The Fisherman and the Golden Fish
I want to tell you a story …
There once was a man and a golden fish …
“The Fisherman and the Golden Fish” (in Russian, «Сказка о рыбаке и рыбке») is a renowned fairy tale in verse by the celebrated Russian author Alexander Pushkin, written in 1833.
It is a powerful and enduring moral fable about greed, humility, and the corrupting nature of insatiable desire.
Plot Summary
The story begins with an old fisherman and his wife living in a dilapidated mud hut by the sea.
One day, the old man catches a magical, golden fish that can speak and grants wishes. The fish begs for its freedom, promising to grant any wish in return.
The kind and humble fisherman, wanting nothing, releases the fish back into the sea and returns home empty-handed.
When he tells his wife what happened, she becomes furious with him for not making a wish. She berates him and demands that he go back and ask for a new washtub, as theirs is broken.
The genders are interchangeable. It does not matter who is man and who is woman, but we will follow the story as written.
The fisherman reluctantly goes back to the shore, calls the fish, and the wish is granted. He returns to find a new washtub, but his wife is still not satisfied.
Her desires escalate rapidly. She then sends him back to ask for a new house. The wish is granted, and the fisherman finds a beautiful new home.
However, his wife’s ambition grows even more. She wants to be a noblewoman, then a tsarina (empress), and finally, the autocratic ruler of the sea, commanding the golden fish to serve her.
With each escalating demand, the sea becomes progressively stormier and darker, reflecting the fish’s growing displeasure and the moral decay of the old woman’s wishes.
Finally, the old woman, now a tyrannical empress, declares she wants to be the “Ruler of the Seas” herself, so the golden fish will be her personal servant.
The terrified fisherman goes to the shore one last time. The sea is black and raging with violent storms. He makes the outrageous demand. The golden fish listens without a word and then disappears beneath the waves.
The fisherman returns home to find that his grand palace and all its riches have vanished. In their place stands the original, broken mud hut, and sitting before it is his old wife, dressed in rags, left with nothing at all.
Moral and Themes
The central moral of Pushkin’s tale is a stark warning against the corrosive power of greed and unending ambition – in other words: entitlement and expectation.
The old woman’s initial desire for a simple washtub is reasonable, but each fulfilled wish only fuels her desire for more, leading her down a path of moral corruption. She is never satisfied and loses her humility, humanity, and ultimately, everything she had.
The tale contrasts the humble, contented nature of the fisherman with the insatiable greed of his wife.
The fisherman represents simple virtue and is rewarded for his initial kindness, while his wife represents avarice and is punished for her hubris.
The story serves as a timeless reminder that true happiness comes not from accumulating wealth and power, but from contentment and gratitude for what one has. Happiness comes from accepting things as they are.
From a Scam Victim Recovery Perspective
The tale of “The Fisherman and the Golden Fish” serves as a powerful and direct allegory for the recovery journey of a traumatized scam victim.
In this context, the golden fish represents the gift of a recovery program, a supportive community, therapeutic resources, and a clear path toward healing. It is a miraculous opportunity, just as the fish was a magical find.
The victim, much like the fisherman, is initially in a state of loss and despair, living in the “broken hut” of their trauma. The recovery program is the chance to ask for something better, to begin rebuilding. However, the story’s critical warning lies not in the gift itself, but in how the recipient chooses to use it.
The victim’s expectations become the “old wife” of the story, a voice of insatiable demand that can corrupt the entire process. At first, the desires may seem reasonable: “I want to stop feeling the pain all the time,” or “I want to understand why this happened.”
These are the wishes for a new washtub, a small but significant improvement. But if expectations are not managed, they quickly escalate. The voice begins to demand, “I want to be completely healed in a month,” “I want my money back,” or “I want to feel normal again and never think about this.” These are the wishes for a new house, then to be a noblewoman.
The victim begins to focus not on the hard work of the present moment, but on an idealized, pain-free future that they believe they are entitled to. This future-oriented thinking is a form of denial, a refusal to accept the reality that recovery is a slow, arduous, and often painful process.
Each escalating, unrealistic expectation causes the “sea” of their recovery to become stormier. The program that once felt like a lifeline now feels inadequate. The supportive community feels like it is failing them. They become angry and frustrated, just as the old wife became enraged with her husband for not securing enough.
They are no longer engaging with the process; they are demanding an outcome that is not yet possible. This is the critical danger: by living in a fantasy future where recovery is quick and easy, they sabotage their real-world progress.
They reject the slow, steady work of healing because it does not match their timeline. In the end, just as the old woman was left with nothing but her broken hut, the victim who clings to unrealistic expectations will find themselves right back where they started, having made no real progress.
The gift of recovery was offered, but their demands for it to be something it could never be ultimately caused it to disappear, leaving them alone in their trauma.
True recovery, the story teaches, requires accepting the process as it is, not demanding it be what we wish it to be.
Prof. Tim McGuinness, Ph.D.
November 2025
