What do you think?
Rate this book
The Psychology of Dexter
Dexter Morgan: Police forensic analyst. Family man. Serial killer. And the star of Showtime’s most-watched series, Dexter.
Aimed at Dexter devotees and armchair psychologists, The Psychology of Dexter takes on the psychological complexities of the popular series with an eye towards insight and accessibility. It analyzes not just the title character, but his family, coworkers, and even his viewers. What makes Dexter tick? And what makes a show about a serial killer so appealing to those of us at home?
From the implications of faking normalcy (could it be behind Dexter’s still-in-progress emotional growth?) to where the show weighs in on the psychological debate between nature and nurture, The Psychology of Dexter gives fans a peek inside Dexter’s�and Dexter’s�psyche.
Aimed at Dexter devotees and armchair psychologists, The Psychology of Dexter takes on the psychological complexities of the popular series with an eye towards insight and accessibility. It analyzes not just the title character, but his family, coworkers, and even his viewers. What makes Dexter tick? And what makes a show about a serial killer so appealing to those of us at home?
From the implications of faking normalcy (could it be behind Dexter’s still-in-progress emotional growth?) to where the show weighs in on the psychological debate between nature and nurture, The Psychology of Dexter gives fans a peek inside Dexter’s�and Dexter’s�psyche.
264 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2006
76 people are currently reading
2138 people want to read
About the author
Bella DePaulo
24 books87 followersI’m Bella DePaulo. I’m proud to say that I’ve always been single and I always will be.
• “Single at heart” is my term for people who love being single – single life is our most meaningful, fulfilling, authentic, and psychologically rich life. My latest book, “Single at Heart,” is all about that.
• The Atlantic magazine described me as “America’s foremost thinker and writer on the single experience.”
• My TEDx talk, “What no one ever told you about people who are single,” has been viewed more than 1.6 million times.
• My 1st book about singles was Singled Out: How Singles Are Stereotyped, Stigmatized, and Ignored, and Still Live Happily Ever After (St. Martin’s)
• I’m a social psychologist, a Harvard PhD with more than 150 scholarly publications. My 2023 article, "Single and flourishing: Transcending the deficit narratives of single life," was published in an academic journal but I wrote it in an engaging and jargon-free way so you don’t have to be an academic to enjoy it.
• I have bylines in the New York Times, the Washington Post, New York magazine, the Atlantic, Time magazine, the Guardian, the Chronicle of Higher Education, NBC, CNN, and many more.
• My work on single people has been described in many publications in the US and around the world, including, for example, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Cosmopolitan, New York magazine, Time magazine, the Atlantic, the Economist, the Week, the Nation, Business Week, AARP Magazine, Newsweek, and the TED Ideas Blog.
• I have been writing the “Living Single” blog for Psychology Today since 2008.
• I have been on NPR many times, as well as many other podcasts and radio shows.
• In 2022, I discussed single people with Maria Shriver on the Today show.
You can learn more about me at my website, www.BellaDePaulo.com.
• “Single at heart” is my term for people who love being single – single life is our most meaningful, fulfilling, authentic, and psychologically rich life. My latest book, “Single at Heart,” is all about that.
• The Atlantic magazine described me as “America’s foremost thinker and writer on the single experience.”
• My TEDx talk, “What no one ever told you about people who are single,” has been viewed more than 1.6 million times.
• My 1st book about singles was Singled Out: How Singles Are Stereotyped, Stigmatized, and Ignored, and Still Live Happily Ever After (St. Martin’s)
• I’m a social psychologist, a Harvard PhD with more than 150 scholarly publications. My 2023 article, "Single and flourishing: Transcending the deficit narratives of single life," was published in an academic journal but I wrote it in an engaging and jargon-free way so you don’t have to be an academic to enjoy it.
• I have bylines in the New York Times, the Washington Post, New York magazine, the Atlantic, Time magazine, the Guardian, the Chronicle of Higher Education, NBC, CNN, and many more.
• My work on single people has been described in many publications in the US and around the world, including, for example, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Cosmopolitan, New York magazine, Time magazine, the Atlantic, the Economist, the Week, the Nation, Business Week, AARP Magazine, Newsweek, and the TED Ideas Blog.
• I have been writing the “Living Single” blog for Psychology Today since 2008.
• I have been on NPR many times, as well as many other podcasts and radio shows.
• In 2022, I discussed single people with Maria Shriver on the Today show.
You can learn more about me at my website, www.BellaDePaulo.com.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 54 reviews
October 2, 2011
Ok, I lost this book for awhile, but I have found it and finished it.
A very interesting read, warning, you do need to have seen the first 4 seasons of Dexter at least to really understand some of the cases made by the various contributors to this book.
Some of the writing is pretty dry and hard to get through, but you have to tell yourself that these people aren't authors, this isn't a story, this is an evaluation.
The Psychology of Dexter is an edited book of essays, it delves into why we watch the show, what draws us to a character such as Dexter, it explores the characters, asking questions such as what if Dexter isn't a psychopath but rather suffering from childhood PTSD? Could Harry have changed Dexter's destiny if he put him on a different path or took him to a shrink? How does everyone around Dexter unknowingly enable him?
Each essay is well thought out and well presented save a couple that I felt the authors shouldn't have been published in this compilation, that they weren't well thought out and the essays could have been someone's psychology essay or review of a character that was homework in college.
The thing that I really liked about this book/essay compilation is that I didn't feel confused by psych speak or jargon; the writers explain the language they use, so I understood, and then use that to explain how real life psychology effects Dexter and his world, or the way we as an audience relate to or perceive Dexter. I felt that not knowing psychology in depth, that I was able to keep up with the jargon because it was explained in simple terms - without making me feel stupid.
A very interesting read, warning, you do need to have seen the first 4 seasons of Dexter at least to really understand some of the cases made by the various contributors to this book.
Some of the writing is pretty dry and hard to get through, but you have to tell yourself that these people aren't authors, this isn't a story, this is an evaluation.
The Psychology of Dexter is an edited book of essays, it delves into why we watch the show, what draws us to a character such as Dexter, it explores the characters, asking questions such as what if Dexter isn't a psychopath but rather suffering from childhood PTSD? Could Harry have changed Dexter's destiny if he put him on a different path or took him to a shrink? How does everyone around Dexter unknowingly enable him?
Each essay is well thought out and well presented save a couple that I felt the authors shouldn't have been published in this compilation, that they weren't well thought out and the essays could have been someone's psychology essay or review of a character that was homework in college.
The thing that I really liked about this book/essay compilation is that I didn't feel confused by psych speak or jargon; the writers explain the language they use, so I understood, and then use that to explain how real life psychology effects Dexter and his world, or the way we as an audience relate to or perceive Dexter. I felt that not knowing psychology in depth, that I was able to keep up with the jargon because it was explained in simple terms - without making me feel stupid.
June 20, 2011
An intelligent look at one of the best shows out there...come on, what amazing level of talented writing and acting does it take to get us to actually root for a serial killer and hope he doesn't get caught!
That, by the way, is what's called cognitive dissonance, according to one of the essays in the book.
I get all gushy when I find intelligent discussion of the shows I like. This book is one of the best of an excellent series (Smart Pop..check them out on the web) and it has definitely enhanced my enjoyment of Dexter. Admittedly, the show is some pretty sick stuff, and after reading this book I can actually label the various psychological concepts that make our favorite sociopath and his non-murderous but equally messed-up family and colleagues in the Miami P.D. tick.
That, by the way, is what's called cognitive dissonance, according to one of the essays in the book.
I get all gushy when I find intelligent discussion of the shows I like. This book is one of the best of an excellent series (Smart Pop..check them out on the web) and it has definitely enhanced my enjoyment of Dexter. Admittedly, the show is some pretty sick stuff, and after reading this book I can actually label the various psychological concepts that make our favorite sociopath and his non-murderous but equally messed-up family and colleagues in the Miami P.D. tick.
September 7, 2014
I enjoyed this collection of articles by psychologists and psychiatrists (and a few psych students). Some read a bit like college essays and several of these people are obviously stuck on their own favorite psychological theory. (Is that some kind of syndrome? PSIS—Psychologist Self-Importance Syndrome) Others are more insightful and interesting. Overall, I'd recommend this book to Dexter fans.
December 17, 2024
i’m obsessed with describing dexter as a “brilliant killer” “on the verge of a complete breakdown when ordering a mocha latte.”
between this book, the comic series i read prior, desperately wanting to rewatch the original series, and eagerly awaiting the prequel series, i’ve been in a very dexter mood lately. while i definitely do not agree with a lot of the opinions and conclusions in these essays, i had a lot of fun reading this collection nonetheless. it’s just a good time to revisit beloved characters and read people’s take on them and either feel validated in my own opinions or feel so passionately about someone being wrong in their interpretations. i have issues with the general armchair diagnosis vibe, but this psychology book definitely works more for me than the philosophy one. i’m gonna start with some general thoughts, essays i loved, some i took issue with, before getting into the main topic of this review.
the essay “rethinking dexter” by lisa firestone is definitely my favorite (though it did feel at times like it was just a plug for the author and her father’s own research/therapies). firestone explores the danger of labeling someone, especially a child, as a “psychopath” and explains that some common traits in childhood are mistaken for adult “psychopathic” traits, and that children who show “psychopathic” traits, even including animal cruelty, don’t automatically continue to possess those traits as adults, or more specifically, grow up to become serial killers; addresses how harry encouraged dexter to kill instead of getting him help because he believed dexter’s future as a serial killer was inevitable, when research shows intervening when a child kills an animal can prevent further harm. it’s not something that sets an unchangeable path toward a life of violence and murder; addresses the belief of “psychopaths” being lost causes, citing studies that have shown juveniles offenders categorized as “psychopaths” receive less therapeutic attention and that adult “psychopaths” are just as likely to benefit from violence reduction treatment: “research suggests psychopaths almost always are treatable if they receive intensive therapy for a proper duration of time”; generally explores how differently dexter’s life could’ve been had he received any kind of help or therapy as a child, especially given how the few therapy sessions he had as an adult were incredibly helpful to him, rather than be groomed into a serial killer. there’s also an interesting look at harry’s world view and how he projected his feelings about criminals and the justice system onto dexter, as well as a showcase of how dexter actually foes feel emotion and from genuine bonds.
my second favorite essay is “the psychology of dexter’s kills” by marisa mauro, which is an interesting analysis of dexter’s kills; his m.o. (usually stalking, subduing, restraining, preparing a kill room, and then killing them), his signature (usually a conversation with the victim about their victims, stripping them, cutting their cheek for a blood sample, and dismembering them once dead), and his victimology (usually killers of innocent of people). “on becoming a real boy” by stephen d. livingston is a good analysis on how dexter came to be and how he could’ve and sometimes wished he had been different—“one wonders how dramatically different dexter’s life course would have been had he entered into treatment for his problems years prior to first taking a human life.” i particularly like the discussion of the self-fulfilling prophecy—harry had an “expectation” of dexter to become a serial killer, which lead him to “benefit the expectancy” by grooming dexter to kill, which lead to dexter becoming a serial killer, “confirming the original expectation” and “justifying” harry’s initial and unfounded belief. “the angels on his shoulder” by jeremy clyman is a lovely look at dexter’s relationships with rita, debra, and camilla and how their positive/loving/caring view of dexter impacted him. “the dark defenders” by wind goodfriend and chase barrick is an interesting analysis of the various defense mechanisms on dexter—denial (laguerta, rita, debra), intellectualization (lundy, dexter), identification (debra, christine), sublimation (dexter), repression (dexter), and rationalization (dexter).
“denial and rita” by tamara mcclintock greenberg is an interesting one, but i wish the approach and conclusion had been different. the editor’s thoughts at the beginning “admit it—you liked lila more than rita. you at least thought she was more intriguing” immediately got us off on the wrong foot lmao. the author is trying to answer why viewers found rita unlikable and annoying and suggest it’s basically because rita isn’t “strong,” especially not compared to debra, laguerta, and lila. but you can’t convince me this entire premise isn’t internalized misogyny. saying rita is unlikable and annoying because she put on a smile, kept moving on with her life, and rarely expressed anger (which was oddly positioned as meaning she was never genuine or didn’t know her own feelings), unlike the other likable women on the show who are bold and aggressive and “powerful and strong” is to say that vulnerability, hope, kindness, trust, and a non-confrontational personality are incompatible with strength, which is not true. rita specifically went through horrible physical and sexual abuse and kept going, took care of her two kids alone, didn’t close herself off to trusting men and finding love again, and stood up for herself and set boundaries when needed. if that’s not strength, i don’t know what is.
moving on, while i don’t agree with referring to harry’s abusive parenting as “narcissism” because i feel that just obfuscates abuse and scapegoats mental illness, i love the exploration in “it’s all about harry” by marisa mauro of the effect harry’s prioritization of his own needs and wants, his neglect, and general subpar parenting had on dexter and debra, even well into adulthood. specifically as it relates to dexter becoming a serial killer—“the code failed to acknowledge dexter’s psychological needs. besides learning the code, he learned not to trust or express his own feelings.” some general things that bother me are the questioning why us normies love to root for a serial killer (it’s not real, who cares?), the often repetitive nature of some essays/talking points, how often an author would say things like “studies show...” and “research has found...” without mentioning anywhere in the essay or in the notes what studies and research they were talking about, and the number of errors regarding the canon events of the show.
now, the main topic of this review, like my review for the dexter and philosophy book, is dexter’s supposed lack of emotions, empathy, psychopathy, and nature. the overwhelming consensus of this book is that dexter didn’t have emotions, experience empathy, feel remorse, etc. like “normal” people do, and that made him a “less human” psychopath/sociopath (who “lack emotion” and are not “normal” “productive members of society”) who was “condemned to kill” and “inevitably” abusive. one author translates the apa’s definition of antisocial personality disorder being a “disregard for and violation of the rights of others” into meaning “sociopaths or psychopaths have little to no ability to feel empathy,” but one can absolutely feel and understand other people’s emotions while making the conscious choice to disregard or violate people’s rights—just look at any politician, lawmaker, or run of the mill bigot. you know who often struggle emotionally; regarding recognizing, regulating, expressing their own emotions; and recognizing, understanding, responding “appropriately” to other people’s emotions? innocent, harmless, non-criminal, non-violent neurodivergent folks.
but regarding dexter specifically, he did indeed have emotions, experience empathy, and felt remorse, etc. he felt love, care, and fondness for cody, astor, harrison, debra, rita, camilla, and hannah. he was afraid of hurting them, afraid of getting caught. he longed for friendship/acceptance, was disappointed when it didn’t work out. he was remorseful and regretted killing an innocent. he was guilty over rita and debra’s deaths. he experienced emotional discomfort at funerals. he passion attacked rita’s ex. he committed a passion kill and broke down after rita’s death. he cried when he killed brian. he had an emotional reaction to a flashback to his mother’s murder. he was often angry, irritated, annoyed, confused, and bored. he also exhibited emotions as a kid/teen/young adult, didn’t want to hurt debra or upset his parents. even when it came to the code, dexter followed it less because of values or morals, and more because of emotions. his adherence to the code was as much about survival as it was the emotional memory of harry (and in the revival, debra), shown in him respecting and honoring harry and trying to live up to what harry wanted him to be (and in the revival, it’s guilt, remorse, and shame regarding debra’s death). with empathy in particular, while lacking it doesn’t make someone evil, dexter did experience empathy. with brian, jeremy, hannah, rita, debra, and harrison, he understood and related to how they felt or reacted “appropriately” to them. he even empathized with various characters, often victims.
back to psychopathy, i’ve never been a fan of how psychopathy is scapegoated for any and all violence and crime. the “impairments observed in psychopaths were not specific to psychopathy but were shared with any number of mental and physical abnormalities and adverse environmental effects,” thus leading to the term psychopathy being used in increasingly problematic ways against marginalized people, not just in how people are viewed, but in real world treatment in educational, health and medical, and legal settings. while people make sure to point out that psychopathy increases the chances of someone engaging in violence and crime, so do many other things, like “being male, having a low reading level, and substance abuse.” but most men, people with a low reading level, and addicts are not violent criminals and the same is true of those who fit the vague categorization of “psychopathy.” those determined to have “psychopathy” (something that is not a recognized medical diagnosis, by the way) “often have no history of violent or criminal behavior.” there’s also nothing to suggest psychopathy “predicts violence” any better than a past history of violence and crime does. psychopathy tends to be linked to crime because most research is conducted on prisoners and one of the most famous tools to assess psychopathy was developed specifically for use in forensic settings like jails and prisons.
one essay argues treating children who exhibit “psychopathic” traits is “difficult,” which is contradicted by research mentioned in another essay about how they are actually receptive to therapy. the myth that treating such people is pointless or doesn’t work not only is abandonment of people who need and deserve help, but it also allows them to be scapegoated for the evil of the world. one author claims a “stressful, traumatic, or neglectful childhood is the wind that propels a ship toward mental illness,” which is just wrong and stigmatizing—mental illness can be caused by trauma, but also things like genetics, life experiences, and naturally different brain chemistry. despite not actually depicting diagnosed disorders on dexter, the “underlying disorders” on the show are said to be “dead on.” it’s bizarre, because everyone knows, especially those studying said disorders, that entertainment crime media generally sensationalizes crime and stigmatizes mental disorders. for the record: “only 3%-5% of violent acts can be attributed to individuals living with a serious mental illness. in fact, people with severe mental illnesses are over 10 times more likely to be victims of a violent crime than the general population.”
psychopathy isn’t the scapegoat here. personality disorders (antisocial, narcissistic, borderline) are thrown under the bus, too. it’s said that personality disorders have been “diagnosed extensively in killers, violent criminals, and even serial murderers” but does anyone stop to wonder if that’s because they actually have personality disorders, or if that’s because disorders are scapegoated for crime/murder because it’s just easy and palatable to accept that people do bad things because they’re inherently, inexorably different from the rest of us? there’s an entire essay arguing harry was a narcissist because he neglected and psychologically abused his kids, and another essay used a violent drug addict who beat and raped his wife as the go-to example of narcissism. both are blatantly bad, as they obfuscate abuse and scapegoat disorders.
the way borderline personality disorder specifically is discussed in this book rubs me the wrong way. first it’s reductively defined as basically extreme mood swings, when in actuality it’s a “pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and affects, and marked impulsivity.” it’s implied that the behavior and emotional state of those with bpd are calculated manipulations when they are not. and most egregiously, it’s said that “for bpd patients, killing can be an impulsive, fleeting reaction—an instant punishment for a slight or a quick reaction to an internal sense of being unappreciated.” however, the “majority of researchers agree they are unlikely to actually physically cause any harm towards others.” the diagnostic criteria for bpd does not include harming others, but it does include self-harm and impulsivity leading to self-damaging behaviors. arguing since impulsivity is part of bpd and killing can be impulsive, then a killer likely has bpd, but this is clearly skewed logic and a warping of the actual diagnostic criteria.
the last part of this topic is the debate about whether dexter being a killer is a result of nature or nurture. i don’t know why this is even a debate, because it’s quite clear in canon that it was not his nature. he was not born with an “irrepressible urge to commit violence,” killing was not “part of his nature,” he didn’t have a “genetic predisposition,” and his urges to kill were not “uncontrollable.” what little we found out about dexter before his mother’s murder when he was about three years old told us that he was a playful, happy, energetic, and well-adjusted child. there was absolutely nothing in canon that suggested otherwise. dexter and brian were both killers and debra wasn’t, not because she didn’t share their biology, but because she didn’t share their trauma. dexter suppressed his trauma and shut down emotionally, and rather than get him help like most parents would, harry groomed him to be a killer, while telling him over and over since he was very young and before he ever harmed a human that he wasn’t “normal,” that his urge to kill was “only going to get stronger,” and that they couldn’t stop it. harry had no reason to believe any of this—he was a cop, not a psychiatrist, and further, when dexter did get evaluated at his mother’s instance, harry coached him in what to say to appear “normal.” while dexter absolutely was capable of not killing (he didn’t kill until age 20, and after over two decades of killing, he stopped killing for nearly a decade after faking his death), nearly two decades of being told by harry that he was an unfeeling monster beyond help did incredible damage to his psyche and view of himself. it would be hard for someone who believed they were a human with emotions to undo that kind of psychological abuse, let alone someone who was brainwashed into believing he was less than human incapable of genuine emotion.
whew. overall, i did enjoy this. it gave me an excuse to write more than anyone will read about a show and character i love.
content/trigger warnings; mentions or discussions of serial killers (real and fictional), murder, death, loss of loved ones, death of mother, death of spouse, death of partner, torture, blood, dismemberment, knife violence, gun violence, drugs, addiction, domestic abuse, child abuse, child neglect, trauma, mental illness, ptsd, ableism, r slur, animal cruelty, war, genocide,
between this book, the comic series i read prior, desperately wanting to rewatch the original series, and eagerly awaiting the prequel series, i’ve been in a very dexter mood lately. while i definitely do not agree with a lot of the opinions and conclusions in these essays, i had a lot of fun reading this collection nonetheless. it’s just a good time to revisit beloved characters and read people’s take on them and either feel validated in my own opinions or feel so passionately about someone being wrong in their interpretations. i have issues with the general armchair diagnosis vibe, but this psychology book definitely works more for me than the philosophy one. i’m gonna start with some general thoughts, essays i loved, some i took issue with, before getting into the main topic of this review.
the essay “rethinking dexter” by lisa firestone is definitely my favorite (though it did feel at times like it was just a plug for the author and her father’s own research/therapies). firestone explores the danger of labeling someone, especially a child, as a “psychopath” and explains that some common traits in childhood are mistaken for adult “psychopathic” traits, and that children who show “psychopathic” traits, even including animal cruelty, don’t automatically continue to possess those traits as adults, or more specifically, grow up to become serial killers; addresses how harry encouraged dexter to kill instead of getting him help because he believed dexter’s future as a serial killer was inevitable, when research shows intervening when a child kills an animal can prevent further harm. it’s not something that sets an unchangeable path toward a life of violence and murder; addresses the belief of “psychopaths” being lost causes, citing studies that have shown juveniles offenders categorized as “psychopaths” receive less therapeutic attention and that adult “psychopaths” are just as likely to benefit from violence reduction treatment: “research suggests psychopaths almost always are treatable if they receive intensive therapy for a proper duration of time”; generally explores how differently dexter’s life could’ve been had he received any kind of help or therapy as a child, especially given how the few therapy sessions he had as an adult were incredibly helpful to him, rather than be groomed into a serial killer. there’s also an interesting look at harry’s world view and how he projected his feelings about criminals and the justice system onto dexter, as well as a showcase of how dexter actually foes feel emotion and from genuine bonds.
my second favorite essay is “the psychology of dexter’s kills” by marisa mauro, which is an interesting analysis of dexter’s kills; his m.o. (usually stalking, subduing, restraining, preparing a kill room, and then killing them), his signature (usually a conversation with the victim about their victims, stripping them, cutting their cheek for a blood sample, and dismembering them once dead), and his victimology (usually killers of innocent of people). “on becoming a real boy” by stephen d. livingston is a good analysis on how dexter came to be and how he could’ve and sometimes wished he had been different—“one wonders how dramatically different dexter’s life course would have been had he entered into treatment for his problems years prior to first taking a human life.” i particularly like the discussion of the self-fulfilling prophecy—harry had an “expectation” of dexter to become a serial killer, which lead him to “benefit the expectancy” by grooming dexter to kill, which lead to dexter becoming a serial killer, “confirming the original expectation” and “justifying” harry’s initial and unfounded belief. “the angels on his shoulder” by jeremy clyman is a lovely look at dexter’s relationships with rita, debra, and camilla and how their positive/loving/caring view of dexter impacted him. “the dark defenders” by wind goodfriend and chase barrick is an interesting analysis of the various defense mechanisms on dexter—denial (laguerta, rita, debra), intellectualization (lundy, dexter), identification (debra, christine), sublimation (dexter), repression (dexter), and rationalization (dexter).
“denial and rita” by tamara mcclintock greenberg is an interesting one, but i wish the approach and conclusion had been different. the editor’s thoughts at the beginning “admit it—you liked lila more than rita. you at least thought she was more intriguing” immediately got us off on the wrong foot lmao. the author is trying to answer why viewers found rita unlikable and annoying and suggest it’s basically because rita isn’t “strong,” especially not compared to debra, laguerta, and lila. but you can’t convince me this entire premise isn’t internalized misogyny. saying rita is unlikable and annoying because she put on a smile, kept moving on with her life, and rarely expressed anger (which was oddly positioned as meaning she was never genuine or didn’t know her own feelings), unlike the other likable women on the show who are bold and aggressive and “powerful and strong” is to say that vulnerability, hope, kindness, trust, and a non-confrontational personality are incompatible with strength, which is not true. rita specifically went through horrible physical and sexual abuse and kept going, took care of her two kids alone, didn’t close herself off to trusting men and finding love again, and stood up for herself and set boundaries when needed. if that’s not strength, i don’t know what is.
moving on, while i don’t agree with referring to harry’s abusive parenting as “narcissism” because i feel that just obfuscates abuse and scapegoats mental illness, i love the exploration in “it’s all about harry” by marisa mauro of the effect harry’s prioritization of his own needs and wants, his neglect, and general subpar parenting had on dexter and debra, even well into adulthood. specifically as it relates to dexter becoming a serial killer—“the code failed to acknowledge dexter’s psychological needs. besides learning the code, he learned not to trust or express his own feelings.” some general things that bother me are the questioning why us normies love to root for a serial killer (it’s not real, who cares?), the often repetitive nature of some essays/talking points, how often an author would say things like “studies show...” and “research has found...” without mentioning anywhere in the essay or in the notes what studies and research they were talking about, and the number of errors regarding the canon events of the show.
now, the main topic of this review, like my review for the dexter and philosophy book, is dexter’s supposed lack of emotions, empathy, psychopathy, and nature. the overwhelming consensus of this book is that dexter didn’t have emotions, experience empathy, feel remorse, etc. like “normal” people do, and that made him a “less human” psychopath/sociopath (who “lack emotion” and are not “normal” “productive members of society”) who was “condemned to kill” and “inevitably” abusive. one author translates the apa’s definition of antisocial personality disorder being a “disregard for and violation of the rights of others” into meaning “sociopaths or psychopaths have little to no ability to feel empathy,” but one can absolutely feel and understand other people’s emotions while making the conscious choice to disregard or violate people’s rights—just look at any politician, lawmaker, or run of the mill bigot. you know who often struggle emotionally; regarding recognizing, regulating, expressing their own emotions; and recognizing, understanding, responding “appropriately” to other people’s emotions? innocent, harmless, non-criminal, non-violent neurodivergent folks.
but regarding dexter specifically, he did indeed have emotions, experience empathy, and felt remorse, etc. he felt love, care, and fondness for cody, astor, harrison, debra, rita, camilla, and hannah. he was afraid of hurting them, afraid of getting caught. he longed for friendship/acceptance, was disappointed when it didn’t work out. he was remorseful and regretted killing an innocent. he was guilty over rita and debra’s deaths. he experienced emotional discomfort at funerals. he passion attacked rita’s ex. he committed a passion kill and broke down after rita’s death. he cried when he killed brian. he had an emotional reaction to a flashback to his mother’s murder. he was often angry, irritated, annoyed, confused, and bored. he also exhibited emotions as a kid/teen/young adult, didn’t want to hurt debra or upset his parents. even when it came to the code, dexter followed it less because of values or morals, and more because of emotions. his adherence to the code was as much about survival as it was the emotional memory of harry (and in the revival, debra), shown in him respecting and honoring harry and trying to live up to what harry wanted him to be (and in the revival, it’s guilt, remorse, and shame regarding debra’s death). with empathy in particular, while lacking it doesn’t make someone evil, dexter did experience empathy. with brian, jeremy, hannah, rita, debra, and harrison, he understood and related to how they felt or reacted “appropriately” to them. he even empathized with various characters, often victims.
back to psychopathy, i’ve never been a fan of how psychopathy is scapegoated for any and all violence and crime. the “impairments observed in psychopaths were not specific to psychopathy but were shared with any number of mental and physical abnormalities and adverse environmental effects,” thus leading to the term psychopathy being used in increasingly problematic ways against marginalized people, not just in how people are viewed, but in real world treatment in educational, health and medical, and legal settings. while people make sure to point out that psychopathy increases the chances of someone engaging in violence and crime, so do many other things, like “being male, having a low reading level, and substance abuse.” but most men, people with a low reading level, and addicts are not violent criminals and the same is true of those who fit the vague categorization of “psychopathy.” those determined to have “psychopathy” (something that is not a recognized medical diagnosis, by the way) “often have no history of violent or criminal behavior.” there’s also nothing to suggest psychopathy “predicts violence” any better than a past history of violence and crime does. psychopathy tends to be linked to crime because most research is conducted on prisoners and one of the most famous tools to assess psychopathy was developed specifically for use in forensic settings like jails and prisons.
one essay argues treating children who exhibit “psychopathic” traits is “difficult,” which is contradicted by research mentioned in another essay about how they are actually receptive to therapy. the myth that treating such people is pointless or doesn’t work not only is abandonment of people who need and deserve help, but it also allows them to be scapegoated for the evil of the world. one author claims a “stressful, traumatic, or neglectful childhood is the wind that propels a ship toward mental illness,” which is just wrong and stigmatizing—mental illness can be caused by trauma, but also things like genetics, life experiences, and naturally different brain chemistry. despite not actually depicting diagnosed disorders on dexter, the “underlying disorders” on the show are said to be “dead on.” it’s bizarre, because everyone knows, especially those studying said disorders, that entertainment crime media generally sensationalizes crime and stigmatizes mental disorders. for the record: “only 3%-5% of violent acts can be attributed to individuals living with a serious mental illness. in fact, people with severe mental illnesses are over 10 times more likely to be victims of a violent crime than the general population.”
psychopathy isn’t the scapegoat here. personality disorders (antisocial, narcissistic, borderline) are thrown under the bus, too. it’s said that personality disorders have been “diagnosed extensively in killers, violent criminals, and even serial murderers” but does anyone stop to wonder if that’s because they actually have personality disorders, or if that’s because disorders are scapegoated for crime/murder because it’s just easy and palatable to accept that people do bad things because they’re inherently, inexorably different from the rest of us? there’s an entire essay arguing harry was a narcissist because he neglected and psychologically abused his kids, and another essay used a violent drug addict who beat and raped his wife as the go-to example of narcissism. both are blatantly bad, as they obfuscate abuse and scapegoat disorders.
the way borderline personality disorder specifically is discussed in this book rubs me the wrong way. first it’s reductively defined as basically extreme mood swings, when in actuality it’s a “pervasive pattern of instability of interpersonal relationships, self-image, and affects, and marked impulsivity.” it’s implied that the behavior and emotional state of those with bpd are calculated manipulations when they are not. and most egregiously, it’s said that “for bpd patients, killing can be an impulsive, fleeting reaction—an instant punishment for a slight or a quick reaction to an internal sense of being unappreciated.” however, the “majority of researchers agree they are unlikely to actually physically cause any harm towards others.” the diagnostic criteria for bpd does not include harming others, but it does include self-harm and impulsivity leading to self-damaging behaviors. arguing since impulsivity is part of bpd and killing can be impulsive, then a killer likely has bpd, but this is clearly skewed logic and a warping of the actual diagnostic criteria.
the last part of this topic is the debate about whether dexter being a killer is a result of nature or nurture. i don’t know why this is even a debate, because it’s quite clear in canon that it was not his nature. he was not born with an “irrepressible urge to commit violence,” killing was not “part of his nature,” he didn’t have a “genetic predisposition,” and his urges to kill were not “uncontrollable.” what little we found out about dexter before his mother’s murder when he was about three years old told us that he was a playful, happy, energetic, and well-adjusted child. there was absolutely nothing in canon that suggested otherwise. dexter and brian were both killers and debra wasn’t, not because she didn’t share their biology, but because she didn’t share their trauma. dexter suppressed his trauma and shut down emotionally, and rather than get him help like most parents would, harry groomed him to be a killer, while telling him over and over since he was very young and before he ever harmed a human that he wasn’t “normal,” that his urge to kill was “only going to get stronger,” and that they couldn’t stop it. harry had no reason to believe any of this—he was a cop, not a psychiatrist, and further, when dexter did get evaluated at his mother’s instance, harry coached him in what to say to appear “normal.” while dexter absolutely was capable of not killing (he didn’t kill until age 20, and after over two decades of killing, he stopped killing for nearly a decade after faking his death), nearly two decades of being told by harry that he was an unfeeling monster beyond help did incredible damage to his psyche and view of himself. it would be hard for someone who believed they were a human with emotions to undo that kind of psychological abuse, let alone someone who was brainwashed into believing he was less than human incapable of genuine emotion.
whew. overall, i did enjoy this. it gave me an excuse to write more than anyone will read about a show and character i love.
content/trigger warnings; mentions or discussions of serial killers (real and fictional), murder, death, loss of loved ones, death of mother, death of spouse, death of partner, torture, blood, dismemberment, knife violence, gun violence, drugs, addiction, domestic abuse, child abuse, child neglect, trauma, mental illness, ptsd, ableism, r slur, animal cruelty, war, genocide,
December 14, 2020
To understand a lot of parts in this book you need to have watched the first four seasons of Dexter. I never knew there was a book looking at the psychology of Dexter until I found it. It's really interesting, looking at details I wouldn't have even thought about, such as the relationship between Dexter and Rita, the relationship of Dexter and those around him and questions of how Dexter would be if Harry hadn't have taught Dexter the code.
At points in the book it seemed to go off topic, talking about other examples rather than what happened in Dexter (why?!). Some parts were quite repetitive too, though the parts not repeating were interesting to read, reading different opinions on what they've noticed while watching Dexter.
At points in the book it seemed to go off topic, talking about other examples rather than what happened in Dexter (why?!). Some parts were quite repetitive too, though the parts not repeating were interesting to read, reading different opinions on what they've noticed while watching Dexter.
February 13, 2012
meh. What could be more fictional than psychologists talking about a made up psychopath?
October 13, 2014
It is no quiet rumor that I loved Dexter; up until the last two seasons.
This book, primarily a reference guide, plummets the common viewer into the deeper realms of Dexter. Written by experts, this book is a nice complementary piece for a show that has gained a large following.
From an examination of personality traits, to the way a psychopath is 'created' this book has it all.
It has a very in depth look at how the individuals around him fed his behaviors, but also how people unintentionally expanded on and promoted his 'Dark Passenger'. The book also included ways that Dexter's relationship fit snug into his 'lifestyle'.
I highly recommend it, and since the show is on re-runs maybe this deeper psychological understanding will heighten the experience of watching it. It is very likely this could make a wonderfully unique psychology paper.
This book, primarily a reference guide, plummets the common viewer into the deeper realms of Dexter. Written by experts, this book is a nice complementary piece for a show that has gained a large following.
From an examination of personality traits, to the way a psychopath is 'created' this book has it all.
It has a very in depth look at how the individuals around him fed his behaviors, but also how people unintentionally expanded on and promoted his 'Dark Passenger'. The book also included ways that Dexter's relationship fit snug into his 'lifestyle'.
I highly recommend it, and since the show is on re-runs maybe this deeper psychological understanding will heighten the experience of watching it. It is very likely this could make a wonderfully unique psychology paper.
January 27, 2011
Want to know how the show Dexter compares to Star Wars or Harry Potter? Want to know why we as an audience can be so fascinated by the journey of a serial killer and even regard him as a hero that we root for? These ideas and many more comprise these essays about the show's first four seasons - written by fans of Dexter who are also psychologists. The show's other characters, as well as Harry, are explored as well. I found it very interesting and thought-provoking. And as I rewatch the show with my husband, I'm better understanding, appreciating and enjoying what I already knew was a great show with one of the most compelling characters on TV - Dexter Morgan. Make sure you've watched through Season 4 though to avoid spoilers.
October 11, 2021
Dexter lays down on the couch for some intense psychoanalysis in The Psychology of Dexter. Several authors delve into the hit Showtime drama and bestselling book series Dexter, and discuss a variety of themes and issues, including psychopathology, nature vs. nurture, self-fulfilling prophecy, and modus operandi, in 17 thought-provoking essays. The essays are fairly well-written, and do a good job at applying psychological concepts to the Dexter characters and story arcs, and at explaining them in an easy to understand way. Still, some of the essays are more interesting than others, and they disagree on a few issues. Yet overall, The Psychology of Dexter as a fascinating look at this remarkable property.
October 22, 2013
It's pretty interesting to read this after the series has ended. It's alright but not much more than any psych student could have easily diagnosed themselves. Some of the papers try a little too hard and leave out details that do not support their ideas, but that's pretty normal I suppose!
Read
September 5, 2013Read the first several chapters years ago & skimmed through the rest. Meh
December 2, 2022
Amazing novel! The psychology aspect of this was beautifully written, but I will say, there is a lot of repetitiveness thought out!
November 13, 2025
WHY I CHOSE THIS BOOK
I chose The book, The Psychology of Dexter because I watched the show and I found it very interesting. I felt the craving to pick up the book to better understand just exactly what was going on in Dexter’s mind while the crazed events were taking place in the show. I am the type of person who thinks an analysis is very helpful and is key to understanding what is going on at all times. This book definitely fulfills the need for that.
Throughout the book, we are given different perspectives about why and how Dexter acts the way he does. These different perspectives are seen through different authors' writings. Although Bella DePaulo is the main author, we hear from people like Joshua L. Gowin who talks about the nature of killers. The book describes how Dexter’s upbringing and child trauma’s effect the way he acts and why he kills. In earlier chapters the topic of fear and anxiety are the main reasons of what are believed to be the stem of Dexter's problems. During the earlier chapters, Dexter is compared to other real life serial killers and how we can make real life connections to what Dexter’s situation is like. Shortly after we go over Dexter's MO and ritual and how that plays a part in how he's a Psychopath. This part describes how part of his ritual is for his self pleasure, and is not needed for following the code of Harry. The main reasons are how he keeps his blood slides as trophies and also how he talks the victims up before killing them. He doesn't need to do these extracurricular parts to get the job done. That's why they are believed to be done for his own pleasure. A later topic that was brought up in this book is how Dexter lacks basic human emotions. When Rita expresses her basic emotions, Dexter acts clueless and has no idea how to act and doesn’t pick up on the social cues. Getting to the later parts of the book, we see how the women in Dexter's life play a big role in the show. Especially Rita because she was the only person to truly see Dexter for who he was. Except for his Dark Passenger. We actually don't know if Rita knew about Dexter’s dark side. This is discussed because Rita had been in denial ever since she met Dexter. This is due to her abusive ex boyfriend Paul. Because of Paul, Rita refused to believe that there was anything wrong with Dexter. Any time Dexter would hint at him having a Dark Passenger, Rita would play it off like nothing ever happened. Lastly in the book, we kind of stop and reach a conclusion about Dexter. The book goes over why we find ourselves rooting for Dexter to kill and escape. We reflect on the antics of a serial killer and how Dexter in ways fits the mold.
What worked exactly in the book was how every aspect of his brain was picked apart. There wasn’t a single point of view that wasn't over. Every conclusion of why Dexter works the way he does was discussed. No crumbs were left on the table in the Dexter department. Second, the book discussed if this situation would work in real life. I found that very interesting because this book takes place in the Miami area, and if it would work there in real life is a very good question to ask. Personally, I think that it would work but not for the longevity that it worked in the TV series. I think at most, Dexter would last a year before anyone found out. Next, I like how Dexter was compared to the Ice Truck Killer, Brian Moser. Or Dexter's blood brother if you will. The similarities and differences of how they kill and operate is very interesting to me. The most similar thing in the way that they kill, is that they leave little to no traces. I like how only the two of them could figure each other out. What I mean by that is Brian could see Dexter's killer in him and Dexter could see Brian’s killer.
What didn’t work with me is that this book can get repetitive and almost boring. The book goes over similar topics constantly with the same characters. Sometimes a little change would be nice. Maybe something lighthearted, like why is Dexter always eating large portions of food. Second, the book didn’t go over Original Sin or most of the continued versions of Dexter. If we got an analysis on those parts of Dexter, that would’ve been much better and the book might have been better in my mind. I feel like the book doesn’t go over how he affects Astor and Harrison. I want to know how Dexter plays a key part in their development just like Harry played a part in Dexter's youth. That's a huge deal and is stressed throughout the book, and I wonder why they would leave it out. Lastly, I believe that you need to have watched the TV show to be able to read the book. The book will give away many spoilers if you haven't watched at least up to season 4.
I believe that this book was just average. I believe that it had potential to be great, but it didn't exactly do it for me. The idea of writing a book that picks apart Dexter's brain and shows what's going on at all times is great. I just feel like they overdid it in ways and left out some enjoyable parts that would've been great.
I chose The book, The Psychology of Dexter because I watched the show and I found it very interesting. I felt the craving to pick up the book to better understand just exactly what was going on in Dexter’s mind while the crazed events were taking place in the show. I am the type of person who thinks an analysis is very helpful and is key to understanding what is going on at all times. This book definitely fulfills the need for that.
Throughout the book, we are given different perspectives about why and how Dexter acts the way he does. These different perspectives are seen through different authors' writings. Although Bella DePaulo is the main author, we hear from people like Joshua L. Gowin who talks about the nature of killers. The book describes how Dexter’s upbringing and child trauma’s effect the way he acts and why he kills. In earlier chapters the topic of fear and anxiety are the main reasons of what are believed to be the stem of Dexter's problems. During the earlier chapters, Dexter is compared to other real life serial killers and how we can make real life connections to what Dexter’s situation is like. Shortly after we go over Dexter's MO and ritual and how that plays a part in how he's a Psychopath. This part describes how part of his ritual is for his self pleasure, and is not needed for following the code of Harry. The main reasons are how he keeps his blood slides as trophies and also how he talks the victims up before killing them. He doesn't need to do these extracurricular parts to get the job done. That's why they are believed to be done for his own pleasure. A later topic that was brought up in this book is how Dexter lacks basic human emotions. When Rita expresses her basic emotions, Dexter acts clueless and has no idea how to act and doesn’t pick up on the social cues. Getting to the later parts of the book, we see how the women in Dexter's life play a big role in the show. Especially Rita because she was the only person to truly see Dexter for who he was. Except for his Dark Passenger. We actually don't know if Rita knew about Dexter’s dark side. This is discussed because Rita had been in denial ever since she met Dexter. This is due to her abusive ex boyfriend Paul. Because of Paul, Rita refused to believe that there was anything wrong with Dexter. Any time Dexter would hint at him having a Dark Passenger, Rita would play it off like nothing ever happened. Lastly in the book, we kind of stop and reach a conclusion about Dexter. The book goes over why we find ourselves rooting for Dexter to kill and escape. We reflect on the antics of a serial killer and how Dexter in ways fits the mold.
What worked exactly in the book was how every aspect of his brain was picked apart. There wasn’t a single point of view that wasn't over. Every conclusion of why Dexter works the way he does was discussed. No crumbs were left on the table in the Dexter department. Second, the book discussed if this situation would work in real life. I found that very interesting because this book takes place in the Miami area, and if it would work there in real life is a very good question to ask. Personally, I think that it would work but not for the longevity that it worked in the TV series. I think at most, Dexter would last a year before anyone found out. Next, I like how Dexter was compared to the Ice Truck Killer, Brian Moser. Or Dexter's blood brother if you will. The similarities and differences of how they kill and operate is very interesting to me. The most similar thing in the way that they kill, is that they leave little to no traces. I like how only the two of them could figure each other out. What I mean by that is Brian could see Dexter's killer in him and Dexter could see Brian’s killer.
What didn’t work with me is that this book can get repetitive and almost boring. The book goes over similar topics constantly with the same characters. Sometimes a little change would be nice. Maybe something lighthearted, like why is Dexter always eating large portions of food. Second, the book didn’t go over Original Sin or most of the continued versions of Dexter. If we got an analysis on those parts of Dexter, that would’ve been much better and the book might have been better in my mind. I feel like the book doesn’t go over how he affects Astor and Harrison. I want to know how Dexter plays a key part in their development just like Harry played a part in Dexter's youth. That's a huge deal and is stressed throughout the book, and I wonder why they would leave it out. Lastly, I believe that you need to have watched the TV show to be able to read the book. The book will give away many spoilers if you haven't watched at least up to season 4.
I believe that this book was just average. I believe that it had potential to be great, but it didn't exactly do it for me. The idea of writing a book that picks apart Dexter's brain and shows what's going on at all times is great. I just feel like they overdid it in ways and left out some enjoyable parts that would've been great.
June 13, 2024
Very different psychological views about the show. I find the most interesting is Melissa Burkley and Edward Burkley's take of Dexter's Dark Passenger from a Freudian perspective.
July 31, 2013
Review originally published here: http://www.iheartreading.net/reviews/...
This book is a collection of essays written by psychologists about the television show “Dexter”, about a serial killer who works is a blood spatter analyst for the Miami Metro police department. “Dexter” is one of my all-time favorite shows, mainly because the main character is so complex. Dexter is a serial killer, but he’s also a colleague, a family man, a devoted brother, a good son. But there’s this dark side to him, this desire to hurt and kill, that could end up being his own undoing. The show is very well-written, and the writers definitely know their subject matter. Because I love the show so much, I was intrigued to start this collection of essays.
Most of them were very good, detailed, offering thorough explanations of why Dexter or his fellow characters do certain things. Each essays provides its own mini-analysis, and sometimes even the experts don’t agree, which shows psychology, in particular the psychology of psychopaths, or serial killers, or what can bring people to become serial killers, isn’t all that easy.
I particularly enjoyed the essay talking about Dexter suffering from PTSD during his childhood, and that most of what Harry interprets as behavior typical for a serial killer is, in fact, behavior typical for a child suffering from PTSD. Even though I have no psychology background except my brief course of law psychology at university, I always believed that Harry was for the most part responsible for Dexter turning out the way he is. Why Dexter may have had all the ingredients of a serial killer, he also had all the ingredients for a traumatised child. But by offering him a code, a way to let go of his anger – that was not healthy at all, killing people hardly ever is – Harry turned Dexter into a serial killer. I felt like this essay in particular hit it spot on, but there were several other essays that were also eye-opening, or had me nodding at every passage.
My major pet peeve? There’s a lot of repetition and redundancy that could’ve been avoided. The authors use the same hooks, sometimes practically the same sentences, and some psychological things are explained three, even four times.
Another intriguing essay explored why viewers are so entranced with Dexter Morgan, and some even see him as a hero since he only kills ‘the bad guys’. How can a serial killer become a hero? I enjoyed reading this essay, although I already had plenty of thoughts about that myself, some of which were repeated here.
Overall, this was a good read, and a must for fans of the show.
This book is a collection of essays written by psychologists about the television show “Dexter”, about a serial killer who works is a blood spatter analyst for the Miami Metro police department. “Dexter” is one of my all-time favorite shows, mainly because the main character is so complex. Dexter is a serial killer, but he’s also a colleague, a family man, a devoted brother, a good son. But there’s this dark side to him, this desire to hurt and kill, that could end up being his own undoing. The show is very well-written, and the writers definitely know their subject matter. Because I love the show so much, I was intrigued to start this collection of essays.
Most of them were very good, detailed, offering thorough explanations of why Dexter or his fellow characters do certain things. Each essays provides its own mini-analysis, and sometimes even the experts don’t agree, which shows psychology, in particular the psychology of psychopaths, or serial killers, or what can bring people to become serial killers, isn’t all that easy.
I particularly enjoyed the essay talking about Dexter suffering from PTSD during his childhood, and that most of what Harry interprets as behavior typical for a serial killer is, in fact, behavior typical for a child suffering from PTSD. Even though I have no psychology background except my brief course of law psychology at university, I always believed that Harry was for the most part responsible for Dexter turning out the way he is. Why Dexter may have had all the ingredients of a serial killer, he also had all the ingredients for a traumatised child. But by offering him a code, a way to let go of his anger – that was not healthy at all, killing people hardly ever is – Harry turned Dexter into a serial killer. I felt like this essay in particular hit it spot on, but there were several other essays that were also eye-opening, or had me nodding at every passage.
My major pet peeve? There’s a lot of repetition and redundancy that could’ve been avoided. The authors use the same hooks, sometimes practically the same sentences, and some psychological things are explained three, even four times.
Another intriguing essay explored why viewers are so entranced with Dexter Morgan, and some even see him as a hero since he only kills ‘the bad guys’. How can a serial killer become a hero? I enjoyed reading this essay, although I already had plenty of thoughts about that myself, some of which were repeated here.
Overall, this was a good read, and a must for fans of the show.
July 17, 2013
Even if you're like me, you've probably heard of the tv show Dexter. Actually, I think my dad watches Dexter occasionally. As for me, I'm making my way through the books. So while I'm jumping the gun, I requested to read this anthology.
Because Dexter is so obviously full of psychologically complex characters (Dexter does claim to be a sociopath after all), there is so much to dig into. This book has eighteen different topics, covering things from The Dark Passenger In All Of Us to Why Psychopaths Like Dexter Aren't Really All That Bad (that one was a really interesting read).
What I liked about the book is that each chapter is it's own self-contained analysis. Quite some of the authors raise points that might contradict each other (incidentally, what is your opinion of Harry?), proving that there are no right answers (wait, this is about literature, I thought we were talking about psychology).
If my psychology class was this interesting, I would probably remember a lot more. As it is, I liked the book a lot more.
So in conclusion, if you're a fan of Dexter, you should definitely read this book. If you like to read about psychology and don't mind spoilers, you should definitely read this book too - I think it explains the subject matter really well.
Disclaimer: I got this book for free from the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for a free and honest review.
This review was first posted to Inside the mind of a Bibliophile
Because Dexter is so obviously full of psychologically complex characters (Dexter does claim to be a sociopath after all), there is so much to dig into. This book has eighteen different topics, covering things from The Dark Passenger In All Of Us to Why Psychopaths Like Dexter Aren't Really All That Bad (that one was a really interesting read).
What I liked about the book is that each chapter is it's own self-contained analysis. Quite some of the authors raise points that might contradict each other (incidentally, what is your opinion of Harry?), proving that there are no right answers (wait, this is about literature, I thought we were talking about psychology).
If my psychology class was this interesting, I would probably remember a lot more. As it is, I liked the book a lot more.
So in conclusion, if you're a fan of Dexter, you should definitely read this book. If you like to read about psychology and don't mind spoilers, you should definitely read this book too - I think it explains the subject matter really well.
Disclaimer: I got this book for free from the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for a free and honest review.
This review was first posted to Inside the mind of a Bibliophile
January 27, 2014
Even though Dexter isn't real the writing and acting is so sophisticated psychologically that mental health professionals are able to discuss both him and the people closest to him as if they were all real.
There are several different articles each by a different professional. Some didn't engage my interest but many did. The second one was the best, I thought, and the one from which I learned the most about Dexter but many others offered real insight.
Dexter's stepfather, Harry Morgan, was taken on and presented as a narcissistic with both Dexter and Debra, his sister, analyzed as typical children of a narcissistic household.
Debra isn't spared the blade as she is seen as damaged with a poor self-worth as she bounces from one man to another in search of validation and a father figure, which she found in Lundy.
Rita is also taken apart. I personally liked her but it seems many people don't because she refuses to be real, hiding her real self along with her anger as she goes from one abusive man to another. She is presented as growing and coming into her own just as she is murdered. Even her great relationship with Dexter is presented as another abusive one although more subtle with Dexter lying and manipulating her in order to hide who he is and what he does to the point of faking a heroin addiction. This brings him to Lila, a borderline personality.
I look at the world a little differently now and am planning to watch the series again to pick up everything I missed the first time around.
There are several different articles each by a different professional. Some didn't engage my interest but many did. The second one was the best, I thought, and the one from which I learned the most about Dexter but many others offered real insight.
Dexter's stepfather, Harry Morgan, was taken on and presented as a narcissistic with both Dexter and Debra, his sister, analyzed as typical children of a narcissistic household.
Debra isn't spared the blade as she is seen as damaged with a poor self-worth as she bounces from one man to another in search of validation and a father figure, which she found in Lundy.
Rita is also taken apart. I personally liked her but it seems many people don't because she refuses to be real, hiding her real self along with her anger as she goes from one abusive man to another. She is presented as growing and coming into her own just as she is murdered. Even her great relationship with Dexter is presented as another abusive one although more subtle with Dexter lying and manipulating her in order to hide who he is and what he does to the point of faking a heroin addiction. This brings him to Lila, a borderline personality.
I look at the world a little differently now and am planning to watch the series again to pick up everything I missed the first time around.
November 16, 2015
I was expecting something a little better I supposed, considering these essays were about the show and not the books. The first couple essays are okay but it might be the kind of book you shouldn't read straight through; I don't even remember season 2 or 4 in their entirety and I remember nothing of season 3 but after the first 3 or so essays, I felt like I was reading things I already knew. A lot of the "conclusions" the authors make were things I kind of felt like "yeah, I know. So what?" And the last two essays didn't even seem to be about Dexter but rather about society as a whole. The last one in particular, even though the title forewarned you about it, hardly even mentioned Dexter. I noticed several typos throughout as well, and one writer didn't know what commas were because it was severely lacking in proper punctuation. The book took me a lot longer to read than it should have, given that it wasn't that hard. I'm not always easily distracted from reading but from this book I really was.
February 10, 2013
Wonderful book. I enjoyed reading the insights of some incredibly intelligent individuals about my favorite character on TV. This book truly gave me a new point of view of some things concerning the show that I had not given much thought to. I really hope they continue with this book for more current seasons. There are SO many more aspects of these characters that I would love to see investigated further. This is an absolute must read for any Dexter fan and for anyone with even the slightest interest in psychology. Since I am going to school for psychology, I am 100% fulfilled by this book. The best part about it is that you don't have to agree with everything these psychologists are saying but the points that are made were incredible.
July 14, 2019
Fascinating psychology book which gave various angles to interpret the show, and brought up ideas from Jungian psychoanalysis which I've heard of elsewhere. I liked the essay which discussed how audiences relate to characters, which explains how viewers/readers work to resolve double consciousness contradictory thinking, allowing themselves to root for a protagonist's goals, however immoral. I also enjoyed the essay about narcissism, since it explored the faults of Harry Morgan's character; this was a very convincing argument, since I don't think Dexter's a true sociopath (with the way his character develops), and he could have been a normal person with the right therapy after his childhood trauma.
May 15, 2013
This is a collection of essays written at the end of the fourth season and there are spoilers if you haven't seen the entire season. Some of the essays looked exclusively at Dexter and some included other characters such as Rita and Deb. While there was much agreement, almost repetition in some essays, I found the differing interpretations of Dexter's own psychology, particularly his evolution, the most thought provoking. At least one examined the psychology of the viewer and this made me look closer at why I enjoy the show so much. As in any group of essays by various authors, I found some more interesting than others but overall I'd recommend it to fans of the show.
Read
June 3, 2011If you haven't watched the entire series by the time you read this book, you'll ruin things for yourself. There should be spoiler warnings on it.
I liked the psychological insight into one of my favorite antiheroes. I thought it interesting that no one psychologist seemed to agree on the source of Dexter's self-imposed status as Dark Avenger. Commentary on te field of psychology I suppose.
Ohhh..also in the series, "The Psychology of Joss Whedon". Too bad I can't find it in any library in the state. Might just have to buy it.
I'm thinkin' permaybehaps. :)
I liked the psychological insight into one of my favorite antiheroes. I thought it interesting that no one psychologist seemed to agree on the source of Dexter's self-imposed status as Dark Avenger. Commentary on te field of psychology I suppose.
Ohhh..also in the series, "The Psychology of Joss Whedon". Too bad I can't find it in any library in the state. Might just have to buy it.
I'm thinkin' permaybehaps. :)
December 30, 2013
The Psychology of Dexter is a series of essays written by mental health types who look at some of the mental health aspects of the show. I enjoyed several of them but lost interest in the book after about 75%-- it just seemed to get repetitive.
I'll be doing a blog series on this book. I'll post the links here after they go live.
My favorite essays were:
Rethinking Dexter by Lisa Firestone, PhD.
Naughty by Nature by Joshua L. Gowin
The Psychology of Dexter's Kills by Marisa Mauro, PsyD.
Deception by Bella Depaulo, PhD.
I'll be doing a blog series on this book. I'll post the links here after they go live.
My favorite essays were:
Rethinking Dexter by Lisa Firestone, PhD.
Naughty by Nature by Joshua L. Gowin
The Psychology of Dexter's Kills by Marisa Mauro, PsyD.
Deception by Bella Depaulo, PhD.
May 21, 2016
Part of the "The Psychology of [pop culture item here]" series, this book is a collection of essays about the show Dexter. The authors present a myriad of different opinions and ideas - one essay argues that Dexter is worse than Paul when it comes to abusiveness, while another essay argues that Dexter (and other psychopaths) aren't nearly as bad as we think. It's an interesting read, and it made me think about the show in new ways.
A note of warning: this book contains spoilers through the end of season four of Dexter.
A note of warning: this book contains spoilers through the end of season four of Dexter.
September 16, 2012
On the one hand, this book is incredibly nerdy (who reads psychological essays about their favorite show besides me?) and on the other, it is completely engrossing and thought-provoking; I mostly loved The Psychology of Dexter. A couple of the essays were very dry or not very stimulating, but most were very clever and enjoyable. Overall, if you are a fan of the show and wonder just HOW you can be rooting so heartily for a serial killer or just need your Dexter fix between seasons, try this.
June 6, 2014
As a die hard fan of the show, I could not wait to get my hands on this book and it did not at all disappoint. It digs below the surface of Dexter and looks in between the lines of what is shown on the screen. It is a well written, intelligent dissection. Put together by a collection of psychologists, it is extremely detailed, intricate and insightful. I would definitely recommend it to anyone who finds themselves craving a deeper look into the series.
April 4, 2015
This book was very entertaining. I love the show Dexter, and I studied psychology in school, so it was a perfect fit for me. While I certainly did not agree with all of the arguments, it was interesting to see how each author made his or her conclusions. It would have been better if it had been updated after the show ended, as it only covers the first four seasons. It could be kind of repetitive, but overall, very interesting!
July 10, 2015
I was pleasantly surprised by this book. It is well written and entertaining. I learned a lot about the application of psychological terms to real life situations (or TV show portrayals). I must find some other similar books. Some articles that I particularly enjoyed: Jared A Defife's "Predator on the Prowl", Marisa Mauro's "The Psychology of Dexter's Kills" and "It's All About Harry", Jeremy Clyman's "The Angels on His Shoulder", and Adi Jaffe's "The Killer Within".
November 23, 2020
Really enjoyed this book. It’s kind of dry as you’re reading basically psychology papers written on the character, Dexter. My only complaint is this book was written before the series ended. This book was written between seasons 4 and 5. I wish they’d go back and revise it based on the events that took place in seasons 5-8. Dexters character changes and he definitely seems to evolve. This book is also written almost 95% about the show, not the Dexter books.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 54 reviews