Features
Jack London’s memoir an entertaining, as well as an educational read

Reviewed by BERNIE BELLAN
When Jack London set out to write his memoir, he told a Zoom audience Wednesday, October 15, he went through 27 different drafts before arriving at the final version.
The result is an absorbing story, titled “Serendipity: My Path Through Life and Law”.
Why “Serendipity” you might ask? Because, as London explains at the very beginning of the book, he attributes a very major part of his considerable success in life to nothing more than sheer luck. Of course, one can easily dismiss that as deliberate self-effacement, but when you do read of some of the amazing twists and turns that his endlessly fascinating life has taken, it’s not hard to agree with his assessment that good luck was very much something that accompanied London at some very key points.
In the final chapter of the book London summarizes the reasons that he considers himself so darn lucky:
“I am seventy-seven but I still feel eighteen. I mean that! My mind has never got past that age. I feel like a kid with a sense of spunk and optimism about the future and the new opportunities it will bring. I know intellectually that’s ridiculous, but that knowledge for the most part doesn’t affect my life. I’m lucky that way and as I have said, luck is the key variable to survival and accomplishment in life.”
The book is partly a personal story of London’s life, including his formative years – of which working at his mother’s arcade at Winnipeg Beach played a pivotal role, and partly a discussion of the law.
It’s written in chronological form; London’s early years are described in a wry and open manner. He admits that a good part of his youth was what could be described as misspent – something, by the way, that he says he doesn’t for one moment regret. Again, London admits throughout the book that he very often managed to find success by being in the right place at the right time.
Whether it was as a student or later as a lawyer, including stints as a professor of law and dean of the University of Manitoba Faculty of Law though, London was constantly interested in exploring new fields. Again, lucky for him, his wife Belva was always willing to encourage him as he set out on one new course change after another, whether it was his going to Harvard for a year, working for the Federal Government as a tax lawyer in Ottawa, or taking a sabbatical year in France.

Readers of this paper will probably find most interesting London’s referencing other well-known lawyers from this community, especially Izzy Asper, Hymie Weinstein, and Harvey Pollock. While he worked with both Asper and Pollock professionally, his lifelong friendship with Weinstein, however, almost ended tragically when they were both passengers in a car when they were 18, along with a third fellow, and their car was involved in a head-on collision on the road to Minneapolis.
Amazingly, as London describes it, he was propelled 200 feet out of the car, but got up with only a scratch on his head. When you read that story and another similar story of yet one more almost fatal accident, you do begin to understand how fate always seemed to be on London’s side.
Not to give away all the juicy parts – but one more enthralling adventure took place in 1992 when Jack and Belva went to Rwanda to observe mountain gorillas in their natural habitat. They happened to be there though just as the horrific slaughter of Tutsis by the majority Hutu tribe began to transpire. Reading London’s account of what he and Belva went through for 36 hours, trapped in a bathroom as shells, bullets, also a Kaytusha rocket whizzed all around them is as terrifying an account of a near-death experience as you’re likely to find anywhere.
Anyone who has heard Jack London speak would know that he’s a master of the English language, able to tailor his remarks so that they’re understandable to just about anyone. Yet, when he refers to his voluminous output as a lawyer, including his many appearances before the Supreme Court of Canada, it’s easy to see that he is as skilled at legal argument as the very best lawyers.
And, while he does introduce many concepts in law through the course of the book, London always explains things in a clear and concise fashion. He has also advocated a consistent liberal philosophy throughout the course of his career, in particular when it comes to advancing the case for the right to die and a woman’s right to exercise control over her own body.
London’s Jewish identity is something that he has always proudly worn. Twice, in fact, he has been called upon to mediate two particularly thorny issues within Winnipeg’s Jewish community. The first was when the Talmud Torah and I. L. Peretz Folk School were both in financial difficulty and a merger was necessary in order to insure the future of at least one Jewish day school in the city.
Later, London’s skill as a mediator was brought into play when three synagogues: the Beth Israel, Bnay Abraham, and Rosh Pina, were brought together in a merger that bruised many egos. Ultimately though, London notes that the most difficult challenge faced by the newly formed congregation was how to assign seats for the high holidays!
In the latter part of his career London began to forge a new path entirely as he developed an expertise in Indigenous legal issues. His writing about the 30 years that he spent serving as counsel to various Native groups provides as clear an explanation as one can read why Native rights deserve to be upheld. At the same time London developed a close relationship with Phil Fontaine, former Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, about whom he writes with the utmost respect and affection.
London played an important role during the Meech Lake discussions, helping to fashion the essential arguments why that particular attempt to amend the Canadian constitution was so deeply flawed (for not recognizing the First Nations as having equal status to the English and French nations).
Ultimately though, London describes an encounter in Vancouver when he was barred from entering a meeting by four Native chiefs in a clear demonstration of anti-Semitism. The bitter effect of that demonstration of bigotry affected London deeply to the point that he no longer engages in working on Indigenous issues
(Ed. note: Following publication of this review in the Oct. 28 issue of the JP&N, Jack London sent me a note in which he wanted to correct what I had written. Here’s what Jack wrote:
‘Your suggestion that I no longer engage in working on Indigenous issues is misleading, I have not been active recently in resolving ‘political Issues’ for the major First Nations lobby groups, concentrating instead on commercial, charitable and litigious cases for First Nation individuals and Bands. I am still of the view that Reconciliation is the pressing social issue of our time.”)
Jack London has traveled down so many paths during his life, it’s hard to imagine that he’s still only 77 years old which, these days, would make him well qualified to run for President of the United States – if he were American. The fact that, as he remarks often during his memoir, he’s always come back to Winnipeg, is a testament to his love for this city and, if I can be so bold, a reflection also on the hold that our Jewish community has on so many individuals who could have made a far bigger name for themselves had they left Winnipeg.
Even if you’re not familiar with Jack London (and it’s hard to imagine too many of our readers being in that position), reading this book will take you back in time to the 1950s and through the ensuing decades. Lucky for us, Jack London hasn’t written his final chapter – and, unlike other notable lawyers who never bothered to write their memoirs (most notably, the late Harry Walsh, who always put off the idea of doing that), London has given us a book that will both charm and educate.
Serendipity: My Path Through Life and Law
By Jack London
Published by Heartland, Winnipeg, 2020
Available at McNally Robinson Booksellers or directly through the publisher
Email:hrtland@mts.net Tel: 204-284-089
Features
Part 4 of the delusional Winnipeg con man story: The guy in LA who figured out who everyone else was that had been conned
By BERNIE BELLAN This is the fourth part of a story about a delusional Winnipegger who believes he is someone of great wealth and has spent the better part of 30 years contacting people all over the world telling them that he wants to invest in their businesses or projects.
The other three parts have been posted here at: Part 1: “The delusional Winnipeg con man who actually believed his own elaborate con and led one victim in Africa to consider committing suicide”; Part 2: “Meeting the con man for the first time in 2021; and Part 3: “An explosive email arrives in my inbox on January 16.”
As I noted in my last chapter, it was some time after that January 16 email arrived before I realized it had been sent by the person I’m calling Rick here – even though the email was supposedly sent by someone else. I still don’t understand why Rick chose to disguise the fact that he was the one who sent the email that detailed the litany of deception that the man I’ve been calling Fred Devlin perpetrated.
There are so many things I still don’t understand about Rick. He’s gone from being extremely cordial to vicious and back again to being cordial.
At first I didn’t keep a record of all the texts I received from Rick. He kept throwing out names I had never heard of – as if I had any idea what he was talking about. I tried to get him to slow down, just tell me who all these different individuals were whose names he was citing.
Rick kept coming back to one name in particular. I’ll call him Jonathan. Rick wrote that Jonathan was trying to get the RCMP in Ontario (where apparently Jonathan lived) to conduct a criminal investigation of Devlin. Since texts are often jumbled I had to keep asking Rick to explain why Jonathan, in particular – out of all the names Rick had mentioned to me who were victims of Devlin’s vast cons, had a story that might convince a police force in Canada to investigate Devlin. What about the others? I wondered. Didn’t they all have reasons to file complaints with police forces.
Over a period of days – in which I was constantly exchanging texts with Rick (I should explain that I’m mostly retired and can devote myself to writing about stories that grab my interest, as opposed to what I used to have to do previously, which was often to write about subjects in which I had no real interest.), I kept asking Rick more and more questions to get a better idea of the scope of Devlin’s activities through the years.
I told Rick that the January 16 email I had received whetted my appetite to the point where I would publish on my website that email along with my own story how I had come to meet Devlin. My original intention was to keep adding to that story as I learned more information about Devlin’s bizarre pattern of duping individuals into thinking he was rich and powerful. However, as I’ve already explained I was intimidated into pulling that story off my website once I got that libel chill letter from a lawyer.
Even though I chickened out on that one, I told Rick I still wanted to pursue talking to the various individuals he had named in various texts whom he described as having fallen prey to Devlin’s machinations. In time I was able to speak to seven different individuals, all of whom gave me permission to record my conversations with them. Strangely enough, once I had wrapped up speaking to everyone who I thought could offer a piece of the puzzle that is Fred Devlin, I was contacted by one more individual, whom I happen to know very well. That person’s name had come up in some of Rick’s texts – and not in a favourable way.
That particular individual said they knew their name had been discussed in negative terms by one or more of the individuals with whom I had spoken and they wanted to set the record straight – but not on the record. They kept me on the phone for more than two hours, but always insisting that nothing they had said could be reported. So, what was the point of their calling me in the first place? I wondered.
That particular conversation, frustrating as it was, was no stranger than some of the other conversations I had with some of the other individuals whose names had been mentioned at various times in Rick’s texts. Conversations were often meandering and had little to do with the story I was trying to chase down. But, I’m a good listener – and I let everyone who wanted to ramble on do that. Trying to make sense of what they told me had happened between each of them and Devlin wasn’t easy and I kept coming back to the original question that first occurred to me when I met Devlin: How long would it have taken you to realize the guy was a nutcase?
Following are excerpts from texts I received from Rick – and remember, I din’t have a clue who he was talking about in most cases. Again, names have been changed to protect individuals’ identities where they asked not to have their names divulged. The texts may seem somewhat disjointed and incoherent, but reading them will give you a sense of how wide a net Devlin cast in his delusion that he was a hugely successful businessman.
The first text here begins with a reference to someone named Bryan. I had been told earlier by Rick that Bryan Hunter was with the RCMP and was working on an investigation of Devlin at the behest of Jonathan who, as I noted earlier, was urging the RCMP to investigate Devlin.
“…just waiting for Bryan to get to work on Tuesday so he can transfer the case from York police to Winnipeg RCMP and get started with the investigation
“Charlie in Africa is still getting death threats and harassment from random strangers
“Avi … is ready to speak with you now and share his story about Fred – his number in Vegas is …
“Also Dan Winthrop is ready to speak with you now too. He’s the guy Fred used to fly around the world to these imaginary meetings to buy millions of dollars of planes and airports and all kinds of crazy stuff. He’s been with Fred for years doing this and has all the evidence and stories about everything. His number is …
“I’m still trying to get Jonathan Soloway to call you but he has trust issues with journalists
“Once you talk to Avi and Dan, you’ll have all you need.
“I’m telling you man this is almost like a major motion film it’s so beyond crazy.
(The following text is about someone whom I’ll call Dan thanking Rick for the work he’s done to try to bring Devlin to justice, also referring to being willing to talk to me.)
“Dan says ‘Thank you so much I do really appreciate the tone of your email and also your great work. It was very timely for you to do this and the end result from my 40 year project was absolute devastation. Fred destroyed and lied in person to top executives of an international company for years and now I’m in the mud because I associated with him. Yes I definitely will talk with this guy’ (That would be me).
“ ‘I will probably fly to Winnipeg to have a chat with him. I’ve been reviewing my story in my head and trying to make it succinct. So I will send you my story before I talk with this guy. Your timing was absolutely excellent. I don’t know if my work will ever continue that I’ve spent so many years on. But you as a businessman and a publisher knows what it’s like to persevere. I accept the suffering that I’m going through now and better to face that Fred is a psychopath now than further down the road. Fred definitely needs to be stopped and is using the names of top leaders in Winnipeg as companies that he says he owns.
“ ‘So you’re doing great work and I honor that.
“ ‘Thank you’ “
A couple more weeks passed between texts with Rick. I wrote to him: “…you keep saying charges are about to be laid, and from what I can see all that the RCMP have done is assigned a case number to Jonathan’s complaint.
“It’s hard for me to believe that the RCMP was taking the complaint seriously.”
Rick responded: “You have no idea the obstacles and challenges we’ve been through to get to this point. I’ve already cried about every obstacle along the way, so I’m not gonna repeat myself and bore both of us. I understand I’m just frustrated and I want this to be over with and I want that psychopath to be locked away, so he can’t hurt any more people.
I wanted to know though, what exactly Devlin had done to Rick that caused him such anguish. I asked him: “Can you quantify how you lost millions of dollars? Was it put into some sort of investment?”
Rick responded: “I didn’t lose millions through a direct cash investment. The loss was through reliance and opportunity cost over roughly two years. Fred promised a $10 million investment to acquire and scale my magazine and represented that $1 million would be advanced to stabilize me personally while the larger transaction was finalized. Based on those representations, I stopped pursuing other investors, shared my full business plan, disclosed confidential and personal information, and spent thousands of hours in daily calls, planning sessions, and operational preparation with Fred, my staff, and outside collaborators.
“We had approximately 20 people lined up and ready to execute once funding arrived, and the company’s growth was effectively put on hold while we waited. During that time I passed on other legitimate opportunities and investors because I believed the deal was real and imminent. The financial loss is the value of years of diverted labor, stalled growth, foregone funding opportunities, and business damage caused by reliance on repeated promises that were never fulfilled. That is what I mean when I say I lost millions of dollars.”
I returned to asking the original question that had been troubling me from the first time I received that original email on January 16: “How can so many highly intelligent people have been conned by Fred – and for so long? I smelled a rat the first time I met him. What was it about him that persuaded so many ostensibly intelligent people to go along with the nonsense he was spewing out when what he was promising could never be backed up?”
Rick responded: “That question is exactly the right one, and it’s really the heart of the story.
“Fred didn’t succeed because people were unintelligent. He succeeded because he was highly adaptive and targeted people’s specific vulnerabilities. He didn’t tell the same story to everyone. He mirrored each person’s values, language, and aspirations, then slowly escalated his claims once trust was established.
“In my case, I’m highly intelligent and have run a successful media company for decades, but I’m also autistic. That combination can mean I take people at their word. I’m less attuned to manipulation cues, and I’m more willing to suspend disbelief if something feels theoretically possible. Over time, especially with constant contact, that matters. When someone speaks with absolute confidence day after day, hour after hour, the brain normalizes the claims.
“The unifying factor across victims wasn’t stupidity, it was money used as leverage. Fred consistently dangled imminent, life changing financial relief. Promised investments, salaries, ownership positions, acquisitions. Once people believed funding was coming, they reorganized their lives around it. They stopped pursuing alternatives. They waited. That waiting is where the damage happens.
“He also used social proof. He placed people into roles within a supposedly massive organization, introduced them to each other, referenced meetings with officials, institutions, and high status figures. Each person assumed someone else had already verified the claims. No one realized they were all operating on the same unverified promises.
“Some victims were vulnerable due to age, idealism, faith, or personal hardship. Others were experienced professionals who believed they were seeing only a small piece of a much larger, already validated operation. Fred exploited optimism, trust, and the very human tendency to believe that extraordinary opportunities sometimes really do exist.
“In hindsight, the claims were impossible. But cons don’t work in hindsight, they work in real time, incrementally, when skepticism is postponed just a little longer each day because the payoff is always right around the corner.
“That’s how intelligent people get caught. Not all at once, but slowly, while trying to act in good faith.
“I’m absolutely willing to go on the record and share every aspect of my experience in detail, including timelines, communications, documents, and the specific representations that were made to me over the two year period. My goal is transparency and preventing further harm to others. I will also work with everyone I’ve interviewed and spoken to so that they can share their stories with you directly as well.”
After reading that particular text – which was well written, I came to the conclusion that the January 16 email I had received had been written by Rick, not by Charlie. I wondered why that was, so I asked Rick why he had used Charlie to send that email? Rick refused to answer that question and said that he felt like he was being “interrogated” by me. I told him that his response only added to my puzzlement over this entire story – which I still find so baffling to understand. Rick’s responses to subsequent questions became increasingly frazzled.
In our final exchange of texts – when I persisted in asking him why he had written that January 16 email, not Charlie, he wrote: “You’re throwing a monkey wrench into the whole thing right now by being a little too pushy and a little too aggressive
“This is always been about stopping Fred from taking more victims, not about you writing a story about our traumas
“The only person who benefits there is you”
In the meantime, I wanted to begin speaking to others who had been victimized by Fred Devlin.
The first person I spoke to by phone is someone I’m going to call Dan Winthrop. Dan Winthrop was an aeronautical engineer who had a plan to bring jet planes from Israel and convert them into water bombers.
Coming next: Dan Winthrop’s story
Features
Israeli Government Report Ranks World’s 10 Most Influential Antisemites
Israel’s Ministry of Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism published this week its official ranking of the 10 most influential antisemitic figures in the world in 2025, and the No. 1 spot was given to social media influencer Dan Bilzerian, who is running for US Congress in Florida.
The Armenian-American entrepreneur and US military veteran is a prominent critic of Israel and Judaism who has promoted antisemitic conspiracy theories and Holocaust denial. He has said he wants to “kill Israelis” and thinks Judaism is “terrible.” He recently claimed antisemitism is a “made-up term” and there is a “big Jewish supremacy problem” in the United States. He formally filed paperwork earlier this month to run as a Republican and unseat incumbent Jewish Rep. Randy Fine in Florida’s 6th Congressional District.
Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg is the world’s second most influential antisemite, according to Israel’s Ministry of Diaspora Affairs, which highlighted her use of terms such as “genocide,” “siege,” and “mass starvation” in reference to Israel’s military actions in the Gaza Strip.
Third place was given to Egyptian comedian and former television host Bassem Youssef, followed by far-right American political commentator Candace Owens in fourth place and Palestinian-British journalist and editor Abdel Bari Atwan in fifth.
The list includes American imam Omar Suleiman, Denmark-based doctor Anastasia Maria Loupis – who has shared online conspiracy theories about Jews and Israel – far-right commentator and white nationalist Nick Fuentes, and conspiracist Ian Carroll.
Rounding out the top 10 is far-right podcaster and former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who regularly promotes antisemitic conspiracy theories about Jewish influence.
Israel said the 10 most “prominent influencers in the global antisemitic and anti-Zionist arena in 2025” were selected based on “both the severity of their actions/statements and the scope of their influence” related to their activities last year. “Each of them has expressed antisemitic views or promoted false information related to Jews, Israel, or both,” the ministry explained. The list does not include individuals with formal political or government positions.
Each individual was ranked based on their influence on social media, but also other factors such as their repeated appearances on news channels, “perceived influence on public opinion, and prominence in certain communities.” The ministry also took into consideration each person’s “level of impact and risk,” which includes how often they upload antisemitic and anti-Israeli posts on social media. The report was released ahead of Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Day, known in Hebrew as Yom HaShoah.
In a separate section of the report dedicated to antisemitic and anti-Israel influencers in the US, Israel’s Ministry of Diaspora Affairs singled out YouTuber and children’s educator Ms. Rachel, who has “increasingly used her social media accounts to amplify pro-Palestinian messages and criticize Israel.”
“Her posts have been interpreted by pro-Israel organizations as one-sided and hostile to Israel, and organizations such as StopAntisemitism have accused her of spreading anti-Israel or pro-Hamas propaganda and called for an examination of her activities,” the ministry stated.
Features
4000 Quarters for my Uncle Lew – a new story by David Topper
Introduction: David Topper has been featured on this website many times. His stories about Albert Einstein have drawn huge audiences, but David’s interests range far beyond writing about science. Most recently, we have featured stories about “Jews in strange places.”
If you want to find all of David Topper’s stories that have appeared on this site, just enter his name in our search engine (the magnifying glass). Here’s David’s latest story – but be warned: As David told me, it’s a “story”:
I adored my Uncle Lew. He was one of many uncles in the large extended family on my mother’s side. Of course, this means that there were many aunts too. But there were not many cousins – at least, none my age. And I was an only child; so I guess you could call me an “only cousin” too. At least when I was very young – say, from ages 6 through 12 or so – until many cousins were eventually born. In all, it seems that I was alone, in those early years.
But I’m digressing already, and I just want to tell you about my grandmother’s brother, my Uncle Lew. You see, he lived in the same city when I was very young, and he came to visit a lot – especially on Sundays, when there was a large gathering of the extended family at my grandmother’s home, with lots of food. He came with his wife, Aunt Lil. But it was Lew who was especially nice to me. He always came with jokes; jokes that the adults laughed at – and I did too, but often not really knowing what was funny.
Most importantly, for me, sometime during the visit, Uncle Lew would sneak up behind me and put his hand in the right side-pocket of my trousers. I knew what was happening, and so I’d just walk away to a quiet part of the house, reach inside my pocket, and pull out a shiny quarter. Rubbing it in my hands, thinking about what I might buy, and putting it back in my pocket – I was happy, and set for the week to come. You must realize that this was sometime in the late 1940s and into the 1950s – and a quarter was worth a lot to a kid. These were the days when a penny could buy a nice treat at the candy store nearby where I lived. And, well you do the math: a quarter was worth 25 pennies. Yes, I adored Uncle Lew, although I’m not sure I would have used that word at the time.
Speaking of money. I remember that the family, especially the men, talked a lot about money. I’m not sure that many of them had a lot of it, since most were of the working class. Maybe that’s why they talked about it. Although I suspect that rich people spend a lot of time talking about money too. Yet, what do I know?
I mention this because, at some point – I don’t remember the date or my age – but Uncle Lew and Aunt Lil moved to another city. Thus: no more shiny quarters in my pocket at the Sunday dinners. Instead, I listened to the talk, mainly among the men, about Uncle Lew. And as best I could surmise: Uncle Lew owed people money that he didn’t have, and so he had to skedaddle to save his skin. It made me think about my quarters, and if I had put them in the bank, maybe I could have helped Uncle Lew pay back his debts. But now it was too late. Uncle Lew was gone and I spent all the quarters on myself – my selfish self, I thought sadly.
But Uncle Lew was not completely out of my life. A few years later he came to town for a short visit. He came for a weekend; and had Sunday dinner with the family. I guess he thought it was safe enough. And nothing happened. So, he did it again, a few months later. And so it went. Thus, Uncle Lew was not out of my life completely. And yes, a quarter was deposited in my pocket on the Sunday dinners. As well, by now, I had a bank account; and I occasionally put Uncle Lew’s quarters in the bank – just in case he might need a loan someday, I thought.
Oh, I forgot to mention: he now came alone. From the talk of the adults, I figured out that he and Aunt Lil were divorced – something my mother later explained to me, because in those days it was not a common occurrence. And people were often embarrassed to talk about it.
Now fast forward several years to the late 1950s, when I was in High School. One day Uncle Lew appeared out of nowhere, carrying all that he owned in a few suitcases. I don’t know why, but he stayed with us. Being an only child, I had a room of my own and so the family got a cot from the basement and they put it in my room. I was okay with this, since I always liked Uncle Lew and was glad to know that he was safe with us.
Our first night together – I in my bed and he a few feet away in the cot – was memorable. Because, in the middle of the night, I woke up and saw a spark of light moving around the room near Uncle Lew’s cot. I guess I forgot to tell you that Uncle Lew was a smoker. Of course, smoking was common in those days, so it was no big thing that he smoked. In fact, if you watch any movie from that period, every time people walk into a room and sit down to talk, someone takes out a pack of cigarettes and they all light up. But I digress, again. Anyway, as you may have surmised, the spark of light moving around in the dead of night was Uncle Lew having a smoke. He was so addicted to cigarettes that he couldn’t get through a night’s sleep without one. And so it went: night after night.
Also, at the time he moved in with me, I was working on building a model airplane out of balsa wood. I usually worked on this in the evenings, after I did all my homework. The parts were strewn across a table in my room, and Uncle Lew often watched me assemble the plane – saying he hoped to see the plane actually fly someday. He said he enjoyed watching me put the thing together (since he seemed to have nothing else to do), and I enjoyed the conversations. I glued pieces of balsa wood together and he smoked cigarettes, depositing the ashes in a tray on my table.
In a short time, I came to understand why Uncle Lew was here. When I was at school during the day, my relatives were taking turns driving Uncle Lew to the hospital for treatments. In those days, people didn’t talk about some things directly. Especially cancer, which was a word that was often spoken in a hushed voice. So that was it; he had lung cancer.
At the same time, Uncle Lew was seeing a dentist for the pain he was having with a tooth in the right side of his mouth. He showed it to me one day, while I was working on my airplane. He was sure that the dentist knew what he was doing, and Uncle Lew was looking forward to getting it removed and replaced with a new tooth. We didn’t talk about the cancer, but looking back on this I can only surmise that Uncle Lew was in denial – or he was overly optimistic about the cancer treatments.
In a short time, the tooth was removed and replaced by the false one. Uncle Lew was elated, and told me that it was the best $1000 he ever spent. Yes, $1000 for the tooth. I don’t know where he got the money. And I’m afraid to ask, for obvious reasons. But I now also question the ethics of that dentist, allowing a patient undergoing cancer treatments to spend so much money. But maybe the dentist didn’t know. Then again, where were my relatives in all this? I am only thinking of this now. As for all things in life while growing up: what is, is reality for that time, and you just go with the flow. Only later, looking back, do you see the quirks and foibles of the past.
Indeed, did I think of helping Uncle Lew with his dental bill? I had a bank account. And some of that money was from deposits of Uncle Lew’s quarters. I don’t know. What I do remember is that not long after the new tooth was planted in his mouth, relieving him of that pain, the cancer got worse – and he spent the rest of his days in the hospital. And that’s where he died.
At the funeral I wanted to mourn. To grieve at the loss of this beloved uncle, who lived with me in the last stage of his life.
But I kept thinking about that tooth – that damned $1000 tooth. While saying the prayer for the dead, the Kaddish, I wanted to concentrate on the meaning of the prayer – even though I couldn’t read Hebrew. But that costly tooth kept flashing in front of me – like the spark of Uncle Lew’s cigarette in the middle of the night.
Even when the body was lowered into the grave, and I took my turn throwing several shovels of dirt over Uncle Lew’s plain wooden coffin – in my mind, I was doing the math: how many quarters are there in $1000?
In a way, on that day, and in my mind, I really buried a tooth – and it just so happened that a body came along with it.
My one consolation in all this is that about a few weeks after the funeral, I finished building my airplane; and I took it out to an empty ball-field near where I lived. Just me and my airplane.
The propeller was attached to a rubber band, and so I wound it up and gave it a push. It took off, rising up, almost as high as the trees beyond the outfield. Then it banked a bit toward the left; and, after heading back towards me, it moved in a circle – almost overhead. It continued circling – rather as if it were caught in a tornado – moving down and down.
When it crashed into a heap of shards of balsa wood right next to me standing on the pitcher’s mound … I laughed, a deep laugh – a laugh that turned into crying. A deep cry – a cry I sorely needed.
Sitting in that empty field next to my shattered airplane – looking up and beyond the trees – I screamed to the sky. “There are 4000 quarters in $1000.”
I walked home, and went to my room. Sitting at my empty table, I said to myself out loud. “I guess I should build another airplane. What do you think Uncle Lew? Let’s go to the store and use some of those quarters to buy another model airplane. Maybe this one won’t be jinxed. What do you think?”
But before leaving the house – and for the first time since Uncle Lew died – I was able to fold up that cot and put it back in the basement.
