What do you think?
Rate this book
American Serial Killers: The Deadliest Years 1950-2000
Fans of Mindhunter and true crime podcasts will devour these chilling stories of serial killers from the American "Golden Age" (1950-2000).
With books like Serial Killers, Female Serial Killers and Sons of Cain , Peter Vronsky has established himself as the foremost expert on the history of serial killers. In this first definitive history of the "Golden Age" of American serial murder, when the number and body count of serial killers exploded, Vronsky tells the stories of the most unusual and prominent serial killings from the 1950s to the early twenty-first century. From Ted Bundy to the Golden State Killer, our fascination with these classic serial killers seems to grow by the day. American Serial Killers gives true crime junkies what they crave, with both perennial favorites (Ed Kemper, Jeffrey Dahmer) and lesser-known cases (Melvin Rees, Harvey Glatman).
With books like Serial Killers, Female Serial Killers and Sons of Cain , Peter Vronsky has established himself as the foremost expert on the history of serial killers. In this first definitive history of the "Golden Age" of American serial murder, when the number and body count of serial killers exploded, Vronsky tells the stories of the most unusual and prominent serial killings from the 1950s to the early twenty-first century. From Ted Bundy to the Golden State Killer, our fascination with these classic serial killers seems to grow by the day. American Serial Killers gives true crime junkies what they crave, with both perennial favorites (Ed Kemper, Jeffrey Dahmer) and lesser-known cases (Melvin Rees, Harvey Glatman).
416 pages, Paperback
First published February 9, 2021
233 people are currently reading
2139 people want to read
About the author
Peter Vronsky
32 books358 followersPETER VRONSKY is an author, filmmaker, and forensic-investigative historian. He holds a Ph.D. from the University of Toronto in the history of espionage in international relations and criminal justice history.
Peter Vronsky is the author of a series of books on the history serial homicide: Serial Killers: The Method and Madness of Monsters (2004); Female Serial Killers: How and Why Women Become Monsters (2007); Sons of Cain: A History of Serial Killers From the Stone Age to the Present (2018)- a New York Times Editors' Choice; and most recently, American Serial Killers: The Epidemic Years 1950-2000 (2021).
He is also the author of Ridgeway: The American-Fenian Invasion and the 1866 Battle that Made Canada, the definitive history of Canada's first modern battle and the subject of his 2010 doctoral dissertation at U of T.
He lives in Toronto and Venice, Italy.
Peter Vronsky is the author of a series of books on the history serial homicide: Serial Killers: The Method and Madness of Monsters (2004); Female Serial Killers: How and Why Women Become Monsters (2007); Sons of Cain: A History of Serial Killers From the Stone Age to the Present (2018)- a New York Times Editors' Choice; and most recently, American Serial Killers: The Epidemic Years 1950-2000 (2021).
He is also the author of Ridgeway: The American-Fenian Invasion and the 1866 Battle that Made Canada, the definitive history of Canada's first modern battle and the subject of his 2010 doctoral dissertation at U of T.
He lives in Toronto and Venice, Italy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 203 reviews
November 21, 2020
As far as studying psychopaths, serial killers, and how they might have become the way they are, this book is an absolute gem. I knew when I started this that it was going to be a five star rating within the first few pages. Starting off with the preface, which was amazingly written and enticing the reader to continue reading, we read about the last "celebrity" serial killer of the epidemic years and a name everyone knows: Jeffrey Dahmer. Enough of a blurb to show how lives can change forever in one day and really kickstart the whole book.
Vronsky writes an absolutely fascinating introduction to the "golden years" of serial killers. His writing is clear and concise, and absolutely filled with interesting statistics, facts, and information. Organized by decade based on the adaption of serial killers in the time and featuring prominent killers in the media, we also learn about outside influences each decade that could help cook up the perfect storm that makes psychopaths commit these heinous acts. Things like wars and fathers with PTSD, media such as movies and magazine filled with dark themes in post war times, the politics of race and underreporting of black victims, the brain of a psychopath and the damage that can cause a shift in personality, etc.
One of the greatest parts of this book for me had to be Vronsky's thorough use of his research and citations. I took down so many of his citations for science journals and books that I want to read to do further research. He remains seemingly objective to everything and merely writes things as they are, which is a talent to be respected when dealing with atrocities that break your heart. He is such a good writer that some of the descriptions and reading about the lives of the victims is devastating.
Thank you to Peter Vronsky, Berkley, and NetGalley for the opportunity to read this ARC, especially for such a well-written book.
Vronsky writes an absolutely fascinating introduction to the "golden years" of serial killers. His writing is clear and concise, and absolutely filled with interesting statistics, facts, and information. Organized by decade based on the adaption of serial killers in the time and featuring prominent killers in the media, we also learn about outside influences each decade that could help cook up the perfect storm that makes psychopaths commit these heinous acts. Things like wars and fathers with PTSD, media such as movies and magazine filled with dark themes in post war times, the politics of race and underreporting of black victims, the brain of a psychopath and the damage that can cause a shift in personality, etc.
One of the greatest parts of this book for me had to be Vronsky's thorough use of his research and citations. I took down so many of his citations for science journals and books that I want to read to do further research. He remains seemingly objective to everything and merely writes things as they are, which is a talent to be respected when dealing with atrocities that break your heart. He is such a good writer that some of the descriptions and reading about the lives of the victims is devastating.
Thank you to Peter Vronsky, Berkley, and NetGalley for the opportunity to read this ARC, especially for such a well-written book.
gave-up-on-it
March 3, 2022I DNF this book and still am not sure why I even picked it up at the library. I like true crime books periodically but this was all over the place. It was just not for me and I know it got good reviews. I'm in the minority again!!!
November 10, 2021
Story 5/5
Narration 5/5
This book is a very good!
I highly recommend it!
Narration 5/5
This book is a very good!
I highly recommend it!
October 4, 2021
A total of 2042 new serial killers appeared in a thirty-year “epidemic” period: 88 percent of known American serial killers in the twentieth century. [...] How and when did it all go so virally epidemic?
I wasn’t planning on reading a non-fiction book about serial killers. It only took me a couple of pages to change my mind. Vronsky historical approach that tries to look at trends and context makes for some compelling page turning.
There would be many more serial killers to come, but none garnered the kind of focus and attention that Dahmer’s generation of serial killers received and still receives to this day. The question why is one of the subjects of this book exploring this epidemic era of serial murder.
What actually convinced me that my time will not be wasted in sensationalist gory details for a jaded audience desensitized to the true horror experienced by victims and their families was the fact that Vronsky is a true researcher, capable of taking a step back from individual cases and of synthesis, quote attribution and extensive bibliographical references for a historical approach to what is ultimately a symptom of a larger social problem. The fact that his presentation is clear, concise and factual, mostly free of subjective editorial commentary, is an unexpected bonus from my first lecture of this author.
Holmes was paid by a newspaper to make a “confession” in its pages to many other murders, none of which were confirmed. While it is true that he owned and operated a hotel and boardinghouse in Chicago, there was no evidence that it was especially designed as a kill house with gas chambers and corpse chutes or that he even murdered anybody in it.
These aspects of Vronsky presentation were evident from the opening chapters, first stating the goals of the exercise, then building a very concise history of the world from prehistory up to the twentieth century. Of particular interest to me was the inclusion of some references to H H Holmes, the Chicago World Fair serial killer that was popularized in “Devil in the White City”, making the comparison between the speculative prose of Erik Larsen and the factual, organized and evidence supported account of Peter Vronsky lopsided in the historian favour.
I do have my suspicions that Vronsky is not entirely free of bias, and that he might have his own pet theories about crime and its representation in the media, but at least he offers them as possible answers to difficult questions and not as irrefutable truth, inviting the reader to continue to research the subject and to keep a healthy skeptical mind.
[1911-1912] These murders were all spectacular crimes, some widely reported in their time, others not, but all mostly forgotten today. Jack the Ripper with his five or six victims is immortalized, but the Louisiana-Texas axe murderer with forty-nine victims is entirely forgotten. The primary difference is that London in 1888 was the center of a global English-language newspaper industry, while North Dakota, Louisiana and Texas were not.
Media attention and media representation is one of those factors that crop up in every period under study. Vronsky has penned a name for this concept : diabolus in cultura that is apparently explored in depth in one of his previous true crime books. Another glossed over theory from a previous book is an oversimplified grouping of serial killers into vampires and werewolves – or cold blooded, careful planners of their murder sprees versus the instinctive, brutal, senseless violence of the impulsive killers. The present novel is focused on a more narrow agenda: why the number of perpetrators exploded in a particular period of time, in a particular place.
In explaining surges of serial murder, criminologist Steven Egger argues, it was not that there were more serial killers but that there were more available victims whose worth was discounted and devalued by society. Egger maintains that society perceives certain categories of murder victims as “less-dead” than others, such as sex workers, homeless transients, drug addicts, the mentally ill, runaway youths, senior citizens, minorities, Indigenous women and the inner-city poor; these victims are all perceived as less dead than, say, a white college girl from a middle-class suburb or an innocent fair-haired child. Sometimes the disappearance of these victims is not even reported.
and also,
The scripting – “what to do and in what way” – for these murders seemed to originate less from the deep instinctual recesses of the primitive corners of the perpetrators’ brains and more from the social, cultural and historical cues from the society they lived in, from what both popular and transgressive culture celebrated in literature, newspapers and the newly emerged medium of cinema.
In order to understand what is so special about the 70s and 80s, Vronsky goes back a generation, partially endorsing the Freudian theory that it’s all about childhood trauma, but then he goes beyond the limitations of the sex obsessed Austrian in order to consider economic, social, political and cultural factors.
During 1945 and 1946, the divorce rate doubled from what it was in 1939 to an average of thirty-one divorces for every hundred marriages, the highest in the world. And the divorce rate among veterans was twice that of civilians.
Fathers traumatized by the Great Depression and by a World War, mothers invited to join in the economic struggle and get jobs then sent back to the kitchen and the washing machine, children molested by authority figures or rejected by peers for being different and so on. We all expect these issues to be mentioned, but Vronsky takes the bull by the horns and lays the blame directly at the cultural representation of women in popular culture, at the pervasive racism still prevalent in society, at the media thirst for sensational labels.
It wasn’t just the war over there that affected people. There was a seismic shift in popular culture at home that took a darker and more paranoid turn. [...] an era of anxiety and dread rather than the optimistic Norman Rockwell impression that we have of happy-to-be-home soldiers and optimistic baby-boom years.
As a long time fan of film noir and of pulp comic books I couldn’t help but squirm a little in my seat as this mainstream celebration of the bondage, torture, rape and murder of women is explicitly connected to numerous individual cases and to countless ‘scripting’ examples in the cases Vronsky highlights.
All these hundreds of magazines had one thing in common: their covers featured a photograph of a professional model posing as a bound victim (detective magazines) or a lurid painted illustration of a bound victim (men’s adventure magazines). Either way, she was inevitably scantily clad or her dress was in disarray or tatters, her skirt hiked up to expose her thighs or stockings, her breasts straining under the thin material of her torn clothing, her bronzed flesh glowing with a fine sheen of perspiration, often with bound legs or legs spread open, tied in a torture chamber, in a basement, on the floor, on a bed, on the ground outside; tied to a chair, a table, a rack, a sacrificial pole; in a cage or suspended from a dungeon ceiling next to red-hot pokers and branding irons heating on glowing coals, turning on a roasting-spit to be cooked by cannibals, strapped spread-eagle on surgical tables for mad Nazi scientists to probe and mutilate. The woman’s face is contorted in fear and submission, sometimes gazing out from the magazine cover toward the male reader, as if she was the reader’s victim, his personal slave who could be possessed for the price of the magazine.
I know about the counter-arguments that there are millions of readers and viewers who don’t become serial killers after watching such movies or reading such magazines, just as there are millions of gamers who don’t go out on a rampage in the real world after playing Doom or Diablo or whatever shoot-them-up is popular today. But I am in agreement with Vronsky that it is one of the factors that need to be considered when building up a profile or taking common sense measures to raise awareness.
In the meantime, the author returns to investigation of the childhood of his epidemic list.
One of the common aspects of serial killer childhoods is rejection by peers, resulting in loneliness.
and also,
Whenever we fail to understand something about a serial killer’s motives, we can quickly mop it up from his dysfunctional childhood. The theory is sometimes painfully true and sometimes not true at all.
Once the novel advances past the gruesome decades that preceded the epidemic years, he selects from the later cases the ones that best illustrate the social and cultural influences he posited in his early chapters. I will not accuse him of cherry picking through the data, because he is careful to offer us counter examples where the general principles don’t apply. Human beings can be relied upon to act outside artificially created rules of behaviour, in particular those with malign mental issues.
I could continue with more examples at how childhood trauma, rape culture, availability of victims, media attention and the interstate system created a perfect storm for the rise of the serial killer. But there is one other factor that comes heavily into play: many of these murders remain unsolved, sometimes for decades, some for ever. Vronsky is again focused not on the how, but on why. Police incompetence, lack of interest when the victims fell into one of the less dead categories, the improper tools at their disposal in the early decades – all these are important factors, but the most important one is “linkage blindness” – a particular American issue that makes each county responsible for crimes committed on its jurisdiction and ignorant of anything that goes on across the state line.
The most successful serial killers in the novel are the ones who had a car and were able to move around the country easily. The FBI only became involved at a late stage in the cat and mouse game, and even today it doesn’t have a powerful tool or enough funds at its disposal for linking up separate murders. Even when it does organize itself in a more logical manner, such a big organization is still prone to missteps and to political games. The media often misrepresents what is possible or how it is done, always looking for a good selling point. Vronsky chooses a couple of famous examples to make his point.
Mindhunters suddenly become extremely popular in the 1980s and 1990s with TV shows or blockbusters that cast a sympathetic eye at serial killers like “The Silence of the Lambs”. For some reason the other repeated movie reference is to “The Exorcist III” probably because it is evidence in two of the most famous investigations.
For many, the serial killer is a symbol of courage, individuality, and unique cleverness. Many will quickly transform the killer into a figure who allows them to fantasize rebellion or the lashing out at society’s ills. For some, the serial killer may become a symbol of swift and effective justice, cleansing society of its crime-ridden vermin.
A full chapter is dedicated to removing the media glamour around the ‘profiler’ concept, in particular the ‘Lambs’ representation.
Profilers are rarely at the actual crime scene; they rarely rush, weapons drawn, to a profiled suspect’s location like in the movies or on TV, and while profiling is a valuable tool in narrowing down an already developed suspect list, there is no case on record of a serial killer being apprehended on a profile alone.
When the FBI’s public affairs people read the script of “The Silence of the Lambs” with the ridiculous scenes of the FBI dashing about the country in military transport aircraft to arrest suspected serial killers and Clarice Starling coming to the rescue and engaging in a gun battle with Buffalo Bill, they knew it was just the Hollywood whitewash that the FBI needed at the moment.
The reality is somewhat different. After a couple of inspired and methodical young officers established a course in criminal profiling at FBI headquarters that was mostly smoke and mirrors, it took the FBI decades to admit the shortcomings of its pet project.
The FBI psychological analysis procedures are of doubtful professionalism.
After its use for nearly thirty years, in 2004, the FBI would conclude the system has “limited utility” in active serial killer investigations and it’s no longer used in day-to-day case analysis.
Finally, there is one more question that needs to be answered in the book: why did the epidemic ended? why is serial killing no longer so fashionable? Where did all those ‘celebrity’ killers go?
The easy answer is police tools got a lot better, in particular DNA analysis and mass surveillance. Communication also got better and profiling, despite its limitations, does offer officers some insight into how the criminal mind works. Vronsky doesn’t forget to mention his pet media connection:
June 1994.
Somebody suddenly changed the channel.
Everything and everybody turned to the O. J. Simpson case.
By that time old school serial killers were yesterday’s monsters, tired old news. Has-beens. Their trials were barely noted in the press. The 1995 trial media circus turned us on to a new source for our true-crime thrill-kill fix-of-the-month: celebrity defendants.
Rape-culture is replaced by celebrity culture. Something else happened around 1990s:
The emergent Internet and a plethora of cable TV channels fragmented the former collective gathering of Americans around a single horror story. The horrors were now packaged into different morsels for different tastes on different channels and media platforms, and serial killers began to lose that monopoly on monstrosity they once held. Once video could be streamed over the internet, the fragmentation was complete.
Are we over the phenomenon? Are there less serial killers now that they are no longer hogging the spotlight? The statistics paint a different picture, and the larger social upheaval of the last years mirror some of the signs of the past. Vronsky urges us to fasten our seatbelts:
If I am right that the serial killer “epidemic era” was a result of a “perfect storm” diabolus in cultura of Great Depression and World War II parental traumas plus true-detective / men’s adventure “sweats” rape culture that twisted a generation of male children in the 1940s to 1960s into the surge of serial killers of the 1970s to 1990s, then we’re in for nasty weather.
May 26, 2023
L'autore è uno dei massimi esperti di storia dei serial killer, storico, ha scritto numerosi testi su questo argomento, di cui vi ricordo di recuperare assolutamente "Genesi mostruose" (tutto sulle SK donne). È anche produttore e regista.
In questo saggio Vronsky analizza il fenomeno degli SK che nella seconda metà del '900 hanno imperversano negli Stati Uniti quasi come fosse una vera e propria epidemia. Il filo conduttore del saggio è Jeffrey Dahmer, il cannibale di Milwaukee, dalla sua nascita, la crescita, l'inizio delle aberrazioni, i suoi crimini, l'arresto e le deposizioni. All'interno di questa linea temporale Vronsky ci parla della prima definizione di SK, negli anni 70, della nascita della psichiatria forense, alla fine dell'800,della nascita del VICAP. L'autore approfondisce anche SK meno noti come Jarvis Catoe, Melvin Rees, Arthur Shawcross o Danny Rolling. Spiega come prima di quella che lui chiama "golden age" dei serial killer dal 1950 al 2000, ci sono state due "epidemie" più piccole dal 1911 al 1915 e dal 1935 al 1941. Il libro ha un risultato scorrevole, accattivante e coinvolgente, senza cadere nel mero prurito di conoscenza di particolari sordidi. La struttura temporale aiuta a conoscere l'approfondimento dell'aspetto criminologico e sociologico, così come l'evoluzione sociale a livello tecnico e scientifico. Ci sono parti decisamente vere e quindi anche molto crude, soprattutto sugli aspetti delle testimonianze dei delitti commessi e del loro modus operandi. Lo consiglio a tutti gli appassionati come me di true crime e a chi vuole approfondire meglio gli aspetti della nascita della BAU (vedi la serie tv Mindhunter).
In questo saggio Vronsky analizza il fenomeno degli SK che nella seconda metà del '900 hanno imperversano negli Stati Uniti quasi come fosse una vera e propria epidemia. Il filo conduttore del saggio è Jeffrey Dahmer, il cannibale di Milwaukee, dalla sua nascita, la crescita, l'inizio delle aberrazioni, i suoi crimini, l'arresto e le deposizioni. All'interno di questa linea temporale Vronsky ci parla della prima definizione di SK, negli anni 70, della nascita della psichiatria forense, alla fine dell'800,della nascita del VICAP. L'autore approfondisce anche SK meno noti come Jarvis Catoe, Melvin Rees, Arthur Shawcross o Danny Rolling. Spiega come prima di quella che lui chiama "golden age" dei serial killer dal 1950 al 2000, ci sono state due "epidemie" più piccole dal 1911 al 1915 e dal 1935 al 1941. Il libro ha un risultato scorrevole, accattivante e coinvolgente, senza cadere nel mero prurito di conoscenza di particolari sordidi. La struttura temporale aiuta a conoscere l'approfondimento dell'aspetto criminologico e sociologico, così come l'evoluzione sociale a livello tecnico e scientifico. Ci sono parti decisamente vere e quindi anche molto crude, soprattutto sugli aspetti delle testimonianze dei delitti commessi e del loro modus operandi. Lo consiglio a tutti gli appassionati come me di true crime e a chi vuole approfondire meglio gli aspetti della nascita della BAU (vedi la serie tv Mindhunter).
February 10, 2021
Serial Killers scare me, that is also one of the reasons I’m fascinated with them. I want to know more about how their mind works and I’m down for a good true crime discussion at any time of the day.
In American Serial Killers, Peter Vronsky threads hard core academic data and has expertly spun them into a true crime story. This is like a history book depicting the timeline of serial killings. Vronsky has taken a particular time period 1950s - 2000s and briefly explored each and every killings happened at that time. He calls this period “The Golden Age” and the introduction is my favourite part in the book!! Some killers I knew, some I may have heard and some I didn’t even knew existed are mentioned in this book. Vronsky has studied these killers extensively and with his clear writing, has presented the facts with statistical evidence. Appreciable work 👏
This is no easy book to digest or read in a single sitting. The informations are well researched and interesting at many places. As this was an arc, I couldn’t get ahold of the references used, but I know they’ll be included in the finished copy. I’m planning on getting the finished copy for my home library because this is a must have/read for any true crime fans.
Thank you Berkley & Netgalley for the arc in exchange for an honest opinion!
In American Serial Killers, Peter Vronsky threads hard core academic data and has expertly spun them into a true crime story. This is like a history book depicting the timeline of serial killings. Vronsky has taken a particular time period 1950s - 2000s and briefly explored each and every killings happened at that time. He calls this period “The Golden Age” and the introduction is my favourite part in the book!! Some killers I knew, some I may have heard and some I didn’t even knew existed are mentioned in this book. Vronsky has studied these killers extensively and with his clear writing, has presented the facts with statistical evidence. Appreciable work 👏
This is no easy book to digest or read in a single sitting. The informations are well researched and interesting at many places. As this was an arc, I couldn’t get ahold of the references used, but I know they’ll be included in the finished copy. I’m planning on getting the finished copy for my home library because this is a must have/read for any true crime fans.
Thank you Berkley & Netgalley for the arc in exchange for an honest opinion!
April 5, 2021
American Serial Killers: The Epidemic Years 1950-2000 by Peter Vronsky is a true-crime book.
First, let me thank NetGalley, the publisher Berkley Publishing Group, and of course the author, for providing me with a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. All opinions are my own.
My Synopsis and Opinions:
Well, a book whose Prologue is the arrest of Jeffrey Dahmer grabs your attention fast.
The Introduction talks about the "Golden Age of Serial Murderers", where these serial killers between 1950 and 2000 actually became "celebrities". The book focuses on male sexual serial killers during this period, hoping to account for the unprecedented surge during that time, as well as the reason for the recent decline in these murderers.
Vronsky then goes on to discuss early serial killers from the 1800's to 1950, world-wide, most of whom I had never heard of, and there were many of them, although Albert Fish is rather well-known, and a few others ring bells. I sometimes got bogged down by dates, and the first segments were about killers prior to 1950....which was not why I wanted to read the book.
Vronsky does, however, finally get to the years I was interested in, and there is definitely a lot of information on the serial killers from 1950-2000. It's just that you have to wade through all of it if you are just interested in one killer.
The information the author provides is very disjointed. For example, there is not a separate chapter on Ed Gein, or Dennis Rader (the BTK killer), or Arthur Shawcross (The Genesee River Killer). Instead Vronsky related the information by years (usually decades), so that we learned about their parents, their childhoods, their formative years. We learned what was happening with all of them during that time. Then it went on to the next decade, and we learn what was happening with those same killers during this time frame. For example, Edmund Kemper's story starts in chapter 3 (although he is mentioned earlier in the book), continues in Chapters 4, 5, 6 and 7, but there is much information on other killers in between, that it is hard to keep track of Kemper.
So, basically, you can't look up a particular killer and expect all the information on him to be in one chapter. His information will be grouped together with others, over many chapters.
However, a number of the biggies are here. These included Ed Gein (who preferred the skin of his victims, which he made into belts, and vests), Dennis Rader (the BTK killer), Arthur Shawcross (The Genesee River Killer), Edmund Kemper, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, as well as some lesser knowns. Some have quite extensive information, others very little.
So, overall, this book is an in-depth look at serial killers. It delves into the "hows and the whys" of the killers, as well as to the "hows and whys" they were caught. It looks at military records, psychiatric notes, FBI Profiling and interviews. It has a lot of information. Bottom line, it was good, but I just didn't like the way it was presented.
For a more complete review of this book and others (including author information and the reason I chose this book to read/review), please visit my blog: http://katlovesbooksblog.wordpress.com/
First, let me thank NetGalley, the publisher Berkley Publishing Group, and of course the author, for providing me with a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. All opinions are my own.
My Synopsis and Opinions:
Well, a book whose Prologue is the arrest of Jeffrey Dahmer grabs your attention fast.
The Introduction talks about the "Golden Age of Serial Murderers", where these serial killers between 1950 and 2000 actually became "celebrities". The book focuses on male sexual serial killers during this period, hoping to account for the unprecedented surge during that time, as well as the reason for the recent decline in these murderers.
Vronsky then goes on to discuss early serial killers from the 1800's to 1950, world-wide, most of whom I had never heard of, and there were many of them, although Albert Fish is rather well-known, and a few others ring bells. I sometimes got bogged down by dates, and the first segments were about killers prior to 1950....which was not why I wanted to read the book.
Vronsky does, however, finally get to the years I was interested in, and there is definitely a lot of information on the serial killers from 1950-2000. It's just that you have to wade through all of it if you are just interested in one killer.
The information the author provides is very disjointed. For example, there is not a separate chapter on Ed Gein, or Dennis Rader (the BTK killer), or Arthur Shawcross (The Genesee River Killer). Instead Vronsky related the information by years (usually decades), so that we learned about their parents, their childhoods, their formative years. We learned what was happening with all of them during that time. Then it went on to the next decade, and we learn what was happening with those same killers during this time frame. For example, Edmund Kemper's story starts in chapter 3 (although he is mentioned earlier in the book), continues in Chapters 4, 5, 6 and 7, but there is much information on other killers in between, that it is hard to keep track of Kemper.
So, basically, you can't look up a particular killer and expect all the information on him to be in one chapter. His information will be grouped together with others, over many chapters.
However, a number of the biggies are here. These included Ed Gein (who preferred the skin of his victims, which he made into belts, and vests), Dennis Rader (the BTK killer), Arthur Shawcross (The Genesee River Killer), Edmund Kemper, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy, as well as some lesser knowns. Some have quite extensive information, others very little.
So, overall, this book is an in-depth look at serial killers. It delves into the "hows and the whys" of the killers, as well as to the "hows and whys" they were caught. It looks at military records, psychiatric notes, FBI Profiling and interviews. It has a lot of information. Bottom line, it was good, but I just didn't like the way it was presented.
For a more complete review of this book and others (including author information and the reason I chose this book to read/review), please visit my blog: http://katlovesbooksblog.wordpress.com/
January 9, 2022
On my final point, see: https://www.bellingcat.com/news/ameri...
While not quite as good as his earlier book, Vronsky here aims to trace something that I have long argued for — that the serial killer is a product of modernity, began to really rise after WWII — and that its prevalence has declined since c. 2000, as methods of capturing the serial killers have improved — and that the psychosis (as I put it) has fled into other areas…, viz. mass shootings (Compare Freud’s revenge of the neurosis re: hysteria). Vronsky does not make this last point, btw. It is also possible that the mass shooting will give way now to large scale political and/or genocidal violence. God help us…
While not quite as good as his earlier book, Vronsky here aims to trace something that I have long argued for — that the serial killer is a product of modernity, began to really rise after WWII — and that its prevalence has declined since c. 2000, as methods of capturing the serial killers have improved — and that the psychosis (as I put it) has fled into other areas…, viz. mass shootings (Compare Freud’s revenge of the neurosis re: hysteria). Vronsky does not make this last point, btw. It is also possible that the mass shooting will give way now to large scale political and/or genocidal violence. God help us…
March 29, 2021
Several detailed accounts of different American Serial Killers, but I found parts to be overly detailed to the point of boring where some parts to be lacking so much - very uneven feel. Additionally, the author tried to include too much in too little space - including backgrounds of FBI's "Mindhunters" and historical events, not just the serial killers. This easily could have been divided into 1950-1970s, 1980s-2000s. The 1980s/1990s section was so small compared to the rest. I also found the author's personal anecdotes of his childhood to be annoying. Overall, an interesting overview of several serial killers, but I wouldn't necessarily recommend it.
March 24, 2023
Interessant boek met een beetje een sombere conclusie. Jammer dat sommige zaken erg kort worden behandeld maar ook wel begrijpelijk uiteraard. Het boek had een goede combinatie van de wat bekendere zaken en wat meer obscure zaken.
November 1, 2021
True Crime is a bookshelf genre for which I lack reads, so one of my 2021 reading quests is to add at least two more completions to fill out that genre. This is a bit difficult, as it’s very uneasy to learn about all these nutbuckets, while many of their victims remain unknown or at the very least, unheralded. This book focuses on the nutters who went wild on killing sprees in the United States over a forty-year period, including some of the most infamous psychopaths in criminal history.
Fifteen thousand years of civilization are hardly enough to extinguish five hundred thousand years of deeply seated murderous instinct in an animal as freethinking and evolved as a human.
The author starts with the conflicts between homo sapiens and the Neanderthals. He believes the latter were wiped out by the former and our killings haven’t ceased since. There is also the ongoing argument about serial killers being “born” as such or becoming nutbuckets because of their “environment”. He makes a valid point that if a human being becomes a serial killer because of the way they were raised, then there should be a whole lot more of them. Instead, he uses research to notate the most common factors for becoming a mass murderer, such as a dominating mother/stepmother, a weak and/or abusive father/stepfather, and head injuries. The years of 1950-2000 also saw the United States step into the global leadership role, starting with the men who returned from WWII having seen or done things which would forever warp the rest of their lives and influence their sons. Add in the societal changes that took place with the 1960s and drugs and you have a combustible pot of angry and spoiled men who saw any conflicts in their paths as reasons to kill others.
Throughout the book, Peter Vronsky introduces us to various killers, with some getting more coverage than others. This isn’t an encyclopedia of killers, more of a highlighting of the worst of the worst. Jeffrey Dahmer, for instance, is the first one we meet after his potential last victim managed to run away into the arms of two police officers. Their entrance into Dahmer’s rooms of hell would spell the end of Dahmer’s hobby. An earlier Dahmer victim had also managed to escape, only to be returned right back to Dahmer’s apartment where the unfortunate victim was finished off as soon as the cops left. That’s right, law enforcement does NOT get a good view here, with almost every serial killer able to elude and continue their murders because various law agencies wouldn’t work with each other. It wasn’t until a national database was established and then aided by the improvements in DNA and forensic science that a better reckoning of total victims came about.
And then…then there was California. The state of golden dreams was a mecca for every screwball and nutbucket out there. The Zodiac Killer. The Zebra Killers. The Trailside Killer. The Hillside Stranglers. The Night Stalker. The Tool Box Killers. The Sex Slave Killers. The Manson Killers. The Golden State Killer. The Environmentalist Killer. The Coed Killer. The Die Song Killer. The list goes on and on.
California has always had a reputation as a dreamy mecca for the weird and occult. Strangely, its beautiful beaches, sunny days and palm trees became a backdrop to darker evil forces, madness and murder.
For example, Herbert Mullin was one of the Santa Cruz area serial killers. He believed that he had to kill, ”so that my continent will not fall off into the ocean.” He was one of the reasons Santa Cruz always had a bit of a tainted aura about it with people being instructed to just drive through the main thoroughfare and to never ever stop for anyone. There’s Edmund Kemper, who killed a series of UC Santa Cruz female students but he really wanted to kill his own mother. His family story is bad but not much worse than other families. What was worse was the fact that he had already been apprehended and served time, but he was released because the shrinks thought he was cured. Yeah, that really worked out, didn’t it?
The guardians of society, not just the cops, but the government-paid psychiatrists who are supposed to keep these freaks controlled, come in for hard evaluations here, too. The author has a point in that we have massively educated professionals who have never really had a difficult time in life (I would also add, suburban, upper-middle-class, lack of street smarts) but they get to decide whether a suspect should be pardoned or released from jail. These psychiatrists with PHDs in their pockets but dumb as sawdust in their heads have made huge mistakes which have led to killers killing more victims. And that’s what gets me. There are so many dead people across the land who will never be identified because of the abject failure of society’s guardians. Super heroes, they are not.
The author also injects some intriguing statistics, such as the use of the automobile as a vehicle for killing and for getting away. Apparently, 78% of the serial killers used cars as part of their endeavours with 50% of those offering victims a lift. Also, Vronsky does provide history on pre-WWII killers, but makes the case that America had still been a rural society with a respect for law and an adherence to class layers. He also reviews the various serial killers in other countries, just to make the reader aware that Americans are not the only nutbuckets on the planet. I remember when my family lived in Australia, we also had lists of missing people and at least 3-4 serial killers preying upon women and children. One Aussie moved to the states and went on an incredible killing spree (he literally killed anyone he met) across several states before the police finally snuffed him out.
As I noted earlier, this isn’t a Wikipedia/encyclopedia list of serial killers. The author takes the time to focus upon a few, so he can relate their life stories, their (usually) military training, and their physical abnormalities. There’s also a chapter on the FBI unit that was developed to deal with the massive upsurge in known killings between 1980-1990. So, this is quite a read. Yes, it fulfills one of my annual reading goals but I’m not sure I want to go near another True Crime book for a while.
Book Season = Autumn (gloomy diners)
Fifteen thousand years of civilization are hardly enough to extinguish five hundred thousand years of deeply seated murderous instinct in an animal as freethinking and evolved as a human.
The author starts with the conflicts between homo sapiens and the Neanderthals. He believes the latter were wiped out by the former and our killings haven’t ceased since. There is also the ongoing argument about serial killers being “born” as such or becoming nutbuckets because of their “environment”. He makes a valid point that if a human being becomes a serial killer because of the way they were raised, then there should be a whole lot more of them. Instead, he uses research to notate the most common factors for becoming a mass murderer, such as a dominating mother/stepmother, a weak and/or abusive father/stepfather, and head injuries. The years of 1950-2000 also saw the United States step into the global leadership role, starting with the men who returned from WWII having seen or done things which would forever warp the rest of their lives and influence their sons. Add in the societal changes that took place with the 1960s and drugs and you have a combustible pot of angry and spoiled men who saw any conflicts in their paths as reasons to kill others.
Throughout the book, Peter Vronsky introduces us to various killers, with some getting more coverage than others. This isn’t an encyclopedia of killers, more of a highlighting of the worst of the worst. Jeffrey Dahmer, for instance, is the first one we meet after his potential last victim managed to run away into the arms of two police officers. Their entrance into Dahmer’s rooms of hell would spell the end of Dahmer’s hobby. An earlier Dahmer victim had also managed to escape, only to be returned right back to Dahmer’s apartment where the unfortunate victim was finished off as soon as the cops left. That’s right, law enforcement does NOT get a good view here, with almost every serial killer able to elude and continue their murders because various law agencies wouldn’t work with each other. It wasn’t until a national database was established and then aided by the improvements in DNA and forensic science that a better reckoning of total victims came about.
And then…then there was California. The state of golden dreams was a mecca for every screwball and nutbucket out there. The Zodiac Killer. The Zebra Killers. The Trailside Killer. The Hillside Stranglers. The Night Stalker. The Tool Box Killers. The Sex Slave Killers. The Manson Killers. The Golden State Killer. The Environmentalist Killer. The Coed Killer. The Die Song Killer. The list goes on and on.
California has always had a reputation as a dreamy mecca for the weird and occult. Strangely, its beautiful beaches, sunny days and palm trees became a backdrop to darker evil forces, madness and murder.
For example, Herbert Mullin was one of the Santa Cruz area serial killers. He believed that he had to kill, ”so that my continent will not fall off into the ocean.” He was one of the reasons Santa Cruz always had a bit of a tainted aura about it with people being instructed to just drive through the main thoroughfare and to never ever stop for anyone. There’s Edmund Kemper, who killed a series of UC Santa Cruz female students but he really wanted to kill his own mother. His family story is bad but not much worse than other families. What was worse was the fact that he had already been apprehended and served time, but he was released because the shrinks thought he was cured. Yeah, that really worked out, didn’t it?
The guardians of society, not just the cops, but the government-paid psychiatrists who are supposed to keep these freaks controlled, come in for hard evaluations here, too. The author has a point in that we have massively educated professionals who have never really had a difficult time in life (I would also add, suburban, upper-middle-class, lack of street smarts) but they get to decide whether a suspect should be pardoned or released from jail. These psychiatrists with PHDs in their pockets but dumb as sawdust in their heads have made huge mistakes which have led to killers killing more victims. And that’s what gets me. There are so many dead people across the land who will never be identified because of the abject failure of society’s guardians. Super heroes, they are not.
The author also injects some intriguing statistics, such as the use of the automobile as a vehicle for killing and for getting away. Apparently, 78% of the serial killers used cars as part of their endeavours with 50% of those offering victims a lift. Also, Vronsky does provide history on pre-WWII killers, but makes the case that America had still been a rural society with a respect for law and an adherence to class layers. He also reviews the various serial killers in other countries, just to make the reader aware that Americans are not the only nutbuckets on the planet. I remember when my family lived in Australia, we also had lists of missing people and at least 3-4 serial killers preying upon women and children. One Aussie moved to the states and went on an incredible killing spree (he literally killed anyone he met) across several states before the police finally snuffed him out.
As I noted earlier, this isn’t a Wikipedia/encyclopedia list of serial killers. The author takes the time to focus upon a few, so he can relate their life stories, their (usually) military training, and their physical abnormalities. There’s also a chapter on the FBI unit that was developed to deal with the massive upsurge in known killings between 1980-1990. So, this is quite a read. Yes, it fulfills one of my annual reading goals but I’m not sure I want to go near another True Crime book for a while.
Book Season = Autumn (gloomy diners)
February 24, 2021
This was the first Vronsky book that I've read and I found the subject matter fascinating. The back story of the golden age of serial killers was interesting as well as the research related to the generation of kids from combat veterans. Well-researched book but can be graphic in some descriptions so definitely not for the squeamish!
February 1, 2023
This book was compared to Mindhunter but is definitely not Mindhunter
October 16, 2022
Pidin kirjoitustyylistä, joka sisälsi ajoittain tummaa huumoria sekä äkkivääriäkin huomautuksia kirjailijan omasta elämästä. Rakenne oli jossain määrin sekava ja kirjassa oli toistoa, mikä jätti hieman viimeistelemättömän vaikutelman.
May 12, 2023
Esce oggi, in tutte le librerie e store online, questo saggio storico e sociologico che illustra come sono cambiati ed evoluti gli assassini seriali, dagli anni '50 ai primi anni 2000.
Attraverso eventi storici importanti e devastanti come la Seconda Guerra Mondiale, la guerra del Vietnam e le modificazioni sociali, le generazioni di Serial Killers hanno avuto un boom di escalation definita anche "L' età dell'oro" proprio in questi 50 anni che Vronsky descrive e approfondisce accuratamente.
Questo tipo di assassini ha spesso caratteristiche comuni: traumi cranici infantili, genitori disfunzionali e spesso reduci da guerre e abusi, bullismo e problemi psichiatrici.
Uomini e donne che scatenano violenze, torture e azioni agghiaccianti verso i propri simili e che lasciano un senso di smarrimento e angoscia perché potrebbero essere i tuoi vicini, i tuoi amici, i tuoi colleghi.
Un libro molto interessante che riesce a dare un quadro preciso ed oscuro della nostra società.
"I Serial Killers esistono fin dagli albori del genere umano. Prima della civilizzazione, l'uomo è stato per centinaia di migliaia di anni una specie animalesca, omicida e cannibale, guidata da una serie di comportamenti istintuali necessari alla sopravvivenza"
Ringrazio @nuaedizioni per la copia in anteprima.
Attraverso eventi storici importanti e devastanti come la Seconda Guerra Mondiale, la guerra del Vietnam e le modificazioni sociali, le generazioni di Serial Killers hanno avuto un boom di escalation definita anche "L' età dell'oro" proprio in questi 50 anni che Vronsky descrive e approfondisce accuratamente.
Questo tipo di assassini ha spesso caratteristiche comuni: traumi cranici infantili, genitori disfunzionali e spesso reduci da guerre e abusi, bullismo e problemi psichiatrici.
Uomini e donne che scatenano violenze, torture e azioni agghiaccianti verso i propri simili e che lasciano un senso di smarrimento e angoscia perché potrebbero essere i tuoi vicini, i tuoi amici, i tuoi colleghi.
Un libro molto interessante che riesce a dare un quadro preciso ed oscuro della nostra società.
"I Serial Killers esistono fin dagli albori del genere umano. Prima della civilizzazione, l'uomo è stato per centinaia di migliaia di anni una specie animalesca, omicida e cannibale, guidata da una serie di comportamenti istintuali necessari alla sopravvivenza"
Ringrazio @nuaedizioni per la copia in anteprima.
May 2, 2023
il miglior libro sui serial killer, senza se e senza ma.
un capolavoro.
un capolavoro.
March 22, 2021
American Serial Killers: The Epidemic Years 1950-2000 by Peter Vronsky is like a true crime encyclopedia of sorts. Vronsky discussed serial killers during a specific period of time (1950-2000) that he termed “The Golden Age.” The book was extremely informative, well researched and written. Definitely a must read for true crime fans. #AmericanSerialKillers #NetGalley
March 2, 2021
My interest in true crime started when I was 6 and a guy broke into a house less than 5 houses away from mine, put plates on the man’s back, and attacked his wife. Our best friends slept at our house for a few days since they lived just a few houses away from the attack as well and it would take some time for their burglar alarm to be installed. The Golden State Killer wouldn’t be caught for about 40 more years.
About 5 years later, in 1985, I read in the newspaper that the (second) Night Stalker seemed to attack people in yellow houses. We lived in a yellow house about 40 miles from his last attack (which seemed a lot closer after reading that article). I slept under my covers that summer.
The golden age of serial killers was right in the middle of my childhood, and it sparked an interest. This book was like a retrospective of the shit that scared the shit out of me when I was a kid. With 35ish years of hindsight, the author takes a sociological approach to what created so many serial killers of the time period. Despite, or maybe because of, such a high population (there’s so damn many of us), coupled with cruel social policies (Reaganomics, for example), a devaluation of human life was inevitable.
But did people have to act on that or take advantage of that to become serial offenders? Well, yeah. Increased opportunity. Affordable transportation. Interstate highways. And people suck.
This book should appeal to both the true crime beginner or veteran, alike. Excellent book for a look at the sociological perspective now that we are (hopefully) at the bottom arc of the apex of the golden age. Hindsight is great, for me, since I did most of my true crime reading in the mid-90s. This book is also great for the beginner since many of the cases are ones that an old-timer probably already knows a lot about. I found myself skimming, however, over the “classics” like Fish, Gein, and Bundy. That being written, there were a lot of unknowns (to me) that were interesting to read about. Definitely worth a read.
About 5 years later, in 1985, I read in the newspaper that the (second) Night Stalker seemed to attack people in yellow houses. We lived in a yellow house about 40 miles from his last attack (which seemed a lot closer after reading that article). I slept under my covers that summer.
The golden age of serial killers was right in the middle of my childhood, and it sparked an interest. This book was like a retrospective of the shit that scared the shit out of me when I was a kid. With 35ish years of hindsight, the author takes a sociological approach to what created so many serial killers of the time period. Despite, or maybe because of, such a high population (there’s so damn many of us), coupled with cruel social policies (Reaganomics, for example), a devaluation of human life was inevitable.
But did people have to act on that or take advantage of that to become serial offenders? Well, yeah. Increased opportunity. Affordable transportation. Interstate highways. And people suck.
This book should appeal to both the true crime beginner or veteran, alike. Excellent book for a look at the sociological perspective now that we are (hopefully) at the bottom arc of the apex of the golden age. Hindsight is great, for me, since I did most of my true crime reading in the mid-90s. This book is also great for the beginner since many of the cases are ones that an old-timer probably already knows a lot about. I found myself skimming, however, over the “classics” like Fish, Gein, and Bundy. That being written, there were a lot of unknowns (to me) that were interesting to read about. Definitely worth a read.
February 26, 2021
It's interesting, but feels a bit like the whole is less than the sum of its parts. He'll write a chapter on serial killers in a particular decade where he'll spend a few paragraphs on the entire decade, and then have detailed depictions of 2-3 serial killers from those years, and then on to the next chapter. He does a good job summarizing the killers that he covers, but it's a little random as to which ones he covers. (Yeah, he covers prominent ones, but plenty of other prominent ones are barely mentioned).
He argues at the very end that we're headed for a larger wave of serial killers in the future. This is the second book I've read recently that's argued that, though the reasons given in the two books aren't that similar. One random thing I learned from this book, unlike the "golden age" of serial killers when the murders were largely white, nowadays serial killers are disproportionately black.
He argues at the very end that we're headed for a larger wave of serial killers in the future. This is the second book I've read recently that's argued that, though the reasons given in the two books aren't that similar. One random thing I learned from this book, unlike the "golden age" of serial killers when the murders were largely white, nowadays serial killers are disproportionately black.
February 25, 2021
Reading almost like a textbook, which I am not against, the book defines serial killing and killers but the minus star is because the disjointed Shawcross narrative weaving in and out of the information was very difficult to read. It was still extremely interesting and really discussed the psychopathy and creation of scripting that I was curious about.
March 7, 2021
More of a series of biographies of various serial killers than a overreaching theory of why so many serial killers existed in the mentioned time frame. I agree with some parts of his theory (head trauma, family trauma, birth of the highway system, etc.) but I disagree with the men adventures/bondage mags contributing. It seems too easy to blame a small slice of media for a "epidemic."
June 25, 2024
i might rant about this one hope thats okay xo. This probably goes without saying, but definitely check trigger warnings before picking up this book.
there were a few good things about this book—the information was there. The book was well-researched. The author clearly knows what he's talking about, just not so much how to go about writing it. The author had some good insights about racial disparities and how some victims were considered "less dead" due to socioeconomic conditions, leaving them as vulnerable targets for serial killers. All in all, this was a very informative book. I appreciated the attention to detail, though this obviously made parts of the book more difficult to read.
Here are the rest of my thoughts:
1. The book was organized into sections by era. There was Stone Age-1930, 1930-1945, 1930-1950 (makes no sense, I know), 1950-1969, 1970-1979, 1980-1990, 1990-2000, 2000-2020. (Each chapter had actual titles that I just don't feel like typing out, so it wasn't as overwhelming as it looks with just the years.) Each chapter talked about multiple serial killers, and none of it was listed in the table of contents, meaning this is NOT the book to buy if you are looking to flip through and read about certain cases. You would only know where to find certain killers if you already knew the dates in which they were active. Accounts were told in an order that I personally couldn't make any sense of. Certain serial killers were split into multiple parts (3 for example) and distributed throughout the entire section. I've seen a lot of reviews touch on this as a negative. I personally found it really annoying.
2. This one drove me crazy. The author on numerous occasions condemns the media and consumers of it for sensationalizing the brutal deaths of innocent people, yet dramatizes his own retelling of the events, adding in law-and-order one-liners where they aren't necessary in the slightest. At best I found them irritating, at worst I found them insensitive and hypocritical. The back cover literally reads: "Fans of MINDHUNTER and TRUE-CRIME PODCASTS will devour these chilling stories of serial killers from the deadliest or so called 'epidemic' years of serial murder." The very audience he criticizes is the one he panders to on the back of the book!
Though this is technically a separate issue, its tentatively related so I'll include it here: the writing style varied throughout the book in a way that rubbed me the wrong way. The author described certain people as "fucked," or would speak very informally, conversationally, and often mockingly about people mentioned—scholars, journalists, people involved in the crime or with the killers/victims. It felt like a rough draft of a book, I guess.
3. The author interspersed personal anecdotes throughout the book. Sure, it's cool that you bumped into a serial killer in an elevator, but that information goes in the preface, or at the very least, its own chapter. It shouldn't be smack dab in the middle of a different topic! And I do not need to know which TV show characters gave you a "little boy boner." Yes, that's a quote. Check page 146 (of this edition) if you don't believe me.
4. The author presents a few arguments (that I disagree with), adding a bias to the book. I know bias is essentially unavoidable when writing about true crime. I know this. I'm just putting that out there. He implies that one of the concepts behind serial killers is the "primordial primitive state." He references the "Four F's" lifestyle of homo sapiens—fight, flight, food, and fuck. I disagree with this argument. He also argues that "sweat" magazines contributed to the rise in serial killings. I think this is true to some extent, but not to the extent that was argued. I agreed for the most part with his points about WW2 and Vietnam, and I wish he would have focused on that a little more and the other stuff a little less. His comments about the 2008 financial crisis and COVID-19 possibly creating future serial killers is interesting, but it feels a little silly. (Of course, now that I say this, he will end up being right.)
Listen. This guy is an investigative historian who teaches history at a University. He obviously knows more about this stuff than I do, and I would never in a million years consider myself an expert just because I watched a few seasons of Criminal Minds. I just didn't like the way the information was presented. I'm sure the author is a great, talented, smart guy, and this review is not a dig on him. His writing didn't work for me, but that doesn't mean it won't work for you.
EDIT: I forgot. He also doesn't fucking use oxford commas
there were a few good things about this book—the information was there. The book was well-researched. The author clearly knows what he's talking about, just not so much how to go about writing it. The author had some good insights about racial disparities and how some victims were considered "less dead" due to socioeconomic conditions, leaving them as vulnerable targets for serial killers. All in all, this was a very informative book. I appreciated the attention to detail, though this obviously made parts of the book more difficult to read.
Here are the rest of my thoughts:
1. The book was organized into sections by era. There was Stone Age-1930, 1930-1945, 1930-1950 (makes no sense, I know), 1950-1969, 1970-1979, 1980-1990, 1990-2000, 2000-2020. (Each chapter had actual titles that I just don't feel like typing out, so it wasn't as overwhelming as it looks with just the years.) Each chapter talked about multiple serial killers, and none of it was listed in the table of contents, meaning this is NOT the book to buy if you are looking to flip through and read about certain cases. You would only know where to find certain killers if you already knew the dates in which they were active. Accounts were told in an order that I personally couldn't make any sense of. Certain serial killers were split into multiple parts (3 for example) and distributed throughout the entire section. I've seen a lot of reviews touch on this as a negative. I personally found it really annoying.
2. This one drove me crazy. The author on numerous occasions condemns the media and consumers of it for sensationalizing the brutal deaths of innocent people, yet dramatizes his own retelling of the events, adding in law-and-order one-liners where they aren't necessary in the slightest. At best I found them irritating, at worst I found them insensitive and hypocritical. The back cover literally reads: "Fans of MINDHUNTER and TRUE-CRIME PODCASTS will devour these chilling stories of serial killers from the deadliest or so called 'epidemic' years of serial murder." The very audience he criticizes is the one he panders to on the back of the book!
Though this is technically a separate issue, its tentatively related so I'll include it here: the writing style varied throughout the book in a way that rubbed me the wrong way. The author described certain people as "fucked," or would speak very informally, conversationally, and often mockingly about people mentioned—scholars, journalists, people involved in the crime or with the killers/victims. It felt like a rough draft of a book, I guess.
3. The author interspersed personal anecdotes throughout the book. Sure, it's cool that you bumped into a serial killer in an elevator, but that information goes in the preface, or at the very least, its own chapter. It shouldn't be smack dab in the middle of a different topic! And I do not need to know which TV show characters gave you a "little boy boner." Yes, that's a quote. Check page 146 (of this edition) if you don't believe me.
4. The author presents a few arguments (that I disagree with), adding a bias to the book. I know bias is essentially unavoidable when writing about true crime. I know this. I'm just putting that out there. He implies that one of the concepts behind serial killers is the "primordial primitive state." He references the "Four F's" lifestyle of homo sapiens—fight, flight, food, and fuck. I disagree with this argument. He also argues that "sweat" magazines contributed to the rise in serial killings. I think this is true to some extent, but not to the extent that was argued. I agreed for the most part with his points about WW2 and Vietnam, and I wish he would have focused on that a little more and the other stuff a little less. His comments about the 2008 financial crisis and COVID-19 possibly creating future serial killers is interesting, but it feels a little silly. (Of course, now that I say this, he will end up being right.)
Listen. This guy is an investigative historian who teaches history at a University. He obviously knows more about this stuff than I do, and I would never in a million years consider myself an expert just because I watched a few seasons of Criminal Minds. I just didn't like the way the information was presented. I'm sure the author is a great, talented, smart guy, and this review is not a dig on him. His writing didn't work for me, but that doesn't mean it won't work for you.
EDIT: I forgot. He also doesn't fucking use oxford commas
abandonados
November 14, 2021Primero, quiero hacer una mención a la maravillosa idea que he tenido de comer calamares en salsa americana justo después de escuchar el prólogo de este libro... Maravillosa experiencia.
A ver, este no es el motivo por el que abandono este audiolibro. Tampoco su narrador, el cual hace un buen trabajo (lo poco que he oído). La razón por la que lo dejo, perdiendo un crédito de Audible en el proceso, es por la poca objetividad y la ridiculez de sus teorías. Sobre todo en los primeros capítulos. Es que no he llegado más allá.
¿Cómo que los Homo Neandertales fueron exterminados, en "tiempo récord" recalca el escritor, por el Homo Sapiens? Pero si no lo saben ni los expertos, ¿cómo lo va a saber este señor?
Inmediatamente después, nos encontramos otra teoría peregrina, que casi hace que mis ojos se queden atascados en sus órbitas de lo bestia que he sido poniéndolos en blanco. ¿Humanos en el sur pacíficos y vegetarianos? ¿Humanos del norte que conquistan el sur y comen carne y los matan? Menos mal que dice, de pasada, que es una de las teorías.
En fin, la imparcialidad no sé dónde está y tampoco la contextualización, ni nada que se le parezca.
Esto no es lo que yo esperaba de un estudio serio sobre el tema. Precisamente, uno de los problemas que se apunta justo al principio: el sensacionalismo, empapa lo poco que he podido "leer".
Demasiado sensacionalista.
He devuelto el audiolibro.
Qué desperdicio de crédito.
A ver, este no es el motivo por el que abandono este audiolibro. Tampoco su narrador, el cual hace un buen trabajo (lo poco que he oído). La razón por la que lo dejo, perdiendo un crédito de Audible en el proceso, es por la poca objetividad y la ridiculez de sus teorías. Sobre todo en los primeros capítulos. Es que no he llegado más allá.
¿Cómo que los Homo Neandertales fueron exterminados, en "tiempo récord" recalca el escritor, por el Homo Sapiens? Pero si no lo saben ni los expertos, ¿cómo lo va a saber este señor?
Inmediatamente después, nos encontramos otra teoría peregrina, que casi hace que mis ojos se queden atascados en sus órbitas de lo bestia que he sido poniéndolos en blanco. ¿Humanos en el sur pacíficos y vegetarianos? ¿Humanos del norte que conquistan el sur y comen carne y los matan? Menos mal que dice, de pasada, que es una de las teorías.
En fin, la imparcialidad no sé dónde está y tampoco la contextualización, ni nada que se le parezca.
Esto no es lo que yo esperaba de un estudio serio sobre el tema. Precisamente, uno de los problemas que se apunta justo al principio: el sensacionalismo, empapa lo poco que he podido "leer".
Demasiado sensacionalista.
He devuelto el audiolibro.
Qué desperdicio de crédito.
July 15, 2021
wow… this was mind blowing but just so good. i went into it thinking i’d be really bored but oh no, i was never bored while reading this. especially with the narration, i loved it. the amount of research that went into this, which you can clearly tell while reading, makes it so much more intriguing.
however it’s of course still non fiction and a book with a lot of heavy information. it is written in a way where it’s never too much though, which i was scared of.
if you’re interested in this topic, read it. it’s so worth it. but do of course remember it is very dark and may be triggering.
however it’s of course still non fiction and a book with a lot of heavy information. it is written in a way where it’s never too much though, which i was scared of.
if you’re interested in this topic, read it. it’s so worth it. but do of course remember it is very dark and may be triggering.
June 14, 2024
this was so cool but very very very depressing. like it should be obvious that huge cultural upheaval causes hella serial killers and huge cultural upheavals happen bc of things like traumatic world wars. that is a very good explanation but i think i will never be satisfied with any answer to the question of why do people kill other people because i myself don’t want to kill people so im never gonna get it.
September 4, 2025
Oof- I loved this book but didn’t want to 🤣. Creepy as hell sometimes but is told really well with enough narrative and details to keep you engaged. If serial killers/thrillers interest you, this is definitely a book to read.
April 18, 2021
there are definitely some editorial choices in this book i'm not super-fond of, with vronsky's tone getting way too flippant at times. his choice of looking specifically at psycho-sexual killers is an odd one i still don't quite understand, as well, with this coming across as a book which is almost insufferably sleazy at times. the lesser-known cases are fascinating, but you have to swallow a lot of bullshit to get to them.
May 23, 2021
This was extremely interesting and insightful but it is also A LOT of Murder, even for me. Highly recommend reading it alongside something lighter and less stabby.
October 21, 2021
A fascinating look at the Golden Age of serial killers, touching upon the stories of some specific killers as well as the broader influences that created them.
July 11, 2022
Sometimes I read books like this and think, "what is wrong with me?!?!" Haha. But really, this was brutal. I mean really brutal. It turned my stomach sometimes. But.... I also really enjoyed it. Why is this grisly material so fascinating to me? I don't know. But this was well written and I learned a lot.... possibly more than I ever needed. I think the next book I read will be nice and fluffy, a comforting hot chocolate of a book about nice people doing nice things. Any recommendations?
Displaying 1 - 30 of 203 reviews