"With its unusual emphasis and sometimes surprisingly personal tone, this may become the definitive Kaczynksi volume."― Publishers Weekly This is a radically new interpretation of the life and motives of the infamous Unabomber. Alston Chase's gripping account follows Ted Kaczynski from an unhappy adolescence in Illinois to Harvard, where he was subject not only to the despairing intellectual currents of the Cold War but also to ethically questionable psychological experiments. Kaczynski fled academia to the edge of the wilderness in Montana, but Chase shows us that he was never the wild mountain man the media often assumed him to be. Kaczynski was living in a book-lined cabin just off a main road when he formulated the view of the world that he used to justify murder. Through Chase's compelling narration of the planning and execution of Kaczynski's crimes, we come to know a thoroughly cold-blooded killer, but one whose ideas were uncannily close to those of mainstream America. Originally published in hardcover as Harvard and the Unabomber .
all college psychology majors should read this. never to condone the actions of this killer, however the research might make you think of the unabomber in a different -light.
Part 1 was slow and unnecessary if you know anything about the Unabomber, but I really enjoyed Parts 2 and 3. This book was incredibly relevant as a high school English teacher who teaches texts like Into the Wild, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, and authors like Joan Didion.
“A Mind for Murder” by Alston Chase is a riveting account of the life and mind of Dr Theodore John Kaczynski better known as the Unabomber. Alston Chase has done a wonderful job in his sketch of the Unabomber's personality. From his ferocious love for reading to his isolation in the wilderness of Montana and finally to his pursue of murder, Ted Kaczynski will always remain an enigmatic figure. This is a scary book because it shows us that genius could turn into madness; that the mind of a once brilliant Harvard graduate and more importantly an intellectual could distort reality and resort to murder.
The author’s style could be appreciated by reading the following passage which I have picked up from the book:
“Kaczynski had discovered just how much knowledge and learning can isolate, how they can cut a person off from others. The more one knows about something, the fewer people there are with whom one can share one’s thoughts. He had conquered a field of mathematics so narrow that only a handful of geniuses around the world could appreciate what he had done. And where was the satisfaction in such an obscure victory?”
I highly recommend reading this book for anyone interested in exploring the darker side of the human psyche.
Interesting although I got a bit bogged down in philosophy/discussion of positivism. Fascinating to learn how cold war led to gen Ed classes at Harvard and what that meant for students.
Not great. There are some interesting ideas but Chase does a poor job of connecting everything. For example, the stuff on Murray, especially his sex life, was oddly non-sequitur. And I think, while it's important not to write someone like UA off as "crazy," it's also important to point to the places where he clearly was not mentally sound and was searching for any justifications to continue killing. If you're looking for a good book on the Unabomber, look elsewhere. If you're looking for a book about the rise of domestic terrorism, look elsewhere. And if you're looking for a critique of modern psychology and Harvard, you can find that some place else too.
This was very much a page turner at first, and getting to learn about Murray's secretive experiment was fascinating but near the end of the book the author started repeating a lot of material. I felt he also got quite off topic at times and completely veered from the path of talking about Ted. Overall, it was a good book to read, but not as perfect as I was expecting.
To its credit, the book tries to narrate an historical context for the Unabomber that is much more thorough and nuanced than the facile "lone nut" conclusions drawn by most journalists. Unfortunately, the writer's lazy, dogmatic, and moralizing prose gets in the way of his effort to provide context for the Unabomber's crimes.
the last chapter was too "moralizing" (for lack of a better word). the tone of the book, while being sym- and em-pathetic to an extent is kinda what FC (TK) was/is talking about. it's complicated. . . lotta gray here seems to me. NOT THAT I ADVOCATE KILLING PEOPLE. but monkey-wrenchin'? well. . . .