No. Words | Quota | Deadline | Wait |
| 1 | Ancient Prayer | 57 |
1905-25 | Atwood | 105 | 9 (a) | 9 (a) | 9 / 10 (b) |
| 2 | Good Luck | 16 | 1922-32 | Birmingham | 66 | 9 / 5 / 4 | 1 | 9 / 4 |
| 3 | Prosperity (c) | 7 |
1933-45 | Hyatt | 102 | 5 (d) |
1 | 9 / 4 |
| 4 | Luck by Mail | 12 | 1952-67 | Halpert | 132 | 5 (e) | 1 | 4 |
| 5 | Death20 | 7 | 1959-77 | Bloomsbury | 193 | 20 | 4 | 4 |
| 6 | Lottery-Death (LD) | 13 | 1974-75 | Maryland | 383 | 24 & 20 (f) | 4 | 9 & 4 |
| 7 | Death-Lottery (DL) | 182 |
1973-08 | AFC | 351 | 20 | 4 | 4 |
(a) Two postcards from England and one from Australia have quota, deadline
and wait all seven [1916,
1923, 1925]. Two late US examples
have quota 10 copies, deadline 10 days and wait 11 days [1924].
(b) Some examples read nine days, others ten.
(c) Includes two Prosperity type letters re-titled "The Luck of London,"
[1944, 1945].
(d) A 1937 postcard asks for ten copies [1937].
(e) "Send this copy and four others" - also on a Prosperity example.
[1939].
(f) Both numbers appear on the earliest examples.
Of our 293 examples of dated English language luck chain letters, 265 are from the mainline and 28 are outliers. Any paper luck chain letter received in the 1990's was very likely a mainline letter, and the product of over 4,000 generations of copying going back to an original letter perhaps composed in World War I. But this ancestry includes many deliberate innovations, and the addition of an entire Latin American letter onto a mainline letter around 1973. We now describe the mainline types and their inter-relationships. This also provides an opportunity to introduce some topics we will investigate in more detail later in this treatise.
1. Ancient Prayer.
An early example of the "Ancient Prayer" chain is a letter postmarked in
Leeds, Maine on January 6, 1905.
Oh, Lord Jesus Christ, we implore Thee, O Eternal God, to have mercy upon mankind. Keep us from all sin and take us to be with Thee eternally. AmenThis is the oldest Ancient Prayer letter in our collection. Here "He who will not say it will be afflicted . . ." seems to imply that recitation of the prayer is sufficient to avoid punishment for noncompliance. "Bishop Lawrence" was the Episcopalian Bishop of Massachusetts and a well known author, at least among Protestants. He actively denied that he had anything to do with the chain letter (1926). Later in 1905 a Catholic publication from France (Bayonne) denounced a similar chain letter. This claimed that a voice heard in Jerusalem during the holy Liturgy predicted terrible punishment for those who do not send out nine copies. Beginning around 1910 a persistent new version of Ancient Prayer appeared on U.S. postcards.This prayer was sent by Bishop Lawrence, recommending it to be rewritten and sent to nine other persons. He who will not say it will be afflicted with some great misfortune. One person who failed to pay attention to it met with a dreadful accident. He who will rewrite it to nine other persons commencing on the day it is received - and sending only one each day will on or after the ninth day experience great joy.
Please do not break the chain. [1905]
This prayer was sent to me. It is being sent all over the world.
It was said in Jesus time that all who would write it and pass it on
would be delivered from all calamities. Those who would not write it
on would meet with some misfortune. Those who write it before nine days,
stating the day received, to nine of their friends will on
the ninth day receive some great joy. So do not break the chain.
Received Oct. 6. Name unsigned. [1910]
Above we use italics for text that is essentially different from what is
in the prior example. The false attribution to Bishop Lawrence has been dropped,
and in its place two statements debut that will appear in various forms on
millions of subsequent chain letters. We discuss the advantages to replication
of "all over the world" later (> circumnavigation). The reward of
"great joy" for compliance is present on nearly all examples of Ancient
Prayer we have discovered (even in Russia?, see Viola, note 59). Around 1909 the
playful suggestion to copy it and "see what will happen" was introduced
[1909]. This became common
(but not universal) on Ancient Prayer [1911] and persists in the mainline
to the present day [2005]. Early versions
of ancient prayer suggest the influence of the letters from heaven. For example,
the 1909 letter claims that
its rewards and punishments were spoken of "in Jerusalem." This was subsequently
replaced in all examples by "in Jesus' time," possibly originating as a copying
error.
An interesting feature in the above 1910 text is the word "stating," seen to be a copying error for "starting" by comparison to other examples [1908, 1911]. A recipient has responded to this error by writing the date (Oct. 6). An abundant variation was soon established in which the date of receipt was recorded [1912, 1914, 1915]. The advantage to replication of this practice was probably that it reminded the recipient of the impending deadline, whereas postcards lacking the date of receipt could be more easily ignored until the recipient realized the deadline had passed with no ill effect. The role of copying errors in chain letter evolution can be overestimated, as compared to deliberate innovations. But for any copying error to produce a successful variation is remarkable, and we will investigate further possibilities of this (> Quota 24).
Some Ancient Prayer examples are self titled "The Endless Chain" [1911], or "The Endless Chain of Prayer" [Fogel, 1908,1923, 1925]. Chain letters as we know them were originally called "Endless chain letters" (NYT, 1906) to distinguish them from the then familiar self-terminating charity chains.
With U.S. entry into World War I in 1917, Ancient Prayer proliferated and
differentiated. Some were exclusive within various fraternal organizations;
some prayed for "peace" and others for "victory." An unmarried woman
in Ohio received at least three of the Victory postcards just in October
of 1917 [Hers 1, 2, 3]. The chain was so numerous
that the editors of the New York Times proposed that it originated
as a German plot to clog the mails (NYT,
1917d). A wartime postage rate increase, from one to two cents for postcards,
may have cooled the chain off and foiled the Huns. The same chain postcard
with substituted titles had also served the martial spirit of the Central
Powers. A German language version, postmarked in Austria a year before the
start of World War I, begins "We Germans fear God, and Nothing else on
Earth!" [1913]. After
the war was over Ancient Prayer declined in the U.S. and England. Some resented
that "during the First World War they and many people they knew had received
letters threatening death or horrors to their loved ones in the trenches
of France if the chain was broken." (Simpson 2000). Two closely related
late examples have copy quota ten and a new prayer [1924-02, 1924-03]. This suggests that
the war related prayers [1916,
1917] had completely captured
circulation, and thus the end of the war required invention of a new prayer.
Foreign collecting will likely reveal the worldwide circulation of Ancient
Prayer.
Prior to uploading the first version of Chain Letter Evolution in 1998
there was no classification of luck chain letters into types. The abundance
and duration of the Ancient Prayer type had been forgotten. The fact that
it was usually written on postcards contributed greatly to its preservation.
Almost all of our physical examples were purchased on Ebay from paper collectibles
dealers.
2. Good Luck.
According to early reports (1948,
1968) and some chain letters, the
Good Luck letter was started by an American officer serving in World War
I [later, on a "Flanders battlefield," 1927]. However our earliest examples
come from 1922, a boom year for the chain both in England and the U.S. These
usually had long lists of paired names at the top, sender to receiver [1922]. Here is an example published
by Ring Lardner (he omitted the names):
3. Prosperity. Folklorist Harry M. Hyatt reported (1935) that "during the latter part of 1933 a 'chain letter' fad appeared" and he gave a nearly complete text. This letter had a list of six sender's names and cities at the top of the letter and instructions to:
The good luck of Flanders was sent to me and I am sending it within twenty four hours. This chain was started by an American Officer in Flanders and is going around the world four times - and one who breaks it will have bad luck. Copy this letter and see what happens to you four days after mailing. It will bring you good luck. Send this copy and four others to people you wish good luck. Do not keep this letter. It must be in the mail twenty four hours after receiving it.The managed list instruction that appeared on the Hyatt letter has been dropped. This letter is very close to late examples of the Good Luck type [1928]. However the three testimonials are similar to those on Hyatt's 1933 Prosperity example. Testimonials of receiving money appear on French letters from 1928, but apparently these letters did not have lists of recipients [Deonna]. Probably the Prosperity letters developed after someone added the list management instructions to a Good Luck letter. These changes eventually led to the advent of money chain letters in 1935 (> Section 4.1), and for this reason we have split these letters off from the previous Good Luck type. A detailed discussion of this relationship appears below (> Origin of Money Chain Letters, Divergence of Luck and Money Chains).Mrs. Gay Field received $5000, five hours after mailing.
Mrs. Ambrose received $4000, four hours after mailing.
Mr. Nevin broke the chain and lost everything he had.
Here is definite proof for the good luck sent prayers.
Good luck to you and trust in God. He who suffers our needs.
This brings prosperity to you in four days after mailing.
Do not send money. Cross the top name off and put yours
at the bottom.[A list of 8 names and cities of residence follow, the first two crossed out.]
Note that the command "Do not send money" has been added near
the bottom. This appears on all subsequent mainline letters to this day.
We analyze the replicative advantage of this command in Section 4.2 (>
Divergence). Some text in
this 1939 letter (. . . was sent
to me, . . . see what happens) suggests it has been influenced in some
circuitous route by an Ancient Prayer letter.
3a. The Luck of London (sub-type)
We have located only thirteen luck chain letters that date from 1930 to
1951. Thus at present it is difficult to delineate a mainline in this period,
or to estimate relative circulation. But we can rely in part on observations
at the time. The previous Prosperity type was, according to Hyatt, a fad
in Illinois in 1933, and hence we can presume it was a fad elsewhere. "The
Luck of London" chain letter is said to have originated during the blitz
(1940), was "frequent" in the U.S in 1944 (Collier's), and continued to circulate
after the war (DeLys, 1948). The
following example was collected by Jean Reherman in Oklahoma.
One flag, One countryWith its changes in italics, we see that the Luck of London letter is basically a Prosperity type letter with a new title, "The Luck of London," replacing "The Good Luck of Flanders" [1939, and < as above]. Also the "American officer" is no longer located in "Flanders," further suggesting to a reader that the letter is a World War II creation. All the numerical specifications remain the same. No list of prior senders is present on our three examples, whereas these were present in the mainline before and after. There is a shift from seeking "prosperity" back to promising "luck," understandable considering the full employment and high war casualties of the time. Despite these shifts in motivation, the actual changes in the text are so small that we have classified The Luck of London chain letter a variation of the prevailing "Prosperity" luck chain letter of the Depression Era.
The luck of LondonThe luck of London was sent to me, I am sending it on to you. This was started
by an American officer, -It has been around the world four times. Copy this and
see what happens four day's later! Send this and four copies to people you wish
luck.Grace Field won $45,000 after sending it. Dr. F. A. Anderson won $25,000 but lost it
because he broke the chain. It will bring luck to you four days after mailing it. Do
not send money. Do not keep this letter. It must be mailed 24 hours after receiving
it. Good Luck. The one who breaks the chain will have bad luck. [1944]
Someone must have deliberately replaced the previous title, "The Good Luck
of Flanders," with "The Luck of London" title as above. Some, or all,
of the other changes may have already been made on the letter at that time,
such as the updating from World War I to II. This is typical for successful
chain letter innovations: not too much is added, and changed text often mimics
the prior text. A traditional chain letter is exactly what has survived thousands
of receipts. Successful innovation requires respect for this received tradition
since the letter will bear adaptions that are not understood. Further, there
will be recipients who have a magical loyalty to the traditional letter,
perhaps because it seemed to work for them once. They will not remember the
exact wording of the letter they used, but they are unlikely to tolerate
a complete rewrite. Thus in the history of chain letters, certainly since
the 1920's, successful innovations are overall conservative: they may be
bold in updating themes, but are unlikely to introduce entirely new themes.
We examine successful innovations very closely in this treatise. This reveals
the mastery of those few anonymous folks who deliberately nudge chain letters
along now and then.
The Luck of London letter may have given rise to a chain letter self-titled
"Chain of Good Luck." These are discussed in the next section on outlier
types (> Outliers).
4. Luck by Mail.
In 1952 Folklorist Herbert Halpert received a chain letter which we have
designated a new type, "Luck by Mail," even though the numerical specifications
were unchanged. The text follows, with novelties in italics.
The Prayer. Trust in the Lord with all thy heart and lean not on thy own understandance in all thy ways acknowledge him and he will direct thy path.
Please copy this and see what happens in four days after receiving it. Send this copy and four to someone you wish good luck. It must leave in 24 hours. Don't send any money and don't keep this copy. Gen Patton received $1,600 after receiving it. Gen Allen received $1,600 and lost it because he broke the chain. You are to have good luck in 4 days. This is not a joke and you will receive by mail. [1952]
Note the famous General Patton appears here, and also, well known at the time, Major General Terry de la Mesa Allen. The implication that a highly esteemed General sent the letter out could certainly boost replication. The descendants of these testimonials still appear over fifty years later, the names and amounts having undergone countless variations due to copying errors. Such changes are often the first discrepancy noticed by observant readers, and thus may serve to discredit chain letters with the public.
The Luck by Mail type also introduces "this is not a joke" and the qualification that you will receive your luck "by mail." These are now mainline universals, and we judge the latter to have been the innovation most responsible for the predominance of this type in the 1950's. This hypothesis involves a possible relationship with money chain letters (> Luck Follows Money).
A less obvious innovation in Luck By Mail is the unconditional declaration that by receiving the chain letter "you are to have good luck." In contrast, the Luck of London letter promised luck "four days after mailing it." This illustrates two contradictory beliefs about chain letters: in the first the letter is a talisman which by mere possession brings good luck; in the second only the act of distributing copies brings good luck. We give more examples of this dichotomy later (> Copy First, Copy Later), and discuss how textual ambiguity may benefit replication.
Luck by Mail continued to circulate well into the 1960's, in many variations. This is surprising since a potent innovation appeared in 1959.
5. Death20.
A chain letter mailed from Bloomsbury, New Jersey in 1959 has large blocks
of text in common with the Halpert "Luck by Mail" letter given above, including
the corrupted Proverb, four day deadline and nine day wait. But near the
end a new testimonial has been added:
It is reasonable to suppose that chain letter copy quotas have increased because of the availability of photocopying. But in 1959 copiers were not readily available - this is the same year that Xerox introduced its first plain paper copier (the Xerographic 914).
Our next example of Death20 is from 1967 (Ace). Without the 1959 Bloomsbury letter one might have guessed at a much later origin for Death20. Possibly it circulated largely in the business and professional communities in its early years. The Bloomsbury letter comes from a hospital and appears to be typeset.
The Death20 chain still circulates, but an entire chain letter has been added to it.
6. Lottery-Death (LD).
Apparently in the early 1970's a quota twenty-four chain letter was translated
from Spanish into English and put into circulation in the U.S. or Canada.
Abundant copies of this letter exist combined with Death20, but no examples
of it as an independent letter have been collected. We name this type "Lottery24"
because of the original copy quota and its introduction of the "Boss Wins
Lottery" testimonial:
Constantine Diso received the chain in 1953. He asked his secretary to make 24 copies and send them. A few days later, he won the lottery of 2 million dollars in his country.State lotteries were spreading in the U.S. in the 1970's and this letter must have appealed to those holding lottery tickets. Since Lottery24 by itself is an outlier that has never been collected in North America, we do not include it as a mainline type. Probably it did circulate abundantly in South America in both Spanish and Portuguese versions, and it was there that it acquired its testimonials adapted to office culture and state sponsored lotteries.
Around 1973 Lottery24 (L) letters were combined with Death20 (D) on single pages in the two orders LD and DL. This event was documented with unedited multiple examples by Michael Preston (1976). Perhaps a motive for combining the chain letters was to reduce photocopying costs after the two had been received at about the same time. Our earliest example of the combination Lottery-Death (LD) is a letter mailed from Maryland in 1974.
Take note of the following:
Constantine Diso received the chain in 1953. He asked his secretary
to make 24 copies and send them. A few days later, he won the lottery of 2
million dollars in his country. Carlos Brandt, an office employee, received
the chain. He forgot it and lost it. A few days after, he lost his job.
He found the chain, sent it out to 24 people, and nine days later, he got
a better job. Zerin Berreskelli received the chain, not believing in it he
threw it away. Nine days later he died.
For no reason whatsoever should this chain be broken!!!!!! Make
20 copies and send them. In nine days you will get a surprise. Write
F.E.G.E. in the right hand corner of the envelope instead of a stamp.
THINK A PRAYER
Trust in the lord with all your heart and all will acknowledge that he will
light the way. This prayer has been sent to you for good luck. The original
copy came from the Netherlands. It has been around the world nine times.
The luck has been sent to you. You are to receive the good luck within four
days after receiving this letter. It is not a joke! You will receive it in
the mail. Send 20 copies of this letter to people you think need good luck.
Please do not send money. Do not keep this letter. It must leave within 96
hours after you receive it.
A U.S. officer received $7,000. Don Elliot received $68,000, but lost it because he broke the chain. While in the Philippines, General Walsh lost his life six days after he received this letter. He failed to circulate the prayer. However, before his death, he received $775,000, which he won.
Please send 20 copies and then see what happens the fourth day after. Add your name to the bottom of this list and leave off the top name when copying this letter.
[A four column list of 33 names follows, six struck out, several in different hands] [1974]
The above device, "Write F.E.G.E. in the
right hand corner of the envelope instead of a stamp," appears on many
LD chain letters. Various initials were recommended (some without the instruction
to omit the stamp), and examples also come from France (Bonnet and Delestre) and
the USSR. The instruction to omit a stamp seems severely counter-replicative.
However the original initials may have been "F.M.B.H" standing for "Free Matter
for the Blind and Handicapped." Current postal regulations allow free postage
for legitimate purposes if the quoted sentence is written where normally
a stamp would appear. Someone in the early 1970's probably misused the privilege
in order to mail chain letters for free, protected from official reprisal
by anonymity. Most recipients would be baffled by this suggestion, but many
would repeat it to save postage. Since the initials were meaningless to most
copiers, they would soon be corrupted. In disbelief, some copier dropped
the instruction to omit a stamp and advised the initials be written on the
upper left hand corner of the envelope. These versions may have benefited
by being opened more often than a letter with nothing at all where one expects
a return address. The mysterious initials may have themselves spurred interest
in the chain. Current U.S. postal regulations require that an envelope claiming
free matter be unsealed to allow examination of the contents. Dr. Jean-Bruno
Renard has collected an interesting chain letter in France that revives the
use of initials as a substitute for a stamp [1999]. Posting without
a stamp is also a feature of many of the current (2006) World Record chain
letters that circulate among children. Post Office automation, rather than
deliberate indulgence, may explain why many of these stampless envelopes
are delivered to addressees.
The LD type was prolific in 1974 - 1975, and also circulated in the U.K (Times, 1974). Some Hungarian chain letters [1983], though much reduced, reveal descent from an LD source. By 1980 the Lottery-Death letters had been completely replaced in North America by our final mainline type, the "Death-Lottery" letters.
7. Death-Lottery (DL).
The DL combination first appears in our sample with a Canadian example [1973] published by John Robert
Colombo (1975). However, since
its ancestry had major deletions, we have chosen a letter supplied by the
American Folklife Center, Library of Congress, as our standard for the type
[1974]. At first the Death20 block
retained its customary senders list, now as an internal list, the Lottery
block following. This awkward requirement was deleted in the mid 1970's and
such versions were more propagative. Though we do not use formatting to infer
relatedness, the most common paragraphing of a DL letter violates the unity
of the Lottery24 block, placing the last sentence of the Death20 block (
"Please send 20 copies of the letter and see what happens in four days")
as the first sentence in a new paragraph starting the Lottery block (right
before "The chain comes from Venezuela and was written by . . .")
[1983]. This may aide
propagation by disguising the compound nature of the letter and its resulting
redundancy and contradictory claims of origin.
The DL type was temporarily eclipsed by LD letters during 1974-75, but a hyper-competitive descent group of DL letters completely replaced them before the end of the decade (the It Works postscript described in > Section 4.6). Thus all mainline luck chain letters since 1980, certainly over a billion, have been the DL type. Within this type are variations that compete with each other for the attention and resources required for replication. The advantages of some of these variations are easy to explain (> Section 4.7).
The Death-Lottery type luck chain letter has proven to be the most successful paper chain letter in history, not only in the sheer numbers produced but also in its migration to other countries. Surely it originated in North America (around 1973), since this region nurtured the independent circulation of the Death20 component, and the many early variations, including the unsyncretized 24 copy quota in the Lottery24 component (in LD letters only, as < above). From North America it has spread to many countries. Examples so far collected are listed below - each of the foreign language texts is supplied with an English translation.
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
2.3 OUTLIERS
St. Joseph.
Sabbath. Anthony13. Novena. Chain
of Good Luck.
The Brill Letter. Mexican Letters. Romance Game. Others.
We have over twenty five examples of English language luck chain letters
that lie outside the mainline. These group into several types.
No example of a Sabbath chain letter has been collected, but a commercial
"traveling postcard" advocating temperance is present in the "various" category
in the archive [1908].
Anthony13.
A brief article in the Pittsburgh Press (1938) mentions a "message
to St. Anthony," that was "making the rounds." Though little text is given,
it asked for 13 copies and circulated on postcards. It was very likely an
ancestor of the following chain letter mailed anonymously on a postal card
from Cumberland, Maryland in 1941:
In 1941 the Post Office would have considered the Anthony13 postcard chain to be unmailable, as it violated U.S. Code Title 18, section 1718, which prohibited language of a "threatening character" on postcards or the outside of an envelope. However, this law was ruled unconstitutional in 1973 because it was "overly broad and violative of First Amendment guarantees of freedom of expression" (Tollett v United States, 485 F2d 1087, from USCS). Luck chain letters inside envelopes have always been mailable. Thus, despite many statements to the contrary, mailing luck chain letters, threats and all, is not against the law. Presumably this applies to E-mail also. The ethics of communicating threats is a different issue. Money chain letters violate various Federal and State laws {USPS}.
Novena.
A rare prayer chain letter from the closing months of World War II asks
that one say a Hail Mary or Our Father once a day for nine days, this as
a prayer for peace [1945-02].
Four copies are requested within four days, but the letter claims it is "not
a chain letter." The sender gives her name and address, and also, as
requested in the text, the name of the person from whom she received the
"Novena." "Notice what happens to you on the fourth day."
From Canada and the new millennium we have another short chain letter that
calls itself a "Novena" [2000] and mentions Mother
Theresa. It asks that you say four Our Fathers and four Hail Marys on the
day of receipt. It also asks for four copies ("hand written") and denies
it is a chain letter. "Watch what happens." This could be a distant
relative of the 1945 letter. ISP hit reports (search strings) suggest
that this letter continues to circulate in low volume (2009).
Chain of Good Luck.
We have collected two corrupted examples [1949-Burma, 1949-Japan] of the self titled
"Chain of Good Luck." These bear testimonials about a private in the Philippine
army and U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt. The first copy states a copy
quota of 12, high for the time. The second copy, found in Japan, is close
to the Burma letter but even more corrupted. It has even lost its copy quota,
which is surely a fatal mutation. Both of these letters have managed lists
at the bottom, though the number of names have been inflated to 12 and 20.
That both examples are foreign letters (in English) probably represents more
collecting bias than a feature of the letter's distribution. The Chain of
Good Luck is probably the same type of letter that is mentioned in the Berkeley
Daily Gazette, as cited in Western Folklore (1950).
The Chain of Good Luck may have developed from a version of the previously
discussed "Luck of London" letters (< Mainline letters). This is suggested by
an article in the Denver Rocky Mountain
News (1947) in which
a postmaster complains of "Luck of London" letters attributed to "an English soldier in the African campaign."
Our two examples of the Chain of Good Luck, and the Berkeley Gazette letters, are all attributed
to a French officer in Africa.
The Brill Letter.
Starting around 1979 a comical rewrite of a DL letter circulated that featured
a long list of celebrity names [Brill]. Said to have originated
in the Brill Building, it asked for thirty copies and used entertainment
industry parlance. All four of our examples date from 1979-80. Perhaps it
died out because the celebrity names escalated off the list.
Mexican Letters.
English translations of Mexican letters circulate in the U.S. in low volume.
A 1984 example [text] from
Oxnard, California has a brief Tagalog addition at the end, and a comment
on this in English. The letter has a quota of twenty-four copies, a deadline
of nine days, and a thirteen day waiting period. I have been informed that
older Mexican letters had a copy quota of thirteen. A recent related letter
has two blocks of Tagalog and much transformation of the testimonials [2004].
An English only example [1995], from North Carolina, represents a separate tradition. It states: "This chain would be sent with five cents which will be donated to the church." There was a nickel taped head up on the letter. This request was also present in an untranslated Mexican letter mailed from Pasadena [1980]. A dime was taped on this letter. This sending forward of money seems to be unique with Mexican luck chain letters and is a striking contrast to U.S. mainline letters of the same period which instruct "do not send money." This command on U.S. mainline letters appeared in the 1930's and functioned to differentiate luck chain letters from the exploding population of money chain letters at that time (> Section 4.2). Thus this forwarding of a small coin may date from the 1930's also, and may be a different solution to the same discard problem that English language luck chain letters faced. It may also have served to differentiate Mexican letters from translated U.S. luck chains. Hopefully older Mexican letters will be discovered that can explain the origin of this feature.
Romance Game.
We have four English language examples of a classroom note typically passed
between young teenage girls. The following was intercepted from a 13 year
old girl by a teacher in California in 1995.
Others.
We have two examples of a chain letter requesting that prayers be said for
missionary efforts [1905, 1906]. The first does not state
a termination number, the second (which has doubled the quota from five to
ten) is stated to self terminate at 1000. A luck chain letter titled "The
Fortune Chain," featuring early testimonials, is a translation of a French
language letter [1931].
We have collected only one circulating paper luck chain letter that is composed
completely independent of any textual tradition [Xmas, 1975]. Though it is
little more than an obsession with geometric progression, the photocopy appears
to have gone through several generations. From the Southern U.S. comes a
"prayer exchange" letter that asks the recipient to "say a little prayer
for each of the five persons listed below" [1985]. Beginning in 1989, a quota
five luck chain letter characteristic of those circulating twenty-five years
before experienced a dramatic revival. We describe this "Media Chain Letter"
in > Section 4.5. Like marine
mammals, an email luck chain [1998]
has returned to the paper medium from which it originally crawled in the early
1990's.
< Start of above section < Start of Chain Letter Evolution - Contents
Propagation.
Modeling chain letter circulation and its changes requires terminology be
defined with care. We will refer to a chain letter variation, say V, and
a given time t. Here V may be a single chain letter or a group of related
letters. First we specialize the use of the term "propagation" so it measures
the "fitness," or replicative success, of a chain letter.
The propagation of variation V at time t is the total number of receipts of V in the month following t.
During exponential growth the increase in a population is proportional to the number of individuals in that population. If y = y(t) designates the population at time t, this condition is dy/dt = ky, k a constant called the growth constant. Solving this differential equation gives
(1) y(t) = y0 ektwhere the constant y0 = y(0) is the population at time t = 0 (the "initial value" of y).
The word "growth" here can be misleading. The population y is decreasing if k < 0, stable if k = 0, and increasing if k > 0. For a chain letter variation V, we interpret the population y as the number of "active" letters present, that is, ones that have been received and still have a reasonable chance of being copied. This might be the letters received within the last month. Approximate exponential growth will occur when a replicator first enters and disperses through a large homogeneous population of enablers, "homogeneous" in the sense that the population's susceptibility to producing copies is initially constant throughout.
For some interval of time P, the "P rate of growth" compares receipts in successive intervals of P days. For a chain letter variation V let y(t) be the number of active letters at time t. Then the P-rate of growth of V at time t, p(t), is
(2) p(t) = [y(t+P) - y(t)] / [y(t) - y(t-P)].
So with P = 30 days, the "monthly rate of growth" at time t is the propagation at t divided by the propagation a month previously. In contrast to the growth constant, rates of growth greater than 1 produce a population increase. If V is undergoing exponential growth then by equation (1), y(t) = y0ekt where k is the growth constant. Using this for y(t) in definition (2) gives p = ekP. Note this is independent of the initial population y0 and the time t, but it does depend on the time interval P. Solving p = ekP for k gives k = ln p / P. So if a population is doubling (p = 2) per month (P = 30 days), then the instantaneous growth rate is k = ln p / P = ln 2 / 30 = .023 (time measured in days). Using k = ln p / P in (1) gives the population y at t days as
(3) y(t) = y0 pt/P
where, as before, y0 is the starting population of active letters. So if a variation is launched with 20 copies, and (presuming exponential growth) its monthly rate of growth is m, after t days there will be an active population of y = 20mt/30 of these letters. We do not have a sufficient sample to accurately estimate the growth constant of a variation, or even to verify if its growth is exponential. Exponential growth is used instead as a conceptual tool to understand rapid increases and decreases in propagation. Such changes are very evident in the collection.
With money chain letters, one hopes that some solicitation or possibility of receiving money increases exponentially. Of course not all these opportunities result in a payment, but perhaps a constant ratio of them will. We call such a process of multiplying opportunity exponential feedback. It is (taken in historical order) the goal of pyramid sales, money chain letters, pyramid schemes and multilevel marketing. The reality of all these schemes escapes our simple numerical formulation. But the importance of exponential feedback processes is more as an idea, a vain hope, rather than a reality.
Circulation and
generation time.
The propagation (receipts in the next month) of a chain letter depends not
only on the number of copies circulating, but also on how fast they are being
replicated. Circulation can be given a precise definition.
The circulation at time t of a chain letter variation V is the number of V received after time t whose parents were received prior to t.The parent of a chain letter is a letter from which it was copied - it is extremely rare that a letter may have more than one parent, or none. The circulation at a given time is simply the number of letters in transition from one person to another, which includes those letters being held but which will eventually be distributed, and those in the mail or otherwise awaiting receipt.
Certain phenomena, notably astronomical appearances, regularly repeat after an exact amount of time has elapsed, called the period or generation time. Some ancient social replicators also repeat regularly; such as sabbath observances and seasonal ceremonies. We identify yearly ceremonies with their calendar date, but historically the solar calendar itself can be seen as a technology to better perpetuate existing seasonal replicators.
A chain letter may be copied over and over, and if the time between these events were always the same (the generation time), we would have a periodic replicator. Such regularity does not occur for chain letters, but for estimation purposes we may assume it does, and use the following average for its generation time.
The average generation time of a chain letter variation V is the arithmetic average of elapsed times from receipt to receipt of V.Surprisingly, the average generation time can be estimated fairly closely for some letters. The mainline luck chain letters since 1970 have specified that the letter "must leave your hands in 96 hours." Adding three days in the mail suggests the generation time may be about one week. Confirmation of this comes from letters which bear lists of dates. Apparently these developed after a single date was placed at the end of a copy and a recipient behaved the same without removing the prior date. The list of dates suggested to downline recipients to add the date also, probably most not realizing there was no such instruction in the letter. In one example there are 72 dates from Aug. 7, 1979 to Dec. 23, 1980 [Bloomington]. This gives an average interval from receipt to receipt of 7.0 days. A second example has 34 dates with an average interval of 7.8 days [Wenatchee]. Probably some senders did not add a date, so the average generation time for these two letters was likely somewhat less than one week.
As calculated above, mainline luck chain letters during these years had a average generation time of one week. Then the estimate of 2 billion received for 20 years (1043 weeks) implies an average circulation (receipts per week) of around 1.9 million. Many chain letters are distributed by hand. Considering this and taking three days from posting to receipt of a letter, on a typical day during 1980 - 1999 there were over a half million English language luck chain letters in the mail.
The Great advantage of a
small advantage.
We illustrate the ideas above in the following scenario of a new variation
being introduced. Suppose the active population of a mainline chain letter
type is stable: for every 100 received these generate about 100 receipts
in turn. To simplify, assume all these letters are periodic with generation
time exactly one week. Under this assumption, the active letters are those
that have been received in the last week. Suppose John Doe gets a degenerate
photocopy of one of these letters and retypes it before making copies. He
happens to add the postscript "Do not send money!," thus creating
a variation V, makes 20 copies and distributes them. When Jane gets a copy
of a chain letter in the mail she habitually glances at it and throws it
away without reading the body of text, figuring it wants her to send money.
When she gets a copy of V she glances at the title and at the bottom of the
letter where one might look to see who the sender was. There is no sender
listed, but the words "Do not send money!" appear prominently. This
communicates at once that this letter does not ask for money. Jane reads
the full text and, since she is waiting to hear if she was selected for a
part in play, she is persuading not to take a chance on bad luck and complies
with the demand for 20 copies.
Some others may react as Jane did: say the new postscript induces just one additional person per hundred to fully and effectively comply to the demand for 20 copies. So now for every 100 V letters received about 120 receipts are generated in turn. This is a weekly rate of growth of p = 120/100 = 1.2, and as long as this is maintained the circulation of this variation will undergo exponential growth. Using equation (3) for this example: y0=20, P=7, p=1.2, and the active population y after t days is y = 20*(1.2)t/7. With this growth rate, the population will double every month since y(t+30) / y(t) = (1.2)30/7 = 2.18 > 2. Starting with 20 copies, two years of such doubling would produce a quarter billion receipts per week - more than the number of adults in the United States.
The scenario employed in this example is realistic: in fact the postscript "Do not send money!" did appear on a mainline luck chain letter around 1939 and rapidly expanded its numbers (> Section 4.6).
Computer simulations by John Burkhardt provide additional evidence for the "great advantage of a small advantage." For twenty letters initially launched, and (in effect) a weekly rate of growth of p = 1., of 150 simulated launchings not one produced a lineage of over 1000 letters. But when the weekly rate of growth was increased slightly to 1.02 then 85 of the 150 simulating launchings still continued after 1000 generations {Meditations on the Chain Letter - link no longer available}.
Immunization.
In the example above, the model of exponential growth produced a doubling
of circulation every month. Obviously such growth cannot be sustained for
years. The number of possible recipients is limited, and there is an immunization
effect whereby receiving more than one chain letter of the same category makes
one less likely to comply with copy demands. If one variation of a luck chain
is abundant, another variation may be deprived of the attention and resources
required for making and distributing copies. Eventually the abundant variation
will foul its own nest by the same process. Thus for population booms, the
exponential growth model applies only at the onset. More sophisticated mathematical
models of growth are available but we will not pursue that approach.
Consider a stable population of quota 20 mainline luck chain letters with a generation time of one week. If a variation arises that gets just one extra person in a hundred to fully comply, the circulation of this variation will double every month and within three years it will be the only mainline luck chain letter still circulating.Such captures of circulation by new variations or types are a common and striking feature of chain letter history. Analysis of why a new variation predominates may be difficult, especially if several innovations are present. Because of the One-in-a-Hundred Rule, this replicative advantage could derive at least in part from infrequent or secretive factors in the recipient population, such as paranoia, uxoricidal fantasies, minority ethnic identification or participation in money chain letters.
3.2 Distribution
Networks.
Chain Letter Distribution.
Core Networks. Efficient Flow.
We will consider in Section 3.8 how certain chain letter content influences the selection of recipients (> Effective Distribution). Here we speculate about the flow of chain letters through a population, how flow patterns may persist and change, and how this may affect the circulation of variations.
Chain Letter Distribution.
The following individual behavior holds with regard to certain social replicators,
and affects their overall pattern of distribution. This applies to photocopied
office humor, jokes, rumors and luck chain letters.
(1) Single source: New items are first distributed by only one source: all subsequent receipts of this item derive from this initial source.These facts are clearly true when the replicator is photocopied office humor. These are far too complex to be invented independently; and likely just one person is the source of a new item (an exception may be the humorous "Useful phrases to know when traveling in Moslem areas" [1995], which was rumored to have been launched by the CIA while American hostages were being held in Lebanon). Almost all the photocopied office humor I received came from just one secretary, who reported that she got most of it from one other secretary. I showed these to the same friends each time; some often made copies and others never did. No one person ever gave me the exact same item twice. Likewise replicative oral jokes are extremely difficult to invent, except for substituting ethnic or national identities in an existing joke {e.g. search for "it's a local call from here"}. And each is likely the creation of a single imagination. In the office, the same few people told me jokes, and did so over the years. One male in particular, who claimed he had been in every bar in the county, was the source of most of the jokes I heard. I either forgot his jokes or told them to certain friends and not others. No one told me the same joke twice unless they had forgotten the first telling. Upon reminding them of this they immediately stopped.
(2) Habitual transmission: If two people are exposed to the same replicator and the first person distributes it and the second does not, then the first person is more likely than the second to distribute a subsequent similarly motivated replicator.
(3) Habitual targeting: And this subsequent distribution is likely to include many of the same people to whom the prior distribution was made.
(4) Repetition taboo: But people are disinclined to distribute the exact same replicator to anyone whom they know has already received it.
For luck chain letters, "single source" is generally true for significant changes except, possibly, deletions. Evidence for "habitual transmission" can be found in some interviews (NYT, 1968). This may begin when an individual correlates some good or bad luck with receipt of "the letter." "Habitual targeting" can be a matter of convenience, and also compliance with targeting instructions in the letter, which may suggest copies be sent to "people who need good luck." In a hoard of nine linen exchange letters received by one person, the lists of senders contain 22 names and addresses but there are only 12 different ones [xe1940]. Finally, "repetition taboo" is in part a restatement of the immunization phenomenon, which explains the cessation of chain letter crazes. Immunization is understandably a refusal to expend one's own time and money on repeated demands for copies. But when transmission is not anonymous a respect for one's recipients will be a factor. This may still operate for anonymous distribution, though not as strongly. From about 1922 to 1977 the great majority of luck chain letters contained lists of the most recent senders. After 1978 there is not a single mainline chain letter in the archive that bears such a list, and almost all the envelopes these chain letters were mailed in did not have a return address. So there was a dramatic shift to anonymous distribution. However most transmissions were still probably from friend to friend, with the prior "known friend to friend" networks still active.
Imagine the complete flow of a social replicator V through a population. We can represent this by a network of transmissions whose points (nodes) and directed connections (arrows) between pairs of nodes are specified as follows.
(1) Each person who sent or received V specifies one and only one node.The network of transmissions ignores variations of V, considering them all the same replicator. For a popular item, such a diagram might comprise millions of nodes and many more connections. "Habitual transmission" and "habitual targeting," particularly targeting of "friends and associates," suggest that such transmission networks have an independent existence rooted in social and work contacts, and the distribution of prior replicators. A subsequent variation will be passed along to many of the same people. We conjecture that these networks have differentiated parts or "structures" that also persist and that affect the propagation of resident social replicators. An interesting possibility is that the same "single source" of V produces another successful replicator, say V'. If the network of transmission is fairly constant, as suspected, then even far out in the network from the source, replicators V and V' should usually be received in that order. Recording such sequences could be used to infer encore creations and the constancy of the network of transmission.
(2) If person A transmitted V to person B then node A is connected to node B.
(3) With each such connection there is associated the time of receipt of V.
Core Networks.
The core of a chain letter network of transmission can be roughly
defined as the largest subnetwork of mutually connected habitual senders.
Several formal definitions of the core of a network are given in Doreian and
Woodward (Social Networks,
1994), but we have so little data compared to the number of participants
that computational methods can not be applied. We suspect this core, as defined,
is more numerous and richly connected than would result from random linkages
because:
(1) Various forms of social stratification (gender, age, race, religion, class) suggest the existence of different chain letter transmission networks, particularly when senders are identified. Some evidence of this can be found on chain letters and in newspaper accounts [gender: 1922, 1933], [race: 1935, 1936] [religion: 2001]. Given that different chain letter transmission networks co-exist, the success of a chain letter variation depends not only on its text, but also on the state of the network that delivers it. These transmission networks are not static entities, but change with changing conditions such as participant age and interaction with other distribution networks. Thus competition between chain letter variations is, in part, competition between the established transmission networks that deliver them. Such competition makes a case for the existence of core networks, since the dense linkage of hundreds of people who habitually and rapidly comply would accelerate exponential growth and sustain circulation by recycling. Transmission networks with a smaller or less cohesive core would more likely disappear or be captured by a rival transmission network.
(2) For over a half century, most luck chain letters had a senders list. And money chain letters require a managed list to function. Very early in the 1935 Send-a-Dime craze, women called friends to make sure they would re-transmit the chain letter and take the same precaution in choosing their recipients (DRMN-1). Such successful oral recruitment techniques would replicate along with the paper text. About the same time, this quest for prior consent appeared as a postscript in a Send-a-Dime letter [1935-04]. Such selection of recipients will link enthusiastic participants. And though the Send-a-Dime bubble soon burst, the transmission network that developed for money chain letters in 1935 probably survived for decades and influenced luck chain letter distribution as well (> Luck Follows Money).Rapid changes in the circulation of a chain letter, up or down, may relate to events in networks that are not modeled simply by exponential growth and immunization within in a large population. Two networks will share some participants. A sudden increase could follow the incorporation of a rival core network by a new letter. Rapid decline of a letter may follow if the core of its transmission network loses connectivity, as by participant aging or immunizations by a rival letter.
Efficient Flow.
The "repetition taboo" implies that there will be an avoidance of duplicated
arrows (A to B and A to B) in a chain letter transmission network. And short
cycles (such as the dyad A to B and B to A) will be less frequent. This especially
applies to letters with a senders list. If the list contains the last n senders,
all cycles of length n + 1 or less can be avoided if one simply avoids distributing
to anyone on the received list. Possibly, competition between networks will
also develop this "efficient flow" since receipt of multiple copies by one
person within a few weeks is wasteful. Those networks with long cycles should
be favored. This could also involve a general westward movement of letters,
or a tendency to move between three major cities in the same cyclic order.
A very large sample would be needed to check for such patterns, nor should
we expect that the repetition taboo and immunization alone could bring them
about. But my guess is that more persistent structure exists in the transmission
networks of folklore than is presently observable. Perhaps some systematized
method of sampling will eventually enable the observation of flow patterns.
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
3.3 EVOLUTION
Descent. Variation.
Differential Replication.
Chain Letter Evolution.
Linked features. Cladistics. Behavior that Affects Propagation.
Descent.
Until the 1970's most paper luck chain letters were copied by hand or typed.
When photocopiers became more common there was some debate if one could use
them for chain letters and still receive good luck (NYT, 1968). One chain letter innovator
declared "may Xerox" in a footnote [1975]. Predictably, the mainline
photocopiers won this debate [but not for one outlier], and almost every
letter that has circulated since 1980 is a photocopy, including originally
hand written ones. But late generation photocopies must eventually be retyped
because of image degeneration. In recent years this retyping is often done
with a word processor.
When we use the word copy we allow that there may be errors, deletions, innovations, and even translation. But we require that at least half the text of the parent letter is carried forward on the copy with matching details. Such a first generation copy may itself be copied, producing a second generation copy, and so on. We say letter M is a descendant of letter L if M is some nth generation copy of L, and then L is an ancestor of M. All descendants of chain letter L, plus L itself, constitute a descent group (or clade), with L the founder. If every letter in a clade, except possibly the founder, has exactly one parent we say it is uniparental. The ancestry of a letter M within a uniparental clade is the sequence beginning with M, then the parent of M, the parent of the parent of M, etc. until the founder of the clade is reached. Any two distinct chain letters in a uniparental clade have a unique "most recent common ancestor." This is the first member of the ancestry of one which is in the ancestry of the other. Because of the convention that a letter begins its own ancestry, two letters in the same ancestry also have a most recent common ancestor, which is the oldest of the two. On extremely rare occasions a chain letter may not have a parent [1975], or may have two (< e.g. the DL founder).
Two chain letters are regarded as identical if they have the exact same text, character for character. Differences in format, spacing or text style are not considered. Thus an identical copy of a chain letter reads out loud the same as its parent. Usually when chain letter L is photocopied, and possibly when copied by hand, an identical copy is formed, called a clone of L. A letter is not considered to be a clone of itself. For any letter L not a clone, the clone group with founder L is constituted by (1) the letter L, (2) all letters identical to L with the same parent(s) as L (identical twins of L), and (3) clones of any member of the group. Clone groups are the natural unit to consider when describing the descent of variations.
All hyper-competitive innovations launched since 1975 debut with a burst of a thousand clones! And this is assuming the innovator distributes no more than the quota, just 20 copies. We will suppose, as in a prior example (< Great advantage), that the innovation experiences initial exponential growth with a weekly rate of growth r = 1.2 (120 letters out for 100 received). We also assume: (1) all copies are photocopies, and all these are clones, (2) all continuing letters are retyped after the thirteenth generation and not before, and (3) no retyped letter is a clone. After 13 generations the total production P of letters will have been:
P = 20 + 20r1 + 20r2 + . . . + 20r13 = 20[r14- 1] / [r-1]where r is the weekly rate of growth. We have used a familiar formula to sum the powers of r. For the hyper-competitive r = 1.2 this gives P = 1,184 total letters distributed. By our assumptions, these constitute a clone group with founder the initial innovation. Of course some early photocopies may have misalignment deletions, or someone may retype long before the thirteen generation. These events will lower the number of clones. But most photocopies are perfectly legible after 15 or more generations, and a retype may be a clone (this then producing hundreds of more clones). So our rough approximation seems reasonable. If we lower the weekly rate of growth to r = 1.1 we still estimate 560 clones. With r = 1.2, the number of letters circulating after 13 generations is about 20(1.2)13 = 214. Of these about (214) x (1/20) = 11 letters will be retyped, these likely all different, at least in small details, from the founder.
The Paper Chain Letter Archive provides overwhelming evidence that chain letters inherit text from their ancestors. From a "Luck of London" letter we read "It has been around the world four times" [1944]. Over 50 years later we read on an Australian letter "It has been around the world nine times" [1997]. From a letter mailed in 1959 from Bloomsbury, New Jersey we read about money won but life lost in the Philippines [1959], just as we do on the 1997 Australian letter.
Inherited details reveal that the letters in the "types" we have designated are descended from a single founding letter for each type. If we start with the Good Luck letters [1922], these and all subsequent mainline letters form a single descent group that extends to the present, and whose founder may have been written in Europe around the time of World War I. This descent group numbers in the billions of letters and some of its ancestries contain thousands of generations (over four thousand, if there is an average of one generation per week).
All luck chain letters since 1900 are probably influenced by the first letter with both a copy quota and a deadline. Present day familiarity with these devices masks their ingenuity: copy quota probably began with a single letter and the concept spread only with the distribution and translation of this letter. The same is likely true for deadlines, dropping claims of divine authorship, statements that the letter is to go around the world and non miraculous testimonials. Such innovations distinguished luck chain letters from the Letters from Heaven with which early luck chain letters were once identified, though perhaps mistakenly (1908). The Letters from Heaven in turn probably have a conceptual founder, perhaps a Greek letter in the first century, and this in turn a pagan predecessor. If we presume there existed spoken rituals that demanded their own repetition [cf.. "He who will not say it . . ." in 1905], these may all have begun with a communication that claimed divine origin and contained an instruction for periodic repetition. As if echoing this primal origin, many of the Letters from Heaven [1863] and a very early "luck" chain letter [1902] emphasized rigid Sabbath observance.
Variation.
Hand written letters are often difficult to read and thus many variations
are introduced as the copier tries to guess what is written. With photocopying,
after some 15 or so generations the text becomes wiggly, spotted and unreadable
in places. Titles and other text at the margins may be lost because of misplacement
of a sheet in a photocopier or image expansion [1991]. Thus photocopied chains,
to survive, must be retyped periodically, which introduces errors and wrong
guesses at illegible or missing words [e.g. "faxed" for "faded"
in 1997]. Lines of text
are often omitted when copiers lose their place in the source letter [compare
Newark1 to the close Newark2 - the later has omitted
"of receiving this letter" and "He failed to circulate the letter"].
Or the copier may notice the omission, and enter the missing line in a new
position in the letter. For example in 1979 "Do not keep this
letter" has been transposed with "It must leave your hands . .
.". In 1985 a misplaced
period has shifted an important ethnic cue (the Philippines) from one testimonial
to another. A few changes are the result of copying what was not intended
to be copied, such as a date, personal postscript or signed name.
In addition to such copying errors, there are many intentional changes. The testimonial of The Unbeliever's Death is often deleted, presumably for ethical reasons [1981]. Attempts to improve the writing style are seen [1995], and reformatting is common [1991]. Often a brief salutation [1989] or postscript [1997] is added, usually never to appear on another letter in our sample. Sometimes a whole new title [1997], sentence [1991], or testimonial appears [1975]. With the use of photocopiers, and possibly before, a recipient of two chain letters may combine them on one page (Preston 1976). This process produced the "Death-Lottery" (DL) type letters that were extremely abundant from 1975-1998.
Probably there are thousands of major innovations every year, but most do not replicate sufficiently to find their way into our sample. There are so many variations, accidental and deliberate, that most retyped letters differ from their parent. We have never collected two identical luck chain letters. Paradoxically, ancestors can still be identified after hundreds of generations, and across translations and subsequent cultural modification [compare the ancestral 1974 to Hungary 1986, or to the second part of 1999].
There is convincing evidence in the archive that on rare occasions, in copying parent letter X to copy Y, text from a third letter (the "donor") is also placed on copy Y. This process, and the text involved, is called a transfer. Here are some examples.
Differential Replication.
Very clear evidence that chain letter content affects replication is present
in Table 6 and Table 7. These show
that letters bearing certain variations have greatly increased in frequency
over a few years, and letters without those features have totally disappeared
from our dated collection. The succession of luck chain letter types (<
Table 2) is also proof of the effect
of content on circulation. The range of years in Table 2 records the earliest
and latest year of circulation so far collected. Thus all the dozen Good Luck type letters were received during
the 1920's, and you are no more likely to receive one today than to be asked
to dance the Charleston at the senior prom.
For most variations we can be fairly sure that after some initial appearance, all subsequent appearances of this variation within some group of letters under discussion are descendants of the initial example. Or if the variation re-appears as a result of a transfer or re-invention, we may always be able to verify this by analyzing other variations present. We call such a variation a feature (or character). Features are variations that can be used, at least in part, to infer that two letters bearing the variation had a common ancestor that also bore it.
Some variations are not features, or at least their use in diagnosing ancestry poses difficulties. For example, deletion of the Unbeliever's Death testimonial occurs independently in separate lineages. Certain corruptions and varying forms of numbers may also appear and re-appear, such as $755,000, $755,000.00, $755000.00 or $75,500,000. The words "Philippines," "receive" and "ignore" are frequently misspelled in the same way. "St. Jude" may be added to a letter, and also removed.
Descent groups (clades) are often considered when their presence significantly increases or decreases in our dated sample. Members of a descent group are recognized by the presence of shared features. Some of these features may have a positive effect on propagation, others neutral, and some may have a negative result. Features that are neutral or negative in an increasing clade are called riders, since they proliferate without themselves motivating replication. Usually there is one key feature judged to be primarily responsible for the increase of the group. Sometimes it may be difficult to select a key feature from two or more positive features present.
Small copying errors will generally be neutral, but some may have had a positive effect on propagation and increased in frequency as a result. Here are three candidates for this curious phenomenon:
The descendants of a single letter have repeatedly replaced all other mainline letters in our sample. We call such a descent group (or its founding letter, or the key feature) hyper-competitive. For example, all mainline letters after 1983 are the descendants of a single letter that first appeared around 1979! This descent group numbers over two billion letters. The key feature responsible for this spectacular replication was probably a new postscript (> It Works). We say this "It Works" postscript (or the first letter bearing it, or its clade) captured the mainline. Such striking examples of differential replication are surprisingly common in chain letter history.
The term "funneling event" from population genetics may be applied to captures, since they reduce the inheritable variation present in a population. These events not only establish highly replicative innovations, but also reset details of text with the features that happen to be present on the founding letter, for better or for worse. Chain letter evolution is characterized by a succession of funneling events through single letters. If a variation, a "small improvement," is merely increasing in the population of letters, it is subject to total elimination by the next hyper-competitive variation. Nevertheless, small improvements do appear to accumulate on chain letters, for example with the mix of testimonials (> Office) or with instructions on to whom the letter should be sent (> Effective Distribution). This appearance requires explanation.
(1) Small improvements may be needed to increment the effectiveness of a letter bearing a key innovation to hyper-competitive power.Explanations (1) and (2) are apparently active in the frequency shifts documented in Table 6 for the sequence of innovations leading to the full It Works postscript. Explanation (4) may apply to the many seemingly concurrent changes that appeared with two new titles in the early 1980's (> Kiss and Love).
(2) Variations that are more frequent because of small improvements are more likely to receive a hyper-competitive innovation.
(3) A universal feature that appears to be a "small" improvement may have previously been hyper-competitive, perhaps during a period of low circulation. Low circulation events are difficult to document.
(4) The author of a key innovation may have also composed small improvements, or selected and transferred them from other letters.
Chain Letter Evolution.
We have described the descent and variation of chain letters, and their differential
replication depending on copied features present in the text. These processes
assure that chain letters "evolve" - that is, they accumulate inheritable
features that increase or sustain propagation. It is this evolution that
ultimately explains "how chain letters work," and why they worked even as
public attitudes and beliefs changed over generations. This success is even
more remarkable considering the universal condemnation of chain letters from
both secular and religious authorities, and the lack of any real service
they provide to their hosts apart from dealing with the false hopes and empty
threats that chain letters themselves created.
Richard Dawkins describes the mechanics of chain letter evolution in River Out of Eden, while also emphasizing that chain letters "are originally launched by humans, and the changes in their wording arise in the heads of humans" (1995, pp 146-150). Our collection reveals that there are a great many such changes but very few that significantly increase propagation. And very few of those that do are the result of an innovation designed to work in the way it does. Indeed, some successful changes are the result of accidents in copying. As in biological evolution, successful chain letter "mutations" are rare events that can exploit an opportunity for replication in a variety of unpredictable ways. So chain letters do "evolve," and apart from computer simulations, are probably the best documented and simplest example of evolution known. Yet, unlike computer simulations, chain letters are readable documents that exploit human hopes and fears. This provides chain letter evolution an unlimited palette of invention, and makes their history intelligible in human terms.
Are the similarities between chain letter evolution and genetic evolution worth our attention? In the previously mentioned (< S. 1.3) article "Chain Letters & Evolutionary Histories" (Bennett, Li, Ma), algorithms used for genetic sequences are applied to reconstruct the ancestry of 33 DL type luck chain letters. The authors state " . . . if algorithms used to infer phylogenetic trees from the genomes of existing organisms are to be trusted, they should produce good results when applied to chain letters. Indeed, their readability makes them especially suitable for classroom teaching of phylogeny (evolutionary history) free from the arcana of molecular biology."
The following biological phenomena suggested or prompted guesses about chain letter adaptions.
There are, however, significant differences between chain letter evolution and biological evolution, and how each can be examined. In addition to the presence of deliberate and calculated human innovations in chain letter texts, we note:
(1) Chain letters usually replicate by the production of exact copies (photocopies) of a single parent letter. A successful new variation likely begins with over a thousand such clones.Linked Features.(2) There is no natural way to define a "species" (type) of English language luck chain letter. Incremental variations are rapidly dispersed throughout the English speaking world. By contrast, most biospecies reproduce sexually within intra-breeding groups (species) that have geographic boundaries. Biological species are "real entities of nature."
(3) At least in part because of their asexual reproduction, chain letter history is characterized by the phenomenon of hyper-competition - the quick capture of an entire niche by descendants of a single letter. Presumably this does not occur with the genomes of biospecies, where funneling is through a taxon such as a genus or species.
(4) The text of a luck chain letter is analogous to the DNA of an organism, but is orders of magnitude shorter, comparable only to the length of a single gene, and like a gene has a beginning and end. Instead of being a sequence of nucleotides, a chain letter consists of readable sentences in a natural language.
(5) Not only can we read the entire "genome" of a chain letter, we can also make reasonable estimations of the effect on replication of any component.
(6) The raw data available for chain letters are far more complete than what are available for any biospecies. We have, in essence, the complete DNA for hundreds of examples, including accurately dated "fossil" forms.
A tempting mistake is to presume that two features first appeared together on one letter. Every letter in the archive which bears feature H may also bear feature G, and visa versa, but this does not imply they appear together on all letters ever produced (if so we say G and H were concurrent). It is quite possible that G could have appeared first and later H was added to a letter bearing G, but no example of G without H has been collected. For chain letters there is no way to deduce concurrence of two features solely from texts, unless one had every letter ever produced. If features G and H are both present in a group of letters under discussion, the following table lists the five possible ways they may appear with relation to each other. The symbol {G, GH}, for example, means that within the group of letters: (1) G appears without H on at least one letter; (2) G appears with H, in any order, on at least one letter, and (3) H does not appear without G, otherwise we would have written {G, H, GH}. The five possible relationships between G and H are all hypotheses, subject to revision depending on subsequent collecting or verification of certain deletions or transfers. None of these relationships depend on recorded dates of circulation for letters, though dates may be used in arguing for or against spoiling exceptions. However, the pre-linkage of feature G to feature H implies that G appeared before H.
Table 3. Feature linkage:
terminology and consequences.
| My terminology: G is _____ to H |
All known
presences of G and H in the clade. |
Cladistic
terminology: G is ____ relative to H |
If H becomes
universal, G becomes _______ |
Possible
Origin |
Spoilers |
| 1. unlinked |
{G,H} |
absent |
H was first added to a letter with G deleted. |
GH exists but is uncollected. |
|
| 2. pre-linked |
{G,GH} |
plesiomorphic, or ancestral |
universal |
G was on the letter that H was first added to. |
All G are by deletion of H from GH. |
| 3. co-linked |
{GH} |
congruent |
universal |
G and H first appeared on the same letter. |
G or H exist but are uncollected. |
| 4. post-linked |
{H,GH} |
apomorphic, or derived |
frequent if GH came soon after H |
H was on the letter that G was first added to. |
H was transferred to a letter already bearing G. |
| 5. transfer-linked |
{G,H,GH} |
homoplasitc, or conflicting |
as above |
H was transferred to a letter bearing G. |
All G or H are by deletion from GH. |
Example 1: The DL letters with an early
It Works postscript read "I,
myself, now forward it to you." But this never appears on a letter with
a Kiss or Love title. "I, myself, . . ." is thus unlinked to
these titles. When these Kiss and Love titles were introduced they were first
added to letters from which "I, myself, . . ." had been deleted.
Example 2: Our earliest Death20 type letter [1959], and all thereafter, bear both the Death and Money testimonial and the demand for 20 copies. No letter has been found which bears either of these features singly. Thus we say these two features are co-linked. They would be concurrent, if, say, they were both transferred from a foreign letter at the same time. If not concurrent, then one appeared without the other. But only if such a letter is collected would we then say the first is pre-linked to the second.
Example 3: Around 1988 a new testimonial, "Car," was added to a letter bearing the title "With Love all things are possible" ("Love"). The Car testimonial proved to be hyper-competitive within the clade of Love titled letters. The earliest example of Car [1988] (and almost all thereafter) also bears a duplication of the admonition against sending money, a feature we call "send no money," which reads:
You will receive good luck in the mail. Send no money. Send copies to people you think need good luck. Don't send money, as fate has no price.
You will receive good luck in the mail. Send copies to people you think need good luck. Send no money, as faith has no price. [1996]This does not contain the duplicated admonition "send no money." However, probably this was the result of a copying error that misplaced "send no money" two sentences forward, replacing the usual "Don't send money, . . ." This letter contains details that were also present on early Love-Car letters which did have "send no money" (> Love gets a car). Thus some ancestor of this letter almost certainly had "send no money" in the usual place, and this was later deleted. We can thus say that "send no money" is universal in the Car clade, being a pre-linked rider.
While in the Philippines, Gene Welch lost his wife 51 days after receiving the letter. [1989]Here "51 days" has replaced the older version in which the wife is lost "six days" after receiving the letter. The "51 days" variation was very likely a miscopy of the word "six" from a degenerate photocopy (I have one in which the "x" is barely visible). Our earliest version of Car bears the "six days" version [1988]. There is no example in the archive of "51 days" that is not accompanied by Car. In the entire population these features appear only in the combinations {Car, (Car)(51 days)}. So "51 days" is post-linked to Car - it was first written on a letter that already bore Car. During the exponential growth of the Love-Car letters, "51 days" proliferated as a post-linked rider, possibly contributing very little to propagation, though such assessments are difficult. If it did give Car letters a boost, say by suggesting very late compliance, this was not sufficient to eliminate the (Car)(six days) letters, which survived well into the 1990's [1996, 1997].
Example 5: In the early 1980's two titles, called "Kiss" and "Love," captured the mainline (> in Section 4.7). For about 10 years a mainline letter bore either one or the other title, so during this time these features were unlinked. However around 1993 both titles began to appear together on single letters. They now formed the combinations {Kiss, Love, (Kiss)(Love)} which implies a transfer had occurred, since deletions from (Kiss)(Love) had certainly not produced all the single titled Kiss or Love letters. In this case, the Kiss title had been transferred to a Love titled letter at least three different times. Kiss and Love were now transfer-linked.
We use the linkage of features to argue (with inherent uncertainty) for or against assertions of the following forms.
Cladistics is a method of classification that utilizes a "sister"
relationship between two "taxa" (named
groups of organisms), this holding when the two are more closely related
to each other (have a more recent common ancestor) than either has to any
third taxon. For cladistic analysis, a taxon must be a clade -
an ancestor and all its descendants (a descent group).
Sister relationships between "nested" taxa (taxa contained in taxa) are expressed
by a bifurcating diagram called a cladogram. A sample of taxa appear
at the terminal nodes of a tree, and two are connected to a hypothetical
ancestor taxon if they are deemed sisters. Often these relationships are
determined using characters (what we have called features) present in some but not all of
the taxa in the sample. Cladograms are chosen which account for the distribution
of characters in the "simplest" way, a principle called parsimony.
In one approach, parsimony is defined as minimizing the number of non-inherited
appearances (transfers) plus the number of losses (deletions) of features.
Instead of using characters, pairs of items may be compared by a numerical
measure of their "relatedness," and from these numbers a consistent cladogram
is constructed. This later method might apply when instead of taxa we are
comparing genomes.
(1) Each clone group V of C specifies one and only one node.Recall that a clone group consists of all identical siblings and their identical descendants. The nodes of a network of variations are clone groups, sets of identical replicators, generally not single replicators nor people who transmit them. For chain letters, any arrow connecting two nodes requires a person who transmitted the corresponding change. But participants who always produced faithful copies are not represented in the network of variations. There are no cycles in a variational network because a replicator can never have served as the parent of one of its ancestors. In a network of variations, multiple arrows converge to the same node only if there are multiple parents. For chain letters, the only documented occurrences of two parent letters being combined into one is from the early 1970's (Preston), in the formation of the founding letters for the Lottery-Death (LD) and the Death-Lottery (DL) clades. The donor letter of a transfer may also contribute text to a chain letter, but we will not regard this as constituting parenthood. Cladistics originally considered taxa, not individuals or clone groups. So even when the member organisms reproduce sexually, taxa are assumed to have but one parent taxon. This assumption simplifies analytic methods in calculating a parsimonious cladogram. For chain letters it is no problem to consider samples of chain letters all within a clade (descent group) and whose every member, except possible the founder of the clade, have exactly one parent. With this simplification the network of variations for the clade will be a tree (no two arrows will point to the same clone group). We call the resulting diagram a tree of uniparental variations for a clade of chain letters. Given any sample of chain letters within a clade, their true cladogram may be easily constructed from the tree of uniparental variations as follows: (1) delete all nodes except those of the sample and their hierarchy of hypothetical closest common ancestors, and (2) replace parental arrows by arrows designating descent between these retained nodes.
(2) If any member of the clone group V is the parent of a founder of clone group V' of C, an arrow connects node V to node V'.
Behavior
that Affects Propagation.
In 1966 Alan Dundes described these universal components of chain letters:
(1) a proclamation that the letter is a chain letter, (2) an injunction to
send a specific number of copies, sometimes within a definite period of time,
(3) a description of desirable consequences of compliance with the injunction,
and (4) a warning of undesirable consequences if the injunction is ignored
or disobeyed (Dundes). Mainline
luck letters contain these components, though the method of identification
may not be by proclamation.
We first identify behavior of a recipient that promotes the propagation of a chain letter, isolating these six components:
3.4 RETENTION
Identification. Differentiation. Woe to scoffers.
By retention of a received letter we mean keeping it in an undamaged state, accessible for copying. The bane of chain letters is immediate discard. If the recipient just saves the letter, as time passes it may work its will by playing on circumstances such as bad luck. The importance of first impressions for chain letters is revealed by the leading sentence in a version of the classroom Romance Game: "You touched this letter so you have to keep it!" [1998].
Identification.
Retention of a chain letter may depend on its identification as a luck chain
letter, and perhaps as a certain luck chain in which the recipient believes.
Quick recognition seems largely based on what is at the top: titles, initial
text or rarely, images. Reputed authors and places of origin may also serve
to identify a letter. A Brazilian letter is titled "Oracao De Santo Antonio"
and a capitalized prayer follows [1994]. A 1996 English language
letter originally from India has Sai Baba devotional images at the top [text, image]. Two translated Mexican
letters have the title "St. Jude Thaddeus," one underlined, the other in
a large font [1984, 1995]. Below this title, both
these letters begin with about the same sentence:
Before anything else, I would like to tell you that St. Jude Thaddaeus will help you in everything you encounter.This attempts a "locking" on the top spot of the letter by a declaration that is difficult to precede without disrespecting St. Jude. Most successful new types of chain letter debut with new titles. In the transition from one type to another, apparently the ready identification of the waning type negatively impacts its replication. Perhaps periodically recipients are more likely to read the text of a letter that appears to be a novelty, or that may not be immediately identified as a chain letter.
The final words of a text likewise have added significance for quick identification, as shown by the replicative success of certain postscripts (> It Works). Placing "St. Jude" at the far bottom of a letter, a pretense of authorship, attempts to lock the conclusion [1996]. The Book of Revelations "seals" itself with: "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book" (Rev. 22:18). Some interpret this as sealing the entire Christian canon.
If identification as a particular luck letter aids replication, then we may expect a highly adapted chain letter will have multiple identities, depending on who is reading it. Several years may have passed since the recipient received a previous chain, so only one or two highlights may be recalled. These might be leading text, alleged geographical origin, or one of the numerical specifications. New types typically retain some of these, and thus may appear as the traditional letter to some and a novelty to others. Neither recipient is wrong - in recent decades successful mainline innovations are notably conservative, most adding just one or two new features to an existing letter.
A clear advantage results if a letter is identified, rightly or wrongly, by an ethnic group as the "same" letter that circulated in the old country.
A private in the Philippine Army won the first prize in the sweepstakes for complying with this chain. [1949]
Dom Dimant, das Filipinas recebeu e nao deu importancia, mandou jogar fora, 9 dias depois morreu. [Brazil, 1994].
The question of where a chain letter originally came from usually has no single answer. Though North America has been a creative source for innovations, especially since 1935, still most of the text on contemporary mainline letters is likely from various other countries. Perhaps the question of origins has an answer if we limit it in a reasonable way. Since 1970 the high copy quota letters (20 and over) have dominated international circulation. Where and when did they first appear? The first appearance of a high copy quota in our collection is on a letter mailed from Bloomsbury, New Jersey [1959]. Its demand for 20 copies is associated with, and enforced by, another innovation that first appears on this letter, the "Death and Money" testimonial. The events in this testimonial are purported to have taken place in the Philippines.
Differentiation.
We have discussed the advantage for a letter to identify itself with multiple
traditions. It may also help circulation if a chain letter prominently distinguishes
itself from another letter. The advantage of differentiation is very clear
for post 1935 luck chain letters (the Prosperity
type). In section 4.2 we explain how the hyper-competitive innovation
"Do not send money" avoided immediate discard by distinguishing the
luck chains from the boom/bust money chain of the day (> Divergence). Another innovation
of these post 1935 letters was movement of the list of names from the
top to the bottom of the letter, where they remained until disappearing in
the mid 1970's. This provided a quick visual flag that the letter in hand
may not be the abundant Send-a-Dime. Money chain letters retained the list
at the top for several years (compare 1935 to 1941).
Woe to scoffers.
We see in testimonials that if one breaks the chain because of tardiness
or unspecified reasons, misfortune may follow, but rarely death. However,
all behavior that makes subsequent replication impossible is punished with
a death.
Devices may be defined with varying comprehensiveness. The three testimonials above and the statement "For any reason, do not destroy or tear" [Mexico / U.S., 1984] might be considered together as exemplifying the single device: "Warn against destruction or loss of the letter."
If the recipient takes the letter as a joke, its promises and threats have no power, and this castrating perception may itself replicate. Possibly some previous types have succumbed to changing attitudes and derision. The pious Ancient Prayer postcard chain, which circulated up through World War I, found few believers in the irreverent and fun loving years following the war. The first three text examples below discourage disbelief. The last three discourage a more serious threat to replication - the expression of disbelief.
M. Francesco Monthey, not having taken this letter seriously, saw his home ruined nine days after having received this letter. [Translation, France, 1928]
El Presidente de Brasil las recivio y no le dio importancia y a los 13 dias se le muri su hija. [Mexican / U.S. , 1980]
One woman made fun of it and on the 13th day her daughter went blind. [U.S., postcard, 1941]
Detective Segunda B. Villa now of the City of Baguie who laughed at this Chain of good luck, met instant death in accident on June 14th, 1948. [International, 1949. Baguio is a city in the Philippines]
Don't make fun or laugh at this because something bad might happen to you or your family. [Philippine / U.S., 1984].
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
3.5 COMPLIANCE
Motives. Origin of Testimonials. Classification of Testimonials.
In this section we presume one has received a luck chain letter and retained it, but has yet to comply with its demands for replication. By compliance we mean that the recipient distributes at least one copy of the letter (perhaps the copy received) within a month of receipt - thus contributing to its propagation. If the entire copy quota is distributed as instructed within the deadline we have full compliance. But partial compliance may be very common. In the previous section on retention we examined features of a letter that affect a recipient's immediate response to it. Here we focus on how chain letter content may influence the recipient's deliberations on whether to comply, particularly on his or her interpretation of ensuing circumstances.
Motives.
The Letters from Heaven motivated
possession and publication by the promise of divine blessing or magical protection
from various perils, combined with threats of divine punishment for disobedience
or disbelief. These were identifiably Christian in Europe, and Hindu in India.
After 1900 divine sanctions were downplayed, and by 1922 the mainline had
only nonsectarian promises of good and bad luck.
Below are listed motives for replicating luck chain letters. These are based on statements of those who send chain letters, chain letter content, and known motives for sending certain postcards.
Some testimonials probably start as hoaxes (> "Car" below); but I suspect most started as rumors that are subsequently incorporated into the body of a chain letter. Say a chain letter has spread through a town, so much so that most people have received it. This can happen without anyone realizing it, as initially with Send-a-Dime in Denver, until Post Office officials noticed increased mail volume. In such a situation, most people have either broken the chain or complied with it. Now say John Doe is hit by a train and killed. There is a good chance he broke the chain. Suppose the letter is found among John's papers. It may then be said that "He broke the chain and was hit by a train a week later," and this may become a local rumor. The rumor may travel with the chain letter, orally or by telephone, each promoting the replication of the other. In this phase the most effective oral form of the rumor will develop. However, the advantage of distant transmittal applies if the rumor is written. First it may be on an attached letter. Next it may be incorporated into the body of the letter: "one person who failed to pay attention to it met with a dreadful accident" [1905]. Good luck testimonials spread in the same way - again the event of a lucky person also being a sender is not nearly as improbable as it may seem. However, should someone be killed who circulated the chain, news of the death may spread, but the compliance with the chain will not. Magic, like vice, is more talked about than is its absence.
Further, events that are not at all remarkable may be perceived by the public as prophesy fulfilled. The familiar "Unbeliever's Death" testimonial (< Woe to Scoffers) states that a person died exactly nine days after discarding the letter in disbelief. A simple estimate reveals that this is certainly true, in fact, it has likely happened at least 36,000 times just in English speaking countries in the last 25 years. Using the above approximations, a typical person received about 10 DL type luck chain letters in the last 25 years (4 per decade); and let us estimate, conservatively, that 6 of those receipts were discarded in disbelief. Assuming a quarter billion English speaking adults, this gives 6 x 2.5 x 108 = 1.5 x 109 disbelieving discards for the last 25 years. According to the The World Almanac and Book of Facts, the U.S. death rate per 100,000 population in year 1999 was 877. This gives the probability that a person will die on a random day as .00877 / 365 = .000024. Multiplying this by the number of times a person discarded a luck chain letter in disbelief gives 36,000 estimated deaths on the ninth day following!
Once a testimonial is established on a luck chain letter, details may vary considerably over the years, such as names and amounts of money won or lost. But the basic structure of the story is surprisingly persistent, suggesting that traditional testimonials play a major role in winning compliance.
Classification of
Testimonials.
To analyze how testimonials promote replication, I classify them by the
following five structures: Win, Comply-Win, Lose, Win-Lose, and Lose-Win.
(1) Win: person X received the letter and had good luck.
Example: General Patton received $1,600 after receiving it. [1952]
The Win testimonials are consistent with a belief that chain letters are
a "charm" whose mere receipt brings luck, much as possession of a Letter from
Heaven might grant a woman an easy delivery. They suggest a recipient interpret
good luck as caused by the letter, creating an obligation to pass the charm
on to others. A Win testimonial may thus recruit a previous nonbeliever who
has good luck. Alternatively, readers may assume that a Win testimonial is
about someone who previously complied with the letter's demands, as in our
next structure.
(2) Comply-Win: X distributed the quota of copies within the deadline
and received good luck.
Example: Mr. Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected for the third term as
president of the United States 52 hours after he mailed this letter. [1949]
Comply-Win testimonials promote the belief that dutiful replication of a
chain letter will bring good luck. This particularly appeals to those who
hope for gain from some forthcoming event, such as a lottery drawing.
(3) Lose: X failed to circulate the letter and after the deadline
passed had bad luck.
Example: Mr. Nevin broke the chain and lost everything he had. [1939]
Lose testimonials promote the belief that only replication of the received
letter can save one from bad luck. They particularly exploit those who feel
that this is not a time they can risk bad luck. This insecurity could due
to a life threatening illness in the family, a job interview or a son in
the military during war.
(4) Win-Lose: X received the letter and had good luck. But X failed
to circulate the letter and lost what was gained, or much more.
Example: Dr. F. A. Anderson won $25,000 but lost it because he broke the
chain. [1944]
A Win-Lose story promotes the belief that receipt of the letter brings good
luck, but in return one must circulate the letter or lose what they received,
or more. It reports two connected events that imply the letter is
a causal agent, in contrast to Win and Lose testimonials that can much easier
be dismissed as coincidences. Win-Lose is persuasive with those who perceive
themselves to have received good luck but have yet to comply. Such good luck
could be escaping injury, recovering from sickness, success in an examination
or winning a bet (Renard, 1987).
(5) Lose-Win: X received the letter and procrastinated or forgot
to comply within the deadline. X had bad luck. X belatedly distributed the
quota and received good luck.
Example: Mr. ASC received this letter. He forgot to post. A few
days later he lost his job. After that he understood the significance of
this letter and he sent 30 copies. He found a new job within 3 days. [India/UK,
1996]
The Lose-Win device encourages the belief that failure to comply causes bad
luck, but this can be reversed, even after the deadline, if one complies in
full to the copy quota. Like Win-Lose, the reversal of fortune points
doubly to the letter as a cause. Lose-Win preys on those who perceive that
they have had bad luck since failing to meet the deadline. Such bad luck
could be an accident, loss of a bet or sale, illness, car trouble or not
being hired. .
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
3.6 Mainline Testimonials
Early Versions. Officer Wins. Elliot Wins and Loses. Death and Money. Boss Wins Lottery.
Lost Job - Better Job. The Unbeliever's Death. Car.
Early Versions.
On an early Ancient Prayer chain letter we read that "one person who
failed to pay attention to it met with a dreadful accident" [1905]. This is the only
testimonial, win or lose, that we have collected on the Ancient Prayer type or the following
Good Luck letters of the 1920's. Testimonials
reappeared in North America during the Great Depression with brief accounts
of gain and loss of money. The two known Prosperity letters [1933, 1939] have three, with the pattern
Win / Win / Lose. One of our two versions of the World War II Luck of London chain letter [1944] introduces the now
classic pattern Win / Win-Lose, possibly having combined the latter two testimonials
from the Prosperity type. From our earliest Luck by Mail type:
"Gen Patton received $1,600 after receiving it. Gen Allen received $1,600 and lost it because he broke the chain" [1952].Of course Patton is the famous World War II tank commander, but "Allen" is apparently a corruption. Patton was soon transposed to the loser's position [1958], but was spared further indignity when his name was corrupted to Bratton [1960] and never restored.
Officer
Wins. Elliot wins and loses.
With the remarkable Bloomsbury letter of 1959, our early example of the
Death20 type, we get the canonical versions of these two testimonials. By
some unknown path of corruption or design, the chain breaker is now a civilian
with last name "Elliot."
"A U.S. officer received $7,000.00. Don Elliott received $60,000.00 but lost it because he broke the chain." [1959]Note that someone has given up on the name of the winning officer. He will eventually join the "RAF" (Royal Air Force), but apart from the expected noise of copying names and numbers, these leading Win and Win-Lose testimonials have persisted for decades.
Death and Money.
This Win-Lose testimonial first appeared in North America on the Death20
founder around 1959 and was associated with inflation of the copy quota from
five to twenty copies. It was the first implied death threat in the mainline.
The variant "wife" (for "life") first appeared around 1975, possibly as a corruption, though it is curious that this 1975 letter had a list of names of 17 couples. It was present on the Kiss and Love founders in the early 1980's and thus became universal. We have no examples of corruption or correction back to "life." Whether "wife" was simply a rider on the successful new titles, or instead carried some replicative advantage over "life," is a difficult question whose answer could be darkly revealing. The "wife" version of Death and Money has been translated and transferred to a Spanish chain letter.
Win-Lose testimonials like Death and Money exploit those who perceive themselves to have received good luck since receipt of the letter. If a gambler wins big at the track after receiving the letter, he may comply to avoid being jinxed his next time out.
We now consider the three traditional testimonials that first appeared in the Lottery24 (L) block of the "DL" and "LD" compound letters of the 1970's. Like the Death and Money testimonial, we have no prior history of these invaders.
Boss Wins Lottery.
This Comply-Win testimonial provided the first mention of a lottery in an
English language letter.
Constantine Diso received the chain in 1953. He asked his secretary to make 24 copies and send them. A few days later, he won the lottery of 2 million dollars in his country. [1974]Many state sponsored lotteries began in the United States in the 1970's, the same decade in which Lottery24 became an established chain letter (in combination with Death20). In 1975 twelve states (all Eastern) had lotteries, three of them starting that year (US News). Canada already had the Quebec lottery. But in Latin America publicly sponsored lotteries had existed continuously since Spanish colonial times. Thus Boss Wins Lottery was "pre-adapted" to the new gambling environment in the United States. Gamblers are notoriously superstitious, lottery players included. A recent edition of Books in Print, under the subject "lottery," listed about 50 books on how to pick lottery numbers, none of them of any more utility than complying with a luck chain letter. The time gap between purchase of a lottery ticket and the drawing favors the replication of chain letters received during this time. A larger and less geographically biased sample of chain letters than we now possess could be used to test if luck chain letters circulated in larger numbers in lottery states.
The above phrase "in his country," apparently an early North American addition, disappeared in the 1980's, thus allowing the recipient to believe the lottery was won in his own region. However this deletion was first present with some potent innovations (It Works, Kiss, Love) and hence prevailed in part, if not entirely, as a rider. Other changes have been minor, including the more usual "Diaz" for "Diso" and the syncretization to 20 copies.
The so called "sweepstakes" promotions likely also increase chain letter circulation. These are sponsored by American Family Publishers, Publishers Clearance House and other firms. Tens of millions participate in these, hoping to win a fortune. Promotion is by television advertising in conjunction with a direct mail campaign of incredible magnitude - almost all adults in the U.S. get this pitch (1998). Recipients are lead to believe that they have already won a huge prize, and that they only need send in an application to receive it. For example, I received a letter from American Family Publishers that displayed through a cellophane window a formal looking document decorated with eagles on each side. It proclaimed:
In addition to its appeal to gamblers, Boss Wins Lottery makes compliance easy for some by suggesting they have a secretary prepare and distribute copies. And it assures them that the good luck still belongs to the boss. This testimonial, and the next one we discuss, show that Lottery24 was well adapted to an office environment.
Lost Job - Better Job.
The following Lose-Win testimonial appears after Boss Wins Lottery on Lottery24.
From the above scenario, we see that Boss Wins Lottery and Lost Job - Better Job function together in dealing with an office environment. The concerns of both supervisors and subordinates are dealt with by example. Just as quota 20 first appeared in the U.S. in association with Death and Money, perhaps copy quota 24 first developed in Latin America in association with these complementary office testimonials.
The Unbeliever's Death.
After the Lost Job - Better Job story we usually find the following "Lose"
testimonial:
Car.
The following Lose-Win testimonial first appeared around 1988 on DL letters
with the Love title. Thus it is not a traditional part of the Lottery24 block,
but is usually formatted continuous with it.
In 1967 the letter was received by a young woman in California; it was faded and barely legible. She put it aside to do later. She was plagued with various problems, including expensive car repairs. The letter had not left her hands within 96 hours. She finally typed the letter and, as promised, got a new car. [1988]Here "1987" ( instead of "1967") is the usual reading, and may well be the year of the first appearance of this testimonial. Within a few years, all DL letters titled "With Love . . . " bore this testimonial. However the Kiss clade continued without it. Variations of the testimonial are incidental, arising mainly from botching the compound sentences. Car has appeared on over a half a billion letters since its debut.
We have mentioned the image degeneration that results from successive photocopying. In my experiments, after 15 generations (all with the same photocopier) there was significant loss of legibility. However, more recently, packets of forwarding letters with the Media chain letter are often legible after 25 or more generations (different photocopiers). In any case, contemporary chain letters are creatures of photocopying, and they must be retyped from time to time. This testimonial is the only one we have seen that explicitly encourages retyping. Evidence that it succeeds in this is present on 1995, which adds to the Car testimonial: "I have retyped it again today in 1995." Another letter gives 20 alleged retype dates, including ten just in the year 1992 [1995]. Presumably, the propagative success of Car is due to this more frequent retyping. Similar letters without it would more often become partially illegible, and therefore more likely to be discarded, or to be retyped with fatal mutations. With a larger sample we could test this by comparing image quality of Love titled letters with and without Car. Our present sample is inconclusive on this.
Though less appealing theoretically, the most effective feature of this testimonial may be its use of the automobile. If someone holds the letter past the deadline, there is a fair chance they too may be "plagued with various problems, including expensive car repairs." Car repairs often occur unexpectedly, always seemingly at the worst time, thus evoking the specter of bad luck. Like any Lose-Win testimonial, Car implies that no matter how late you may be, compliance will turn bad luck to good. By using car trouble as its example of bad luck, this testimonial may be particularly effective in activating late compliance.
Further, for many the desire for a new car is greater than their respect for reason. Suppose John Doe plays the lottery. Then likely he has already given careful consideration to which vehicles he will purchase after winning. The Car testimonial, in its original form, is clever in not specifying how the young woman gets a new car. She may win it, or win the money to buy it, or perhaps receive it as a gift from a man she is to meet. Thus this testimonial may activate compliance by interacting with the fantasies of lottery players and others.
Notes that one has retyped a chain letter occasionally appear as postscripts. This appears on a Brill parody letter:
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
3.7 EFFECTIVE
COPYING
Faithful copying. Self-correcting text. Copy quotas. Copy First versus Copy Later.
Faithful copying.
Successful replication of a chain letter requires copies
be legible, accurate and complete. We examined in the last section how the
Car testimonial suggests retyping, and thus upgrades the legibility of a
photocopied chain that contains this testimonial. The following instructions
also promote faithful copying of text.
Names and numbers are usually highly variable on chain letters because if partly illegible there is no context for the copier to infer the correct form. But as they vary they may at some time assume a form that allows the whole to be reconstructed from a part. We call such text self-correcting. Consider:
Names may also be self-correcting, as by widespread familiarity.
Mr. Owen, from Sordt (Victoria), won the first prize of the Michigan lottery, 1,200,000 pounds sterling. [Switzerland, 1928, translation from French]Here the word "Victoria" is very recognizable, internationally known, and unlikely to be confused with another geographical location. Just from the above two examples, the repetition of "Victoria" could be a coincidence. But other features in these two letters reveal that the 1931 letter was a circulating English translation of a letter close to the 1928 French language letter. However all the names, except "Victoria," have been so transformed that they betray no relation. For example, "Mr. Putz, of Michigan, owes his fortune to the fact that he scrupulously followed these instructions" [1928] is cognate to "Pola Negri owes her fortune to having carried out instructions in a most conscientious way" [1931]. Even in another 1928 Swiss letter we find "M. Privois, from the State of Cadron, owes his fortune to the fact that he scrupulously followed the above directions" [1928]. Thus, especially in these hand copied letters, copying names is very noisy, except for those that are self-correcting.
Mrs. Barnes of Victoria won the big prize in lottery of 20,000 golden liras on the ninth day. [Florida, 1931]
Below is a list of variations on the name of the victim in the Unbeliever's Death testimonial.
Zarin Berrachille [1973],
Zerin Berreskilli, Zarin Rurreasville
Zorin Barrachilli, Zerij berreskelli, Caren Wichile, Zerim Berreball
Zarin Borracbilt [1975],
Brian Barbialle, Brian Barabiaila
Dalin Nairchild [1979], Colin
Holschild, Darinn Meirchild,
Dalan Fairchild [Kiss-Love founder],
Darin Hairchild, Dolon Fairchild
We pause here to note that the family name "Fairchild" is self-correcting since it is a compound of two familiar English words and a familiar name. Fairchild predominated from 1983 onward. We designate it by "F" below, and continue with the tortuous transformations of the first name, which never settled.
Dalon F, Delan F, Sobon F, Dalah F, Dallan F, Davan F, Galan Pairchild
Bolan F, Blaine F, Olean Lauchild, Dales F, Dallas F, Galan Paircheild
Dian F, Dilan F, Daln F, Darlene F, David F, Delri F, Mr. Fairchild
Deian F, Delea F, Dala F, Karen F, Nolan Foarohald, Darron F, Mellisa Horton
[1994]
Carl Daddit (name from the prior testimonial, which was deleted), Colan Fatchild
[France, 1997]
Brian Fairchild [2003]
Despite the great initial variation in the family name, and continuing variation of the first name, clearly almost all copiers are trying to get it right. Some are probably working with a highly degenerate photocopy. Perhaps "Fairchild" has more going for it than just self-correction. It is an innocent and virtuous sounding name, yet this seeming virtue offers no protection if one destroys the letter. On a translated Mexican letter: "Isabel Buena lost her copy and lost her life" [1984]. Again the family name is a word in Spanish, and a virtuous one (Buena = good). Such a tactic may boost propagation slightly, but recall that chain letter evolution is characterized by the rise of new variations that eliminate their cousins and establish their incidental features on every letter. If the founder of the Kiss & Love titles [1983] had read "Zarin Rurreasville" instead of something close to "Dalan Fairchild," Zarin would have been everywhere until obliterated by copy errors. And if "Rurreasville" had ever stumbled on a self-correcting form, it would not have been "Fairchild." Self-correcting text does not increase propagation, it only preserves itself from corruption. Its only chance for predominance is to ride a successful innovation, self-correction preserving it in the outflow where another name would soon disappear in the copying noise. This is how "Fairchild" became near universal, by riding the hyper-competitive Kiss-Love founder and enjoying near immunity from corruption in the process.
The name "Elliot" (as in the Elliot Wins and Loses testimonial) also appears to be self-correcting. This may be due to the scarcity of common surnames that begin with the letters "Ell." Also it seems some letters remain more legible in late generation photocopies than others; upper case "E" for example.
Self-correction applies to most of the text of a chain letter, since there is inherent redundancy in language. Some words and phrases are often corrupted, others rarely. Spoken replicators transform to a more memorable form, written replicators to a more self-correcting form. However, it is difficult to formulate general principles to assess the self-correcting power of any given text. We will rarely make use of self-correction, instead focusing on text whose meaning increases propagation.
Copy quotas.
All known luck chain letters specify a fixed number of copies that the recipient
is directed to produce.
Do luck chain letters threaten punishment if you distribute fewer copies than the quota? I have yet to find an example. Often the only implied threat is for "breaking the chain," which could be interpreted as requiring only that one pass on the received letter to avoid bad luck. Partial compliance to the copy quota may account for many distributions. Thus it would probably reduce propagation for a chain letter to explicitly threaten this behavior, since then some may reject the letter entirely as too demanding. Yet it is essential to get recipients to produce the full quota of copies as often as possible. This dilemma has resulted in the survival of chain letters that are ambiguous on this issue. You are told "you must make twenty copies." And after his secretary made twenty copies and sent them out, Constantine Dias won a lottery. But in the same letter, bad luck comes only to those who distribute no copies at all, as in Death and Money where life is lost after one "failed to circulate the letter." An explicit statement of this option appears on a Russian chain letter [Homily, 1990], where just passing it on is considered a "neutral" act.
Copy First versus Copy
Later.
So by just passing on the original letter, perhaps one may avoid bad luck.
How many copies must one distribute to get good luck? Again chain letters
are ambiguous; by one reading you need not distribute a single copy! The
contemporary mainline letter is a compound of two differing folk beliefs
or susceptibilities: Copy First views the work of replication as bringing
subsequent good luck, Copy Later sees the letter as a charm whose
mere receipt brings luck.
COPY FIRST text requires one first distribute copies of the letter before receiving good luck, as if in compensation. "You must make twenty copies . . . and after a few days you will get a surprise." One cannot refuse to send copies just because no luck is received: "For no reason whatsoever should this chain be broken!" However, ambiguously, bad luck may be reversed by late compliance to the letter's demands, as in Lost Job - Better Job.
The Copy First orientation places the recipient subordinate to Fate. Hope for good luck and fear of bad luck are about the only motives for replication. Copy First testimonials are of the Lose, Comply-Win, and Lose-Win structure. Much of the text of Lottery24 is Copy First.
The Copy First structure also appears on other social replicators. Devotional messages have been placed in the classified advertisements of U.S. newspapers for many years. Here is an example (my italics) from the "Religious Announcements" category of The Los Angeles Times (Nov. 25, 1991):
In the Copy Later orientation, one is almost bargaining as an equal with Fate. If no good luck is received in the stated interval, the charm has failed, and perhaps no copies need be distributed. If luck is delivered, the motives for replication now include gratitude and benevolent transmission of the charm to another. Hope and fear are less active, though not absent. The great taboo is to receive luck but then neglect your side of the bargain and fail to distribute the letter. You may lose what you received: "Don Elliot received $60,000 but lost it because he broke the chain" - or you may lose much more " . . . before his death, he received $775,000 which he had won." Copy Later testimonials are of the Win and Win-Lose type. The notion of simply passing on the original letter to avoid misfortune is associated with the Copy Later belief (as expressed by Boris Pasternak in 1959, see also lr1990). The chain is a chain of benevolence, not of fear. Equity is maintained by granting it to one more person. In the Death and Money testimonial a life is lost after General Walsh "failed to circulate the prayer (letter)." But this is not punishment solely for not complying, rather it is for not complying after receiving a large sum of money. Thus the letter grants luck by mere receipt, but exacts a dreadful toll from ingrates who do not then pass it on. This view of chain letter magic is outside the mindset of some revisers. Two letters collected by folklorist Paul Smith modify Death and Money to read: "Before her death he received $7,775.00 after circulating it just prior" [England, 1992]. This attempts to cast the events in a Copy First frame, but implies the wife died despite prior circulation of the letter. A North American revision fails in the same way [1991].
Other social replicators display the Copy Later structure. The following example (my italics) was published in The Los Angeles Times classifieds (Feb. 7, 1990):
Copy First and Copy Later may not be folk beliefs, but rather susceptibilities to one or the other side in a branching that naturally develops when supernatural promises compete for replication. A currency chain is a short message on paper money that encourages the reader to copy it on other bills (Olbrys). These varied replicators have appeared on U.S. bills for several years. Here are two examples:
Anyone that receives this bill will be blessed with lots of money. Then write this on ten other bills. (U.S., $10 bill, June 1998)
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
3.8 Effective
Distribution
Targeted distribution. Deadlines.
The manner in which chain letters are distributed may significantly affect propagation, but chain letters have little to say about it. Mainline letters have always just said to "send" the copies. In practice they are sent by mail, placed in work mail slots or left where they will be found, such as on car windshields or desks. In Brazil they may be left in elevators and on doorsteps. When a choice of recipients can be made, the persons selected obviously will affect the number of second generation copies produced. Chain letters have evolved instructions for this choice that probably work better than anything a mere mortal could design.
Targeted distribution.
By targeted distribution we mean any preference or exclusion in the
selection of recipients. Chain letters usually have something to say about
targeting. The most common recommendation is "send these to your friends"
[1902]. This may seem of
little help to propagation, but note that at the least it discourages sending
to a celebrity - an almost sure waste of a copy. The next major innovation
in mainline letters appears on Good Luck: "Copy this out and send to nine
people whom you wish good luck" [1922]. Though this opens the
door to celebrity distributions, it may also target people who need good
luck. During the Great Depression "whom you wish good luck" was changed
to "whom you wish prosperity to" [1933]. During the perils of
World War II "prosperity" changed back to "luck" [1944]. With the Death20 letter
this was improved to read ". . . to friends you think need good luck"
[1959]. With this targeting
the chain letter will seek out those in a desperate situation and who are
thus more vulnerable to its promises and threats. But some recipients may
give up on the letter if they have fewer than twenty friends. On the It Works
innovation of 1979 "friends" has changed to "people," giving
the current and stable reading "Send copies to people you think need luck"
[1997].
The Lottery block originally stated: " . . . send it to your friends, parents or acquaintances." With new titles in 1983, "parents" was deleted, and "friends and associates" now appears (> section 4.7). The classroom Romance Game addresses girls, so "Send this to 7 people, no boys" [1998]. There is, however, an Internet version that is genderless [e1995]. The same letter also specified "You can't send it to the original person" meaning the sender. Others chains specify the copies are to be sent to "diferentes personas" [1980]. When a list of prior senders is present this by itself aids in effective targeting since one may avoid sending a copy to any of these people. This may be explicitly instructed: "Important: Do not address your letter to persons already on the list" [International, 1949].
We should emphasize that evidence from the dated collection shows that chain letters do NOT evolve by a series of small (secondary) improvements. Instead, a killer variation comes along every few years, swamps all its rivals, and universal details are set by what was linked to it. But small improvements can still accumulate for reasons previously discussed (< Section 3.3).
All the above targeting instructions likely increase propagation over no suggestion at all. However, the following, which appeared on a luck chain letter, seems counter-replicative: "Limited to Masons" [1954]. A similar restriction arose in the course of the Springfield, Missouri pyramid craze (1935), and during World War I the Ancient Prayer split into specialized versions that circulated within various fraternal organizations (NYT, 1917). The Send-a-Dime craze manifested letters that were restricted to people with last name "Smith," another for "Johnson" (DP, 1935). This "over-specialization" phenomenon probably arises when there is a chain letter boom and a recipient has many versions to choose from. One which then makes a personalized appeal may be chosen over others. But this is a recipe for extinction since targeted groups will be the first to overdose on the letter. The last three examples of over-specialization were definitely during chain letter booms; perhaps "Limited to Masons" is evidence that there was a luck chain boom around 1954, soon after the innovations of the Luck by Mail type appeared.
In Section 2.2 we listed as a characteristic of luck chain letters that they contained some language about going around the world.
This prayer was sent to me and is being sent all over the world. [1910]What replicative advantage does this device bestow? Is it merely a tradition whose only advantage to propagation may be that it gives the letter an appearance of respectable longevity? This does not explain the success of the early forms of this device, beginning around 1910, though it may have some validity in recent decades. We propose that these statements influence targeting, suggesting that copies be sent to distant places. Chain letter versions that bore this device were less likely to die off in an immunized local population. They were more likely to take hold in foreign countries. Note that early versions after 1910, and those on the modern Lottery24 letter, are stated as mild commands. This device is comparable to the hooks and parachutes present on some seeds. Awareness of this need for dispersion appears early on a quota 3 composed solicitation for funds for a monument to slain President William McKinley:
This prayer was sent to me and must be sent all over the world. [1912]
The chain was started by an American Officer and should go three times around the world. [1922]
Prayer of Safety must go all over the world by card. [Postcard, 1941]
It has been around the world four times. [1944]
Since this chain must make a tour of the world, . . . [Lottery24 block, 1974]
It has been around the world nine times. [Death20 block, 1974]
This was sent by a priest from Columbia around the world . . .
This started in Malabon and spread throughout the world. [Mexico / Philippines / U.S., 1984]
Cette chaine a fait 7 fois le tour de la terre. [France, 1995]
It would be advisable to send one to a nearby friend and the others to friends as far away as possible, in order to send the plan broadcast. [Oct. 1905]This letter had been circulating for around four years, and according to a number present, had gone through 209 generations! An early version does not have the dispersion request [Dec. 1901].
Deadlines.
Chain letter events in the 20th century reveal that for propagative success
it is not enough merely to reproduce in quantity - it must also be done quickly.
Repeatedly a new variation will flood potential senders, thus starving out
competing variations for the attention, energy and respect needed for compliance.
Consequently we included a time limit in our measure of propagation: the number of descendants
produced within a month. Around the turn of the century a deadline
appeared on a chain letter, and ever since they are near universal.
Now, within seven days after you receive this letter, make seven copies of it exactly as it is written and send these to your friends. [1902]The redundancy in the numerical specifications in our first two examples above provides self-correction, protecting the copy quota and deadline from corruption. The first example is from the chain letter protesting Sabbath violations. Thus the number seven was likely chosen because it is the number of days in the week. This is also our earliest example of a deadline, though we do not know if this was the first. If so, its invention may have been motivated by the desire to utilize the venerated seven day interval, rather than by an anticipation of increased propagation.
Those who wrote it and passed it on before nine days, starting the day received, and mailed to nine of their friends, on the 9th day re-ceived some reward. [1911]
Do not forget this day for the next nine days. [1917]
Do it within twenty-four hours and count nine days and you will have some great good fortune. [1922]
Do not keep this letter. It must leave within 96 hours after you receive it. [1959]
Some versions of the Ancient Prayer postcard chain ask the sender to date copies: "No name sign date only" [1912]. This would remind recipients of the day of receipt, discouraging shifting deadlines. On some luck chain letters the deadline has been measured in hours, as in the last two examples above. This may just be a stylistic rider, or perhaps there is some self-correction, especially for the 24 hour deadline that held from 1922 until the arrival of quota 20 letters in 1959.
Many Ancient Prayer versions prescribe sending a copy one day at a time: ". . . he who will write it for nine days, commencing the day received . . ." [1908]. This keeps track of the deadline by counting it out. It also associates the chain letter with the Roman Catholic Novena devotion, which involves daily observances for nine consecutive days. This would have been apparent to Catholics at the time, but invisible to most Protestants. Collecting has revealed a small but long lasting niche in North America for an explicit Novena devotional chain letter [1945, 2000]. As discussed in Section 3.4, there is an advantage for a letter to be identified as one's own by different ethnic or religious groups. A similar device (ambiguity) may be at work in "This prayer was sent by Bishop Lawrence, recommending it to be rewritten and sent to nine other persons" [1905]. Bishop William Lawrence was the Episcopalian Bishop of Massachusetts and an author, well known among American Protestants of the time. Likely many Catholics would have presumed by his title that he shared their faith. Incidentally, Lawrence had nothing to do with the chain letter, but received complaints from all over the world for his alleged endorsement (Lawrence).
Can one still receive good luck, or escape bad luck, by distributing copies after the deadline? The answer is a clear "maybe." Considering first the "Copy Later" Death20 block, the only explicit deadline statement is "Do not keep this letter. It must leave your hands within 96 hours." As noted above, this seems like you only need to pass on the original. And there is no mention of someone suffering misfortune on the fourth day after receipt. Examining the "Copy First" Lottery24 block, there is no explicit deadline statement. Nine days seems to be the implied deadline, judging from Lost Job - Better Job and the promise of a "surprise" in nine days. Thus again, it appears ambiguity is the optimal policy. The letter needs to encourage promptness and does so with a deadline and accounts of bad luck for tardiness: at the same time it needs to encourage late compliance and does this with a Lose-Win testimonial. We will say more about the missing deadline on Lottery24 (> quota 24).
< Start of above section < Start of Chain Letter Evolution - Contents
Typical Send-a-Dime money chain letter, this posted May 8, 1935 in Beaumont,
Texas. Archive item 1935.
4.1 THE ORIGIN OF MONEY CHAIN LETTERS (1922 - 1935)
Introduction. Transitions to Prosperity
Club - texts. Table
4 - From Good Luck to Prosperity to Prosperity Club. Good Luck for Men. Good Luck for Women. Easy version. The Miracle letter.
Prosperity. Prosperity Club.
Introduction.
In the spring of 1935 a chain letter craze developed that was to sweep the
world. This was the advent of money chain letters. Post Office officials first
became aware of the existence of the craze when "floods of send-a-dime chain
letters threatened to swamp the Denver mails" (Denver Post, April 19).
The name "Send-a-Dime" has stuck, even though this name never appeared on
the letter, and most were titled "Prosperity Club." Despite immediate threats
of prosecution, on April 28 alone the Denver Post Office handled an estimated
165,000 chain letters (DP-9a).
The craze rapidly spread to other cities - on May 8 the "chain letter splurge"
had increased the St. Louis daily mail average from 450,000 to 800,000 letters
(DP-19). Probably
more letters were passed hand-to-hand then mailed (NYT-39). The world wide distribution
of money chain letters, just in 1935, probably far surpassed a billion letters.
Transitions
to Prosperity Club - texts.
In this section we will show, as everyone assumed at the time, that Send-a-Dime
was a composed letter. But, ingenious as this composition was, it was closely
based on an existing luck chain letter, and this letter itself was
very likely producing money for insiders. We have but one example [1933] of this Prosperity type letter from before the
Send-a-Dime craze, published by folklorist Harry Hyatt (Hyatt, 1935). Finding more pre-1935
Prosperity letters should be a prime goal of ephemeral paper collecting,
since they could tell quite a story. For one, they should reveal the development
of the Prosperity type from the previous Good Luck type of the 1920's. That such
a step-by-step development took place is fairly certain. We will make a guess
at this development here, and hypothesize some intermediate letters. But
the history of chain letters is not deterministic, and this reconstruction
will likely have to be changed when more letters are collected. However we
can reliably state that the key innovation that led to money chain letters
was the managed list, where senders
are instructed to remove the top name and address and insert their own at
the bottom. Our earliest example of such an escalating list is Hyatt's 1933
letter, but likely a managed list had appeared a few years earlier on a letter
that was closer to the Good Luck type. The presence of a managed list of
names and towns on a luck letter leads to an amazing consequence: for a brief
period at least, luck chain letters worked! That is, some people living
in small towns received unexpected money in the mail. We will make the case
for this "Miracle" letter in detail below. Other key innovations that led
to money chain letters were the reduction of the copy quota from nine to
five, and the change in the gender of listed prior senders from all male
to all female.
For detailed comparison we first give the texts of these three key letters.
(1) Our starting chain letter is Good Luck, which according to legend was started by an American Officer during World War I (du Von, 1935) (Bender, 1968). However our earliest examples are from 1922. Good Luck was apparently the first luck chain letter to make a complete break with religion, and the first to mention "luck." Good Luck used the same copy quota nine as the previous Ancient Prayer, but sped up circulation by reducing the deadline from nine days to "twenty-four hours." Most versions had a leading list of prior mailings in the format "X to Y" as below.
(2) The next text is Hyatt's 1933 luck chain letter from Illinois (Hyatt). A key feature is a managed list of six names and towns (Hyatt left out two names and two towns for privacy). We will detail below how the Hyatt letter differs from the prior Good Luck type. These changes reveal a pecuniary motivation masked as superstition and charity. Throughout this section, features shared with prior letters (disregarding wording and order) are in the normal font, and innovations are in bold italics.
(3) The concluding letter of our trio is an example of Send-a-Dime that probably comes close to its original form. This was published in an obscure periodical on direct mail (Postage and the Mailbag). Most published versions left out the list of names. I have made a few minor changes to conform to earlier letters. Send-a-Dime is clearly based on a letter very close to Hyatt's 1933 Prosperity example. Both have a leading managed list of six prior senders, a copy quota of five and a promise of "prosperity."
(1) Good Luck ---------------------------------------- [1922] -----------------------------------------
Birmingham, Ala. June 8, 1922(2) Prosperity ------------------------------------------ [1933] ------------------------------------------Claude Sanders to Phil Gleischman
Phil Gleischman to M. H. Starr
M. H. Starr to J. V. Allen[25 pairs of names omitted here]
Walter S. Coleman to A. A. Gambill
A. A. Gambill to J. F. SuttleCopy this out and send to nine (9) people whom you wish good luck. The chain was started by an American Officer and should go three times around the world.
DO NOT BREAK THE CHAIN, for whoever does will have BAD LUCK. Do it within twenty-four hours and count nine days and you will have some great good fortune.
"Let all go smiling through 1922."
We trust in God. He supplies our needs.Mrs. F. Streuzel..., [omitted]... Mich.Copy the above names, omitting the first. Add your name last. Mail it to five persons who you wish prosperity to. The chain was started by an American Colonel and must be mailed 24 hours after receiving it. This will bring prosperity within 9 days after mailing it.
Mrs. A.Ford........, Chicago .....Ill.
Mrs. K.Adkins......, Chicago .....Ill.
Mrs. R.Arlington..., [omitted]....Ill.
Mrs. [omitted]....., Quincy.......Ill.
Mrs. [omitted]....., Quincy.......Ill.Mrs. Sanford won $3,000.
Mrs. Andres won $1,000.
Mrs. Howe who broke the chain lost everything she possessed.The chain grows a definite power over the expected word.
DO NOT BREAK THE CHAIN
See what happens on the 9th day.
(3) Send-a-Dime (Prosperity
Club) --------------------------- [1935] -------------------------------
PROSPERITY CLUB-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In God We TrustMrs. Christine Galuppe 828 29th St. Denver, Colo.
Miss Alice Ferguson 1440 Marion St. " "
Mrs. Carl Ferguson 1440 Marion St. " "
Miss Katharyn Wiley 2317 Dexter St. " "
Miss Thelma Hardy 2317 Dexter St. " "
Mrs. Villa Pickens 1320 St. Paul St. " "Faith Hope Prosperity
This charm was started in the hope of bringing prosperity to you.
Within three days make five copies of this letter, leaving off the name and address at the top and adding your name and address at the bottom, and mail to five friends to whom you wish prosperity to come.
In omitting the top name, send that person ten cents (10c) wrapped in paper as a charity donation. In turn, as your name leaves the list you will receive 15,625 letters with donations amounting to $1,562.50.
Now is this worth a dime to you?
Have the faith your friend had and the chain will not be broken.
Michael Preston observed (Preston) features shared by Good Luck (1928), Prosperity (1933) and French letters from 1928. Both Good Luck and Prosperity instruct you to copy the letter and send it to people to whom you wish luck / prosperity, this to be completed in 24 hours. This will bring you luck / prosperity within 9 days. Both attribute the letter to an American officer and warn against breaking the chain.
Here we hypothesize missing phases between two letters by (1) identifying
all the changes required to transform one letter to the next, and (2) grouping
together changes that share a single common motivation, consistent with necessary
order relations among the changes. We ignore reordering and differences in
word choice (e.g., "American Officer" equates to "American Colonel").
The following hypothetical changes transform the Good Luck letter of
1922 to the Prosperity letter of 1933.
In Table 4 we assign a motive to each of these five groups of changes as numbered above, and hypothesize the circulation of three intermediate chain letters between Good Luck (1922) and Prosperity (1933). Clearly the order of the innovations could vary some, and transfers from foreign letters could further complicate matters. Even if all the innovations were in the order shown, it is unlikely that just one person made all the changes in each group. But it simplifies explanation to assume so, and introduce fictional scenarios below for each new hypothetical letter.
Table 4 - From Good Luck
to Prosperity to Send-a-Dime.
| Changes | New Motive | Name of resulting letter | Date | Link to text |
| Initial | Status | Good Luck for Men | 1922 | Alabama |
| 1.1 | Propriety | Good Luck for Women | 1926? | Hypothetical |
| 2.1 - 2.4 | Economy | Good Luck for Women - Easy | 1928? | Hypothetical |
| 3.1 - 3.2 | Faith | Miracle | 1932? | Hypothetical |
| 4.1 - 4.5 | Money | Prosperity | 1933 | Illinois |
| 5.1 - 5.6 | Charity | Send-a-Dime | 1935 | Denver |
Good Luck for Men.
(Motive: status, Initial changes)
We guess that the Good Luck letter did not have a leading list of names when
it first started, perhaps during the Great War. Say in 1922 a celebrity X
sends a Good Luck letter to friend Y and happens to head the letter "X to
Y," probably not expecting this will be copied. If you are Y, if you include
"X to Y" on your nine copies, you display to others that you are a friend
of X. But you don't want to be too obvious about this, so you write "Y to
Z1," Y to Z2," etc., each below the "X to Y" on the letters you send to Z1,
Z2, etc., as if this were the required form. The process can repeated downline.
In our example (< above) there are
thirty pairs of names. In his syndicated weekly column, Ring Lardner said
he had received twelve such letters and recognized some names on the lists
(Lardner). A British example
from 1928 contained 99 names, including officers and judges (Burrell).
Of the 31 different names on our example, all 18 that have identifiable gender are men. It is the same on other examples - all men. So we call this letter "Good Luck for Men." We identify the principal motive for the circulation of this variation as status display, though the initial innovation (X toY) was likely whimsical or merely someone's habitual form for letters.
Good Luck
for Women. (Motive: propriety, Change 1.1)
All names on Prosperity (< above)
are of married women, and women dominated early Send-a-Dime as well (RMN 1935-1). The change in
gender could have occurred when a copy of the "Good Luck for Men" version
was sent to a woman and soon only women's names appeared on the list. Or
a letter could have been restarted by women. In either case, when all names
began with "Mrs.," both propriety and precedent would dictate copies be sent
only to other women. We do not know when the Good Luck gender change happened,
but it was probably necessary for the continuation of the letter into the
1930's. Reports from England in 1928 suggest the Good Luck letter there had
male and female branches (Burrell,
Wright). A circulating English
translation [1931] of
a French language letter [1928],
pre adapted to the Great Depression by having some financial testimonials,
had a "from X to Y" leading list of 14 names, thirteen identified as "Mrs."
and one as "Jean." Charitable appeals are important throughout the origins
of Send-a-Dime, and presumably these could gain more sympathy from women.
Easy version.
(Motive: Economy, Changes 2.1 - 2.4)
There are 30 pairs of names in the above example of Good Luck for Men, listed
in a vertical format as "X to Y." Suppose a secretary received one of the
above letters with as many women's names and thought it would be fun to send
it to her friends. But she saw no reason to burden herself, nor her friends,
with more work than necessary. To economize she listed the names once, instead
of using the prior "X to Y" format in which most appear twice. She also reduced
the list to six names, and added a list management instruction so the list
would not increase. To save further time she may have reduced the copy quota
from nine to five. Why five copies? According to a 1941 secretarial
manual (Gregg), with standard weight
paper only four legible carbon copies could be made, plus the first page
makes five. The change from nine to five copies occurred during or before
1929, since we have a luck chain letter intermediate between Good Luck and
Prosperity which has copy quota five [1929-06]. This letter,
however, is probably not in the ancestry of Prosperity since it has no list
of prior senders.
The Miracle
letter. (Motive: Faith, Changes 3.1 - 3.2)
With the leading list of names under control, a title could more conveniently
be placed and retained at the top of the page. "We trust in God. He supplies
our needs" was added above the six names. This was very likely done after
the depression had started (1929), the initial intent being to bolster faith
in response to economic peril. Letters with this timely message may have
replicated more than untitled versions. Other titles may also have replicated,
but the charitable implications of "He supplies our needs" were to
be important. We guess that at about the same time the tradition developed
to add one's town and state on the senders list. This was not possible with
the "X toY" format on Good Luck for Men. The new title and a managed list
of names with towns and states, innovations of seeming minor importance,
produced an amazing result that in turn led to the greatest "mind virus"
of the last century. We incorporate the changes so far, 1.1 to 3.2, in the
following hypothetical "Miracle" letter which we guess actually circulated
around 1932. The names are fictional. Recall that bold italics represent
innovations over the prior form (in this case, over "Good Luck for Women
- Easy").
The Miracle letter ------------------------ Hypothetical - around 1932 -------------------------------
We trust in God. He supplies our needs.
Copy the above names, omitting the first. Add your name last. Mail it to five persons who you wish luck to. The chain was started by an American Colonel and must be mailed 24 hours after receiving it. This will bring luck within 9 days after mailing it.
DO NOT BREAK THE CHAIN See what happens on the 9th day.
This letter has been mailed by "Mrs. F. Fairchild, Small, Idaho" (call her Flora). Perhaps the Fairchild family has lost their farm and are impoverished. Willing to try anything, Flora obeys the instructions on the letter and sends out five copies with her name now at the bottom of the list of six names. She has removed a prior top name, but she did not send out any money, and there is no instruction to do so. Within nine days she begins receiving money in the mail from strangers, from all over. Dimes, quarters, even a five dollar bill! She remembers the luck chain she sent out. It has worked! Flora eventually receives a total of about $30. She accepts what has happened as divine providence. She placed her name on a list below the words "We trust in God. He supplies our needs." To take the letter at its word would not be an unusual conclusion in 1932, especially since managed list instructions and money chain letters had never been seen before.
Why did Flora receive the money? Each letter that she sent out that was processed according to the instructions would result in five new copies with "Mrs. F. Fairchild, Small, Idaho" moved up one notch in the list. If every recipient fully complied, eventually there would be 56 = 15,625 letters with her name at the top. Of course such a rate of compliance is all but impossible. But if just two of every five people complied, there would eventually be 5 x (25) = 160 letters with "Mrs. F. Fairchild, Small, Idaho" at the top. That is a high rate of growth also, but possible during a "chain letter fad." Note also that Flora's name and town are self-correcting, so even after 5 generations of hand copying there is a good chance they would be preserved.
We have presumed the "Miracle" letter contained only names, cities and states (no street addresses), which is the form Hyatt gave for the subsequent Prosperity letter. This in not a deliverable address for someone living in a city or town of more than, say, twenty thousand population (such as all but the last town I selected above for the Miracle letter). But in 1932 it was an adequate address for people in small towns. I have seen many old covers without a street address. A person would not hesitate to address a letter to "Mrs. F. Fairchild, Small, Idaho" knowing it would get delivered. Alternatively, Flora may have received a version of the letter which had complete addresses, and followed the example.
So say there are over a hundred letters received with an adequate address for Flora at the top of the list, and many others received with her address further down on the list. Why would anyone send her money? After all, the "Miracle" letter does not request anything be sent. First, recall the tradition of charity chain letters. We have a divinity student's 1889 chain solicitation for money [1889], and there is a 1916 example soliciting for an "old railroad man" [Billy]. During the Great Depression there could have been a proliferation of charity chain letters of various forms, and begging letters. Some sympathetic recipients could have responded without careful reading of the Miracle letter. Above the names appeared: "We trust in God. He supplies our needs." This suggests that all six of the people listed are dependent on religiously motivated charity. Thus some people, moved by the suffering wrought by the depression, might without reading further send all six people on the list a donation. This would explain the receipt of money "within 9 days after mailing," before there was time for one's name to work to the top. Partial literacy could also bring mistaken responses. And there could have been a tradition that sending money was necessary to receive good luck. Recall the Mexican letters that ask the reader to send a coin forward with each copy mailed out (< Outliers). Or such a recommendation could have been spread by promoters of the letter as part of a conscious scheme to obtain money. However, for our scenario we presume otherwise, since we are trying to reconstruct how such a scheme could have developed in the first place.
What is our evidence for this naive receipt of money? Given the form of the Prosperity type letters, once someone from a small town signed on, and their copies propagated well downline, it would almost have to happen. There is also lost evidence. Around 1975 someone told me that long ago a grandmother had sent out a luck chain letter and got a lot of money in the mail from strangers. At that time I had not seen Hyatt's publication, and did not know that in the early 1930's there were luck chains with lists of names and some mailable addresses. This fact had also been lost in the story I heard. The story seemed so ridiculous that I discounted it and eventually forgot who told me.
If our reconstruction is correct, there were one or two glory years when luck chain letters actually "worked" for some, as if by magic. The money received was not expected by the sender of the letter, nor even by the authors of the innovations that made it work. These surprise benevolences may have inspired a folk belief in the efficacy of luck chain letters that has sustained the genre for three generations.
Prosperity. (Motive: Money,
Changes 4.1 - 4.5)
We now consider the changes that complete the transition from Good Luck
to Prosperity. Stories of the naive receipt of money would circulate
orally, or possibly as testimonials on versions of the Miracle letter. Some
people would understand the exponential feedback process involved, and would
use the letter to try to get money. We can reason out some of their behavior.
They would restart the letter by replacing the names in the list with
aliases; or with the names of conspiring friends and relatives, forming a
"circle" of six people. The circle would not feel bound by the copy quota
of five, but instead might distribute hundreds of copies. But first, what
changes might be made to the prior chain letter to increase cash receipts?
Consider change 4.1: the Good Luck letter stated it "should go three times around the world" and someone deleted this in the ancestry of the Prosperity letter. Every luck chain letter before and since has had some words about circumnavigation. However, letters that go overseas are unlikely to return a donation, so this deletion suggests financial motivation.
Next consider change 4.2: in two places someone changed "luck" to "prosperity" in the Prosperity ancestry. This could not be accidental - someone hoped, and wanted others to hope, that the letter brings money, not just "luck."
Change 4.3 suggests the same intent: three money testimonials have been added, including "Mrs. Sanford won $3,000." Testimonials about receiving money accumulate on modern luck chain letters, and appeared in 1928 in France (Deonna). But the use of the word "won" (instead of "received") twice on the Prosperity letter is suspicious. Possibly it could encourage replication of the letter by people hoping to win a bet. The Irish Sweepstakes was very popular in the early 1930's. Or the letter itself could be some form of lottery, additional instructions being transmitted orally.
Change 4.4 also moves in the direction of money: the previous warning of generalized "bad luck" for breaking the chain has been replaced, functionally, by the third testimonial that associates breaking the chain with financial ruin.
Changes 4.1 to 4.4 show that in 1933 there was a replicative advantage for luck chain letters that suggested financial gain, and that de-emphasized the role and reward of luck. Less than two years later a completely rational promise of money, Send-a-Dime, flooded the mails.
However, if we consider the perceptions of a circle of six people who are knowingly "operating" a version of the Prosperity chain for money, it seems they would not want to disclose how the letter worked. Disclosure could generate competing circles, invite problems with taxes or the postal inspectors, and destroy the charitable aura of the letter on which they believed everything depended. Thus the interest of major distributors seems contrary to the disclosures on the Prosperity letter.
To resolve this seeming contradiction, first consider some numbers. Just because we have but a single example of a Prosperity letter before 1935, that does not imply this type of letter was rare. If it could be a "fad" in Adams County, Illinois, why not in any other county in the United States? For that matter, two of the names on Hyatt's Adams County letter are from Chicago. A confused article in Literary Digest (April 20, 1937) assumes the reader has received more than one luck chain with list management instructions. Prosperity letters were probably a nationwide fad, producing tens of millions of letters. Even if there were thousands of secretive operators, this is far more letters than they could generate. Next, which alternative would better replicate: secrecy about the money-making properties of the letter, or disclosure? Certainly the more one is convinced that the letter brings donations by an understandable process, the more copies one will distribute. Individual members of a circle would be tempted to tip their relatives about the letter, and stories of its success in obtaining money by rational means would spread along with the letter, boosting replication. Or, in some simpler form, this information may be placed on the letter itself, such as "Mrs. Sanford won $3,000." Such disclosures on the letter would outpace oral recruitment by reaching out at a distance, even to strangers. As people became privy to the opportunity, there may have been a growing core network that preferred secrecy to disclosure. But the letter replicates just beyond that core in vast numbers. The content of a prevailing chain letter is simply what has appeared that best replicates. This may not be what most people want on the letter. Nor can a growing population of initiates easily control content, since their Frankenstein monster of exponential growth will run away and discover unanticipated methods of reproduction.
Evidence for this trend toward rational disclosure includes not only changes
4.1 to 4.4 as discussed, but the last change, 4.5, completing the Prosperity
letter. This is the addition: "the chain grows a definite power over the
expected word." This may be a corruption or mystification of a
prior explanation of how the letter worked. The word "power" may have first
appeared with a mathematical meaning. This trend away from providence or
luck, and toward a shared hope for money through mechanism, culminated in
the remarkable Send-a-Dime letter of 1935.
Send-a-Dime (Prosperity Club).
(Motive: Charity, Changes 5.1 - 5.6 )
The Send-a-Dime money chain letter was a major rewrite of a Prosperity luck
chain letter. Both have the word "God" at the top, a managed list of six
names below that, and the instruction to mail it to five people "you
wish prosperity to." We now discuss some innovations of Prosperity
Club (5.1 - 5.6).
5.1. "Prosperity Club"
Likely this was the name chosen by the author for the letter, or for participation
in it. "Prosperity" was the stated goal of the prior "luck" letter. Calling
it a "club" gave the appearance of organizational reality and encouraged
social contact along links. This probably served to unify the independent
circles that were operating the Prosperity letter.
5.2. Deletion of: "He (God) supplies our needs."
With Send-a-Dime, it was your friends, their friends, the "club" that delivered
prosperity, not God or luck. A nod was given to tradition by the monetary
subtitle "In God we Trust" (compare to "We Trust in God" on
Prosperity). The author also deleted all references to good or bad luck that
appeared in Prosperity, including the three money testimonials.
5.3. Full street addresses were used. Now everyone could play the game, not just people in small towns.
5.4. ". . . within three days . . ."
The deadline was extended from one to three days.
5.5. "In omitting the top name send that person ten (10c) cents
wrapped in a paper as a charity donation.
This explicit request that money be sent was the key innovation of Send-a-Dime,
making it the first money chain letter. The explanation of sending (and receiving)
dimes was deftly handled by associating it with the departure of a name from
the list, as if in compensation. Note that these dimes were described as
a "charity donation," revealing Send-a-Dime's early association with
charity. Another key innovation over Prosperity was also present here (its
ingenuity camouflaged from our modern eyes by its own success). Prosperity
operators must have dreamed of getting a five dollar bill. To fix the amount
of the donation, and at just ten cents, would never have occurred to them.
However the request for a fixed donation, usually a dime, appears on all
prior charity chain letters, such as [1916].
In turn as your name leaves the top of the list you should receive 15,625
letters with donations amounting to $1,536.50.
Instead of trying to explain the exponential feedback process (a lengthy
and difficult task, especially in a corruptible medium), the author simply
gives the maximum number of dimes one might receive. Thus the reader is challenged
to verify this number, and in the process may become obsessed with exponential
growth. Even today, tens of thousands of people are fascinated with exponential
feedback, and pursue its promise of wealth with money chain letters or multi-level marketing. In 1935,
the $1,562.50 maximum payoff would buy about what $25,000 does today.
Though it was to become the mother of all nuisances, the original Send-a-Dime letter was a work of genius. The author understood how chain letters were working then, probably better than we will ever know, and with amazing economy completely rationalized and transmuted this tradition. With a composition of no more than 120 words, a new communications process was introduced to the world. No prior example of this process has ever been discovered. It is related to the older "Ponzi scheme," in which the money of new investors pays the old investors. But a Ponzi scheme has a fixed center, as do pyramid sales and multilevel marketing. The Prosperity Club exponential feedback process does not have a fixed center, and could be called a "floating Ponzi."
Who wrote Send-a-Dime? In 1935, many people wanted to know, including reporters and Postal Inspectors. Yet the author's identity was never revealed. There was one obscure report that we feel deserves credence - Donald Wickets writing in 1935 (Liberty). Based on Wickets' account, newspaper articles and the evidence from chain letters, we offer the following scenario for the launching of Send-a-Dime.
In early 1935, a woman living in the Denver area, call her Mrs. C ("C" for charity), has received versions of the Prosperity type luck chain. She learns that it is generating cash donations and completely understands the process. Mrs. C rewrites this letter, producing the first "Prosperity Club" text. She consults a Denver attorney concerning its legality and he gives her the green light (told to Wickets by the attorney). Mrs. C places the names of people needing money on the letters and distributes the letters, launching a worldwide money chain letter craze. In the first newspaper report on the craze, a Post Office Inspector states: "We intend to trace down the individuals responsible for starting the craze, and when we have the necessary evidence we'll arrest them for federal prosecution." Mrs. C keeps her authorship of the letter a secret, probably as she had planned from the start.All the names on Hyatt's 1933 Prosperity letter are married women and women dominated early Send-a-Dime, supporting Wickets' claim that a woman started the craze. The text of Send-a-Dime, and the inability of the Postal Inspectors to track down the originator, add evidence that Mrs. C was motivated by charity. Money chain letters leave multiple paths to trace back to a founder. Her name probably never appeared on a chain letter. According to newspaper accounts, early participants in Send-a-Dime perceived it as a charity scheme, often associating it with the "share the wealth" political slogan of Louisiana populist Huey P. Long (Olson). Very soon however, the postal inspectors' worst suspicions were realized as the Send-a-Dime process was used for thousands of petty cons.
The 1935 money chain letter craze was not a single radiating wave, but
several pulsations as new methods were devised to recruit participants,
thwart cheating and appear legal (as by avoiding use of the mail). "Pyramid schemes" soon developed in
which the letter was purchased at parties or meetings organized by those
higher on the list. Supervision guaranteed payment to the top person on the
list and discouraged restarts. All pyramid schemes are now illegal, even
if they never use the mail. A well known example is the "Circle of Gold," begun in 1978 in
California. In this scheme one enters the process by buying a letter bearing
a list of twelve names for $50. The seller assures that the buyer sends $50
to the name at the top of the list. Two copies of the letter are then prepared
with the top name removed and the buyer's name inserted last. The buyer then
becomes a seller, and attempts to sell these letters for $50 each, thereby
recouping the initial $100 entry cost. We call this process a Springfield5 type pyramid,
since it began in that Missouri city on May 8, 1935 with a $5 ante version.
Reporter Allen Oliver recorded conversation about it moments after its inception
(Springfield
Leader and Press). See a photo from Springfield below. Claims that
pyramid schemes are an ancient invention (1958, 1980) have not been
verified, though the "triangular" numbers (10+20=30, 10+20+30=60, 10+20+30+40=100)
in Mark 4: 4 - 9 (the Parable of the Sower) suggest some organized method
of propagating "the word."
[Photo purchased on eBay. Attached text reads: "Springfield, MO. - It
was a Pot of Gold for some while it lasted. Scene is in a garage in Springfield,
during the height of a "get rich quick" spree where speculators bought letters
for $5.00 each and sold two copies for $5.00 each, keeping one five. This
craze soon failed for lack of buyers but the gains to some of the participants
attracted nation-wide attention while it lasted. Those who made sure money
were the notary publics, who charged from ten cents to fifty cents per letter
to notarize them. Note at right center of table man with money in hand and
notary public with stamp." Further text is torn away. Scheme may be described
wrong on this note - probably it was the Springfield5 type as described
above.]
Money chain letters have greatly diversified since 1935 and many billions have been mailed worldwide. We have collected closely related examples from England that ask for a sixpence, bear a list of five names and addresses instead of six, and reassure the reader that there is " no further assessment or catch" to the procedure [1935e1, 1935e2]. A 1988 study describes contemporary letters and attitudes of the "players" (Boles & Myers). Money chain letters have also invaded the Internet in great numbers [2001].
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
4.2
DIVERGENCE OF LUCK AND MONEY CHAINS (1935 - 1939)
Send-a-Dime crash. Identity crisis. Identification by command.
A Demon appears.
Send-a-Dime crash.
The Send-a-Dime chain letter craze of 1935 peaked in the weeks after it
received its first newspaper coverage (April 19 in Denver, April 21 in New
York). Denver restaurant owner A. McVittie received 2,363 copies in two days
(April 27). However, by
May 28 the New York Times was reporting "Chain-letter fad on wane."
Hopes to make money using Send-a-Dime quickly collapsed and the letters became
a public nuisance. Parodies circulated that mocked the process and expressed
intimidating hostility to senders [1935].
Despite the subsequent long term survival of money chain letters, surely there
came a time in the mid 1930's when chain letters were quickly discarded with
little examination.
Identity crisis.
While money chain letters were being contemptuously discarded by the millions,
what was happening to the prevailing Prosperity luck chain letters? Many
must have suffered the same fate since they looked so much like Send-a-Dime.
After all, Send-a-Dime was modeled on them, with the leading list of six names.
Here is a challenge for you: for a luck chain letter to survive then, how
could it convincingly distinguish itself from the reviled and illegal money
chain letters?
Identification by command.
You may suggest a prominent disclaimer. But contemporary money chain letters
often claim that they are not a chain letter [1978].
Probably from thousands of variations there appeared "Do not send money"
[1939, probably earlier].
In 1952 an observant reporter, writing about Send-a-Dime, noted that almost
all luck chain letters had this sentence (Nelson), as all do now. It mattered
little, for replication, whether a recipient sent money or not. The replicative
power of "Do not send money" resided in its distinguishing the letter
it was on from a money chain. What other sentence could so decisively inform
a reader that the letter in hand did not ask for money? This use of a command
for identification is a striking example of the creativity of the
folk process. The contents of a traditional chain letter are not understood
by their literal meaning, but by their affect on propagation.
Once "Do not send money" predominated on luck chain letters, they could not nourish hope of bringing money by some rational means. And the author of Send-a-Dime, the fabulous Mrs. C, had removed all mention of good luck or bad luck, and removed all testimonials. Thus luck chain letters and money chain letters parted ways, and since this splitting of the motivational stream have radically diverged. Testimonials would reappear on money chain letters, but instead of third person tales of good and bad luck we now see first person fictions of riches gained. No luck is involved in these stories - getting rich allegedly follows by cause and effect if you obey the instructions.
A Demon Appears.
A recent (4/2003) discovery reveals that there was an early experiment (1935-36?)
in asking for money and threatening bad luck for noncompliance. The
following "actual letter found among some mementos" appeared in the March
1977 issue of the nostalgia magazine Good Old Days (Esther Norman, 1977). The
initial list of five names and addresses were not published.
THE GOOD LUCK CHAINThis appears to be a fairly typical Send-a-Dime letter with a good luck paragraph and a bad luck paragraph added (in italics above). The good luck paragraph may be an edited version of testimonials circulating at the time on a Prosperity type letter [compare to 1933]. The bad luck paragraph appears to be a composed list designed to frighten a representative variety of downline recipients into sending a dime to the author. None of these testimonials mention a name, nor do they bear the win-lose or lose-win structure of the more memorable testimonials that first appeared during the 1940's and 1950's. An undated money chain letter also received by Ester Norman [1935u] contains some similar rewrites as above ("Be careful! Choose friends who can be trusted.") Possibly a single chain letter operator only a few slots up line was the source of the bland threats and promises in the above letter. In any case, scores of chain letter texts support the view that money chain letters abandoned the appeal to good and bad luck, and that luck chain letters, by around 1939, universally demanded that no money be sent. But considering the explosion of money chain letters in 1935 it should not be surprising that there were experiments in hybrid forms of money and luck letters, prior to the evolutionary divergence described above.Dear Friend:
This chain was started in the hope of bringing good luck to you. WITHIN THREE DAYS, make five (5) copies of this letter, leaving off the top name and address and add your name and address at the bottom of the list. Remember, faith, hope and charity!
Mail or give these five copies to five of your friends or relatives to whom you wish good luck and prosperity to come. Be careful to choose friends who are reliable and dependable and who will be certain to keep the chain unbroken.
An Army officer received $5,000 from sending out the letters. A housewife received $3,000 and a high school student received $1,000, so you can see that it pays off.
Send 10¢ to the top name on the list, the one that you omitted. Wrap it carefully in paper, put it in an envelope, enclosing nothing else, as a charity donation. In turn, as your name reaches the top, you will begin receiving hundreds of dimes.
Beware! If you break the chain you will have bad luck. One woman was in a car accident when she broke the chain. Another woman was sued for divorce. A man lost his job. A high school student failed to pass in three subjects. Bad luck will follow you if you break the chain!
Send your five letters today! Pick good friends you can trust! The dimes will begin arriving if you do. [1936uu]
But could a hybrid money / bad luck chain long survive, and if so, what might it evolve toward? Surely the most malignant combination of the many motivations for complying with a chain letter is the joining of money with fear. A grim evolutionary potential of a such a letter is extortion, real or simulated. An internet informant told me that a hundred quota money chain letter existed (1996) in India that, as they recalled, contained bad luck warnings against breaking the chain. But threats on money chain letters are not mentioned in over a hundred U.S. newspaper articles, many dating back to 1935. There is the curious suicide of Cecil Headlee, 39, who "shot and killed himself because he thought 'a mob was going to get him for breaking the chain' " (DP, 1935-26). This brief account does not tell us what type of chain letter was involved. I had always presumed it was a "standard" Send-a-Dime type, which we should expect for May 15, 1935. But perhaps some more sinister version of money / bad luck had reached Mr. Headlee, perhaps one that mentioned an unsolved murder. There is no reason to doubt the authenticity of the Norman letter given above, and thus likely more threatening versions did circulate. But if so, they would have been brought to the attention of the postal inspectors, who in 1935 had tremendous discretion as to which transgressors to pursue. A "send money or die" letter would surely have annoyed them, and thus any such demon may have been squashed as it emerged from its egg.
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
4.3 LUCK
FOLLOWS MONEY (1952)
The Luck by Mail type. Follow-up letters. Design or Self-organization?
Though luck and money chain letters diverged in content after the 1935 Send-a-Dime boom / bust, some features have appeared in luck chain letters that may have special appeal to distributors of money letters.
The Luck by Mail type.
Our principal text will be a letter mailed anonymously from a town in Tennessee
in April 1952 (Halpert). Unlike
most chains of the time, the letter did not have a list of senders.
The Prayer. Trust in the Lord with all thy heart and lean not on thy own understandance in all thy ways acknowledge him and he will direct thy path.
Please copy this and see what happens in four days after receiving it. Send this copy and four to someone you wish good luck. It must leave in 24 hours. Don't send any money and don't keep this copy. Gen Patton received $1,600 after receiving it. Gen Allen received $1,600 and lost it because he broke the chain.
You are to have good luck in 4 days. This is not a joke and you will receive by mail. [1952]
Follow-up Letters.
Many direct mail campaigns will follow-up
a first solicitation by another. I have mentioned the massive "sweepstakes"
mailings of American Family Publishers, Publishers Clearing House and other
companies, which try to convince people (without exactly saying it) that they
will win a huge cash prize if they respond (< Sweepstakes). I have received a follow-up letter
stating that prize winners had asked about giving a gift to members of the
"prize patrol." The letter explained that this was against company policy,
but suggested that the purchase of a magazine subscription would be an appropriate
gesture instead. Several years ago, after receiving a "you may already have
won" letter, my mother received a follow-up that purported to be from an
attorney who had obtained the public information of her being a "finalist."
The "attorney" offered his services as a financial adviser, implying that
it was likely my mother would soon be in need of his services.
Suppose that John Doe is operating a Send-a-Dime letter, say in 1950. Our sample of money chain letters contains over 30 from 1935, but only four from 1936 to 1974. The nearest date I have to 1950 is 1943. However many things happened in 1935, within weeks of the start of the craze in April. The initial Send-a-Dime restriction to five copies was immediately ignored by chain letter operators. No formal copy quota is present now, but money letters often suggest mailings of hundreds. Also in 1935, the ante was often raised from a dime to a dollar, five dollars and more. But probably there remained a niche for the dime chain in 1950. Based on the price of a first class postage stamp (three cents), a dime then would buy what a dollar does now. And dollar antes are common now on money chain letters.
So John Doe mails out a couple hundred money chain letters, perhaps similar to the original Send-a-Dime in that they ask for a dime and, for tradition sake, ask that five copies be sent out. He has aliases or relatives in all the slots for prior senders - no reason for strangers to get in on the money. John is disappointed that his previous response rate shows the letter is not quite propagating on its own, and wonders if he could increase response by a follow-up letter. What would work as a follow-up?
First, the follow-up letter itself should be a chain letter - otherwise John will only reach those on his mailing list, and the big money comes if his Send-a-Dime letter multiplies downline. But there is no point to sending another money chain letter so soon. Could using a luck chain letter as a follow-up increase response to the money chain letter?
With all exponential feedback processes, whether money chain letters, pyramid schemes or multilevel marketing, the most lucrative product to transmit downline is faith. Suppose someone has received the money chain letter, and then, fatefully, an anonymous letter arrives proclaiming he or she will soon receive a mysterious cash bonanza by mail. Surely this increases the temptation to try the Send-a-Dime letter. Even if the follow-up letter persuades just one additional person in ten, this could bring hundreds of extra responses. Those so persuaded, if they do not restart the letter like John did, will leave most of John's aliases on the list and mail five copies to people they know. And then, would not many of those on John's mailing list also comply with the luck chain letter they had received? If so, who would they send it to? Likely the same people they sent the money chain to, either naively, or realizing that as the luck letter motivated themselves, so too it may motivate others and thus increase their downline compliance to the money chain. Conveniently, both the luck and money letters asked for five copies, not surprising since the second was modeled after the first in 1935.
So a luck chain letter may be a good follow-up to a money chain letter. Are any innovations of the 1952 Halpert letter designed to better serve this purpose? First, Proverbs seems doubtful, though it may have helped by creating the impression that this was a letter no one had seen before. As for the new testimonials, both generals get $1,600. The maximum payoff for Send-a-Dime was $1,562.50, a figure present in the original Send-a-Dime text. Rounded off, as in memory, this easily becomes $1,600. Thus we should expect this number would encourage fantasies of hitting it big with Send-a-Dime. Finally, Luck by Mail states you will receive your good luck ($1,600) by mail, the very medium that delivers the Send-a-Dime bonanza. Thus the 1952 Halpert letter may have been a modification of a circulating chain letter designed to follow-up Send-a-Dime.
If so, it could have had a high replication rate among money chain players, and its distribution was highly targeted to this group. The paths of prior money letters had left loosely connected transmission networks totaling perhaps 10 million people, some links going back to 1935. The Halpert letter, and subsequent variants, may have surged through these networks, also spinning off letters into the general public in sufficient quantity to kill off all its luck chain letter cousins by immunization.
Money letters setting higher antes probably followed transmission paths of Send-a-Dime in 1935. In North Dakota, Miss Elma Bergrud received a quilt patch exchange letter [1935-10] from the same person who had previously sent Send-a-Dime [1935-05]. In 1978, the $1000 ante pyramid scheme "Circle of Abundance" followed the earlier $100 ante "Circle of Gold" (Marks 1978). It is easy to see why all this happened. For example, pyramid schemes are illegal and flow along social contacts in the early going. Thus the lower ante Circle of Gold established a tree of trusted prior participants that was available to the same "circle" for the higher ante next round. Of course this second tree was pruned of all those who lost money in the first round.
Symbiotic distribution occurs if for two replicators within a network of transmission, the receipt of one favors the replication of the other. Recall that quota five and quota twenty letters circulated simultaneously during 1959 - 1967 (< Table 2). Perhaps this was possible because of niche differentiation. Luck by Mail (quota five) may have been a symbiotic resident within the old money chain network, while Death20 was establishing itself among offices workers and professionals..
Design or Self-organization?
Apart from suggestive bits of text, there is no other direct evidence that
luck chain letters ever followed money chain letters. If we had samples of
all the chain letters received by a few people, then by examining postmarks
the phenomenon might be confirmed. Even if this symbiotic distribution could
be proved, that does not prove someone deliberately modified a luck chain
letter to serve as a follow-up to a money letter. For if among the thousands
of variations present in the chain letter population, some happen to appeal
more to money chain letter players, then these will flow in the money chain
transmission networks. Thus it is difficult to decide if some features are
the product of calculating human design, or the product of selection from
a vast pool of accidental or uncalculated variations.
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
4.4 ORIGIN
OF COPY QUOTA 24 (1959 - 1973)
The Lottery24 type. Missing deadline. Accidental origin hypothesis.
Table 5 - Selected luck
chain letter specifications.
The Lottery24 type.
We have previously discussed the Lottery24 type chain letter, its South American
origin and its combination with the Death20 type in North America in the
early 1970's (< LD Type). As noted
by Preston, the original copy quota of this type was twenty-four. From one
of his examples: "You must make twenty-four copies . . ." [1975, B4], and many other examples
retained twenty-four in the testimonials (Preston). But within a few years,
variations predominated in North America which had eliminated this inconsistency
in the copy quota, reading twenty copies instead. Mexican [1984, 1995] and Brazilian [1994] letters, and we suspect
most indigenous South American chains, still retain copy quota twenty-four.
Missing deadline.
A curious fact about Lottery24 is that its early North American forms have
no explicit deadline. Nine days seems to be the implied deadline, since that
interval brings a better job to an office worker and death to an unbeliever.
But there is no statement commanding the recipient to complete distribution
of copies within a specified interval of time. On the Lottery24 block of
contemporary DL letters you find: " . . . an office employee, received
the letter and forgot it had to leave his hands within 96 hours."
However the italicized deadline is an internal transfer from the Death20
block that first appeared around 1983 (a rider on Kiss). Except for Lottery24, all English
language luck chains, and most foreign examples, have an explicit deadline.
Accidental origin hypothesis.
The origin of high copy quotas (20 and over) is puzzling. In North America,
quota 5 letters dominated circulation from around 1929 on into the 1960's.
But a quota 20 letter had appeared by 1959, and eventually captured mainline
circulation near the end of the 1960's. The origin of the South American
quota twenty-four is also a difficult question. Just one example of a Spanish
or Portuguese letter from 1955-1979 would be a great help. Still we venture
this hypothesis:
Copy quota 24 originated by accident when someone mistakenly used the "24" from a 24 hour deadline as the copy quota.The following table will assist in presenting the details of this hypothesis. Hypothetical letters are in red print.
Table 5.
Selected luck chain letter specifications.
| No. | Location | Years | Quota | Deadline | Wait | Type | Link |
| 1 | U.S & U.K. | 1922 - 1929 | 9 copies | 24 hours | 9 days | Good Luck | Brittain |
| 2 | France | 1928 | 9 " | 24 " | 9 days | Good Luck | Deonna |
| 3 | U.S. | 1929 | 5 " | 24 " | 4 days | Good Luck var. | Patterson |
| 4 | U.S. | 1933 - 1945 | 5 " | 24 " | 9 & 4 days | Prosperity | Reherman |
| 5 | U.S. | 1952 - 1967 | 5 " | 24 " | 4 days | Luck by Mail | Hansen |
| 6 | Venezuela | 1930? - 1968? | 5 " | 24 ": | 9 days | Hypothetical | |
| 7 | Venezuela | 1965? | 24 " | 24 " | 9 days | Hypothetical | |
| 8 | Venezuela | 1965? | 24 " | None | 9 days | Hypothetical | |
| 9 | U.S. | 1973 | 24 " | None | 9 days | Lottery24 block | Preston |
| 10 | Brazil | 1994 | 24 " | None | 9 days | Unnamed | Savio |
| 11 | Mexico / U.S. | 1980 - 1995 | 24 " | 9 & 13 days | 13 days | Unnamed | Montenyohl |
The origin of copy quota 24 as a copying error in Latin America could have involved the following five events.
(1) Letters with the a 24 hour deadline had circulated internationally since the 1920's, and were still very common in North America during the 1960's (Nos. 1 to 5 in the table). Though uncollected, very likely a luck chain letter circulated in South America that also had this 24 hour deadline (No. 6 in the table).The successful change to quota 24 may have happened not long after Lottery24 accumulated its two office testimonials, Boss Wins Lottery and Lost Job - Better Job. This copying error had probably happened many times before, but with the availability of photocopying this time it was taken seriously.
(2) At some time, perhaps around 1965, someone mistakenly used "24" for the copy quota on No. 6, producing the hypothetical letter No. 7 with quota 24 copies and deadline 24 hours.
(3) In this mutated letter the prior 24 hour deadline did not allow enough time to produce and distribute 24 copies. So new variations quickly appeared, one of which deleted the deadline, producing letter No. 8.
(4) Hypothetical letter No. 8 was translated into English producing the Lottery24 block No. 9. Another branch of No. 8 was translated in Portuguese and was an ancestor to the Brazilian letter No. 10.
(5) Another variation of the mutated 24 copies in 24 hours (No. 7) extended the deadline by using the waiting period (9 days). This was an ancestor of the Mexican letter No. 11.
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
4.5 THE
MEDIA CHAIN LETTER (1963 - 1998)
How an obsolete chain letter survived in obscurity for twenty years, became
famous in 1990, and now pushes jokes on the Internet.
For over 65 years, humorous texts have circulated from office to office and person to person [1935]. One such item, which we call "Play Golf," lists the illustrious positions of several tycoons at the height of their careers in 1923, the same year that golfer Gene Sarazen won the PGA tournament. Sarazen died in 1999 at age 97.
1. President of the largest steel company?
2. President of the largest gas company?
3. President of the New York Stock Exchange?
4. The greatest wheat speculator?
5. President of the Bank of International Settlement?
6. The great Bear of Wall Street?
These men should be considered some of the world's most successful men, at least they found the secret of making money. Now more than 65 years later, do you know what became of these men?
1. The president of the largest steel company, Schwab, died a pauper.
2. The president of the largest gas company, Howard Hopson, is insane.
3. The president of the Ne York Stock Exchange, Richard Whitney, was
released from prison to die at home.
4. The greatest wheat speculator, Arthur Cooper, died abroad, insolvent.
5. The president of the Bank of International Settlement shot himself.
6. The great Bear of Wall Street, Mr. C. Riverhore, committed suicide.
That same year, 1923, the winner of the most important golf championship, Gene Sarasen, won the U.S. open and PGA Tournament. Today he is still playing and he's solvent.
Conclusion: Stop worrying about business and play golf!!!! [first part of 1988]
The 1988 version Play Golf, whose text is given above, has a short luck chain letter added to it, forming what we call "Play Golf Plus."
This letter originated in the Netherlands, and has been passed around the world at least 20 times, bringing good luck to everyone who passed it on. The one who breaks the chain will have bad luck. Do not keep this letter. Do not send money. Just have a wonderful, efficient secretary make four additional copies and send it to five of your friends to whom you wish good luck. You will see that something good happens to you four days from now if this chain is not broken. This is not a joke. You will receive good luck in four days. [second part of 1988]This added quota five chain letter, the "Golf Partner," is closely related to the type we have called Luck by Mail. Differences include the instruction to have a secretary make the copies, and the absence of the luck "by mail" stipulation. Our earliest Play Golf Plus is the 1972 example cited above. It had a list of 14 prior senders' names at the bottom. By the early 1970's chain letters with a death threat and demanding 20 copies had completely replaced all independently circulating quota five luck chains (< Table 2). Thus the Golf Partner was probably added to the end of Play Golf in the 1960's or before. Both forms continued to circulate, probably Play Golf via the distribution network of photocopied office humor and Play Golf Plus more by mail.
In the 1970's and thereafter, the Golf Partner had become a living fossil, surviving only in the mutually beneficial relationship with Play Golf. Considering the class associations of golf, Play Golf and Play Golf Plus may have always appealed more to people who commanded the labor of a secretary. But no one could have predicted that in 1990 the chain letter was to go on its own again, and be mailed by such people that it would be called: "The Media chain letter" (Joseph Nocera, New Republic, Nov. 12, 1990), "The Chain Letter of the Rich and Famous" (Diedre Fanning, New York Times, Oct. 7, 1990), and "The VIP Chain Letter" (Charlie Clark, Washington Post, Nov. 16, 1991).
We have collected four samples of the Media chain, the earliest dating in June, 1990. But we have eighteen accounts of it in newspapers and popular periodicals. Dates are rare in these sources, but the following events occurred, perhaps some simultaneously or in a slightly different order.
Our samples of the Media chain letter have 17, 21. 34 and 48 cover letters, and there are reports of 50. The stacking orders new-to-old and old-to-new both appear. As you progress back in time the images of the letters become more and more corrupted from successive photocopying. The older letters often refer to illustrious prior senders whose letters have since become illegible and were removed from the stack. Occasionally you encounter a FAX or a photocopied business card. The average time from receipt to receipt was a little less than eight days.
Our oldest example of the Media chain letter contains many names of celebrities and executives in the entertainment industry [1990]. But the oldest letter in the stack was sent by Pierre Salinger, former Press Secretary for President Kennedy. For narrative convenience, we assume that the celebrity attributions are reliable. However it should be kept in mind that the signatures present are all corrupted photocopies and hence unverifiable. Another Media chain letter bundle [1990] circulated in American real estate and investment firms, crossed over the Atlantic and returned. Many comments are musings on the utility of good luck. "Some of us in the securities and real estate businesses forgot that it's better to be lucky than smart." Another theme, common in published reports on the Media chain, is admission of fear of bad luck. "A man will do anything out of fear" (Newspaper editor). Most reporters accepted these comments at face value: "Media Barons Knuckle Under Superstition" (AP headline, Aug. 29, 1990). But some observers noted social reasons for the letter's success.
2. Exercise of wit. "These accompanying documents, most recipients admit, are what prompts them to play the game and write their own 'I can't believe I'm doing this' notes, as they pass the letter on" (Kathleen Hendrix, Los Angeles Times, Jan. 1991). Almost all of the comments on forwarding letters attempt humor, and the early self-deprecation theme is often carried forward. "Tell me why I am doing this" (Feb. 1991). "The name for this is idiocy. But hopefully not many will know" (May 1991). Growing lists of thematic humor also appear on graffiti, photocopied office humor and E-mail chains [e1996].
Status motives were present with other chain letters. Many copies of the Good Luck chain contained long lists of "X to Y," so that if you are Y, any downline recipient can conclude that X knows you [1922]. A striking later example has 113 different names. These start out with Japanese naval officers, phase into a European venue, and half way through shift to Hollywood celebrities such as Sid Graumann, Harold Lloyd and Mac Sennet [1926]. The half serious 1979 Brill chain [1979] had no real threat but many entertainment industry stars in its list of prior senders. Perhaps many of the listed celebrities never actually sent out the Good Luck or Brill letters. But forwarding letters with the Media chain were on corporate stationery and usually signed, thus providing a more convincing display for identification with celebrity.
The Media chain letter continued to progress through hierarchies for several years. A note in the British Medical Journal (March 25, 1995) complained of its "wad of memos." Infected organizations included the Ministry of Defence, the Metropolitan Police and the National Health Service. Like chickenpox, the Media chain letter is usually a one-time infection, leaving a trail of immunity. As the paper form of this chain letter works out its extinction, the text has crossed over into the vast new territory of the Internet.
Though we have not located an example, probably sometime in the early 1990's Play Golf Plus was digitized and transmitted via E-mail. Many photocopied office humor items have also crossed over to the Internet. A July 1993 chain E-mail consists of a series of ironic questions, later versions of which are titled "Why ask why?" By mid 1995 this item had been pasted on the beginning of Play Golf Plus [e1995]. Since then the "Media" chain letter, with continuing modifications, has been attached to other email jokes, including "The Gift" [e1995-12], and "The Frog":
READ THIS MESSAGE AND PASS IT ON....
A man takes the day off work and decides to go out golfing. He is on the
second hole when he notices a frog sitting next to the green. He thinks nothing
of it and is about to shoot when he hears, "Ribbit. Nine Iron" The man looks
around and doesn't see anyone. "Ribbit. Nine Iron." He looks at the frog
and decides to prove the frog wrong, puts his other club away, and grabs
a nine iron. Boom! he hits it ten inches from the cup. He is shocked.
He says to the frog, "Wow that's amazing. You must be a lucky frog, eh?"
The frog reply's "Ribbit. Lucky frog." The man decides to take the
frog with him to the next hole. "What do you think frog?" the man asks. "Ribbit.
Three wood." The guy takes out a three wood and Boom! Hole in one. The man
is befuddled and doesn't know what to say. By the end of the day, the man
golfed the best game of golf in his life and asks the frog, "OK where
to next?" The frog reply, "Ribbit. Las Vegas." They go to Las Vegas and the
guy says, "OK frog, now what?" The frog says, "Ribbit Roulette." Upon approaching
the roulette table, the man asks," What do you think I should bet?" The frog
replies, "Ribbit. $3000, black 6." Now, this is a million-to-one shot to
win, but after the golf game, the Man figures what the heck. Boom! Tons of
cash comes sliding back across the table. The man takes his winnings and
buys the best room in the hotel. He sits the frog down and says, "Frog, I
don't know how to repay you. You've won me all this money and I am forever
grateful." The frog replies, "Ribbit, Kiss Me." He figures why not, since
after all the frog did for him he deserves it. With a kiss, the frog turns
into a gorgeous 15-year-old girl.
"And that, your honor, is how the girl ended up in my room."
The origination of this letter is unknown, but it brings good luck to everyone who passes it on. The one who breaks the chain will have bad luck. Do not keep this letter. Do not send money. Just forward it to five of your friends to whom you wish good luck. You will see that something good happens to you four days from now if the chain is not broken. You will receive good luck in four days. [e1997]
Around 1967 the predominant chain letter was too long, too threatening, and demanded too many copies (twenty) to be added successfully to an office humor joke about golf. Instead someone added the text of a brief quota five chain letter, a type that was soon to become extinct as an independent chain letter. Surely no one could have anticipated the career of this letter.
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
4.6 THE "IT WORKS" BLITZ (1979 - 1982)
The rise of the It
Works postscript. Table 6 - Occurrences of D,
L, LD and DL variations.
Why did "It Works" work? Associated features.
The rise of
the "It Works" postscript.
In the mid 1970's four structural types of luck chain letters circulated
in English speaking countries:
To document this sudden population change we tabulate the four types above, sub-classifying the DL letters into five mutually exclusive and successive variations. Letters with uncertain circulation dates are not used.
Table 6. Occurrences of D, L, LD, and DL variations.
D: All Death20 type letters
L: All Lottery24 type letters (none collected so
far).
LD: All Lottery-Death type letters
DL-n: Death-Lottery (DL) letters with a list of names.
DL-0: DL letters with no list of names, nor any
of the following three postscripts.
DL-m: DL letters concluding with "Do not send money" or
variants.
DL-i: DL letters concluding with "Do not send
money. Please do not ignore this" or variants (none collected so far).
DL-w: DL letters concluding with "Do not send money. Please
do not ignore this. It works" or variants.
| Years | D | L | LD | DL-n | DL-0 | DL-m | DL-i | DL-w |
| 1959 - 1971 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1972 - 1973 | 2 |
0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1974 - 1975 | 1 | 0 | 13 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1976 - 1977 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1978 - 1979 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| 1980 - 1981 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| 1982 - 1983 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0(a) | 0 | 13 |
| 1984 - 2005 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 (b) | 138 |
(a) One letter apparently had "Please do not ignore this - It works" deleted
in its ancestry [1982-01]. It
is not tabulated.
(b) A few later letters have had the final words "It works" deleted [1984-08]. These are not tabulated.
We name the complete postscript "Do not send money. Please do not ignore this. It works", and its variations, by the concluding phrase "It Works." The earliest It Works postscript in the archive was mailed anonymously in May 1979 to an Oxnard, California address [text]. Likely it had appeared a few months before. Measured by the number of participants, the It Works founder is the most copied document in human history, if we consider its varying descendants as the same "document" (and do not so consider ancestors of It Works). The It Works descent group monopolized mainline circulation up until the millennial collapse of paper luck chain letters (> All fall down). Versions were translated into French [1995], Spanish [1996], Polish [1992], Italian and likely many other languages. A highly modified DL letter, amusingly adapted to an Indian audience, has been collected in England [1996]. This probably also derives from the Its Work founder, though all that remains of the full postscript is "Please don't neglect this." It Works descendants also invaded the Internet, but in this medium the postscript was soon deleted [e1994].
The progressive development of the It Works founder in North America proves that this is where it was launched. It is extremely unlikely that successive translations could have produced such examples.
Why did "It Works" Work?
The tabulated data suggest that each of three successive innovations (DL-0,
DL-m, and DL-i & DL-w) increased propagation.
DL-0: The internal senders list in DL letters was an awkward liability [1975], especially since photocopying was rapidly becoming the dominant method of replication. When a letter must be typed or hand copied, it is not that much additional bother to update a list of names. But if one is photocopying, instructions to revise the letter in any way may prompt discard. Further, asking for one's name is not consistent with anonymous distribution, which has since completely prevailed. Deletion of the internal list also gave the resulting text the appearance of a single chain letter, making the contradictions between the D and L blocks less likely to be observed.
DL-m: Then adding a postscript repeating the injunction against sending money provided a highly visible flag that the letter was not a solicitation for money.
DL-i & DL-w: The failure to collect a "DL-i" letter suggests that "Please do not ignore this" and "It works" first appeared concurrently. Together they constitute a polite affirmation of the power of the letter, in contrast to the previous bossy conclusion: "For no reason whatsoever should this chain be broken." This was retained, but now was much less prominent. A money chain letter circulating at the time contained "Do it . . . it really does work" [1978]. Perhaps It Works luck chain letters followed this money chain (> Section 4.3), each increasing the other's circulation. "It does work" is a common variant of the luck chain letter postscript, and is the form on our oldest example [1979-05]. Many radio and television advertisements use "It Works."
Associated features.
Recall (< Section 3.3) that a "feature" is
very unlikely to be created more than once. Recall also the terms we introduced
to relate one feature to another: unlinked, pre-linked, co-linked, post-linked
and transfer-linked (< Table 3).
As Table 6 reveals,
by 1984 all circulating mainline luck chain letters were the DL-w type (Death-Lottery
with It Works), our group under consideration here (the "in-group"). In cladistic
analysis, one is usually concerned with post-linked features (shared derived
characters, or synapomorphies) which determine taxa within the in-group.
Here, instead, we will list pre-linked and co-linked features (primitive
characters, or plesiomorphies) which, in addition, differ from those present
on most of the DL letters prior to the in-group launching. We call these
"associated features." For a standard of contrast to these associated
features we use the early DL-n letter [1974-10]. For the It Works founder
we use [1979-05]. Of course
the most prominent of all variations pre-linked to It Works were (i) the
deletion of the internal list of senders (which probably happened many times),
and (ii) the single postscript "Do not send money" and its variants.
We have not listed these.
(1) DL-n: You will receive good luck within 4 days of receiving
this letter.
It Works: You will receive good luck within four days of receiving
this letter provided in turn you send it back out.
Note: This "provided" clause is co-linked to It Works on [1979-05].
(2) DL-n: Send twenty copies of this letter
to people you think need good luck.
It Works: Send copies of this letter to people you think need
good luck.
Note: This deletion is pre-linked to It Works, appearing on
the DL-0 letter [1978-04].
(3) DL-n: Please do not send money.
It Works: Do not send money, for fate has no price on
it.
Note: Co-linked on [1979-05]. "Fate
/ faith" is not diagnostic of phylogeny.
(4) DL-n: It must leave (you) within 96 hours.
It Works: It must leave your hands within 96
hours.
Note: "Your hands" is pre-linked to It Works on the DL-m letter [1979-01].
(5) DL-n: This chain comes from Venezuela, was written by
St. Aptine de Cade . . .
It Works: This chain comes from Venezuela and was written by
Saul Anthony De Cadif...
Note: "Sol" is pre-linked to It Works, appearing on
the DL-m letter [1979-01].
(6) DL-n: . . . a missionary from South America. Since the chain
must make a tour . . .
It Works: . . . a missionary from South America. I, myself,
now forward it to you. Since the chain must make a tour . . ..
Note: Co-linked on [1979-05].
Having listed the features associated with the advent of the full It Works postscript, we can now argue that the DL-m letter [1982-01] has had "Please don't ignore this - It works" deleted in its ancestry. This seems apparent since all of the above associated features appear on this letter, except for (4) "your hands." And in this case the entire containing sentence, "Do not keep this letter. . . . It must leave your hands within 96 hours" has been deleted. Thus it is reasonable to assume that the It Works founder was present in the ancestry of 1982-01. Supporting evidence comes from Table 6 above, where, if otherwise, 1982-01 would be a late and last holdout against the It Works blitz.
Alternatively, the ancestry of 1982-01 may never have had the full postscript. There could have been a common ancestor of 1982-01 and the It Works founder which concluded with "Remember no money" [like 1979-01] and also bore all the above associated features. If this were the case, all these six features would be pre-linked to It Works. Any one of these could also manifest as pre-linked if a letter is collected that bears it and whose ancestry is free from It Works. Quite possibly this may happen, as the co-linkage of two features is always a tentative and suspect status. We see from this example that despite our large dated sample of letters, varying hypotheses of ancestry may not be easily resolved
In any case, the universal appearance of all these six features at the advent of the It Works descent group is convincing evidence that the full postscript was added to just a single letter, and that all subsequent letters bearing it are descendants of that letter. For example, on a late DL letter collected in North America [2004] we can recognize the first five of the above pre and co-linked features though some are modified after 20 years of retypes. For the sixth listed feature, "I myself now forward it to you," we have noted previously that this disappeared from circulation around 1984 when new titles must have been added to a letter without it (< Example 1).
In assessing propagative effect, one might argue that we have succumbed to a bias that overemphasizes beginnings and ends (titles and postscripts), thus missing more critical features within the body of a letter. However, recipients are subject to the same bias. Still, let us examine if associated feature (1) above, "provided in turn you send it back out," is the main reason for the success of the "It Works" letters. It appears early in the letter, and fundamentally changes the operating superstition about the letter from a lucky talisman to a fateful obligation (see Copy later versus Copy first). Perhaps the provided clause did have some positive effect on propagation, since Copy first language appears to be gaining in recent decades. But we have one, and only one, letter on which it appears without the It Works postscript, the puzzling [1982-01]. Whatever the genealogy of this letter, it did not replicate sufficiently to show up again in our sample, something we should expect if the "provided" clause were highly effective by itself. However, the potency of the full postscript is itself challenged by the rapid propagation of a variation that deleted the last two words ("It works"). This deletion, co-linked to a transfer of the Kiss title, appears in the "KCL" variation of the 1990's (> Section 4.7, item 7). But the KCL letters begin with the Kiss title and conclude with the Love title, thus combining the appeal of both. This may more than make up for the loss of "It works."
It could be claimed that the de-sanctification of Anthony, change (5) in our list, had a negative effect. This was likely of accidental origin. As noted, "Sol" appears on a letter in the It Works ancestry, probably as a miscopy of "St." from a degenerate photocopy. A subsequent letter in the ancestry probably miscorrected this to "Saul" and so it has remained, a rider on the It Works blitz. On the other hand, "Saul" could be slightly positive, since visible Catholicism seems to be disfavored on North American chain letters. Our only record of re-sanctification of the Venezuelan author appears in a minor clade from the mid 1990's that featured a Catholic title (> JKLC).
The It Works funneling event eliminated the D, L and LD type letters from English language circulation (or possibly these succumbed to DL-0 or DL-m). Also eliminated were those DL letters that retained a list of names (DL-n), ending a tradition that had dominated luck chains since the 1920's. This mass extinction happened remarkably fast; after 1980 there are none of these doomed types and features in the archive. Finally, It Works also killed off its potent elders, DL-0 (no list) and DL-m (no money) in a year or two.
< Start of above section
< Start of Chain Letter Evolution
- Contents
4.7 THE MAINLINE
SINCE 1980
Introduction. Table 7 - Occurrences of
Trust, Belief, Kiss, Love, Wife's Money and Car. Trust expires.
Belief fizzles. Kiss and Love divide the territory.
Kiss gets Wife's Money. Love gets a Car. Kiss jumps on top.
All fall down. Table 8 - Numbers of English language paper
luck chain letters collected per year of circulation.
Introduction.
By 1981 almost all luck chain letters circulating in North
America were the descendants of a single founder that had appeared a couple
years before bearing the It Works postscript. In the next two years new titles
appeared which rapidly dominated circulation, and later in the decade a very
effective new testimonial appeared. If we assign the following names to these
and other components, our allegorical section names (Trust expires, Belief fizzles, Kiss and Love divide the territory, Kiss gets Wife's Money, Love gets a car, Kiss jumps on top, All fall down) describe the major developments
in mainline letters since 1980.
(1) Trust: "Trust in the Lord with all your heart and He will acknowledge and He will light the way." This is the corrupted form of Proverbs 3:5-6 that appeared as a leading "prayer" on the hyper-competitive It Works letter in 1979.The following table gives the frequency of these components, including transfers of the Kiss title to a Love-Car letter.(2) Belief: "And all things whatever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive." This new title is the King James version of Matthew 21:22.
(3) Kiss: The title "Kiss someone you love when you get this letter and make magic."
(4) Love: "With love all things are possible." This title is probably a substitution in Mark 10:27: "With God all things are possible."
(5) Wife's Money: The following modification (in italics) of the Death and Money testimonial: "While in the Philippines, Gene Welch lost his wife six days after receiving this letter. He failed to circulate the letter. However, before her death, she had won $50,000. in a lottery. The money was transferred to him four days after he decided to mail out this letter."
(6) Car: The testimonial: "In 1987 the letter received by a young woman in California was faded and barely readable. She promised herself to retype the letter and send it on, but put it aside to do later. She was plagued with various problems, including expensive car repairs. The letter did not leave her hands in 96 hours. She finally retyped the letter as promised and got a new car."
Table 7. Occurrences of Trust, Belief, Kiss, Wife's Money,
Love and Car.
| Years | Trust | Belief | Kiss | Love | Kiss - Wife's Money |
Love - Car |
Kiss transfers to Love - Car |
| 1972-74 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1975-77 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1978-80 | 9 | 1 |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1981-83 | 6 | 4 | 4(a) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1984-86 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 15 | 4 |
0 | 0 |
| 1987-89 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
10 | 3 |
0 |
| 1990-92 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 |
24 | 2 (b) |
| 1993-95 | 0 | 0 | 1? | 0 | 5 | 10 | 7 (c) |
| 1996-98 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 11 | 15 (d) |
(a) The earliest three (1983) do not have a title, but have other Kiss
features, e.g. [1983-02].
(b) Date estimated. Kiss and Wife's Money transferred. Love deleted.
(c) Kiss-Car-Love 3, Kiss-Love-Car 3, Jude-Kiss-Love-Car
1
(d) Kiss-Car-Love 2, Kiss-Love-Car 7, Jude-Kiss-Love-Car
4, Love-Kiss-Car 1, Kiss-Car 1
We now discuss these changes in frequency, following the allegorical subtitles.
Trust expires.
Proverbs 3:5-6 had appeared near the top of most mainline letters since
1952 in countless corrupted forms until the It Works blitz in 1979
fixed its form as "Trust" given above. This header probably had positive
replicative effect at first, but by the early 1980's it seems to have become
a liability. Perhaps quick recognition of a letter as the nuisance of the
prior decade was a factor.
Belief fizzles.
Someone replaced Trust with "Belief" in 1980, placing this New Testament
verse above the body of the letter. On our earliest version [1980] the verse is identified correctly
as Matthew 21:22. "Belief" was immediately successful at the expense of Trust,
but within two years its circulation seems to have ended. This was probably
due to the appeal of two new secular titles we discuss next. The omission
of the Unbeliever's Death was an early post-linked feature [1981] that apparently captured the
Belief clade. This may have also contributed to the quick demise of the Belief
title a couple years later..
Kiss and Love divide the territory.
Our earliest Kiss title is from October
1983 [Make Magic, 1983-10]. However
there are three letters from earlier that year that have no title yet bear
the same features of the 1983-10 Kiss letter. These titleless letters could
have derived from an initial Kiss letter that had its title cut off, or the
Kiss title could have been added to a titleless letter. We will take the
"Untitled Kiss" letter 1983-04
as the standard for the Kiss descent group. For the Belief standard we take
the oldest example, 1980, collected
by Charles Bennett. The Love title first
appears on a letter sent from Sweden to England [1983-06], which we take as the
standard for Love. The following list compares text in these standard Belief,
Kiss and Love letters to a prior It Works letter with the Trust title [1980].
(2) Trust: The original copy is from the Netherlands.
Belief: (same as Trust)
Untitled Kiss: The original copy is in New England.
Love: (same as Untitled Kiss)
Note: New England is
co-linked on the Untitled Kiss letter.
(3) Trust: You will receive good luck within four days of
receiving this letter provided you in turn send it back out.
Belief: You will receive
good luck within 4 days upon receiving this letter, provided you in turn
send it back out.
Untitled Kiss: (same as Trust)
Love: You will receive good luck within four days of receiving
this letter, providing you, in turn, send it on.
Note: "Send it back out" is pre-linked on Untitled Kiss
and subsequently retained in the Kiss clade. "Send it on" is co-linked
to Love.
(5) Trust: . . . send it to your friends, parents,
or associates.
Belief: Send it out
to your friends, parents
and associates.
Untitled Kiss: . . . send them to friends and associates.
Love: (same as Untitled Kiss)
Note: The deletion of parents is co-linked to
the Untitled Kiss.
(6) Trust: Take note of the following:
Belief: (same
as Trust)
Untitled Kiss: Do note the following:
Love: (same as Untitled Kiss)
Note: Do is co-linked to Kiss.
(8) Trust: Carlo Raditt
. . . forgot it and a few days later, lost his job.
Belief: Carlo Depot . .
. forgot it. A few days later he lost his job.
Untitled Kiss: Carla Dadditt . . . forgot it had to leave
his hands within 96 hours. He lost his job.
Love: (very close to Untitled Kiss)
Note: The insertion of had to leave his hands within 96 hours
is co-linked to Kiss.
This list strikingly illustrates the closeness of the early Untitled Kiss and Love letters. Kiss and Love also match on three variations we did not list (two small omissions and "copy" for "chain" in "Since the chain must make a tour of the world . . ."). Both Kiss and Love modify "Please send 20 copies and see what happens to you on the fourth day" to exactly "Please send 20 copies of the letter and see what happens in four days." Of the listed variations from the Trust standard, only number (3) reveals a distinction between Kiss and Love, with Love reading "send it on" rather than "send it back out" as Untitled Kiss, Belief and Trust read. These features suggests that the Love title replaced the Kiss title on a letter that was at most a few retypes downline from the launching of Kiss. Perhaps a recipient of Kiss was inspired to produce the second new title after noticing that the long running Trust "prayer" had been successfully replaced. Or perhaps the Kiss standard [1983-04] was always untitled, and Love was added to this titleless letter at around the same time as Kiss was. Possibly both titles had the same author, but then what explains (3) "send it on"? In any case, a single letter (the Kiss-Love founder) was a near ancestor of both Kiss and Love, and hence an ancestor of over a billion letters that subsequently bore these titles.
The above features, though often corrupted, are identifiable on every mainline letter after 1984. For example, on 1998-07 "Gene Welch" has been corrupted to "George Welch," but we never again see "General" or "Gen." as was present in the 1970's. Even minor changes such as "copy" for "chain" have persisted. This is a remarkable demonstration of 15 years of faithful copying, and overwhelming proof that the progeny of the Kiss-Love founder completely captured the mainline. Yet at the same time, the 1998-07 letter has its own features that will mark all letters copied from it (for example, "the original is in England" as well as "George Welch").
Concurrence innovation can never be rigorously deduced just from texts. But the features associated with Kiss-Love are notable both for their number and for the prevalence of co-linked (rather than pre-linked) features. This suggests cautious rewriting by the Kiss-Love innovator. In item (1) above, changing "prayer" was needed when the Trust "prayer" was dropped. The earliest examples use "letter," but immediately after, "paper" prevailed. This history is difficult to explain. Possibly instead of being concurrent with the titles, "letter" was post-linked, along with other substitutions, including "paper." This suggests that the author of the Kiss title may have failed to change the referent prayer. "New England" for "Netherlands" could have been concurrent with Kiss, and may be the actual place of the innovation. But "New England" could also be a pre-linked corruption of "Netherlands." Or perhaps "New England" was concurrently chosen by the Kiss innovator because of this similarity to "Netherlands," thus ambiguously declaring a new chain letter and accommodating misidentification as the old one. Note that item (8), "it had to leave his hands within 96 hours," is an internal transfer from the leading Death20 block to the Lost Job - Better Job testimonial of the Lottery24 block. This too could be the concurrent work of the Kiss innovator, and was imitated by the author of the Car testimonial. Or perhaps the same person launched Kiss, Love and Car!
Why were the Kiss and Love titles so successful? Did some of the above linked features also contribute significantly to the propagation of these letters? Consider the participant age of a social activity - for chain letters the average age of those who are replicating it. Participant age may regress (marijuana smoking), remain fixed (school traditions), or advance with time (canasta), perhaps even keep pace with calendar time (class reunions). There is a postcard exchange letter (an ancestor of the kids' World Record chain letter) whose participant age has regressed. You be the judge: here is some text from an example received by an eleven year old in Clarkston, WA:
It was started in 1986 if it goes through 1995 it will be in the Guiness Book of World Records (your name will be included). It has never been broken, so please don't spoil it for everyone . . . If you were to break the chain we would have to wait another nine years to be in record book. [1996]For luck chains, the succession of types suggests that the participant age of an established type advances. Co-linked variation (6) above reveals that "parents" was dropped as a distribution target for the new titles. Sending the Trust version to parents may itself have statistically advanced its participant age, especially since many senders distribute just one or a few copies. For this and reasons that follow, apparently the new titles gained the loyalty of youth, while the core network of Trust letters aged.
Kiss may have especially appealed to young people and been used for flirting. The sender may hope that a recipient will be emboldened to act on the suggestion, the sender getting the kiss. Love may have benefited by appearing to be a Bible verse to those somewhat familiar with the New Testament, yet appearing completely secular to others. Men may have preferred Kiss, women Love; or younger people Kiss, older Love.
Kiss gets Wife's Money.
Item (4) in the above list reveals that the "lost
his wife" version of the Philippine Death and Money testimonial was
pre-linked on both the Kiss and Love titled letters. As a result it rode
these titles to universality in the mainline. Shortly after wife became
universal, the "Wife's Money" modification of Death and Money appeared on
a Kiss titled letter:
While in the Philippines, Cora Welch lost his wife six days after receiving this letter. He failed to circulate the letter, however, before her death, she had won $50,000. in a lottery. The money was transferred to him four days after he decided to mail out this letter. [1986]In this version not only is it the wife who loses her life, but it is she who first got the money. The final sentence reflects a reviser's puzzlement over the original Copy Later frame, in which Mr. Welch gets the money after merely receiving the talismanic letter. To force a Copy First frame, now it seems the money is at first inaccessible to Mr. Welch, until finally he complies and only after that the money is transferred to him. So in this Wife's Money version, Mr. Welch gets nothing but misery until he mailed out the letter, though some readers who identify with Mr. Welch may count his good luck as twofold.
Remarkably, this new version of the Kiss letter rapidly captured the Kiss niche within a couple years, as seen in the above table (< Occurrences). We are not counting as "Kiss letters" those on which the Kiss title was transferred (in the "KCL" transfer the Wife's Money feature was also transferred, on others it was not). From 1988 to 1999 there are 18 examples of Kiss & Wife's Money, and only one dubious example of Kiss without it (the rewritten 1995). I detect no significant new feature on these letters other than the "Wife's Money" modification. Why did this innovation prove to be so successful in the competition for senders? Whatever the answer (other than "genetic drift"), we are likely within the realm of the One-in-a-Hundred Rule. The suggestion that this reveals the secret wish that one's wife were dead does not work, for then it would seem a husband would hold the letter until after his wife died, which is negative for propagation. Perhaps the conversion to Copy First made the testimonial more understandable, especially to the younger readers that may have disproportionally circulated the Kiss title. More likely, this mentions a lottery winner in the Death20 block, well before the "Boss Wins Lottery" testimonial in the Lottery24 block. Of a hundred people, say two would fully comply to a chain letter if they read in it that it brought luck in a lottery. And say of these two people, one reads only the first half of the letter. Receiving the Wife's Money innovation, that one person will now encounter a lottery claim, providing the one-in-a-hundred fully compliant new booster.
The origin of "Wife's Money" may depend on a simple mistake. It would be very easy to shift the gender of the last pronoun from "he" to "she" in Death and Money:
While in the Philippines, Gene Welch lost his wife six days after receiving this letter. He failed to circulate the letter. However, before her death, she had won $750,000. in a lottery. [hypothetical]This weakens the power of the testimonial since it is not clear if Mr. Welch ever got the money himself, and both good and bad luck are now going to his wife, yet he broke the chain. So this hypothetical version invites revision, such as adding "The money was transferred to him four days after he decided to mail out this letter." The fact that our earliest example of Wife's Money uses "Cora Welch" instead of "Gene Welch" could only add to the gender confusion. In any case, this illustrates how a simple change, possibly a copying mistake, could provoke a lengthy addition.
Love gets a Car.
The Car testimonial is usually
self-dated 1987, and first appears in our sample in July 1988, appended near
the end of a Love titled letter [1988]. Only one Love titled
letter thereafter fails to possess it! Despite this quick conquest of the
Love subtype, the Kiss titled letters persisted without Car. This suggests
that these two titles had a different audience, perhaps differing by motive,
age or gender as speculated above. If Kiss and Love had the same motivational
niche, Love & Car would have swamped Kiss just like it did Love. We discussed
the replicative advantages of Car in Section 3.6 (< Mainline Testimonials). The Car testimonial
has the following associated features, using 1983-06 for the "Love Founder"
and 1989-03 as the standard for
the "Love-Car" innovation.
(1) Love Founder: This is no joke. You will receive it
in the mail.
Love-Car: This is no joke. You will receive good luck
in the mail.
Note: "Good luck" is pre-linked to Car on 1987-06.
(2) Love Founder: You will receive it in the mail. Send copies to
people you think need good luck.
Love-Car: You will receive good luck in the mail. Send no money.
Send copies to people you think need good luck.
Note: "Send no money" is pre-linked on 1987-06. Discussed previously
(< Example 3).
(3) Love Founder: While in the Philippines Gene Welch lost his wife
six days after receiving the letter.
Love-Car, 1989: While in the Philippines, Gene Welch lost his wife
51 days after receiving the letter.
Note: Post-linked to Car on 1989.
Discussed previously (< Example 4).
(4) Love Founder: Since a copy must make a tour of
the world you must make twenty copies and . . .
Love-Car: Since the copy must tour the world, you must make 20 copies,
and . . .
Note: Pre-linked on 1987-06.
(5) Love Founder: Please don't ignore this. It works.
Love-Car: Do not ignore this. St. Jude. It works.
Note: Pre-linked on 1987-06.
"St. Jude" is also added to top or at the extreme bottom of some letters.
Feature (2) above, the early "send no money," is probably positive for propagation since it doubles and advances slightly this universal prohibition. It may have originated accidentally in re-typing, first as an exact duplication of "Do not send money . . .", then edited to "Send no money" to lessen redundancy. Features (1) and (4) are surely neutral. It is difficult to assess the effect on propagation of features (3) and (5). These are briefly discussed elsewhere (< 51 days), (> Jude). The absence of any co-linked features in our list reveals that the person who first added the Car testimonial to a letter made no other modifications.
Kiss jumps on top.
In the 1990's the Kiss letters still enticed senders despite the proliferation
of the Love-Car combination. Surely Kiss circulation would have increased
if the Car testimonial had been transferred to a Kiss letter. There is no
example of this happening. However, more potently, the Kiss title was transferred
to a Love-Car letter. This happened at least three or four times. These transfer
events are designated below as (i) KCL, (ii) KLC, (iii) JKLC and (iv) LKC.
(i) The KCL transfer (5 + 2?
examples)
In two undated examples of this Kiss transfer the Love title was deleted
[1991a, 1991b]. In later examples the Love
title appears at the very bottom of the letter [1993-04], and the designation
"KCL" refers to the order of the Kiss, Car and Love features on these letters.
A detailed analysis is necessary to determine that a transfer took place,
the totality of the transfer and to what base letter. Here is a list of some
features linked to the KCL innovation, using the most common form of Love-Car
[1989] and a typical Kiss letter
[1986-05] as standards of
comparison to KCL [1993-04].
(1) Love-Car: With Love all things are possible.
Kiss: Kiss someone you love when you get this letter and make
magic!
KCL: (Same as Kiss)
(2) Love-Car: You will receive Good Luck within four days of receiving
this letter provided you, in turn, send it on.
Kiss: You will receive good luck within four days of receiving
this letter, provided you send it back out.
KCL: (Same as Love-Car)
(3) Love-Car: You will receive Good Luck by mail. Send
no money. Send copies to people you think need good luck.
Kiss: You will receive it in the mail. Send copies to people
you think need good luck.
KCL: (Same as Love-Car, using 1994 for KCL).
Note: "Send no money" probably deleted on the KCL standard
[1993-04].
(4) Love-Car (most): While in the Philippines, Gene Welch lost his
wife 51 days
after receiving the letter.
Kiss: While in the Philippines, Cora Welch lost his wife six days after receiving
this letter.
KCL: (Same as Love-Car)
(5) Love-Car: However, before she died, he received $7,755,000.
Kiss (most): . . . however, before her death, she had won $50,000 in a
lottery. The money was transferred to him four days after he decided to mail
out this letter.
KCL: (Very close to Kiss)
(6) Love-Car: (Car testimonial present)
Kiss: (Car testimonial absent)
KCL: (Same as Love-Car)
(7) Love-Car: Remember, send no money. Do not ignore
this. St. Jude.
It works!
Kiss: (Same as Love-Car but without "St. Jude.")
KCL: Remember: send no money. Do not ignore this. With Love all things are possible.
Note: The deletion of the phrase "It works" is co-linked to
the original KCL Kiss transfer. The addition of "With Love all things are
possible" as a postscript is post-linked to this transfer. "St. Jude" is
not reliably diagnostic of ancestry.
The simplest explanation for the mix of features on these letters is that two transfers were made from a Kiss donor onto a Love-Car letter: (1) the Kiss title, and (5) the "Wife's Money" modification of the Death and Money testimonial. Note that such incidental features of Love-Car as (2) "send it on," the duplicated (3) "send no money," and (4) "51 days after" are present on KCL. This argues that Love-Car was the base letter to be copied since these features would not likely be chosen to transfer (from Love to Kiss). Initially the Love title was deleted from the recipient of the transfer forming a "KC" letter. Item (7) above records the subsequent restoration of the Love title to the bottom of KC forming KCL. The deletion of "It Works" on KCL, likely co-linked to the restoration of Love, is probably negative for replication but is outweighed by having both titles present.
For two chain letters that are closely related but have varying features, an effective composite can be formed as follows. With the letters side by side, consider the components in order. For two homologous (related) components place the one considered most positive for replication on the composite letter. If a component on one letter does not have a match (homologue) on the other, place this component on the composite. This process is somewhat analogous to genetic sexual reproduction. If, around 1991, we started with the most common Love-Car letter and a typical Kiss letter, this would have produced the KCL letter, provided the Kiss title was preferred over Love (which is then dropped), and the default choice when homologous components were about the same was the Love-Car version. The format of an early KC (Love deleted) letter [1991b] has ten paragraphs mostly corresponding to components. This letter may be a remnant of this process.
One additional letter with the Kiss-Car-Love order [1997] is not derived from the same transfer event as the above letters. It bears the pre-title "Magic." A later Kiss & Car combination [1997] may also be a separate transfer.
(ii) The KLC transfer (10 examples).
Though the KCL transfer appeared earlier, the "KLC" transfer propagated more
successfully. The earliest version of this letter [1994-12] was provided
by the American Folklife Center, Library of Congress. In these letters the
Kiss title has been transferred to a Love-Car letter, with the Love title
retained immediately below, hence the order "KLC." All of these KLC letters
are derived from a single founder, with the co-linked: "You will receive
good luck within four days of receiving this letter, and you must, in
turn, send luck." This replaces the more usual condition "provided
you, in turn, send it on" [1989].
KLC also truncates Lost Job -
Better Job, omitting Carlo getting a better job. This co-linked rider
is likely negative for propagation. The KLC variation has been translated
into Spanish [1996].
The propagative advantage of the KLC variation is clear: it adds the replicative
power of Kiss to that of the powerful Car testimonial, and retains the Love
title only slightly diminished in prominence. The Kiss-Love order combines
sensibly: "Kiss someone you love when you get this letter and make magic.
With love all things are possible." Prior to the millennial collapse
of paper luck chain letters in North America, the KLC innovation was probably
destined to capture the whole mainline, uniting the two sub-niches that developed
with the Kiss and Love titles in 1983. Table 7 is reason enough to have believed
this.
(iii) The JKLC transfer (5 examples).
Another Kiss-Love-Car combination, "JKLC," features "St. Jude" as
a title above Kiss [1996-02].
The JKLC letters share with the above KLC clade the omission of Carlo getting
a better job. Further analysis is needed to determine if this deletion is
pre-linked to the KLC transfer and a hypothetical JKLC transfer event,
or if JKLC is a modified KLC letter. The JKLC letters are co-linked to two
notable features: (1) "Gene Wall lost his wife ten days after
receiving the letter," and (2) "The chain comes from Venezuela and was written
by Saint Anthony Degroup, . . ." (re-sanctification, see also <
de-sanctification).
The proliferation of "St. Jude" in the mainline since 1987, usually as a postscript, does not prove it has positive replicative effect. Instead, it may be riding the potent Car testimonial [1988], on which it was pre-linked. "St. Jude" has been added more than once to North American luck letters [1991, 1992], and has been removed frequently [1993,1994, 1997]. Thus by itself it is risky to use for inferring phylogeny. On Mexican chain letters "St. Jude Thaddeus" clearly has replicative potency [1984, 1984, 1995]. The appeal of Jude to Latinos is fairly recent - one informant called him the "Patron Saint of Anglos" in the 1950's (Robert Orsi).
(iv) An additional Kiss and Love letter has the order Love-Kiss-Car [1997]. We have not
determined if this "LKC" variation is descended from a separate transfer
event, or is a re-ordering of one of the above transfers. The only example
has rewrites and changes that appear to have resulted from the retyping of
a very degenerate copy (e.g. "good luck in them all" for "good luck in the
mail"). ,.
The KLC, JKLC, KCL and LKC combinations all probably originated with recipients
of Love-Car who remembered the Kiss title (or retained a copy), perhaps associating
it with some prior romantic or sexual success. Wishing to use it again, they
added the Kiss title to the Love-Car letter. Such transfer of key text from one letter to
another may often increase propagation and is a significant factor in chain
letter evolution. Examination of foreign language chain letters should reveal
more transfers both to and from English language letters. At the time of
first writing this subsection on transfers, I thought that the KCL letters
would capture the Love-Car descent group within a few years. However circulation
of all these DL chain letters was soon drastically reduced and new evolutionary
factors that are not yet clear came to play among the remnants.
All fall down.
Despite the success of the DL type letters in the 1990's, their circulation,
at least in English, has collapsed since the new millennium, as the following
table illustrates.
Table 8. Numbers
of English language paper luck chain letters collected per year of circulation.
| Year of circulation |
Mainline | Outliers |
| 1995 | 15 | 3 |
| 1996 | 20 | 0 |
| 1997 | 9 | 0 |
| 1998 | 1 | 2 |
| 1999 | 1 | 0 |
| 2000 | 0 | 1 |
| 2001 | 0 | 0 |
| 2002 | 0 | 0 |
| 2003 | 1 | 0 |
| 2004 |
3 |
1 |
| 2005 |
1 |
0 |
| 2006 |
0 |
0 |
| 2007 |
0 |
0 |
| 2008 |
1 |
0 |
Collecting efforts that had produced at least several circulating letters
a year continued from 1995 to about 2000 - thereafter collecting resources
for current letters were greatly reduced. Still it is significant that only
six circulating examples have been collected since 2000. The primary cause
for this population collapse must surely be the immunizing effect of exposure to the
flood of email chain letters, hoaxes and parodies, especially among youth.
This was the basis of a 1995 prediction that "the familiar 'prayer' or
'good luck' type chain letters will totally disappear from the US mail by
the year 2000" [e1995-06]. A century of
denunciation failed to eliminate paper luck chain letters (New York Times:
1916, 1917e, 1931, 1959b). The Internet and email may
have all but ended them in just a few years.
Postscript (9/8/2008). Five actively circulating mainline luck chain letters
have been collecting from 2004-08. Two are very similar and noteworthy for
a penultimate injunction not to sign on [2004, 2005]. One DL letter in English
was circulating in Eritrea in 2004. A recent acquisition
may deserve to be named a new type, though much of its text derives from
a standard DL letter. This letter [2008], titled "The Financial
Blessings Letter," (1) retains all DL testimonials except the Unbeliever's Death, (2) deletes
much other DL text, especially at the beginning, and (3) has rewrites to
promise a divine monetary reward for replication. Several transcriptions
of paper versions are showing up on the WWW { search "Financial Blessing(s)
Letter" on Google ). Possibly paper luck chain letter populations may now
increase because of two factors. First, their recent rarity has has
reduced immunity, thus allowing for a rebound. Second, it appears that in
the last few years very few email
luck chains are circulating, and so there is much less cross immunization
against the paper versions. If so, and there is a sustained economic downturn,
the "Financial Blessings Letter" may be the next dominant paper chain letter,
though internet searches probably preclude any paper chain letter from becoming
as abundant as the dominant nuisances of the twentieth century. If you receive
a paper chain letter, even one that is very similar to one already in the
archive, please send it to me so that I can adequately document this phase
in chain letter history. Thanks, Daniel VanArsdale
< Start of above section < Start of Chain Letter Evolution - Contents
Daniel W. VanArsdale
1404 W. Guava Ave.
Lompoc, CA 93436
Telephone:
(805) 735-8323
email:
barnowl@silcom.com
Chain Letter Evolution: http://www.silcom.com/~barnowl/chain-letter/evolution.html
Index page of Daniel W. VanArsdale: http://www.silcom.com/~barnowl/index.htm
Eat No Dynamite (A collection of college graffiti): http://www.silcom.com/~barnowl/graffiti.htm
Update at: C1, C2, C4,
C5, C6, C7, C8, C9.
End: Chain Letter Evolution, Version 10/27/1998f
11/04/2002p 1/7/2007