Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.84 AVERAGE
3.84 AVERAGE
I found this book to be extremely information, not only in the patterns of serial killers but with jurisdiction and more political level aspects of profiling. I especially appreciated the last chapter and the discussion around the death penalty. While at times Ressler did seem to brag about his accomplishments, there is truth in how much success and process he made across the FBI. Really interesting and fundamental read for understanding profiling — the real profiling, not the ones we often see across popular media or entertainment.
I think the show Mindhunter, despite being advertised as based on the book by John Douglas, pulls a lot from this book as well. Ressler is a less of a showman than Douglas, but there's still a little humble bragging here. Still, it's clear that catching murderers was important to him, and really . . . how many of us would take his job, even if we could do it well? There's a certain strength to the men and women who will go up against the very worst humanity has to offer in an effort to speak for those who can no longer speak for themselves. I could never do it.
I read true crime not for the vicarious thrill, but to try to understand the psychology of people who enjoy hurting others. And there's a little "there but for the grace of God go I" to it, too. After countless shows, documentaries, and many books, I don't feel I'm any closer to understanding these people than I did before I started. But I'm a tiny bit better at recognizing them sooner. So if Ressler and Douglas can identify serial killers off of a few crime scene photos and want to brag about that a little, I say more power to them. They've earned my respect. I'm glad Ressler was around when he was. Doesn't sound like he's replaceable.
I read true crime not for the vicarious thrill, but to try to understand the psychology of people who enjoy hurting others. And there's a little "there but for the grace of God go I" to it, too. After countless shows, documentaries, and many books, I don't feel I'm any closer to understanding these people than I did before I started. But I'm a tiny bit better at recognizing them sooner. So if Ressler and Douglas can identify serial killers off of a few crime scene photos and want to brag about that a little, I say more power to them. They've earned my respect. I'm glad Ressler was around when he was. Doesn't sound like he's replaceable.
dark
informative
The cases are interesting and the distinctions between organized and disorganized killers are well written. Overall an informative book, but one star taken off due to the nature of Ressler’s unlikeable personality, honestly, the more I read the surer I became that he probably wasn’t a pleasant person to be around. Be prepared to endure huuuuge amounts of ego stroking, overall I recommend everyone to just stick to John Douglas. Dougla’s books are better written and less egocentrical.
Here's what I wanted when I read Incendiary - a look into the mind of a repeat criminal. Ressler is a pioneer in the field of profiling and uses cases, both famous and not, to explore the minds of serial killers. I learned a lot - organized vs. disorganized killers, what may push someone to their first murder, and what drives them to repeat the crime again and again.
While informative and interesting several things put me off, though. First, the victims are minimized, often reduced to clues to analyze the mind of the killer. The criminals' thought process, and the men who work to understand it, are prioritized above all else. The upcoming book Dead Girls address this point really well - watch this space for a review on release day.
Also, Ressler is full of himself and it grates. What's the line... 'may the lord grant me the confidence of a straight white man'? That's Ressler. He quotes letters of commendation while he humble brags about every little thing. He tells stories about bending the rules for the sake of the investigation and always comes out squeaky clean. It's goddamn annoying but also maybe expected from a G-man of his era. (Note: expected does not equal excused.)
I listened on audio and have no complaints about the narrator or production. While nowhere near perfect, Whoever Fights Monsters provides a foundation to build my Serial Killer Summer on.
...yeah, I'm making it a thing. Heaven help me.
While informative and interesting several things put me off, though. First, the victims are minimized, often reduced to clues to analyze the mind of the killer. The criminals' thought process, and the men who work to understand it, are prioritized above all else. The upcoming book Dead Girls address this point really well - watch this space for a review on release day.
Also, Ressler is full of himself and it grates. What's the line... 'may the lord grant me the confidence of a straight white man'? That's Ressler. He quotes letters of commendation while he humble brags about every little thing. He tells stories about bending the rules for the sake of the investigation and always comes out squeaky clean. It's goddamn annoying but also maybe expected from a G-man of his era. (Note: expected does not equal excused.)
I listened on audio and have no complaints about the narrator or production. While nowhere near perfect, Whoever Fights Monsters provides a foundation to build my Serial Killer Summer on.
...yeah, I'm making it a thing. Heaven help me.
dark
informative
sad
tense
fast-paced
Content Warnings
Graphic: Animal cruelty, Rape, Murder
dark
informative
reflective
medium-paced
dark
informative
fast-paced
A fascinating read but let down by a couple of things. Ressler's need to regularly stroke his own ego is irritating as noted in other reviews, but the thing that really undermined the book for me was his false statement regarding the identity of the Wearside Jack hoaxer. Ressler (writing in 1992) states the hoaxer was a retired police officer with a grudge against George Oldfield. This is not true. The hoaxer was not identified until 2005 and was neither a former police officer nor someone with a grudge against Oldfield. Given that Ressler presents this speculation as fact means I cannot take any of his other recollections without a large pinch of salt. When he is repeatedly bragging about the accuracy of his profiles, how can I be sure that his recollection is accurate and not just wishful thinking or speculation as in the case of Wearside Jack? There are no citations in any of the cases and precious few direct quotes from other sources so the whole thing ends up being anecdotes which may have been embroidered rather than the factual insider account I was hoping for.