i’m really, really proud of this paper.
American Media and the People’s Fascination with Serial Killers
Contemporary and American pop culture have always been present as a major source of influences on our society. We consume what we watch on television, and read in magazines and newspapers thoughtfully and assume most to be true. After all, why would a company publish an article if it was not proven to be true? People who are viewed as having “celebrity status” are all well known faces and names that come up frequently in our news. The media is responsible usually for creating that celebrity’s status in society. What really captures the attention of many Americans today though is the prevalence of violent crime. Celebrities commit significant amounts of various misdemeanors and felonies, be both violent and nonviolent. We become intrigued by the stories we hear regularly on Showbiz Tonight and on the E! News Channel about the drug abuse and even more locally on your 5:00 news in the afternoon after work. They tell us about who shot who, who killed who and who may still be on the run. However, the changing and blurring line between gaining fame and becoming a celebrity seems to be more about those who are clearly visible to the world and are well known for what they have done rather than looking at and appreciating their talents and merited accomplishments. Those who commit heinous crimes and become infamous for them are the ones who tend to grab more of our attention. The social issue with America’s fascination with the serial killer has become a cultural phenomenon in today’s media world as we enjoy watching shows and movies and reading books about different notorious killers throughout time. In some cases it seems that it may be easier to become famous by killing a number of people and getting a movie made about you instead of working hard to get signed by a record company. Humans have a natural attraction that is fueled by fear and our curiosity in mysteries about murderers that has forced its way into American pop culture in recent years.
People have always looked at violence as almost a sick source of entertainment in a way as they are always interested in what is going on and what has happened. When something happens on the street and the police come and rope off the scene with caution tape there is always a crowd that flocks to that crime scene. Although the feasible reaction is to be disgusted at the sight of a dead body or body parts, there is some level of fascination and curiosity that is seen during this collective gathering. Mark Seltzer describes this act as a part of the “wound culture” explaining that humans always are intrigued by crime and disobedience which in turn brings the media into play here (Schmid, 5). The media portrays the murderer(s) as a sort of superstar of this culture. Even if the killer is anonymous or reaches fame after conviction and becomes a post mortem celebrity. With serial killers, the thought and possibility of rhetorical messages within the killings leads to a sort of ideology and adoption of this crime into a shocking societal norm. Beginning with the flocking crowd and law enforcement, following through with media representation, then moving on to the attention of politicians, film makers, and social and cultural critics a portion of society gains serious interest in serial killers. As word spreads to the masses as the killings continue a wider variety of people may gain a potential interest in what is happening and begin to follow the stories presented by the media. Thus, further increasing the killer’s celebrity status as this does not essentially happen by chance the people’s interest in the crime is not limited to repulsive reactions, condemnation, and disgust and ironically in some cases admiration. Either way, people’s attraction to what the serial killer’s emblematic acts are conveying there is always someone paying great attention to the murderer’s stories.
A serial killer’s ability to become a celebrity of sorts all depends on the mediums available and their ability to use them to their own advantage, regardless of initial motivation. The changing nature of fame due to developing and prevalent use of technologies is very much conducive to making celebrities out of many social groups including serial killers. The expansion of different mediums like mass printing, photography, the internet, and streaming online news video has made it easier for such criminals to have the opportunity to get the entire country’s attention and become an infamous and terrifying public figure. This created a distinction between “good” and “bad” celebrities and their claim to fame while also putting emphasis on what was made visible to the public. This backs up the claim that celebrities today are more or less those who are seen and spoken of rather than realizing they are famous for their merit. In some cases this can also guarantee amounts of power given to the celebrity. As the media feeds the people’s fascination giving greater attention to those who murder in masses provides the killer with a certainty of fame and can potentially promote their renown and actions. This feeling can even possibly increase even more so after the suspect is captured and tried in court. You may ask though, why are so many American’s obsessive and willing to follow such gruesome cases in this strange aspect of culture that has been created to make a celebrity out of an immoral character that kills for sport? Where does this arousal and need for this type of celebrity come from?
The reality and public realization of death as a part of life has been exploited through growing technologies and media since the nineteenth century. Improvements in health care and sophistication in funeral homes and funeral services has made death a more socially acceptable thing. Death is linked to many social anxieties but as it becomes more relevant as a part of human life through media exposure it becomes less of a pressing issue for some. Media such as newspapers contribute to this in publishing obituaries and news broadcasts present deaths in society to us on a daily basis. However, natural anxieties and stresses over death still exist and can be limited to how we as a society decide to deal with it as the media presents it to us. Watching our favorite movie star perform violent acts on television and in film can satisfy a human need to express negative emotions and models for evil personalities because having a dark side attached to your personality, and sometimes enjoying it, are natural. Seeing celebrities represent death in such ways attracts our attention and arouses us as a source of media and entertainment. Many still wonder though how can we be so terrified of serial killers but so attracted and allured by them at the same time.
The question is answered by Eric Deitrich and Tara Fox Hall in Serial Killers: Philosophy for Everyone explaining that “serial killers show up in art because they show up in real life” (Dietrich, Fox, 94). The media creates an alluring and artistic social construct that we enjoy. Another answer to the question of our arousal to serial killers can be described as “what is actually alluring is the idea of the serial killer, but only when that idea is contemplated from a certain, specific, safe frame that allows both the positive and negative emotions associated with serial killers to be experienced at the same time” (Dietrich, Fox, 94). The ideas and concepts that the film and entertainment industry provides to partner with our fascination of serial killers is only useful when one knows that they are fictional and are safe from the hands of the killer.
The Showtime television series Dexter is based off books written by Jeff Lindsay. The show depicts Dexter Morgan, played by Michael C. Hall, who works as a forensic blood spatter analyst in the Miami Metro Police department. On his own time Dexter is a serial killer who kills other serial killers in an act that can be described as a vigilante. In the book Natural Born Celebrities by David Schmid he describes a character known as a heroic criminal (Schmid, 19). Dexter is just that. If we were to rely on our basic moral intuitions we would naturally condemn Dexter because he is still in fact a serial killer. In Serial Killers: Philosophy for Everyone there are multiple chapters dedicated to the analysis and morality of Dexter Morgan. To give more background on Dexter’s character he witnessed the brutal slaughter of his mother when he was just three years old which in turn developed a “dark passenger” he has carried with him throughout his life. Having been given this dark and twisted mindset Dexter possesses the need to kill. Having been adopted by an honest cop that worked for the Miami Police, Harry Morgan, he was taught how to steer his urges into an acceptable force that would satisfy his needs to hunt, stalk and kill his prey. Harry Morgan taught his son a code of ethics essentially that gave him guidelines on who he can kill and limitations that provided good reason for him to kill a person. Dexter kills those who have escaped the justice system and ultimately deserve to die for what they have done to others while leaving absolutely no traces of evidence, no witnesses and no body to be found. As terrifying and socially distraught as he may seem Dexter is a family oriented man who eventually marries and has children of his own eventually making him out to be a normal human being with feelings that he actually denounces of himself in the first two seasons of the show. Some may be confused as to whether or not to view Dexter Morgan as a hero or murderous villain because we originally thought that our basic ideas about human nature, good and evil, and people’s role in society had a solid foundation. Then we meet Dexter who is a cold-blooded killer, but his murders help save and avenge innocent lives and viewers are forced to question his morality and his position in this sort of gray area he is standing in as a member of society. Dexter is associated with the ethical approach of utilitarianism which describes the act of bringing about the greatest good for the greatest number of people.
During the show we are placed directly inside Dexter’s darkly oriented mind as he narrates every action, thought and feeling provoked in him, if he feels anything at all. Naturally, morality would call for the serial killer who is villainous to be caught, but we sympathize with Dexter’s character making the series all the more interesting and mind gripping. But by rooting for Dexter’s success and vengeance among the greater evils in his surrounding society we see ourselves on the good side of the good versus evil spectrum at hand. The viewer recognizes him as a superhero of sorts but he still kills people because he feels the absolute needs to, then chops them up into pieces, places them in trash bags, throws them into the ocean and collects blood samples on glass slides from each of his victims sliced cheek to save as tiny trophies. Despite all he stands for Dexter is still an evil being to the core. The writers of the show do an exemplary job of evoking conflicting feelings within the viewers throughout every episode. The problem being that we realize Dexter Morgan is severely abnormal, a self-proclaimed psychopath and a monster inside but the audience still cannot help but to identify with him in one way or another.
One of the most pressing issues on the show is that Dexter must destroy the only people that he would ever be able to socially connect with since he lacks such skills and has to fake them to be accepted and remain unsuspicious. He creates an alter ego outside himself that allows him to pretend to be a part of something bigger in society when really he is all alone. The role he takes on is not just an inconvenience or a joke but an absolute denial of his own self. By following the code that his father, Harry, taught him to implement Dexter kills his long lost biological brother in the first season of the show. Dexter was not even aware of his existence in that the repressed memory of his mother’s death was not revealed until he met his brother, Brian. The traumatic experience the two boys watched together as their mother was murdered by a chain saw in a cargo container sent both boys to extreme ends of the evil spectrum as they both became serial killers as a result. Essentially they both killed in the same way, chopping up bodies just as their mother had been. Dexter’s longing for social acceptance and sometimes the urge to just shout out “I’M A SERIAL KILLER!” is completely abolished when he kills his brother who is really the only person on the planet who could see, accept and love Dexter for who he truly is. But to follow through with the code Harry taught Dexter he must eliminate his brother because he brother killed without reason.
When viewing Dexter’s murderous ways of living life as a psychological issue, we can relate the acts back to that of Sigmund Freud when discussing human nature and the development of civilized society. “Human life involves a conflict between the id and the superego. The id refers to our basic urges – an amoral, insatiable, egocentric drive for self gratification. This drive is a fundamental part of our nature that cannot be eliminated, must be restrained, or individuals would be out of control and civilization would be impossible” (Amper, 110). When thinking about it in depth Freud’s concept actually makes sense in looking at the mind and uncontrollable urges to kill that many serial killers develop over many years. Dexter just happens to be an acceptable, enjoyable and entertaining example. The show has won two Golden Globes, won 26 other various awards for the picture, and been nominated another 89 times.
Stepping further into the media’s fascination and sometimes glorification of serial killers, the movie industry has produced several films inspired by closely represented real life situations and heinous crimes in recent years. Examples include the films Phone Booth that tells the story of an ordinary pedestrian who randomly answers a public payphone in Times Square. He is told over the phone by a sniper on the other end of the line that he will be shot if he hangs up. This movie was released in 2002 by Twentieth Century Fox but was delayed at first because the date was too close to the chaos ensued in Washington D.C. by the sniper that terrorized the city. Paramount Pictures pulled ads for their movie Body Parts a few days after Jeffrey Dahmer was arrested due to close nature and graphic depiction of similar crimes committed by Dahmer. The company denied any resemblance and reference to the murderer however, but still acknowledged the fact that the timing of the film was inappropriate. NBC was about to broadcast a new TV movie thriller called A Stranger in the House that involved a psychopathic killer of sorority sister’s just days after the gruesome murder of a few Chi Omegas from Florida State University by Ted Bundy in 1978. Jane Caputi wrote that moments like these were “slips of the societal tongue… moments of brief but unintended clarity” where we get a glimpse of how the “acceptable” ways in which American culture expresses its fascination with murder might be implicated with unacceptable actual incidents of murder (Schmid, 22). But still the media persists in presenting the acts of serial killers as a social spectacle. Probably the most quintessential example of how the film industry makes murder in film something exciting to watch involves Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter and his exceptional and award winning performance in The Silence of the Lambs. Hannibal Lecter is a cannibalistic serial killer that not only kills his victims in great numbers but enjoys eating them. The film essentially created a cult around Lecter’s character that has since continued to grow as sequels to the film and books were made. Hopkin’s performance as the infamous, calm minded and gruesome cannibal gained him much respect in the Academy as well as praise that can “reasonably be taken as relatively unguarded expressions of fascination with and admiration of Lecter himself, who was recently voted the top movie villain of all time in an Internet poll” (Schmid, 23). The film won Oscars in all the major categories in 1992 including that of best adapted screenplay, best director, best actor, best actress and best film.
Some newspaper and magazines in the 1990s were forced to lower their editorial standards to compete with the articles written in tabloid magazines such as The National Enquirer. These magazines included raw and graphic articles about “murder of the month,” “trial of the year,” and the most frightening and detailed stories they could find relating to murderers and serial killers as the fascination rose higher and higher over the decade. In this, media tends to over report violent crimes in the news. We see this in our everyday lives as we watch depressing stories about who was killed in cold blood in our community today and how the murderer has yet to be caught. The daily news is overrun by “bad news” more often than “good news” because for many reasons humans enjoy hearing about bad things that continue to happen. However, murders only make up a small fraction of crime reports in the United States. The competitive nature in all media calls for the searching, investigating and reporting of the most gruesome, bizarre and intriguing crimes in order to grab the attention of American viewers and raise each station’s ratings. This turns our attention though to the topic of an existing social problem. The media seems to enjoy terrifying its viewers with the reporting of such heinous crimes.
The media has also developed the habit, or technique possibly, of giving a name or face to a virtually nameless suspect in serial killers and mysterious predators nationwide. A great example of this also resorts back to the Showtime television series Dexter. Throughout each season Dexter fights, competes with and hunts down a different villain. Such names provided to the criminal he and the Miami police are searching for include “The Ice Truck Killer,” “The Trinity Killer,” and “The Skinner.” All these names were given to the murderers in relevance to the way they selected and killed their victims. Real serial killers have been dubbed names such “The Black Widow” given to Lydia Trueblood whom, just as the female spider is known to kill their mates, killed five of her six husbands. Nicknames given to people can suggest much about a person’s character and personality. It can give you insight to what a person is about, what they are interested and even what kind of life they lead. There is something about these deeply personal identifiers that appeals to us, brings us clarity, and in labeling someone we are able to assert who they are (Zirngibil, 167). These quick descriptions communicate and host enough information about the person and usually correct information regarding them and their lifestyle is condensed into a single term making them that much easier to identify in the media.
Some famous serial killers are believed and recognized as being so notorious in that most are typically male and their target victims are women. Jane Caputi recognizes these facts and relates the patterns of such killers to “mythic, archetypal figures” (Schmid, 4) and indicates that patriarchal culture has enriched and enshrined the appearance of many serial killers. Murderers like the legendary Jack the Ripper are modernized to date with terrorizing women, empowering men, and inspiring them to sometimes even emulate his actions. Jack the Ripper was known for killing and mutilating prostitutes throughout England in the late 1800s. The movie From Hell was released in 2001 starring such massive stars as Johnny Depp and Heather Graham. The film offers an inside look into the Masonic mindset of Victorian aged Englishmen and how misogyny was much of the reason and motivation in the Ripper’s killing of female prostitutes. Schmid, however, discusses the thoughts and ideas of the people in England during the time Jack the Ripper was operating about how many believed that the murderer could not have possibly been English but American, further involving Americans in the thrills surrounding serial killers. More relevant and American serial killers who aimed their vicious crimes towards women include Ted Bundy and Christopher Bernard Wilder. These men participate in a cultural movement and propagation of lethal misogyny. Ted Bundy escaped from law enforcement several times and succeeded in killing an estimated 30 women from 1973 to 1978. Christopher Wilder was an attractive and charming photographer who hunted young women in malls offering girls modeling jobs and photo shoots then kidnapping, sometimes raping and then murdering them. But the consent and trusting attitudes of the women who are charmed by these dangerous men poses a question. How and why these young women were able to be so attracted and lured in by such monsters? We hear the stories and truly believed that these men should be able to be picked right out of a crowd when truly this is impossible. They are recognized as monsters because the notion that such an evil doing person could be even the slightest bit normal is absurd. The acts of serial sexual murders committed were unthinkable in eyes of the public when news came about as violent acts against women of all types easily make headline stories in America. These men are given this unrecognizable social description by the media which in turn keeps them from getting caught in the long run because they are virtually impossible to identify at a glance.
The most surprising and strange thing about men like Bundy and others who killed numerous women is that when they are put on trial not only do they receive true and everlasting fame but they are always surrounded and admired by women who are still physically attracted to them. Influences like this, even during the time span of the crimes themselves, many serial killers keep on because of the natural publicity they receive from America’s media. Many serial killers are well aware of their rising fame in America as they continue to terrorize society because they truly believe the people enjoy the stories. David Berkowitz, better known as the “Son of Sam” commented after being arrested that “I had finally convinced myself that it was good to do, necessary to do it, and that the public wanted me to do it” (Schmid 23). Throughout Berkowitz’s killing spree he communicated with the New York Post who published letters he wrote about his serial killings. Another murderer, Carl Panzram, was active from 1915 to 1929 killed more than 22 people. After being caught and jailed he proceeded to contact writer’s days before his execution and sending them various newspaper clippings, pictures and suggestions about what someone ought to write in a book about him. Panzram is an example of how some serial killers go ahead and take initiative in identifying themselves as big celebrities. Critics of the intense media coverage of serial killers claim that the sureness of media attention sends positive and affirming messages to killers. Some serial killers desire celebrity status so much that exposure in the media is what actually motivates some to kill.
An interesting case though of a famous, jailed, serial killer lobbying for more fame on his plate involves Jeffrey Dahmer. Speculation arose about Dahmer, before he was murdered himself in prison in 1944, of whether or not he had actually been in contact with both publishers and movie studios about selling his story as many rumors had suggested. Upon Jeffery Dahmer’s murder all ideas about any movie deal was stopped but, legal restrictions still would have prevented Dahmer from receiving any sort of revenue. The money instead would have been distributed amongst the families of his victims. After all the possibilities of any deal makings were halted some of the victim’s families explored alternate options to make money off Dahmer and his murders, perhaps in compensation for their loss. It was proposed that they would auction off Dahmer’s property including random assortments of things such as his toothbrush, murder weapons like a saw and hammer, a 55 gallon vat he used to decompose the bodies and even the refrigerator where he stored the hearts of his murder victims. Strangely enough, the families’ motives in suggesting auctioning off of any of these items were looked upon as being quite noble it seemed as if they had been consumed and were unable to avoid participating in what is called “fetishization and consumption of Dahmer’s drama by mass audiences” by Mark Pitazzo (Schmid 263).
The logic in consumerism of “murderabilia” dominates many aspects of the American fascination and promotion in media of serial killers. The selling and profiting from random artifacts belonging or relating to serial killers has become an entire industry in itself. The point of fame for a killer is no longer whether something is determined as being ethical, but whether it sells or not. Notoriety becomes a source of capital income, and can make itself a familiar name in a household. Many would agree that creating an action figure doll of an infamous serial killer for children to play with would be tasteless, but David Johnson believes otherwise. He has made action figures of Ted Bundy, Ed Gein and Jeffrey Dahmer to name a few and he plans to make a suggestive model of Jack the Ripper. Serial Killer Central, or www.skcentral.com, offers many items made by serial killers themselves, including art, former known addresses of the killers, and even streaming videos of chilling testimonies made by the killers. Other websites like www.supernaught.com offers up bricks that belonged to Jeffrey Dahmer’s apartment building for a price of $300, while locks of Charles Manson’s hair are also put up for sale for close to $1,000. Sale of “murderabilia” is only a fraction of what contributes to the fascination and defining integration of serial killers into American pop culture. T-shirts, books, songs, television shows and even trading cards have brought about an even more keen interest in contemporary American society. Still today many serial killers, dead or alive, are brought into the celebrity spotlight in their most egregious forms and glorified. In 2003 John Walsh, the former host of America’s Most Wanted and man whose son had fallen victim to a heinous murder, brought about the issue of “murderabilia” on his daytime television program the John Walsh Show. In an unsuccessful attempt to look at and research both sides of the industry’s consumers and protestors, much attention was drawn to the serial killer’s victim’s families and how disturbed they were by the issue. But the industry has even furthered American impulse to learn about serial killers and given an opportunity to become hands on with such artifacts, which is also a chilling situation to think about.
The other issue about “murderabilia” is about those who purchase the items. Who are these people, and why do they want to buy and have such items that essentially hold memories of pure evil acts of human nature and embrace them? What are their morals? Do they have any values pertaining to that of human life and could they eventually become psychopaths themselves? The question of the abnormality concerning such consumers isn’t too big of an issue according to Rick Stanton. Stanton is one of the biggest collectors and dealers of “muderabilia” in the United States and he ensures people that the people who buy his items are average people who enjoying collecting historical artifacts as many Americans have made a habit of. He regularly insists that an attitude of moral neutrality be directed towards the industry that serial killers, collectors and the media alike have all created into existence.
The social prominence of celebrity serial killers has seriously become a popular topic and social norm in America in recent years. When the fame of notorious and evil minded serial killers is noted by a vast majority of population, it is typically denounced in lacking morals and is condemned. This was prevalent in such media sources like John Walsh. However, much of America applauds the popularity the media sets forth in glorifying serial killers and violent murderous acts in society. The imbrications in American pop culture surrounding serial killers and condemning such villains seems to be the most morally satisfying rhetorical answer to the problem. The creation of movies, books, and television series that promote the idolization of such psychopaths as the works protagonists in some depictions and the obvious antagonists in others has effectively created almost a sense of worship and admiration for these characters. The phenomenon baffles some and intimately intrigues others to conduct further research in why and how serial killers have become a major part of America’s history of these immoral celebrities whether they are still alive, have not been caught or are now in prison and like some, put to death. These criminals have been accepted in accordance with other superstars in American culture that the media also loves to embrace. Whether we can recognize the serial killers face or if they remain anonymous and are only called by a nickname concerning the details of their murderous work, American media has done an amazing job in exploiting violent crime and keeping the attraction to the classic American murder mystery alive. We as humans will always be willing to learn more about and focus on the havoc raised by the ever occurring phenomenon of serial killers.
