The Gates of Janus- Analysis of serial murder or a platform to rationalise serial murder?

When I first discovered that notorious serial killer Ian Brady (the Moors Murderer) had written a book from his prison cell offering an insight into the phenomenon of serial killing and its analysis, I thought this can offer a fresh insight into the mind, motive and methodology of a serial killer, through the lens of a serial killer himself. The book within itself holds so much room for critical analysis and interpretation, it is incredibly challenging to pinpoint one particular finding. This blog aims to explore in smaller parts, numerous findings throughout the book- “Gates of Janus”. The book is broken into three significant chapters. The first chapter explores the contextualisation and social construction of serial murder with ties to morality, hedonistic nihilism and the social constriction of murder, and the ways in which the phenomenon of murder has been commodified and romanticised, this is explored through the lens of the media, and produces a cultural criminological narrative. The second part delves into eleven cases of convicted serial killers and their murders. Brady narrates their upbringing, early childhood and psychological and sociological make up which had been produced as a result of these childhood experiences. The third and final part of the book is an epilogue and afterword by Peter Sotos, who is the collaborating author in the book, Sotos discusses his experiences, hesitations, and successes of being approached to write a book in collaboration with notorious serial killer Ian Brady. This blog however focuses solely on the works of Ian Brady, and his insight into the phenomenon of serial killing and its critical analysis.

Ian Brady begins by discussing the legal definition of murder, as interpreted by himself in a bid to dispel any distinctions in the definition of murder and to provide a benchmark for morality and for the reader to question where they stand on the moral compass of committing murder. Ian Brady then goes into depth around the political economy and the ways in which societal functions, white collar and corporate crimes have committed acts of murder against mass numbers of innocent civilians. There is a particular heavy focus from Brady around crimes of the powerful, and it can be interpreted as a way of absolving himself from the atrocities he had committed against 5 children that we know of with partner Myra Hindley between 1963 and 1965. An effort through the book to produce examples of state and corporate murder, drawing upon the Holocaust, firebombing of Dresdon, the Atomic holocausts of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the deployment of napalm upon Vietnam, during the Vietnam war. The parallels between morality and legality, and the ways in which they intertwine to shape one another is an argument presented by Ian Brady. He argued that he opposed a collective gathering of principles which has been ascribed by the powerful, and the expectancy that each and every member of society is expected to comply with, in other terms legality. Brady instead favoured an individualistic and autonomous set of principles and values, in which each and every member of society should have a right to create and execute.  This opposition of collective values, which for Brady would stretch as far as acts of murder and rape. In this argument presented by Brady, morality should be  interpreted as an individualistic construction and there should be a recognition that there is no one universal policy, code or law for determining the state of morality, but it holds itself in its own construction with the individual, and their morality is widely shaped by ontological empiricisms.

Taking the perspective of individualistic morality, it explains why later in the book, Brady draws upon atrocities committed throughout modern history across the world, which arguably has produced his own nihilistic and sceptical subjectivities. The events of the Holocaust, which saw 6-7 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, communists and anyone else deemed “unworthy” subjected to brutal torture and murder at the hands of Hitler’s SS. Brady argued that Global Governments were becoming increasingly blood thirsty through the continuous preparation to go to war and shed blood, and would then hide the physical and psychological impacts which going to war has had on the soldiers sent to the front line. The feelings of despair, resentment and tiredness of these actions was encapsulated by Ian Brady, and displayed his scepticism of societies and Governments, and thus arguably revealing his deeply rooted nihilism. It can be argued by some Criminologists that the modus operandi in which Ian Brady committed serial murder, was an expression of his nihilistic hedonism. The lack of care, remorse or even dignity for the victims that he had brutally murdered revealed a sense of satisfaction, enjoyment and fetishism in a world which to Ian Brady is broken and corrupt within its own underpinning structural conditions. Hedonistic nihilism is the only alternative for Ian Brady to survive and thrive in this world, as emulated throughout his narratives in his book.

The next significant section of the book is when Ian Brady attempts to provide some similarities between serial killers and Police Detectives. The shared characteristics between a serial killer and a detective according to Brady, is that they both share a “common unorthodox philosophy” can be found through “solitary dedication and commitment”, “ruthless in purpose”, “astute in deceit”, “clear in strategy” and to “feign incompetence to provoke overconfidence” These identified similarities of a serial killer and detective as described by Ian Brady, has arguably produce an attempt to humanise the otherwise alienated serial killer, and to put the acts of a serial killer on the same metaphorical wagon as a detective. A detective who particularly in the United States, would be required to shoot at, wound or kill an individual who may be at the forefront of an criminal investigation who may be utilising violence against the detective and colleagues. If a detective was to kill someone or a series of people as a last resort through legally justified measures, this would be categorised as legal murder, as the death of the suspect or offender was in the interests of safeguarding citizens, the detective themselves and the state. Murder committed by a serial killer however is of course illegal and holds zero ethical, moral and legal ground. Drawing upon Brady’s views of individualistic morality, and disdain over collective morality, it is no surprise that he had attempted to categorise serial killers and detectives into the same boat, and absolve himself from conscious responsibility for the murders he had committed in the 1960s through attempting to level himself onto a normalised and socially acceptable platform, knowing full well that use of the term “serial killers” would bring the reader to Ian Brady as the author and as a convicted serial killer.

Another attempt displayed in the book whereby Ian Brady was attempting to normalise and subliminally justify the act of serial killing was to question why society is so inherently fascinated with serial killers, and so unstimulated by acts of war committed each and every day by armies and soldiers through the orders of the Government Administration? Also why those who have killed within the military under the name of a military operation are not required by mainstream society to show as much remorse or guilt as those citizens who kill under their own individual and personal rationales. In other words, serial killers and mass murderers. Brady answered his own questions by saying that “society has given the former permission to openly indulge, glory and exult in unlimited slaughter and panoramic devastation”. According to Brady, the media have also contributed to the normalised attitude of killings in the events of war. Drawing upon Brady’s argument of individual morality, it can be interpreted he is arguing that if the Government have the right to issue killings, and they be legitimised, commodified, romanticised through popular media culture, then how does the act of serial killing hold any less integral moralities? Brady believed that morality is an individual basis and therefore an individual is only accountable to themselves and the levels of value and morals they set for themselves.

According to research, characteristics of a serial killer are psychologically made up of narcissism, sadism, psychopathy and sociopathy. These characteristics have been displayed throughout Ian Brady’s book. Examples include the visibly desperate attempts to justify and normalise the horrific actions he has committed through drawing upon legitimised violence and producing a spectrum for morality in which he is in control of ascertaining his own morality, and therefore his own guilt. Declaring himself judge, jury and executioner of his own actions. This arguably displays a coherent lack of emotional intelligence, consciousness which within many serial killers is not possessed commonly.

In conclusion, Gates of Janus, is an imperative book for any Criminologist who wishes to better understand the mind, motive and psychological make up of a serial killer. Brady additionally makes reference to eleven convicted serial killers ranging from John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy to Richard Ramirez, many of whom had a different victim pool, modus operandi and upbringing. Brady has studied all cases in depth and provided an insight as to what he presumed their rationale would be before, during and after committing multiple murders. Brady also frequently referenced his own views on morality, hedonism, nihilism and social constrictions of murder in comparison to his own ontological frameworks throughout.  Ian Brady provided a unique insight of serial murder in a nominalist context. One cannot ignore however that he has also used this book as a method to capitalise on his own moral subjectivities and provide what to him is a rationalisation for murder which otherwise would have remained unheard and unnoticed.