Rating: 
Summary: Poorly written account of possibly correct theory
Review: Although the basic tenet of the featured theory of Dr. Athens is probably correct, namely that a `rational' decision process typically accompanies even extreme outbursts of violence, this book is a surprisingly poor examination of Dr. Athens work. It is the worst of the books of Richard Rhodes I have read. Little critical thought is displayed concerning the evidence for, or implications of Dr. Athens theory. For example, it is claimed that there are a few basic personality types which largely determine one's likelihood of reacting in a violent manner. However, later we come across the statement that "... the surprising discovery was made that these can change with time". But it is then crucial to ask how malleable this personality type is and how frequently it can change. If one's personality type can change, say, from one encounter to the next (depending on eg. the perceived strength of the opponent or victim), then this personality type is a meaningless characterization of the offender. If on the other hand it is stable over many years in many different situations then it might be useful (but then the stability is the surprising thing, not the change). But this, along with many other issues is never discussed by Mr. Rhodes. Many times the "straw man" of one of a fairly absurd set psychological theories of violence is used as the alternative to that of Dr. Athens. It may be that some believe in such theories, but the more serious alternatives of partial genetic or neurological (via injury etc) predisposition to violent acts, as opposed to the "violentization" process that Dr. Athes advocates, are dismissed out of hand with no analysis whatsoever. Instead of examining these important questions the author spends his time on rather ridiculous examinations of the lurid lives of some celebrities as "evidence" in favor of Dr. Athens theory. This is pure (prurient) padding. I am glad that Dr. Athens' theory is getting some of the attention it seems to deserve, but this work of Richard Rhodes does it a disservice by not thinking about the claims clearly.
Rating: 
Summary: Best book I've read on how people become ultraviolent
Review: I agree with the comments of Mr. Olsen. Lonnie Athens' ground-breaking work on the developmental process of violent criminals--which he calls "violentization"--is lucidly described by Rhodes. The book is fascinating and logical, supported by Athens' field work and personal experience. Human evil is rooted in human experiences and this book is a refreshing antidote to mystic speculations on why people commit "unthinkable" crimes. I've read numerous books on crime and violence and almost never end up with a clearer understanding of the motivations of violent actors. I discovered this book by happenstance at a small bookstore in Michigan and did not read the review in the New York Times Book Review. This book deserves a wide audience. I did not find it dry at all.
Rating:
Summary: Criminology with Psychology
Review: I've met more than a few criminologists at the University where I learned and taught psychology (and where, interestingly, Athens spent a good chunk of his early career), and I was always struck by how little psychology I found in the writings and the lectures of most criminologists. I don't mean complex theories of motivation or conversion or what have you; I mean simple notions of learning that we teach freshman students. Criminologists seem to be able to generate complex hypothesis at the drop of a hat, but precious few of them are willing to step back and say, as Athens did, that brutal criminals act that way because they've been taught to be brutal. And astoundingly enough, when Athens did bring some simple psychology into criminology, he was thought a dangerous radical. Reading of Rhodes' ideas I was put in mind of the books of the John Douglas, who built up FBI's Criminal Profiling division- another man who caused a revolution in crimonology by applying simple, well-known principles of learning. Rhodes' biography of Lonnie Athens is interesting for a number of reasons; first the story of the man himself, second, the revolution he brought to the study of criminal behavior- a revolution that still hasn't quite taken hold everywhere- and last as a picture of a how change comes (or doesn't come) in well-established areas of academic study. Strongly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: The Maverick hits the mark...
Review: I've read a fair share of the latest crop of books on the topic of violence and the criminal mind, and this book is in the top five. Rhodes has done a stellar job in presenting the theories and findings of criminologist Lonnie Athens. I'm in contact with some of the country's worst criminals - those that sit on Death Row. This book has been most beneficial in understanding the hows and whys that landed these people there. If you're interested in understanding how the criminal mind works and want to read a book that you can actually understand and process, this is the book for you. Written for both the professional and the layman, this is a wealth of insight into what makes a mind go criminal, and why violent actions result. Excellent work, Dr. Athens - you have my highest praise. Oustanding writing, Mr. Rhodes. I look forward to your next work.
Rating: 
Summary: Brilliant but such a huge question unanswered!
Review: It is not clear why the state of completed violentization is consolidated to the degree of no return?! The author(s) claim that a cataclysmic experiences or long-term significant events lead to fragmentization. That should apply also to violent criminals otherwise the theory of transition through fragmentation is NOT a theory... I was very disappointed in the end of the book, almost like a European movie... it ends without a finish... and it would not matter much if it wasn't for the grave implications of acting on the idea that violent criminals are irreversibly violentized and that another "cataclysmic experience" "or significant series of events" would not open an opportunity for a transformation leading away from violence.
In other words... what is missing is the other half of the theory, the de-violentization theory. Are there ANY violent criminals who have managed to return to non-violence? Why are statistics being treated so harshly throughout the book yet they come handy in dealing with this important question?
Even if there were only a few, then what was the process of their de-violentization? Could it have been another "cataclysmic experience" or some other sequence of significant events? Was it some process of transformation, which would challenge the violent phantom community and violent "generalized other" and replaced them with their non-violent equivalents?
My question is... "Why is de-violentization impossible?" What is the evidence that such process DOES NOT exist? For if it didn't, all that we learn from this theory through the examples of veterans and so on, are irrelevant to building programs of rehabilitation and healing. If during their service veterans completed violentization, according to the conclusion of this book, they should all join the violent criminals in the brig! But for this to happen we must first prove that there is NOT ONE case available of a person who has completed violentization and who has managed to return to non-violence.
If the "tranformation through fragmentation" theory works one way, it should also work the opposite... otherwise the theory is not worthy of consideration for explaining the violentization process, and therefore this is not a theory to be taken seriously in providing clues on neither our correction nor our veteran rehabilitation programs.
The book in general is wonderfully written and there is nothing wrong with generating questions on a hot subject such as violence.
Rating:
Summary: A Must Read Book, but its not the Whole Story
Review: Not a light read, Richard Rhodes does a excellent job of relaying the groundbreaking work of Lonnie Athens in human story fashion. Lonnie Athen's work is one of the most significant works in sociology and psychology in the last hundred years. Rhodes chronicles Lonnie Athen's life and struggle to overcome his father's violence and his struggle to correct the stupid, statistical academic view of the criminal and society. Its a riveting story, plus it puts forth Athen's development and explanation of his notion of violentization, as one kind of socialization of individuals. Rhodes, then goes into several interesting examples of this process to illustrate the notion. Most reviewers are right: this is a great book. Its a must read for understanding humanity. On other hand, one reviewer calls the book a biased and simplistic book. He is partially right, but we should be so lucky to get such a biased and simple view. Rhodes and Athens are biased, but their view is clear and logically correct. And to call Athen's explanation of the human psyche as simplistic, is not fair. It sounds simple because it makes sense. Any explanation of the human psyche is going to be too simplistic. On the other hand, that reviewer has a point in that Athens doesn't explain all, and Athens and Rhodes, through no fault of their own, have not explained that human "temperament" (inherent personality preferences) has a role in influencing the actions and reactions of all concerned. Obviously, looking at other books: in particular Please Understand Me II and the Nuture Assumption should give readers a clearer view of Lonnie Athen's grandfather, father, mother, brother, and most importantly Lonnie, himself, in terms of their differing temperaments. It does make a difference. Looking at Lonnie Athens and his brother's reactions to their violent father is interesting comparison in two differing temperaments in similar circumstances. Clearly there needs to be more work done on the role of socialization, where Athen's violentization is only one kind of socialization. Athen's Self as a Soliloquy could serve as a landmark for other's in following the complex interactions between the individual and his environment. Adding the notions of temperament and more complex notions of the peer group interaction will be the next possible step.
Rating:
Summary: One genius writes about another!
Review: Randy Starr is the author of NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF INSANITY: ONE MAN'S RECOVERY---
---
WHY THEY KILL is, in fact, an outstanding literary contribution. Most importantly, its author tells of the work of the brillant criminologist, Lonnie Athens.
Dr. Athens has written two books (and a multitude of articles himself). In particular, it is his book, THE CREATION OF DANGEROUS VIOLENT CRIMINALS which, perhaps, someday will rightfully be seen in the field as one of the "forensic bibles" that it truly is. His "four stages of violentization" are both professionally presented and articulated for the rest of us to learn from.
Richard Rhodes has served us very well, in that the has brought a valuable message from the genius Professor, Lonnie Athens! IT'S A MUST READ!!!
Rating:
Summary: One genius writes about another!
Review: Randy Starr is the author of NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF INSANITY: ONE MAN'S RECOVERY---
---
WHY THEY KILL is, in fact, an outstanding literary contribution. Most importantly, its author tells of the work of the brillant criminologist, Lonnie Athens.
Dr. Athens has written two books (and a multitude of articles himself). In particular, it is his book, THE CREATION OF DANGEROUS VIOLENT CRIMINALS which, perhaps, someday will rightfully be seen in the field as one of the "forensic bibles" that it truly is. His "four stages of violentization" are both professionally presented and articulated for the rest of us to learn from.
Richard Rhodes has served us very well, in that the has brought a valuable message from the genius Professor, Lonnie Athens! IT'S A MUST READ!!!
Rating:
Summary: A good book, but biased and simplistic
Review: Richard Rhodes does a very good job recounting the life and theories of Dr. Lonnie Athens, a criminologist who rejected the fashionable mental illness models of violent behavior in favor of actual interviews with violent criminals. Athens and Rhodes had reason to be concerned about violence, for they come from abused backgrounds themselves. By listening to acutal violent people with some respect (instead of the psychiatric nonsense of deciding that anyone unlike a psychiatrist is automatically insane), Athens came to a simple conclusion: violent people are violent because violence works for them. It gets them what they want out of life. And the violent reach that conclusion by learning from the people around them. So far, so good. I come from a poverty-stricken, violent background myself, and what Athens found rings true. But there's more to it. It's no wonder that many psyciatrists view violence as insanity, for many violent people take huge risks for trivial gains -- or at least, that is how most people would view it. One has to wonder how these people view life. Athens never asks the kind of person who choses to deal with a rude party guest via aggravated assualt "Don't you think that was sort of dumb?" Athens is apparently looking for a theory of all violence, but his answer overlooks the question of how violence ever got started in the world. If violent individuals are coached into violence by other violent individuals, who taught the First Violent Person how to behave? Rhodes also biases things when he test Athens's theory against some famous murder cases. Rhodes examines the Clutter murders recounted in Truman Capote's IN COLD BLOOD, and tells us how Perry Smith, who killed the Clutters, fits Athens's theory. He leaves out the fact that Dick Hickock, the other criminal, planned the crime, and included murdering all witnesses from the begining, or that Smith went along with the idea of robbery but didn't want to kill the Clutters. Smith's decision to kill seems to have had a large impulsive component, exactly what Athens's theory wants to totally exclude. Of course, Athens isn't the only person to interview murderers. The FBI Behavioral Science Unit does it all the time. But because what the FBI has discovered doesn't fit Athens's theories too well in some cases, Rhodes trashes them, and quite unfairly. And despite Rhodes's denial, there is evidence pointing to genetic links to violent behavior. In sum, you can learn a lot from this book, but it's the latest contribution to the ongoing study of violent crime, not the final answer.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent book, minor flaws
Review: The story of Athen's struggles to become part of the tenured academic community during the drought years of the Reagan era will bring back memories for many scholars, may not be of interest to others. The format of the rest of the book is something between Krafft-Ebing and "Stiffed," with themes from both books. Rhodes flatly rejects the idea that people who have been abused, dominated, or neglected may react strongly to against other authority figures or people that remind them of a parent (displacement). This overlooks the cause of many daily conflicts. Also, it does not explain workplace shooting sprees or later domestic terrorists such as Tim McVeigh. A little less dogmatism and focus on celebrities would have made this a more convincing and enduring book. It is still very good.
|
