TV series "Dexter"

[somthing798]

A TV series called "Dexter" features a man who kills people who escape the legal system. He only kills people who he is sure are murderers, but he does break into people's houses who he suspects to be murderer's. He feels no emotions. Are his actions ethical? I suggest watching one episode or reading a Wikipedia page.

The show also reminds me of something I heard about Ayn Rand. She once tried to right a story based on a serial killer. He would feel no obligation towards society, no emotion. For whatever reason she stopped writing. I can't remember the details.

I would like some input. Do you think the idea was based of Ayn Rand's attempted novel. Do you think it is ethical?

I say yes to the ethical part, but I can't be certain of it being based on her attempted novel.

[kiaer.ts]

Dexter takes definite pleasure in killing. He is certainly not emotionless.

If one takes as given that he cannot change his nature as a serial killer, that he would never be happy without killing, then his decision to kill only those who actually deserve it is a way of subjecting his drive to reason, in the same way that a diabetic might chose to use saccharine to placate a sweet tooth. That certainly counts as a decision having to do with morality.

This story has nothing to do with Rand's planned novel, The Little Street, but there is no saying the show's creator didn't read her Journals.

I have only seen the first two episodes of Dexter, at a friends suggestion. Having experienced real violence I do not find I need fantasy violence as entertainment. But I did watch the show. I suggest you read Ayn Rand's Journals (with the caveat that they are highly edited without notice to the reader of changes) rather than being satisfied to discuss rumors. You can get the book through interlibrary loan if your local branch doesn't have it.

[BaalChatzaf]

Dexter takes definite pleasure in killing. He is certainly not emotionless.

If one takes as given that he cannot change his nature as a serial killer, that he would never be happy without killing, then his decision to kill only those who actually deserve it is a way of subjecting his drive to reason, in the same way that a diabetic might chose to use saccharine to placate a sweet tooth. That certainly counts as a decision having to do with morality.

This story has nothing to do with Rand's planned novel, The Little Street, but there is no saying the show's creator didn't read her Journals.

I have only seen the first two episodes of Dexter, at a friends suggestion. Having experienced real violence I do not find I need fantasy violence as entertainment. But I did watch the show. I suggest you read Ayn Rand's Journals (with the caveat that they are highly edited without notice to the reader of changes) rather than being satisfied to discuss rumors. You can get the book through interlibrary loan if your local branch doesn't have it.

It turns out that Dexter is a monster from the git-go. He is a killer due to trauma suffered as an infant and there is little he can do about it. However, his father, a policeman understands this and trains Dexter to use his killer urge in a useful fashion. He is to prey only upon the predators. His dad, being a cop, teaches him how to gather and evaluate evidence against his potential victims. If these people are truly guilty (or proven so beyond Dexter's reasonable doubt) and if the law can not deal with them, then Dexter does. So he ends up by killing only the bad guys. Think of what a surgeon does. He takes his urge to slice and dice other people and puts it to good use.

I have a certain sympathy with Dexter's character. His emotional development has been stunted and he has many of the symptoms of Aspberger's Syndrome. He cannot fully feel empathy at the instinctive (pre-verbal) level so he must learn to simulate it in order to get along in normal society. While I am not a serial killer, I had to do many of the things Dexter does. I learned how to be a human being the way some people learn to paint --- by the numbers. I have gotten rather good at it and I "pass" for human these days without difficulty. Over seven decades of learning to "paint by the numbers" has given me a reasonable skill at fitting in the world of "normal" folk. I even married a "normal". We get along just fine. We have be at it over 54 years. She does not get too upset with my Aspie literal mindedness and I sympathize with her naturally developed empathy. What she genuinely feels, I deduce I ought to feel.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Edited January 29, 2011 by BaalChatzaf

[Brant Gaede]

I knew a man named Dexter. KIA in Laos 1967. He was a great guy.

I knew a US army officer who loved to kill and used war to do it and get away with it. Then he came home, killed his wife and got convicted.

The only Dexter I've ever watched was a clip of "the hero" knifing some rendered-helpless jerk to death.

Who needs this crap?

--Brant

[kiaer.ts]

The premise of the show is brilliant. The audience wants to see bad guys punished. Dexter's job as a detective, his family life, and his obsession set up all sorts of possible dramatic plot conflicts. Where the show loses me entirely is its loving focus on sadistic violence. It's the difference between the brilliant thriller, The Silence of the Lambs, and the disgusting-for-disgusting-sake slasher flick, Hannibal.

I just watched and most highly recommend the movie Kick Ass. It features all sorts of vigilantism, but the violence is a matter of plot, not of style or theme.

[Brant Gaede]

The premise of the show is brilliant. The audience wants to see bad guys punished.

That's a dubious audience premise. It strikes me as cheap and shallow.

--Brant

[kiaer.ts]

The premise of the show is brilliant. The audience wants to see bad guys punished.

That's a dubious audience premise. It strikes me as cheap and shallow.

--Brant

"The audience wants to see bad guys punished" is not the premise. The premise, the "plot-theme" is, "What happens when a serial killer by nature with a respected profession and a family sublimates his urge to kill into executing those who deserve it?" That is a great dramatic premise. It involves internal psychological conflicts, external conflicts, the constant threat of danger, and so forth. Unfortunately, I myself don't at all like the way the show is executed, and can understand why you too would find it distasteful.

Edited January 29, 2011 by Ted Keer

[Brant Gaede]

The premise of the show is brilliant. The audience wants to see bad guys punished.

That's a dubious audience premise. It strikes me as cheap and shallow.

--Brant

"The audience wants to see bad guys punished" is not the premise. The premise, the "plot-theme" is, "What happens when a serial killer by nature with a respected profession and a family sublimates his urge to kill into executing those who deserve it?" That is a great dramatic premise. It involves internal psychological conflicts, external conflicts, the constant threat of danger, and so forth. Unfortunately, I myself don't at all like the way the show is executed, and can understand why you too would find it distasteful.

I don't believe audiences, generally speaking, want to see that sort of thing as a primary, at least--but that show does have an audience, of course, just not me.

--Brant