If I were to pick the most impressive book I've read recently, it would be Morgan Housel's 'The Art of Spending Money' (책 <The Art of Spending Money> 노트). At first, I watched an interview video of the author and fell for his eloquence and logic, which naturally led me to become interested in his recently released book. However, the book hadn't been published in Korean yet, and I had no choice but to read it in English with tears in my eyes.

Fortunately, it wasn't a book filled with literary or difficult expressions, and I managed to finish it somehow. And even if I didn't understand 100% of it, what it wanted to convey was clear, and I couldn't deny that it was a book that deeply resonated with me. It was a good book. So I went around recommending it everywhere.

Then one of the people I recommended it to told me the latest news about the book, and oh my, the news was that the book would soon be translated and published! Excited by the good news, I quickly checked what the title would be, and to my surprise, the title was 'The Equation of Money' (돈의 방정식). I immediately felt resistance. I wished it could have been something like 'The Aesthetics of Spending' (소비의 미학), even if not 'The Art of Spending Money.' The reason I initially felt resistance was that, having read the Author's Note at the beginning of the book, the title didn't resonate with me.

Spending money is more art than science. There's no universal formula, no fixed rules. What brings one person joy may leave another feeling empty. And so, just as with investing, understanding our emotions—our biases, hopes, and fears—can guide us toward smarter choices. Choices that reflect who we are, what we value, and how we want to live.

Was it because the publisher wanted to clearly indicate that this is a sequel to the author's previous hit, 'The Psychology of Money'? Was it because 'The Equation of Money' seems more provocative and likely to sell better than 'The Aesthetics of Spending'? Does it matter as long as people widely buy and read the book? Various thoughts came to mind.

References