The Serial Killers: a Study in the Psychology of Violence [Paperback]

by Colin Wilson, Donald Seaman

An ordinary family house in a quiet West Country town - 25 Cromwell Street, Glouster. Now known throughout the world as the House of The home of Fred and Rosemary West and the scene of one of the most shocking cases of serial murder England has ever seen. United by acts of unimaginable cruelty, the West's partnership was one of the most deadly in criminal history.
And serial killers are increasing. Triggered by either sexual fantasies or a need to infilct pain and fear, their sadistic addiction to frenzied killing is the most horrifying of all crimes.
But with the fromation of the world's first National Centre for the Analysis of Violent Crime in Virginia, made famous in the hugely popular Silence of the Lambs, the methods of tracking these elusive killers have been revolutionised.

Genres: True Crime, Nonfiction, Crime, Psychology, History, Biography, Serial Killer

349 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1990

About the author

Librarian Note: There is more than one author by this name in the Goodreads database.

Colin Henry Wilson was born and raised in Leicester, England, U.K. He left school at 16, worked in factories and various occupations, and read in his spare time. When Wilson was 24, Gollancz published The Outsider (1956) which examines the role of the social 'outsider' in seminal works of various key literary and cultural figures. These include Albert Camus, Jean-Paul Sartre, Ernest Hemingway, Hermann Hesse, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, William James, T. E. Lawrence, Vaslav Nijinsky and Vincent Van Gogh and Wilson discusses his perception of Social alienation in their work. The book was a best seller and helped popularize existentialism in Britain. Critical praise though, was short-lived and Wilson was soon widely criticized.

Wilson's works after The Outsider focused on positive aspects of human psychology, such as peak experiences and the narrowness of consciousness. He admired the humanistic psychologist Abraham Maslow and corresponded with him. Wilson wrote The War Against Sleep: The Philosophy of Gurdjieff on the life, work and philosophy of G. I. Gurdjieff and an accessible introduction to the Greek-Armenian mystic in 1980. He argues throughout his work that the existentialist focus on defeat or nausea is only a partial representation of reality and that there is no particular reason for accepting it. Wilson views normal, everyday consciousness buffeted by the moment, as "blinkered" and argues that it should not be accepted as showing us the truth about reality. This blinkering has some evolutionary advantages in that it stops us from being completely immersed in wonder, or in the huge stream of events, and hence unable to act. However, to live properly we need to access more than this everyday consciousness. Wilson believes that our peak experiences of joy and meaningfulness are as real as our experiences of angst and, since we are more fully alive at these moments, they are more real. These experiences can be cultivated through concentration, paying attention, relaxation and certain types of work.

Reviews

[✨Bean's Books✨ · Rating 2 out of 5]

Most of this book seems like trashy satire that you would read in a tabloid magazine instead of realistic facts. The authors do not spare you the gore however. This book was written in 1988 although I have the reprinted 2008 version. I think because of the time that it was written a lot of the information here is out of date. I guess you could use this as a quick reference for melee introductions to different serial killers but you would definitely want a different book for decent research.

[John Anthony · Rating 4 out of 5]

I usually worry about my lapses of short term memory but here it comes as something of a relief – that I can’t retain in my addled little brain all the horrors Colin Wilson catalogues here. The impression I’m left with is of a worthwhile read which shows similarities and differences between the various types of killer from the 19th to the 21st century and the reasons, such as they are, behind their atrocities. The psychology explored by the author gives purpose to his writing and helps me to make sense of the pointlessness of randomly destroying human life.

The sudden ending suggested that the author was in a hurry to finish it. Perhaps he’d had more than enough by the time he reached that point.

[Paul · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is not worth the time it took to read it.
There is plenty of gory detail, for fans of that sort of thing. But the book jumps from topic to topic with no perceptible logical structure. And the author makes sweeping generalization without a scrap of evidence to back them up. For example, he announces that political radicals have the same motivation for their actions as serial killers.
But worst of all are the errors in basic factual information. He states that Ted Bundy almost always drove stolen cars, when in fact Bundy used his carefully modified VW "beetle" through the most prolific part of his murderous career. And he does not even get the correct identities of the Manson Family defendants in the Tate-LaBianca murder trial!
My verdict: The author is guilty of throwing together a bunch of misinformation and unsupported theorizing in order to make a quick buck

[Halina Hetman · Rating 1 out of 5]

Не знаю, нащо я зробила це з собою. Нащо читала майже місяць таку жорстоку, застарілу, погано написану книжку, що потрапила мені до рук випадково і відбила бажання читати. Ось чому я її не рекомендую:

1. Виправдання злочинців. Між строк, у злочинах винуваті: батьки і вихователі, суспільство, дружини, які пішли від садистів, - і звісно ж, жертви. Жертви, бо вони були проститутками чи просто опинилися не в той час і не в тому місці, жертви, бо вони не втекли, чи, навпаки, втікали, а треба було почекати, жертви, бо вони виглядали невинно - або ж провокативно. А, ну і травма голови теж винна: It seems certain that the two head injuries were responsible for turning Fred West into a serial killer. Злочинець винен іноді, але, взагалі-то, більшість серійних вбивць - дуже розумні і інтелигентні люди, з IQ вище середнього, якщо ви не знали.
2. Torture porn. Подробні описи знущань над жертвами ніби смакуються авторами.
3. Мова, якою описуються злочини, вражає: Rose was already fully sexually experienced when she met Fred West at the age of fifteen, in 1969 (тобто Роуз була зґвалтована власним батьком і іншими дорослими багато разів до цього часу, що і описано раніше, але потім це насилля подається як "сексуальний досвід"). Такою мовою автори послуговуються дуже часто, називаючи ґвалт сексом, згоду, яка була дана під страхом смерті - згодою, а не примусом, а викрадення не вважаючи злочином взагалі. Іноді злочини виправдовуються тим, що жертва на фотографіях не виглядала так, ніби їй боляче, або ж тим, що жертва вже була зґвалтована кимось раніше.
4. Українофобія. Незважаючи на те, що говорячи про бекграунд Чикатило, автори навіть згадують Голодомор як ознаку ненависті Сталіна до українського народу, тут же пишуть the Ukraine та вказують, що Ukrainians are an ethnic minority in russia. Загалом, вони не відрізняють СРСР від росії, так ніби всі захоплені комуністами величезні території п'ятнадцяти республік автоматично стали якоїсь збірною "росією". Книжка, на хвилинку, написана в 1996 році, коли ніякого СРСР вже не існувало п'ять років.
5. Расизм. На темношкірих автори кажуть blacks, coloured, negroes, на корінних жителів - Indians (я навіть не зразу зрозуміла, звідки там індуси взялися в Колумбії). Те, що поліція не переймається жертвами, що не відносяться до білої раси, просто декларується як факт, але ніяк не коментується і не називається систематичним расизмом.
6. Фактичні помилки. Я не є фанаткою трукрайму (якщо хочеться чогось такого, просто дивлюся Блогмайстра), але навіть я, після одного відео про Теда Банді, знаю що він скоїв більшість своїх вбивств, використовуючи власну машину, яка навіть стала в якомусь сенсі "легендарною". Автори ж книги помилково стверджують, що він здебільшого крав машини. Скільки ще таких неточностей було допущено, залишається тільки здогадуватися.
7. Взаємовиключні твердження. В одній главі нам розповідають, що всі серійні вбивці походять з бідних родин і приводять якісь соціологічні теорії щодо цього, в наступній - приклад декількох серійних вбивць із заможних родин. Теж саме щодо поганого дитинства і аб'юзивних батьків - ніби-то нема серійного вбивці, який зростав би в нормальних обставинах, аж ось декілька прикладів буквально на наступних сторінках. Спочатку автори доказуть, що серійними вбивцями літніх білих людей стають тільки темношкірі чоловіки - аж ось описи білих маніяків, які теж вбивали велику кількість білих старушок. Серійні вбивці - продукт модерного суспільства, от раніше такого не було! А далі - про те, як було раніше (спойлер: маніяки, серійні вбивці і збоченці, виявляється, існували в усі часи). Таким чином, виникає когнитивний дисонанс щодо всіх поданих в книзі теорій, бо вони протирічать одна одній, а автори ці протиріччя ніяк не коментують.
8. Дуже багато описів відважних і прекрасних героїв з ФБР і дуже мало пояснень, що вони насправді зробили і які результати принесла їхня робота. Виглядає як підлизування.
9. Я розчарувалася в системі покарання США та інших країн. Ви думаєте, в нас погані суди? Людина вбила 110 дітей, а її посадили на 16 років. Людина знущалася і вбила іншу людину - її виправдали, бо адвокат дуже пристрасно описував, який цей вбивця хороший батько (він вбивав знову і знову після цього, як не складно здогадатися). І такі приклади розкидані по всій книзі - вони просто вселяють страх жити, бо ти не захищений в жодній країні світу, навіть в нібито "правовій". На фоні фактів того, як закон, поліція, суди не змогли захистити суспільство від маніаків, навіть коли ті потрапляли їм прямо в руки, трохи іронично звучить патос, який ллється з авторів щодо агентів ФБР.
10. Ну і, звісно, з 18 джерел з бібліографії - 6 інших книг цих самих же авторів...

Коротше, мрак, нелогічність та упередженість.

[Elementary Particle · Rating 2 out of 5]

The book referrs to most of the well-known serial killers and it does not spare the usual gory descriptions. It also has a few "smart" referrences (as I would call them), to Abraham Maslow, William James, Auguste de Villiers de I'sle-Adam and others.

However, there are some referrences that made me dislike the book because they are sending it straight into the mud of pseudoscience/paranormal. First off, the author seems to endorse the idea of demonic posession in the case of a certain killer. Second, it seems to support the theory of Rupert Sheldrake regarding "morphic resonance"; the final chapter could have been so much better without running into this laughable "woo woo".

[Ape · Rating 2 out of 5]

So, I had to keep saying to myself: This was written in the 1980s. It is not the author’s fault that the world has since moved on. But then I see my copy is a revised edition from 2007. Still, it’s 2019, so that’s over ten years. And maybe I’m nit picking, but then I come across another idiotic passage, and I think no, this is no good. I mean, here’s what I wrote after just reading the introduction:

Comes across as a bit sensationalist and trashy. And spinning the old popular lines, simplistic and glossing over social and economic history with grand sweeping statements. I can't say I was massively impressed by the introduction where they were banging through the history of serial killers and a generalisation of when and why they started. Not considering that back in history, things wouldn't have been reported or examined in detail, the police and the justice system were very different beasts to what we know today. And apparently in history everyone was so poor that they simply didn't have time to be serial killers because they were too busy finding food. Except there's always been rich folks?! And then later stating that some serial killers came about because they were living in poverty and were resentful of the rich around them? And apparently the Victorians were really repressed when it came to sex (and therefore all peoples in history before them) and it was only later on when women started getting jobs and were more untouchable (before then all women were poor and keen to be prostitutes so sex wasn't such a driving factor) that the sex mad appeared. Just... really? Do you honestly believe that simplistic global view of human history? And then there's this little throwaway comment: "The typewriter had been invented in the 1860s, and businessmen soon discovered that women made better typists than men." (p. 7) (Women have been kept in low paid, menial jobs and nothing else because they’re better at those jobs? End of?). I get that this book isn't about social or economic history or a particularly female perspective but there are constant little hints here and there that this isn't going to delve particularly deep into the complex thoughts and motivations of people, or how social and economic factors really were or affected people.

So, as an account of the facts of crime, it’s probably a very well researched book and by god the guy knows his crimes. It’s interesting I guess from a historical perspective to read about how the FBI was developing profiling – even to read how it was doing at the time of the writing of the book. Imagine what those guys will be doing with the technology available today. It does get a bit grinding at times because there are that many details and facts about that many murders. You can get lost. And he bounces about and returns to things in different chapters, explains the same terms over and over (ok, I get it!!!). And I do feel that he contradicts himself throughout the book, but you get bogged down in overwhelming detail you can’t be bothered to plough back through for the first statement. But those little throwaway comments here and there, the reliance on 50s sex research (by god, what enlightened times – sarcasm) meant that what is subtitled “a study in the psychology of violence”, doesn’t feel like a good study into psychology, and comes across at times like a narrowed minded view on world order. Yes, there are some points he makes where you see the sense. A lot of these serial killers have had very nasty childhoods, with abuse and neglect, often head injuries – lost children that have gotten very messed up. But it’s a sad world out there and not everyone who has such an upbringing (if you could call it that) becomes a serial killer, so what is it about these people? Is it that there’s something wrong with the wiring they’re born with, and the social triggers push them that way? I don’t feel like he really went in to this. Really, this all speaks to me that communities need to pump money, time and effort into children’s services for ALL children in the country if they’re to stop a lot of these social criminal problems that crop up in adulthood.

As I mentioned before, his grasp of social and economic history is woeful. Here is a quote from the update chapter that made me cringe: “Serial murder is a social aberration that has arisen in the last two hundred years and – thanks to modern forensic policing and behavioural science – might effectively cease to happen within the next generation or so. Other once universal forms of crime have been driven out of existence by both technology and society’s willingness to combat them creatively: banditry and slavery, to name just two. So it is not too much to hope that the serial killer might soon go the way of the Viking raider and the Roman gladiator...” (p. 311) So... there’s no slavery globally? No one raids other villages/countries/lands, steals goods, girls, women, whatever, makes off with them, forces them into marriage, rapes them, burns their houses? People don’t beat the crap out of each other for entertainment? We don’t have bandits/pirates anymore? Am I nitpicking? Maybe this book isn’t just not grasping history, but the nature of humanity itself.

This is a view of crime from a male perspective. There was one cringeworthy sex research he mentioned where women are divided into low, medium and high dominance – high being superior and less likely to be a victim. Also the woman who finds the male member beautiful. Not that it’s just women that seem misunderstood.

“It must be recognised that this element of conquest is present in all male sexuality. If it were absent, the male would find the female totally undesireable.” (p.156) Now, I don’t know how the guys feel about this generalisation, but then what is he saying about the gay community? A gay man wanting to “woo” (sorry, limp use of word, can’t think of a better one just now) and seduce the apple of his eye, has no sense of conquest in getting that new man in his life, because female bodies don’t do it for him?

The book also uses zoology studies when noting that serial killers don’t come from privileged backgrounds – they’re poor people from overcrowded slums and this is what pushes them down that road. It’s all the overcrowding. Prepare for another uncomfortable comment: “The zoologist Desmond Morris remarked that cities are ‘human zoos’, and added: “ Under normal circumstances, in their natural habitats, wild animals do not mutilate themselves, masturbate, attack their offspring, develop stomach ulcers, become fetishists, suffer from obesity, form homosexual pair-bonds, or commit murder”. The conclusion to be drawn may be that the crime explosion will continue until such time as the population explosion has been brought under control.” (p 227)

I am left uncomfortable. I can’t claim to be an expert on anything, but I didn’t feel as though this very chunky book delivered on a lot. I’ll leave with a thought: it’s the killers that are remembered in detail, the victims that are churned through as drones of one another and all forgotten. Is that right? Should we even read books about such things (well, yes, if only to try and learn why things like this happen so you can try to prevent it in the future).

[Rodeweeks · Rating 4 out of 5]

I do not necessarily like Wilson's style of writing, it sometimes seems confusing. However, the book was better than expected. Obviously out of date - both in history and in psychology - it still make for interesting reading (if you can look past the vivid descriptions). It seems like Wilson is as interested in the sex as the murderers themselves, but that might be normal. It is with this word "normal" which there is a constant fight within the book. These people, evil as they may be, needed help - the quicker they can get help the less they may kill. Any one of us can fall into the traps they fell in, we all fight a constant battle against our own demons and some of these are more evil than we are sometimes willing to admit. Keep fighting

[Stephanie]

This book is amazing. It is very detailed about lots of serial killers, their personalities and things that may or did contribute to their actions. It has alot of information regarding the FBI and Psychological profiling which really interests me. I'm fascinated by this book and even though it is written in an academic way it is still easy to read and understand. I am very much enjoying it.

[Shin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Crime is near to us. And we are living ordinary world, however psychopath destroys easily. To know real crime and understand why they did such things is very important for us.

[Courtney · Rating 1 out of 5]

Where do I begin? the authors randomly decided some serial killers were bisexual and others gay (‘homosexual’) and would repeatedly describe them as such. Descriptions of what the killers did are simultaneously stomach-churningly graphic and boring as hell. As other reviews have noted, there are many factual inconsistencies (otherwise known as errors, or lies) and the authors in general presumed a lot of unprovable things about the killers.

Also my favourite typo in the whole book was the footnote about “Howard Henty Holmes”

[Jamal Sahraoui · Rating 3 out of 5]

Full of detail about what notorious serial killers did, how they went about it (full of gore imagery), how they were caught depending on the latest methods of crime tracking, and finally revealings about serial killers background and motivation. I felt like the book was one single chapter talking about various crimes.

[Jorezza Antonio · Rating 5 out of 5]

I learned a lot about serial killers in this book. It's actually very informative, was also watching Mindhunter while reading this.

[Ian Fitzpatrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good, had to put it down a few times due to the head space it puts you in. Page upon page of cases, but focuses on the back-stories and crimes as much as the psychology of why

[SarahRobins_reads · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read the outdated version but I enjoyed it. Maybe a bit repetitive but still have some good explanations about the crimes and some of the psychology behind them.

[Mysweetybooks_ · Rating 3 out of 5]

3,5/5 ⭐

Libro molto interessante soprattutto se si vuole a capire meglio la psicologia dei serial killer

[Marissa Whiteside · Rating 1 out of 5]

I couldn’t even finish this book once I realized that there was no actual information in this book, and what was in there was not correct. Terribly written. Just awful. Don’t waste your time!

[Francesca Fabris · Rating 4 out of 5]

Carino, anche se a parer mio un pó troppo veloce sui casi

[Evieee · Rating 2 out of 5]

One of the most horrific books I have read... read with discretion...

[Luna · Rating 2 out of 5]

So, where to start?

There's nothing inherently bad about this book, except for the fact that it is. Most of it, especially the first few stories of serial killers, feel as though they were written by high schoolers for their final essay. The chapters are riddled with grammar, punctuation and occasionally even spelling errors, which makes me wonder just what sort of editing process it was put through. Some of the chapters are also just based on myths, which makes me wonder what the point was.

The quality of the chapters improved slightly, but only just. Certain chapters were interesting and insightful, but a lot of it appears to be what the authors could find off the internet. Furthermore, the killers are localised to the UK and US only- not a very international perspective.

Dull and disappointing.

[Joni Doe · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting but very out of date

A lot has happened since 1990. Its almost 30 years ago. Whilst compelling, The Serial Killers could use some serious updating. Many of the cases discussed are mentioned as "trial pending' and such. Whilst a prologue does discuss in detail a number of cases post 1990, these newer cases' influence on criminal psychology isn't discusses in the main body of the text.

The main point at which this disparity between then and now really hit me was when describing Quantico's BSU computer system as 'pulling up.a hundred cases...processing them overnight...and telexing the result to the office'

Additionally, it does contain details which have come to be considered in accurate or false - Ed Gein never engaged in cannibalism, for example.

[Elisa · Rating 2 out of 5]

The book referrs to most of the well-known serial killers and it does not spare the usual gory descriptions. It also has a few "smart" referrences (as I would call them), to Abraham Maslow, William James, Auguste de Villiers de I'sle-Adam and others.

However, there are some referrences that made me dislike the book because they are sending it straight into the mud of pseudoscience/paranormal. First off, the author seems to endorse the idea of demonic posession in the case of a certain killer. Second, it seems to support the theory of Rupert Sheldrake regarding "morphic resonance"; the final chapter could have been so much better without running into this laughable "woo woo".

[Stephen McQuiggan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating account of the history of sex crime and the explosion of the serial killer in the late 20th Century which eventually led to the breakthrough of profiling in Quantico, Virginia; painstakingly drawing clues from seemingly 'clean scenes', and finally getting some sort of handle on what appear, on the surface, to be unsolvable crimes. And what debauched crimes they are - Cameron Hooker taking a severed head into a shower, in particular, is one of those moments when you realise truth really is stranger, and infinitely more disturbing, than fiction. Feeling a little jaded? Read this, see how you feel after you've finished.

[Rebeckah11 · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am hoping I've picked the right book as mine does not have a second writer names on it :-/
My copy details forensic investigations and profiling of serial killers in a way to see how they tick and can be recognised. I found this extremely interesting. How many times have seen a case on the news and been left thinking why? This book goes some way to explaining the why, ot to the point that you end up feeling sorry for the killer (oh yes there are books like that out there), but you begine to understand just what might have made them kill.

[Fabio · Rating 1 out of 5]

Capita, a volte, di salvare dal macero libri che amici/parenti/conoscenti/biblioteche avrebbero destinato alla discarica. L'animo di lettore prende il sopravvento: non si può fare, è contro natura!
Ecco, a volte capita che, letto il libro, un dubbio se la scelta sia stata quella giusta possa anche venire.
Ma no: non si può diventare serial killer di libri. Neppure di quelli inutili e scritti male.

[Elle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interessante ma Poco Approfondito

[Sammie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating, yet disturbing. You can't really discuss the psychology of serial killers without talking about their crimes, and some of the people featured in the book did some horific things. If you like watching TV shows like Criminal Minds, it is along the same lines but more disturbing, since it is all true.

[Alice · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was fascinating, yet a little disturbing. I really enjoyed reading about the history of serial killers and about some of the specific past cases such as Jack the Ripper and Ted Bundy. Also about the profile of a serial killer and the possible reasons why people become them. Overall it was a genuinely intersting read with some good ideas and lots of information.

[Terry McCann · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very good read and in-depth look at serial killers, from the very beginning to modern day. Enjoyable read covering many serial killers with lots of detail. One of the better books I've read on serial killers.

[D.]

The Serial Killers: A Study in the Psychology of Violence by Colin Wilson (2007)

[Jon Lewis · Rating 3 out of 5]

As interesting as it was disturbing. It highlights the importance of psychological profilling.