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 a fixed number of 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 700 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 E. 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 700 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.
Listed here are files in the directory /chain-letter/
and sub directories /archive/, /e-archive/
and /photo-archive/ that the user can utilize.
The following conventions help the reader decide whether
to pursue a link.-
1.2 Motivational Categories
Religion Charity
Luck Advocacy Money
Parody Exchange World Record Chain Email.
A chain letter explicitly asks a recipient to make or purchase copies of itself and distribute them. Examples reveal that the form and content of a chain letter are highly correlated with the principal motive for its replication. We have classified all of the chain letters we have collected into one of the following eight motivational categories. The order of the categories here matches their order of appearance historically.
Religion.
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.
Several chain letters have been collected that have
a purely religious motivation. These include solicitations for
prayers [1905] and Catholic
devotional themes [1945]. Filenames
for these begin with an "r".
Charity.
A charity chain letter requests money or some
item be sent to a fixed address, ostensibly for charitable,
political or memorial purposes. Charity letters
were common before 1900 and influenced early luck chain letters,
as well as enabling the advent of money chain letters in 1935. For
these reasons we give this category special attention here.
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 oldest "chain letter" collected, but one from the summer of 1888 is described
(Paul Collins) and likely others
had circulated in previous years. 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 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).
Chain letters of all motivational categories that did not claim
to be self-terminating were called "endless" for a while, and
this language shows up in some laws outlawing pyramid schemes.
More recently, 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 of these are hoaxes {Jessica Mydek}. A revealing
item in the archive is nine pages regarding a chain solicitation
for one dollar contributions to the 1950 campaign of anti-union
Ohio Senator Howard Taft. These were rescued from
the discarded files of the Atlantic Coast Line railroad
police. Considerable pressure was applied to employees to
participate. Archive filenames for charity letters begin
with "c".
Luck.
Luck chain letters appeal primarily to superstition,
promising good luck if the letter is copied and distributed
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.
Advocacy
Advocacy chain letters are distributed
to promote some cause and do not ask that money be sent. Often
they involve a petition. A 1903 postcard, as well as asking that
copies of itself be distributed, 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 itself could be a petition, as in
an attempt to draft Calvin Coolidge as the Republican nominee
for President [1927].
An example not involving a petition is an August,
1940 letter advocating Republican
Wendell Willkie for President and asking that ten
copies be sent. The use of chain letters
in political campaigns goes back at least to 1912 (NYT, 1927). Other chain letter
causes include Czech independence [1949], nuclear disarmament
[1985], protests
of apartheid [1988],
and a libelous boycott of Proctor & Gamble
[1986]. Advocacy chain emails
are also common, such as a perennial appeal to support
National Public Radio [e1996]. Advocacy chain letters have filenames beginning with
"a" 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]. In
Section 4.1 we will 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 {USPIS}
and State (West's CA)
laws. Money chain letter filenames in
the archive begin with "m".
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
collected 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 (especially the latter) had circulated,
uncollected, since 1935. The wife exchange
parody was commercially produced as a postcard [1954], and an undated matchbook
advertisement suggests even earlier commercial production of
chain letter parodies [1940?].
The wife exchange parody itself fell victim to parody in an imitative husband
exchange letter with feminist undertones [1980]. Despite commercial
publication, chain letter parodies circulated 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).
Exchange.
The exchange chain letters ask that an item
of 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 [1985]. By the new millennium
the request for postcards had been deleted and the letter became
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].
In [2005] this was still circulating in large volume. 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. The chain may have
been reduced in recent years (2012) by parents searching on text.
As for all chain letters here, children's names and addresses have
been obscured in online versions. Filenames for the "world
record" chain letters begin with a "w" in the archive.
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, photographs,
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.
Many e-mail chains began as digitizationis of paper chain
letters. A very early example is
an exact transcription of a circulating
paper luck chain letter [e1982 - note archaic
address formats]. Paper office humor items were also put online [e1995]. Once established
chain emails are rarely subject to replicative
changes arising from unscheming changes or
copying errors, as we will see occurs within the
paper medium. This is because an email is usually reproduced
exactly, and thus there a few if any variations. However
both luck chain emails and money schemes quickly developed
adaptions to the new medium through a series of deliberate
hoaxes or calculated modifications. A new restraining
factor manifested when e-mail chains were posted on various lists
and group venues, provoking critical analysis and ridicule.
Recipients of a chain email are now likely to search the web
on key text, particularly if money is solicited. Such a search
will discover naive postings and attempts to recruit participants
in money schemes. However, high in the list of matches, one will
also encounter critical comments and disarming analysis, such
as on some of the money chain emails in the archive associated
with this essay [me2009].
Email screening criteria by Internet Service Providers
have, in recent years, also become a significant factor
in the survival of email replicators.
< 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 the text of all the letters in the archive can be searched using 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
(17 in number) and non-English language chain letters
(35), though present in the archive, are excluded from the
table.
| Years | Luck | Charity | Advocacy |
Money | Parody |
Exchange | World Record |
| 1885 - 89 | 3 | ||||||
| 1890 - 94 | 1 |
||||||
| 1895 - 99 | 1 |
4 |
|||||
| 1900 - 04 | 1 | 4 |
2 |
||||
| 1905 - 09 | 13 |
4 |
|||||
| 1910 - 14 | 30 |
1 | |||||
| 1915 - 19 | 14 |
6 |
1 | ||||
| 1920 - 24 | 13 |
||||||
| 1925 - 29 | 8 |
1 | |||||
| 1930 - 34 | 3 | ||||||
| 1935 - 39 | 4 |
1 | 1 | 49 |
8 |
19 | |
| 1940 - 44 | 4 |
1 | 9 |
19 |
|||
| 1945 - 49 | 5 |
1 | 10 |
||||
| 1950 - 54 | 5 | 1 | 6 |
4 |
|||
| 1955 - 59 | 5 |
5 |
2 | ||||
| 1960 - 64 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
1 | |||
| 1965 - 69 | 5 | 1 | 1 |
2 | |||
| 1970 - 74 | 1 | 1 |
3 |
||||
| 1975 - 79 | 27 | 6 (a) | 2 |
6 | |||
| 1980 - 84 | 35 | 3 | 2 |
4 |
|||
| 1985 - 89 | 38 | 1 (b) | 11 | 2 | 6 |
7 | |
| 1990 - 94 | 53 |
1 | 1 | 3 |
1 |
4 | |
| 1995 - 99 | 53 |
1 | 3 | 16 | |||
| 2000 - 04 | 6 |
2 |
5 |
||||
| 2005 - 09 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
9 |
|||
| TOTALS | 325 |
31 (b) | 18 | 79 (a) | 35 |
98 |
14 |
| Luck | Charity | Advocacy |
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, sub directories 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 sub directory /archive/russian [content].
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 chain letters.
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 text, image].
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 | 13 | 1949-67 | 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", probably
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 [Hero 1,
2 ]. 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.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]
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 vs 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). With the appearance of these two high copy quota types in the 1970's, the use of photocopying as a means of reproducing paper chain letters totally dominated. Hand copying all but disappeared. Perhaps a motive for initially combining two 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 hybrid 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. Blind13. 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
"advocacy" category in the archive [1908].
Blind13.
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 Blind13 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).
We recently (2012) collected a Roman Catholic devotional
chain letter from 1936, just after
the Send-a-Dime storm. The reader is asked to say three
Our Fathers and three Hail Marys.
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
out of and into the digital realm 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
replicative success or failure 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 on the number of copies
"circulating", and how this may change in the near future. 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 the received letter from which it was copied. It is extremely rare that a chain letter does not have a single parent letter. Many luck chain letters explicitly encourage one to pass on to another the same physical letter received. If this is done it simplifies terminology to consider the received letter as a parent of itself. 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 was 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 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 {The Great Chain of Letters}.
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 with limited resources are available but these would
not be of much help for chain letters..
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 see Rule 7] [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 most of the parent letter is carried forward on the copy with matching details. On extremely rare occasions a chain letter may not have a parent, for example the founder of 1975. Or it may be the concatenation of two letter, for example the very first Death-Lottery type letter - a hybrid. It is convenient to exclude such letters in what follows, and consider only those chain letters that have exactly one parent. 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. The ancestry of a letter M within a descent group 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 descent group 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, this means the unique "common ancestor" of M and its ancestor M' is M' itself.
Two chain letters are regarded as identical if they have the exact same text, character for character, as well as the same text styles and formatting. Usually when chain letter L is photocopied, and possibly when retyped, an identical copy is formed, called a clone of L. It might be possible that two letters could be identical but had different parents, but we can disregard that unlikely possibility. A replicator 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 L and all its clones. Clone groups are the natural unit to consider when describing the descent of variations.
All hyper-competitive chain letter innovations launched since 1975 debut with a burst of many clones, likely as many as a thousand. And this is assuming the innovator and compliant recipients distribute exactly 20 copies, no more. 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. These constitute a clone group with founder the initial letter containing the 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 for post-linked |
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.The nodes of a tree of variations are clone groups, sets of identical replicators, generally not single replicators. There are no cycles in a variational tree because a replicator can never have served as the parent of one of its ancestors. 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 no two arrows will point the same node (clone group). Given any sample of chain letters within a clade C, their true cladogram can be easily constructed from the tree of variations for C by deleting nodes not in the sample and connecting each letter by an arrow from its nearest ancestor in the sample.
(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 subtype [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.
Likely by some unknown path of corruption, the chain breaker
"Gen Allen" has been transformed to the civilian "Don 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-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 , Berreskilli Caren
Wichile, Zerim Berreball
Zarin Borracbilt [1975], Brian Barbialle,
Brian Barabiaila
Dalin Nairchild [1979], Colin Holschild,
Darinn Meirchild,
Dalan Fairchild (Kiss-Love founder) [1983], 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 received 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
than 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 of a type we have called Prosperity. These letters had
likely developed some time after the 1929 stock market crash
since they reflect economic hard times. The complete text of
a 1933 Prosperity chain
letter was published by folklorist Harry Hyatt in 1935 (Hyatt). Finding more pre-1935
Prosperity letters should be a 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. Another innovation that could have helped
monetize the expectations of senders was the addition of testimonials about
"winning" money. The presence of a managed list of names and towns,
and suggestions to send or expect money, lead 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? At first, if she follows instructions, five letters with "Mrs. F. Fairchild, Small, Idaho" in the bottom (5th) slot will be mailed. Now making the extremely unlikely assumption that everyone receiving these letters likewise exactly complies with its instructions, on the second step there would be 5x5 = 52 = 25 letters with Flora's name now in the 4th slot. Continuing this way, eventually there will be 56 = 15,625 letters with her name in the first (top) slot. More generally, if the copy quota is q, and the number of names in the escalating list is n, perfect compliance upon the part of all recipients will produce qn letters with Flora's name at the top. As money chain letters have diversified, and exchange chain letters developed, many different values of q and n have been used, and in most of these letters, the value of qn appears to encourage compliance. Of course perfect compliance is all but impossible. But with q = 5 and just two of every five people complying, 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 the choices I have made for 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 160 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 single fixed center, as do pyramid sales and multilevel marketing. The Prosperity Club exponential feedback process does not have a single center, and could be called a "collective Ponzi scheme."
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 Furthman Wickets (a pen name for Nazi sympathizer George Sylvester Viereck) 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 Jane Doe, has received versions of the Prosperity type luck chain. She learns that it is generating cash donations and completely understands the process. Jane 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). Jane 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." Jane Doe 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 Jane Doe 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.
The Send-a-Dime blank forms we have collected [1935] suggest that it was
in fact often restarted. 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 Springfield 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 Springfield 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 Jane Doe, 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 (1936?) 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 50's. An undated money chain letter also received by Esther Norman [1935u] contains some similar rewrites as above. All the over 35 Send-a-Dime letters we have collected to date (12/2012) were mailed between May 5, 1935 and the close of that year. None of these have any threats or negative testimonials. This and numerous published accounts show that the Send-a-Dime letter, at least in its advent, abandoned the appeal to good and bad luck. But it should not be surprising that eventually money chain letters appeared, by design or naive hybridization, that threatened bad luck for breaking the chain. There is a newspaper account from 1937 that claimed "dime chain letters .. often gave nasty warnings of disaster to anyone who might contemplate breaking the chain" (Pittsburgh). So it appears that money chain letters with threats did arise and replicate after 1935Dear 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 such a chain letter 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 (1996) that a hundred quota money chain letter existed in India that, as they recalled, contained bad luck warnings against breaking the chain. And 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, but considering the early date, May 15, 1935, probably the fear came from Mr. Headlee's head rather than some letter. But there is no reason to doubt the authenticity of the Norman letter given above, and thus likely more threatening versions did circulate. However I suspect these would have been brought to the attention of the postal inspectors. 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"
works? 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 < 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 eventually
increase because of two factors. First, their recent rarity has
reduced immunity, thus allowing for a rebound. Second, it appears
that in the last few years, perhaps due in part to ISP screening, 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
Telephone: (805) 735-8323
email: barnowl@silcom.com
Chain Letter Evolution (this file): 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 12/9/2012