The Mask of Sanity: An Attempt to Clarify Some Issues About the So Called Psychopathic Personality (Hardcover)

by Hervey M. Cleckley (Author)

Product Details

• Hardcover: 471 pages
• Publisher: Emily S. Cleckley; 5th edition (November 1988)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0962151904
• ISBN-13: 978-0962151903
• Product Dimensions: 9.7 x 6.7 x 1.2 inches
• Shipping Weight: 2 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 4.9 out of 5 stars See all reviews (17 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #441,576 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

39 of 39 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars This is the classic that first defined the psychopath, August 16, 1998

By	[e-mail] (Georgia, U.S.A.) - See all my reviews

Cleckley first wrote this book in 1948, and it still reads as fresh as ever. He was a therapist in a mental hospital who found that criminals sent there were excellent at playing the therapy game but were actually conning him. From this he developed perhaps 20 definitive characteristics of a type he called "psychopath", a term that had a variety of unclear meanings up until this point. The term has since been changed to sociopath and changed in the last two DSMs to "anti-social personality disorder". Whatever they are called their principal characteristic as far as society and the individuals who have to deal with them are concerned is that they do not have a conscience (a lack that is hard for some people to conceptualize and that is hard to measure). Cleckley's work is a classic because of its impact, yet he is too often forgotten. For example, from his experiences in the same hospital, Samenow authored the widely regarded Criminal Personality in the 1970s, yet does not acknowledge his debt to Cleckley. The most amazing thing about Cleckley's book is that it is so well written. It is a good read and has literary merit. Cleckley underestimated the dangerousness of psychopaths because of the sample he was dealing with, but his Mask of Sanity is still very much worth reading for anyone who is interested in psychopaths or criminals. Indeed, it is far superior to Hare's popular 1990's book on psychopathy, and Robert Hare is the author of the DSM dianostic criteria for psychopathy (which he ignores in his popular book).

34 of 35 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A book that's ahead of it's time, December 3, 2001

By	"tobeanna" (Sydney, Australia) - See all my reviews

I really recommend this book to anyone interested in the subject. His case histories are a book in themselves and capture the soul of a psychopath so well. A very thorough book that examines every aspect of the condition, I am impressed by his attempt to even explore historical and literary references. Ahead of it's time because his conclusions cannot be shaken even now. A much better book than Hare's "Without Conscience". Hare even lifts phrases directly out of the book eg."trivial, impersonal affairs".

Astonishingly accurate portrayal of psychopaths without sensationalizing the subject. I like how he gives different types of psychopaths; these are men and women in the street, 'ordinary' individuals but so disturbed (hence the very apt title).

His analysis is spot-on: he really knows his subject. More thorough than Hare's. He doesn't fudge any details. Really all you need to know about the topic. Still the best book about psychopaths.

50 of 54 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The first, and in many ways, still the best, May 20, 2000

By	R. Wallace "Bob Wallace" (St. Louis, Mo USA) - See all my reviews (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

I first read this book in a psychopathology class; it has always stayed in my mind. Everyone should read it. The author's defining characteristics of the psychopath are still as relevant today as they were over 50 years ago: the psychopath (today usually called an "anti-social personality") is much like a gourd; there's an outside (the "mask of sanity"), but inside there's nothing there. No conscience, no guilt, no remorse. They're great actors, though. In their more disturbed forms they're the serial killers, such as Ted Bundy. Cleckley suspected these people were literally monsters, lacking whatever made them human. A must-read for those involved in law enforcement.