Psychopaths: New Research & Studies

Ronnie Jersey said:
As one of my brothers is a sociopath / psychopath (I have trouble distinguishing the differences, and perhaps he is both anyway)..
Click to expand...

I've read various definitions trying to determine subtle differences between the two. Some psychologists believe they're basically the same thing, it is just that different language has been favoured over time. I don't believe either term features in the DSM, but both essentially relate to Antisocial personality disorder. Overall it seems a bit of a contentious topic, but for what it's worth I personally believe they're the same thing, perhaps with different terms being applied to varying intensity of behaviour/traits.

Jon Ronson wrote a great book called The Psychopath Test which includes snippets of interesting research around the topic. I've just finished reading Confessions of a Sociopath which I enjoyed, however it is a bit repetitive and written in quite a narcissistic way, which can make it hard going at times.

The author of the latter book is a law professor who was meant to be anonymous, however inevitably various internet sleuths think they've tracked her down (I won't speculate or name). I read comments from a person who claimed to be an ex student which made me laugh. They said they could believe it, as when she interacted with him he said he 'couldn't tell whether she wanted to sleep with me or eat me'. :hahazebs:
 
Cloudbusting said:
I've read various definitions trying to determine subtle differences between the two. Some psychologists believe they're basically the same thing, it is just that different language has been favoured over time. I don't believe either term features in the DSM, but both essentially relate to Antisocial personality disorder. Overall it seems a bit of a contentious topic, but for what it's worth I personally believe they're the same thing, perhaps with different terms being applied to varying intensity of behaviour/traits.

Jon Ronson wrote a great book called The Psychopath Test which includes snippets of interesting research around the topic. I've just finished reading Confessions of a Sociopath which I enjoyed, however it is a bit repetitive and written in quite a narcissistic way, which can make it hard going at times.

The author of the latter book is a law professor who was meant to be anonymous, however inevitably various internet sleuths think they've tracked her down (I won't speculate or name). I read comments from a person who claimed to be an ex student which made me laugh. They said they could believe it, as when she interacted with him he said he 'couldn't tell whether she wanted to sleep with me or eat me'. :hahazebs:
Click to expand...
I think the lines are very blurred, when it comes to sociopath / psychopath.
Bottom line though is total indifference to the feelings or emotions of others, no sense of compassion, loyalty or empathy present. Everyone else is completely disposable when they can no longer be used.
I won't bore you with the endless stories, but after being totally unable to support himself after running out of victims, my brother moved in with my parents out of state after telling them tales of woe. And they believed him, which was the saddest thing of all. They felt so sorry for him, and when I tried to tell them the truth they wouldn't have it, so I gave up.
The charm that these sociopaths / psychopaths have is just unbelievable. As for my brother, I don't think I ever truly saw the real person, and probably have no idea what he was really up to. Aren't many murderers in that category?
At any rate, I believe they are extremely dangerous, because no one knows what they are capable of doing to get their way.
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
At any rate, I believe they are extremely dangerous, because no one knows what they are capable of doing to get their way.
Click to expand...

I believe that all generalisations (except this one) are dangerous. :twothumbs:

Not everyone lives according to their impulses and capacities.

Psych/sociopathy is the latest in the OoooooooOOOOooooOOOOO Big Bad Wolf series of mental health/neurology stigmatisation. We've seen it going through Scizophrenia, Bi Polar, Autism, Narcissism and here we are with this. It used to be "mental illness" in general of course, but now that communications are faster and with the growing cult of the anti-experts and their FACTS!!!!! it's down to a higher level of resolution and moving to the next one more quickly. :headbang:

Just a matter of battening down the hatches and surviving until the pop-psychology and tabloid frenzy moves on.

Fortunately this place has usually failed to swallow the media hype - and long may it continue!
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
I think the lines are very blurred, when it comes to sociopath / psychopath.
Bottom line though is total indifference to the feelings or emotions of others, no sense of compassion, loyalty or empathy present. Everyone else is completely disposable when they can no longer be used.
I won't bore you with the endless stories, but after being totally unable to support himself after running out of victims, my brother moved in with my parents out of state after telling them tales of woe. And they believed him, which was the saddest thing of all. They felt so sorry for him, and when I tried to tell them the truth they wouldn't have it, so I gave up.
The charm that these sociopaths / psychopaths have is just unbelievable. As for my brother, I don't think I ever truly saw the real person, and probably have no idea what he was really up to. Aren't many murderers in that category?
At any rate, I believe they are extremely dangerous, because no one knows what they are capable of doing to get their way.
Click to expand...
I read that the difference between sociopaths and psychopaths is that sociopaths are people who have been badly damaged by life . They come from bad backgrounds and have usually suffered a lot of abuse in child hood , so that cruelty is seen as normal and empathy weakness . They have formed a dog eat dog kind of attitude to life , as a survival mechanism. Psychopaths , on the other hand are just born that way and can come from the most loving and nurturing family backgrounds , however they are cruel , manipulative and self serving , with no ability to feel empathy or compassion . They are not mentally ill. its just the way they are . However , they can mimick the behaviour of those that are not psychopaths , to suit any agenda that may necessitate them gaining a person's trust
 
queenofwands said:
I read that the difference between sociopaths and psychopaths is that sociopaths are people who have been badly damaged by life . They come from bad backgrounds and have usually suffered a lot of abuse in child hood , so that cruelty is seen as normal and empathy weakness . They have formed a dog eat dog kind of attitude to life , as a survival mechanism. Psychopaths , on the other hand are just born that way and can come from the most loving and nurturing family backgrounds , however they are cruel , manipulative and self serving , with no ability to feel empathy or compassion . They are not mentally ill. its just the way they are . However , they can mimick the behaviour of those that are not psychopaths , to suit any agenda that may necessitate them gaining a person's trust
Click to expand...
Reading something, and experiencing something are two different things.
I have several brothers, and we all grew up in the same family, yet the rest of us got on in life, married, worked, and had rather 'normal' lives, though none of us keep in touch with each other. But that's a whole other issue.
I will say that I think there are many 'predatory' people in the world, I have come across a few of them, and they also have a way of 'throwing off' a conversation - in other words, if one gets too close and asks too many questions, they will quickly turn the conversation onto a whole new topic, and only later will you realize they never answered you at all.
The Casey Anthony trial of 2011 here in Florida was an example - Anthony was accused of murdering her 2-1/2 little girl, whose body was found a few blocks from her residence, and her car trunk reeked of human decomposition. It was a First Degree Murder trial.
Well Anthony told so many whoppers from Day 1, accusing this one and that one, giving police the names of people who didn't even exist, that no one ever figured out what really happened, and she was acquitted. Partially I think because of her ability to manipulate the facts.
And I don't think they ever determined whether she was a sociopath or a psychopath, or whatever - perhaps there are more categories! :)
But certainly some of them can be dangerous - which is why I was quite happy that my brother moved away.
 
Last edited:
I believe I wrote about this before here - I worked in a construction office and one of the crew bosses had neglected to do something on one of the jobs.
The owner was quite upset with him, and when this man came into the office he said that his wife was at death's door at the hospital, which was why this had not been done.
Well it wasn't long before one of the workers told us that the wife was alive and well, and had never been in the hospital at all.
Then I found myself wondering if there really was a wife. LOL
 
There are people who seem to have no conscience and no shame, whether they are capable of killing or maiming others I don't know.

I worked with two, both women, who did absolutely **** all at work but seemed to be able to talk their way into promotion, higher paid jobs and not be found out until they were in a position where the employers paid them off rather than admit they should never have employed them.

There were only four people I knew who caught them out. Three were male and one of those had a mindset very like the two women. (He did **** all as well but relied on others to get things done, so when the woman in question didn't get things done he called her out!) The other three were good managers but were still unable to change the opinions of a lot of people who were taken in.

When caught out they just lied to all and sundry, blamed other people and seemed to genuinely believe that they were right and being got at.

I mention gender here just to make the point that both women and men could adopt this behaviour and both men and women were fooled by it or in some cases were able to spot it. Any flattery or charm they used wasn't sexual.
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
Reading something, and experiencing something are two different things.
I have several brothers, and we all grew up in the same family, yet the rest of us got on in life, married, worked, and had rather 'normal' lives, though none of us keep in touch with each other. But that's a whole other issue.
I will say that I think there are many 'predatory' people in the world, I have come across a few of them, and they also have a way of 'throwing off' a conversation - in other words, if one gets too close and asks too many questions, they will quickly turn the conversation onto a whole new topic, and only later will you realize they never answered you at all.
The Casey Anthony trial of 2011 here in Florida was an example - Anthony was accused of murdering her 2-1/2 little girl, whose body was found a few blocks from her residence, and her car trunk reeked of human decomposition. It was a First Degree Murder trial.
Well Anthony told so many whoppers from Day 1, accusing this one and that one, giving police the names of people who didn't even exist, that no one ever figured out what really happened, and she was acquitted. Partially I think because of her ability to manipulate the facts.
And I don't think they ever determined whether she was a sociopath or a psychopath, or whatever - perhaps there are more categories! :)
But certainly some of them can be dangerous - which is why I was quite happy that my brother moved away.
Click to expand...

Casey Anthony was certainly a pathological liar and a conwoman. Don't know if she got away with murder,

Here's a useful timeline of the case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Casey_Anthony_case
 
ramonmercado said:
Casey Anthony was certainly a pathological liar and a conwoman. Don't know if she got away with murder,

Here's a useful timeline of the case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Casey_Anthony_case
Click to expand...
Oh I watched that trial every single day. At work I had it on the computer, and listened all day while managing the office.
There were quite a few of us who blogged about all the details for a few years, it is still on:

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/forums/caylee-anthony-2-years-old.166/
http://www.acandyrose.com/caylee_anthony_directory_index.htm

Nancy Grace had a tv show on every night at 8:00 pm and featured the case for years, it never left our tv.
The first time I heard about the case I was preparing dinner and the tv news was on, they were saying, 'A Florida woman reported her 2-1/2 baby missing after 31 days', and I turned to Mr. R and said, 'That woman murdered her baby'.
Websleuths (link above) had the best details, they had attorneys and investigative experts digging up all the facts, one man even came up with the exact placement of the Duct Tape which was placed across the little girl's mouth and nose.
Mr. R was working in a huge warehouse when the verdict came in, hundreds of employees, mostly male. It was announced on loudspeaker, which was something they never did, and Mr. R said that not one of those men could believe she was acquitted.
 
Last edited:
ramonmercado said:
Evolutionary benefits of being a psychopath.

When you start to notice them, psychopaths seem to be everywhere. This is especially true of people in powerful places.

By one estimate, as many as 20 percent of business leaders have "clinically relevant levels" of psychopathic tendencies – despite the fact as little as 1 percent of the general population are considered psychopaths. Psychopaths are characterized by shallow emotions, a lack of empathy, immorality, anti-social behavior and, importantly, deceptiveness.


From an evolutionary point of view, psychopathy is puzzling. Given that psychopathic traits are so negative, why do they remain in successive generations?

Psychopathy seems to be, in the words of biologists, "maladaptive", or disadvantageous. Assuming there's a genetic component to this family of disorders, we'd expect it to decrease over time.

But that's not what we see – and there's evidence that the tendencies are, at least in some contexts, an evolutionary benefit. According to my own research, the reason for this may be down to the ability to fake desirable qualities through deception. ...

https://www.sciencealert.com/psychopaths-appear-to-possess-a-mysterious-evolutionary-benefit
Click to expand...
They seem to be conflating psychopathic-like behaviour as a trait with psychopathy as a pathology. Not the same thing really. I kinda feel the folk who came up with the 'dark triad' traits ought to have chosen different names.

As an evolutionary adaption, if you take "The Goodness Paradox" evolutionary argument about self-domestication to be sound, then a bias toward the sort of 'no empathy/no remorse' adaptation that reduced reactive aggression and also provided little pause before taking part in pro-active aggression to 'deal with' overly disruptive/aggressive/lazy 'tribe' members, might well do OK enough to survive as an adaptation.

This could explain why female psychopathy is rarer as the direct connection between a mother and child would be so maladapted by a psychopath that I imagine offspring survival in a species as co-operative as homo sapiens, would be compromised over many generations.
 
Coal said:
Very rough rule of thumb: psychopaths are born, sociopaths are made.
Click to expand...

Are you sure of this? I ask because I've not (personally) seen research to firmly back this up. Based on what I've read to date, my understanding is that (if they are actually separate conditions) both are expressed due to a combination of genetic and environmental factors.

It's such an odd topic - you see conflicting information all over so it's quite difficult to determine what is fact. I think this could be in part due to what Frideswide mentioned upthread - lots of hype and hysteria around the topic.
 
I have not yet read this entire thread but wanted to link this interesting interview with someone who is aware of his tendencies.


The YT channel is Special Books By Special Kids and the video is titled “An Interview with a Sociopath”. Unfortunately, it is a three year old video, so it takes a bit of scrolling.

The YT channel that this is featured on is quite interesting. The interviewer has many video interviews with many different people, all living with something that mainstream society may not be aware of. I could spend hours watching it.

As far as I understand, psychopathic and sociopathic labels are being used less in professional circles. I think the one reason is because there is so little that identifies them as separate diagnosis.

The word psychopath is often used to garner many horror movie tropes and to gain readership in articles.

This information may have already been posted. The psychiatric profession now uses "personality disorders" in the DSM V. This is a quick overview of personality disorders and even it states that "DSM-5 groups the 10 types of personality disorders into 3 clusters (A, B, and C), based on similar characteristics. However, the clinical usefulness of these clusters has not been established."

Added link to quote above:
https://www.msdmanuals.com/professi...y-disorders/overview-of-personality-disorders
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cloudbusting said:
Are you sure of this? I ask because I've not (personally) seen research to firmly back this up. Based on what I've read to date, my understanding is that (if they are actually separate conditions) both are expressed due to a combination of genetic and environmental factors.

It's such an odd topic - you see conflicting information all over so it's quite difficult to determine what is fact.
Click to expand...
As I said before, the lines are blurred between sociopath / psychopath.
I recognize my brother in some of the things stated by the young man in the youtube video @brownmane posted, but apparently that man is a sociopath. My brother was much worse than this man, dangerously so, and I would label him as both.
At one point I was working for a large company, I had a good position there. My brother was out of work (as usual) and I got him a job in the mail room where I worked. It was receiving, sorting and delivering mail and packages in the facility.
After he was there a short time, I was called into the security office where I was surprised to see my brother being interviewed. Turned out they had been watching him, he had been stealing packages of sample products and selling them (jewelry and such), I had no idea what he had been up to. And the company wondered if I had also been involved - I could have lost my job.
I was furious with him especially because I knew he had several thousands in the bank recently, and certainly didn't need to be stealing anything.
Well he lost his job and just went skipping out the door as though nothing was wrong and completely oblivious as to how he had embarrassed and damaged me, that was nothing. And that's just a small example of his behavior, which got steadily worse over time.
 
Coal said:
They seem to be conflating psychopathic-like behaviour as a trait with psychopathy as a pathology. Not the same thing really. I kinda feel the folk who came up with the 'dark triad' traits ought to have chosen different names.
Click to expand...

Amen!

Getting very irritated by the OMG FACT brigade squealing about things and trying to co-opt specialist vocabulary to bolster their experiences. Not everyone in life will be in to you. Some people are tossers. These two things are not mutually exclusive or mutually comorbid.

People who wail about how nasty someone was to them by dehumanising and labelling that person? Maybe that's for the irony thread.

Recognise the situation. Remove yourself or disarm the situation. Take revenge if that floats your boat. Don't wind yourself up by telling ghost stories late at night. Don't spread panic and disinformation.

Is this where I say that while I intellectually don't go much for Contributary Negligence I'm heart and soul against choosing to wear a big notice that says I'm prey! Can't run fast! Taste nommy!

Especially if those who chose to wear such a notice then want to whinge about the consequences.

:headbang:
 
Last edited:
Frideswide said:
Is this where I say that while I intellectually don't go much for Contributary Negligence I'm heart and soul against choosing to wear a big notice that says I'm prey! Can't run fast! Taste nommy!
Click to expand...
There is a considerable difference in the real world between one's right to walk alone unarmed through a dark dangerous neighbourhood and the wisdom of doing so.
 
Frideswide said:
Amen!

Getting very irritated by the OMG FACT brigade squealing about things and trying to co-opt specialist vocabulary to bolster their experiences. Not everyone in life will be in to you. Some people are tossers. These two things are not mutually exclusive or mutually comorbid.

People who wail about how nasty someone was to them by dehumanising and labelling that person? Maybe that's for the irony thread.

Recognise the situation. Remove yourself or disarm the situation. Take revenge if that floats your boat. Don't wind yourself up by telling ghost stories late at night. Don't spread panic and disinformation.

Is this where I say that while I intellectually don't go much for Contributary Negligence I'm heart and soul against choosing to wear a big notice that says I'm prey! Can't run fast! Taste nommy!

Especially if those who chose to wear such a notice then want to whinge about the consequences.

:headbang:
Click to expand...
I agree.

I think that since it seems to be culturally insensitive to just term an abusive and callous person an "abusive and callous person*," all the quasi-medical terms have replaced the tacky, direct ones. I suspect most everyone runs into an abusive and callous person; a smaller subgroup learns how to identify and protect themselves; and so on. I have met a few astonishingly nasty persons; I have no idea why they are the way they are or what their psychological condition is. I would not publicly term them a sociopath or psychopath because I actually don't know what those terms clinically mean, or if the nasty persons fit the definition.

I vaguely wonder if terming the nasty person by a medical/psychological term, one somehow starts down the slippery slope of thinking the person just can't help himself or herself, it is not their fault, etc.

* Otherwise known as a jerk, a wife-beater, a lazy manipulator, etc. In my own mind, I use different terms which are not fit for public expression. :)
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
Never heard of that film, thank you!
Click to expand...

Here's an interesting article about Highsmith, her characters, her diaries and her "real voice".

Obsessions Are the Only Things That Matter: On Patricia Highsmith’s Diaries and Novels​

March 13, 2023 • By Cody Siler



https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sha...ter-on-patricia-highsmiths-diaries-and-novels
https://twitter.com/share?url=https...mith’s Diaries and Novels&via=lareviewofbooks
0 COMMENTS
https%3A%2F%2Fdev.lareviewofbooks.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2023%2F03%2FHer-Diaries-and-Notebooks.jpg

Patricia Highsmith: Her Diaries and Notebooks: 1941–1995
PATRICIA HIGHSMITH

AT 21 YEARS OLD, Patricia Highsmith put her finger on the theme that would dominate her life’s work. “Obsessions,” she wrote, “are the only things that matter.” Now, 80 years later, the iconic suspense novelist has herself become the object of an unhealthy fixation: we are all obsessed with Pat. Last year, the writer was cast as the protagonist of a graphic novel, Grace Ellis’s Flung Out of Space: Inspired by the Indecent Adventures of Patricia Highsmith, and a documentary, Eva Vitija’s Loving Highsmith, while Adrian Lyne adapted her 1957 novel Deep Water into a film starring Ben Affleck. These new additions to the Patriciaverse join a crowded field; in the last two decades, a half dozen of her books have been made into movies, and she’s been the subject of three biographies and countless essays. The misanthropic writer whose morbid oeuvre provided fodder for classic films like Strangers on a Train (1951) and The Talented Mr. Ripley (1999) is now in the limelight herself.

Highsmith exemplifies a quintessential archetype of today’s online culture: she is the “problematic fave” par excellence. One of the most successful suspense novelists of all time, she came of age as a lesbian in the 1940s, underwent therapy to “cure” her sexuality, and published the iconic queer love story Carol (also known as The Price of Salt) in 1952 under a pseudonym, fearing it would damage her reputation. She was also an outspoken racist, a virulent antisemite, and an emotionally abusive partner. Contemporary fascination with Highsmith dates back to her death in 1995, when 42 notebooks were discovered neatly stacked and bundled in a closet in her imposing Swiss mansion. Those diaries, which stretch all the way back to when she, as a college student, first recorded her thoughts on the theme of obsession, have provided fuel for the nearly three-decades-long litigation of her character that continues today. ...

https://lareviewofbooks.org/article...er-on-patricia-highsmiths-diaries-and-novels/
 
ramonmercado said:
Here's an interesting article about Highsmith, her characters, her diaries and her "real voice".

Obsessions Are the Only Things That Matter: On Patricia Highsmith’s Diaries and Novels​

March 13, 2023 • By Cody Siler



https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/obsessions-are-the-only-things-that-matter-on-patricia-highsmiths-diaries-and-novels
https://twitter.com/share?url=https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/obsessions-are-the-only-things-that-matter-on-patricia-highsmiths-diaries-and-novels&text=Obsessions Are the Only Things That Matter: On Patricia Highsmith’s Diaries and Novels&via=lareviewofbooks
0 COMMENTS
https%3A%2F%2Fdev.lareviewofbooks.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2023%2F03%2FHer-Diaries-and-Notebooks.jpg

Patricia Highsmith: Her Diaries and Notebooks: 1941–1995
PATRICIA HIGHSMITH

AT 21 YEARS OLD, Patricia Highsmith put her finger on the theme that would dominate her life’s work. “Obsessions,” she wrote, “are the only things that matter.” Now, 80 years later, the iconic suspense novelist has herself become the object of an unhealthy fixation: we are all obsessed with Pat. Last year, the writer was cast as the protagonist of a graphic novel, Grace Ellis’s Flung Out of Space: Inspired by the Indecent Adventures of Patricia Highsmith, and a documentary, Eva Vitija’s Loving Highsmith, while Adrian Lyne adapted her 1957 novel Deep Water into a film starring Ben Affleck. These new additions to the Patriciaverse join a crowded field; in the last two decades, a half dozen of her books have been made into movies, and she’s been the subject of three biographies and countless essays. The misanthropic writer whose morbid oeuvre provided fodder for classic films like Strangers on a Train (1951) and The Talented Mr. Ripley (1999) is now in the limelight herself.

Highsmith exemplifies a quintessential archetype of today’s online culture: she is the “problematic fave” par excellence. One of the most successful suspense novelists of all time, she came of age as a lesbian in the 1940s, underwent therapy to “cure” her sexuality, and published the iconic queer love story Carol (also known as The Price of Salt) in 1952 under a pseudonym, fearing it would damage her reputation. She was also an outspoken racist, a virulent antisemite, and an emotionally abusive partner. Contemporary fascination with Highsmith dates back to her death in 1995, when 42 notebooks were discovered neatly stacked and bundled in a closet in her imposing Swiss mansion. Those diaries, which stretch all the way back to when she, as a college student, first recorded her thoughts on the theme of obsession, have provided fuel for the nearly three-decades-long litigation of her character that continues today. ...

https://lareviewofbooks.org/article...er-on-patricia-highsmiths-diaries-and-novels/
Click to expand...

In my very cursory readings about her over the last 30 minutes (!), I get the impression that she was both unhappy and unpleasant to people. As in very very unpleasant. Very very very....

Thanks for bringing her to our Fortean attention. Hard to decide which label fits her best.
 
ramonmercado said:
Here's an interesting article about Highsmith, her characters, her diaries and her "real voice".

Obsessions Are the Only Things That Matter: On Patricia Highsmith’s Diaries and Novels​

March 13, 2023 • By Cody Siler



https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/obsessions-are-the-only-things-that-matter-on-patricia-highsmiths-diaries-and-novels
https://twitter.com/share?url=https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/obsessions-are-the-only-things-that-matter-on-patricia-highsmiths-diaries-and-novels&text=Obsessions Are the Only Things That Matter: On Patricia Highsmith’s Diaries and Novels&via=lareviewofbooks
0 COMMENTS
https%3A%2F%2Fdev.lareviewofbooks.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2023%2F03%2FHer-Diaries-and-Notebooks.jpg

Patricia Highsmith: Her Diaries and Notebooks: 1941–1995
PATRICIA HIGHSMITH

AT 21 YEARS OLD, Patricia Highsmith put her finger on the theme that would dominate her life’s work. “Obsessions,” she wrote, “are the only things that matter.” Now, 80 years later, the iconic suspense novelist has herself become the object of an unhealthy fixation: we are all obsessed with Pat. Last year, the writer was cast as the protagonist of a graphic novel, Grace Ellis’s Flung Out of Space: Inspired by the Indecent Adventures of Patricia Highsmith, and a documentary, Eva Vitija’s Loving Highsmith, while Adrian Lyne adapted her 1957 novel Deep Water into a film starring Ben Affleck. These new additions to the Patriciaverse join a crowded field; in the last two decades, a half dozen of her books have been made into movies, and she’s been the subject of three biographies and countless essays. The misanthropic writer whose morbid oeuvre provided fodder for classic films like Strangers on a Train (1951) and The Talented Mr. Ripley (1999) is now in the limelight herself.

Highsmith exemplifies a quintessential archetype of today’s online culture: she is the “problematic fave” par excellence. One of the most successful suspense novelists of all time, she came of age as a lesbian in the 1940s, underwent therapy to “cure” her sexuality, and published the iconic queer love story Carol (also known as The Price of Salt) in 1952 under a pseudonym, fearing it would damage her reputation. She was also an outspoken racist, a virulent antisemite, and an emotionally abusive partner. Contemporary fascination with Highsmith dates back to her death in 1995, when 42 notebooks were discovered neatly stacked and bundled in a closet in her imposing Swiss mansion. Those diaries, which stretch all the way back to when she, as a college student, first recorded her thoughts on the theme of obsession, have provided fuel for the nearly three-decades-long litigation of her character that continues today. ...

https://lareviewofbooks.org/article...er-on-patricia-highsmiths-diaries-and-novels/
Click to expand...
Very interesting - Highsmith certainly had a deep understanding of the human psyche. I haven't read any of her books, but after seeing 'The Talented Mr. Ripley', she knows people to a staggering degree, I'll have to get to the library.
She was way ahead of her time apparently.
 
Endlessly Amazed said:
In my very cursory readings about her over the last 30 minutes (!), I get the impression that she was both unhappy and unpleasant to people. As in very very unpleasant. Very very very....

Thanks for bringing her to our Fortean attention. Hard to decide which label fits her best.
Click to expand...
She does seem to have been thoroughly nasty. Maybe she had a streak of psychopath in her?
 
Endlessly Amazed said:
In my very cursory readings about her over the last 30 minutes (!), I get the impression that she was both unhappy and unpleasant to people. As in very very unpleasant. Very very very....

Thanks for bringing her to our Fortean attention. Hard to decide which label fits her best.
Click to expand...

A great writer though.
 
Endlessly Amazed said:
What's wrong with calling her a bitch or cunt? Or an unhappy bitch, etc. I am trying to wean myself away from psychological labels, and it is surprisingly difficult. In any case, yes, nasty,
Click to expand...

Yep. I've occasionally come across people who I've found quite repugnant and have wondered whether their behaviour is due to some sort of condition, but have eventually come to the conclusion they're probably just awful people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top