Helter Skelter discussion

Every October I ready scary books for Halloween. This past October I picked up Helter Skelter cause I heard it was super scary. But I only got through like 20 pages. It was just so dry and from the point of view of the detectives. When does it get better? Is it worth the time?

It is dry there is no doubt...I actually didn't get this book for the scary/gore part of it but more for the pyschological point of view...in my opinion, no it doesnt really get better and the movie version..isn't much better...but reading about what was going through ole' Charlie's head at the time...scary and fascinating..and thank the stars he's where he cant hurt anyone!

Bugliosi did this one, as well as And the Sea Will Tell, like a novel for the first two-thirds of the book. The last third delves into the building, strategy development, and execution of his legal cases. Both stories are interesting. Neither is scary like a Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street, Scream, or Halloween movie. I did find myself being more aware of strange characters in certain circumstances for several years after reading about Manson. So I guess I'd say the scare factor hit you over time subsequent to the read.

This book scared the hell out of me!
the scariest part is that it is a true story- holy crap the movie is freakier- I grew up in the country and I always was scared that the manson crew would jump outta the woods! lol

As Maria said, the most troubling aspect is that it happened, and it keeps on happening. I thought the book was very well done and one of the best "True Crime" books out there.

Helter Skelter is more of a mass murder sort of thing, and it's scariness is, as you mention, founded in the reality of it. It certainly supports the statement, "truth is stranger than fiction."

On the other hand, I have read books about actual serial killers, and they are similarly scary for their reality. That said, those guys are even stranger in fiction. They all have kinks and quirks that can be amplified and tweaked in make-believe to seem all the more frightening.

I took a college-level course titled The Literature of Serial Killers. It entailed reading, comparing, and analyzing non-fiction and fiction books about serial killers and profilers. Some studies have indicated that there are even some physical characteristics that are often common among these criminals, such as attached earlobes and webbed toes. This course, along with criminal and abnormal psychology courses, as well as two criminal law courses, came in handy when I chose to write my first novel about a serial killer.

Another tidbit I've encounterd in more than one place is that there are always 50 or so serial killers operative in the United States at any given time. Now that's scary.

Thanks for the feedback!!

Manson is still scary. The book was scary for showing how easy it was for Manson to manipulate his followers.

It's scary because it's real. The crimes were so gruesome that for most of us it would be hard to imagine that another human being could inflict such harm and in such awful ways to another human being. That people could have such evil in their hearts is what is so scary. I thought that even the "creeping" was scary, and that was before The Family actually started their killing spree. Can you imagine being fast asleep in bed and someone is creeping around in your house just to prove they can do it without waking you up? That in itself is scary as I don't know what!

Scary in the sense that there are messed up people out there like that. People who brainwash others that are mentally and emontially unstable yet capable of awful and tragic acts of murder.

Dick wrote: "Helter Skelter is more of a mass murder sort of thing, and it's scariness is, as you mention, founded in the reality of it. It certainly supports the statement, "truth is stranger than fiction."
..."

I agree with that statement...that there a multiple serial killers always running loose...that truely is a frightening factor in the lives we live today....what was the title of your first book you wrote? am curious to see if its one I have read. Thanks for your interesting postings...

I want to underscore Joanne's point of Manson's manipulation of his followers. Strangeness and eccentricity was often the norm at that point in history, when thousands of us were hitching up and down the west coast, back and forth across the US. There were a million stories from that era; Charles Manson's was one of them. Part of what Helter Skelter shows is how it became difficult for some to discern between living on-the-edge and in-the-wild as opposed to living in the presence of real evil, disguised with trappings of Hippie. @ Alana, I think it's definitely worth it to keep trudging through the book. It's dry, for sure, but the style grows on you. Maybe you can try it again later!

It might help if you learned more about Manson, cults, and serial killers before reading the book. It will spark the interest you need to connect with the book. I find that helps. Sometimes it's best to see a movie before the book and sometimes not.

This book was "really, really scary". I read a lot of scary books and watch a lot of scary movies.

This is the only book that gave me nightmares. I think a lot of the scarieness comes from knowing this is a true story about live evil that exists amongst us!

It is very scary. I could not sleep for a while after I read it. I have read many, many books. I read this in high school and am now in my 40's, this and In Cold Blood will stay with you for a long time.

I found it extremely scary... but was it because it was a true story? was it because someone was sick enough to plan this bizarre murder out? was it because it could happen to anyone? was it because it was a cult? or was it because it happened over and over again? I'm not sure. But i also have to think it is because they 'enjoyed' killing and smearing blood, and the whole 'shock' response.

It's not ghost story scary, but it is psychologically scary. Mainly because it really happened. It's scary to think someone could be so cold and muderous and even scarier that he was so charismatic he persuaded people to become a part of his screwed up "family."

Read this back in 1970' s living alone in apartment. Very scary and eerie . I agree some of the legalese was dry but the definitive book on Manson and his cult of followers.

My uncle was a friend of Sharon Tate's father, both being in the service together. I remember the summer morning that my mother told me about the deaths. I was about 12 years old. A few years later I read the book, and the descriptions of the Manson family's sick, perverted behavior terrified me. Then a few years after that, I moved to California, and happened to briefly date someone who lived in the Venice apartment that some of the Manson members had tried to visit years earlier for the purpose of killing the resident who lived there. They were purposely misled to the wrong apartment directly above the intended victim by one of the group who had second thoughts, thus sparing that victim. This has always haunted me.

Hannah wrote: "It is very scary. I could not sleep for a while after I read it. I have read many, many books. I read this in high school and am now in my 40's, this and In Cold Blood will stay with you for a long..."

I too read this when I was younger (in college) and am now 60. And the same with In Cold Blood. They both haunt me. Especially Helter Skelter, since there were coincidental connections to that book, as I commented earlier.

It's scary because of how delusional Charles Manson was, and still is.

Yeah. Its really scary - the fact that is is true is just horrendous.

The writing is not very scary. But the fact that it actually happened is very, very scary.

I'm not sure how scary it would be if I read it today but back when I first read it as a teenager in the late 1970s it scared the hell out of me!

Making matters worse, we lived in the middle of nowhere in the California desert, near a highway truck stop where there were always drifters and hitchhikers traveling through... I was a very nervous kid that whole summer after I read it, in my mind every stranger was a possible lunatic or mass murderer.

Remember, except for Manson, these were basically just a bunch of regular kids running around playing at being hippies and flower children before it all went horribly, terribly wrong. THAT was the scary part.

I think when most people think of a scary book to read, they are looking for escapism - fiction. For me Vampires, Werewolves, etc., can be fun when someone like Stephan King takes an absolutely ridiculous concept, like the vampires of Salem's Lot and makes us believe it for a little while.

Although certainly scary, I wouldn't include Helter Skelter as a scary book because it is fact. It's terrifying and it will give you nightmares - but it's not Halloween fare. It's like any other "true crime" book, scary because it's real but not what people think of when they mean " a scary book."

Man, I hope that made sense.

Your answer makes perfect sense, Chuck. True stories don't necessarily provide the visceral type of scare that you get from a make believe story.

@Mike I too read this only a few years after the fact,(1977) and at age 12, there's not much experience to draw upon to negate the feeling that this kind of thing DIDN"T happen every day! My only consolation was that upstate New York was a LONG way from California! Scary? Not really, but horrifying definitely!

This book is scary because it is REAL. It's long and tedious at times, but when I was reading it, and I'd go to bed and turn off the lights at night, I knew that there really were people out there in real life who actually did these horrible things. Other books you can put down and breathe a sigh of relief that they're fiction. This one is a terrifying fact.

It was one of the most frightening things I have ever read. But then, I remember when the murders happened. My father had an alarm system installed in our house within weeks of the murders even though we lived thousands of miles away. He would lecture me often about never leaving my window open at night even though we did not have air conditioning.) And He told me exactly how a criminal would do it.

The book is scarey because some victims were chosen at random. Some victims were chosen for the flimsiest of reasons. And some victims were chosen to prevent them from testifying against them or because they got in the way. As I recall, the Tate home was targeted because a music producer use to live there and had declined to record a Manson song.

What do you say about people who are willing to do anything, anything someone asks of them without regard to morality, compassion or the law?

The author probably wrote the book, at least partially, to ensure that those people never got paroled. At the end of the book, he speculated about how long each would serve it jail.

I found the courtroom portion to be particularly interesting. How does a judge maintain control of his courtroom in the face a group of defendants and their followers trying to do everything they can to disrupt it and still provide the defendants with a fair trial that will not be overturned upon appeal.

This book is well worth reading whether you are interested in criminal justice, law, psychology, history or current events.

Wow ... I'm not alone in thinking this book is scary. I remember my mother reading it when it was first released and (like an idiot) I started looking at the pictures inside and even brought it to school (1976 ... 4 th grade). I distinctly remember some of the text that stuck with me: the page saying "this book will scare the hell out of you" and the first words of chapter 1 saying how quiet that August night was ("you could here the ice rattling in cocktail glasses ..."

Needless to say, the book (mostly that damn LIFE photo of Manson's face) did in fact scare the hell out of me ... For years. When I finally got around to reading the whole book several years later, I was fascinated about the entire case ... And over 30 years later, it still fascinates me. The best true-crime book ever written, in my opinion.

Dachokie wrote: "Wow ... I'm not alone in thinking this book is scary. I remember my mother reading it when it was first released and (like an idiot) I started looking at the pictures inside and even brought it to..."

Manson's face gave me nightmares. For me, this book and The Stranger Beside me tie for the top spot of best true crime books ever.

Dachokie wrote: "Wow ... I'm not alone in thinking this book is scary. I remember my mother reading it when it was first released and (like an idiot) I started looking at the pictures inside and even brought it to..."

It was probably the first contemporary true crime event I was aware of as a young teen (I think I was around 14 when I read it). Unlike something like Jack the Ripper, it wasn't just a scary story about someone from a long time ago, Manson had actually happened during my lifetime!

I'll take the less popular point of view I'm sure. This book is 'scary' because Bugliosi decided that Manson was guilty of conspiracy (no, he's not a serial killer, or a killer of any kind) and used fear to sell that point of view to the public/jury. Bugliosi admits in the book that he had to find a way to get Manson convicted because he didn't have enough evidence to prove his theory. The brainwashing in this book was done by Bugliosi and the victims were the public and the jury (and ultimately Manson).

Hitler didn't personally kill anyone either ... He still had to be "dealt with". Plain and simple, Manson convinced others to carry out his plan of killing because he, like many high-level Nazis and today's jihadist leaders, didn't have the "guts" to do it himself. Manson was/is no idiot ... He's a master manipulator that preyed on the weak and convinced them to do some awful things and subsequently tried to manipulate others into thinking he had nothing to do with it ... Bugliosi wasn't fooled. I personally wish they'd just release him so someone else could do what the state of California never would ...

Matt wrote: "I'll take the less popular point of view I'm sure. This book is 'scary' because Bugliosi decided that Manson was guilty of conspiracy (no, he's not a serial killer, or a killer of any kind) and use..."

I can't agree with your assessment that Manson is a victim. It's something along the lines of saying a mafia don who ordered hits but never actually pulled the trigger isn't guilty of anything.

As far as Manson's "hands on" contribution, while never actually convicted -- at this date what would be the point -- Manson did personally shoot someone (a drug dealer the family had ripped off) a couple of months before the more infamous murders and left thinking that he had killed him (which, obviously doesn't make him a killer but does give a pattern of behavior showing that he wasn't the least bit opposed to the idea).

Manson is a victim of the system. He was put in Father Flanigan's boys home at 8 years old and has, save a few short stints on the outside, been institutionalized his whole life because he lacked a family/support. You can demonize him if you want but Watson/Krenwinkle/Atkins/Van Houten did the crimes and most people who condemn Manson don't even know their names because they're buying the story Bugliosi sold. Those people ('followers') were all educated suburbanites they weren't stupid or weak, they made their choices. In fact they say so themselves except for the coward Watson. I do believe Manson was guilty of conspiracy in the LaBianca killings because there is evidence for that. The others are on Tex Watson for exactly what you bring up Mike, Lotsapoppa and the drug deal that went south. This case is very intricate and I've been studying it for a few decades. You won't shock me by quoting headlines or bringing up Command Responsibility (Nuremberg trials). Bugliosi also believes that Lee Harvey Oswald was the only shooter in Dallas in Nov. of '63. The man is obsessed with singular responsibility.

** Just keep watching the responses here. People remove culpability from everyone involved except Manson.. he 'made' them do it. Doris Tate recognized Manson as a scapegoat. She was, and rightly so, focused on Watson/Atkins/Krenwinkle.

The book is not scary by horror novel standards. It is however scary by life standards. To read how one man can control the minds of so many, by keeping them drugged, into MURDERING for him. It is terrifying. It really makes you wonder about how safe you really are in your "safe" home.

Matt wrote: "Manson is a victim of the system. He was put in Father Flanigan's boys home at 8 years old and has, save a few short stints on the outside, been institutionalized his whole life because he lacked a..."


That's too easy. It absolves Manson of any responsibility for his actions -- the reason for Manson's repeated incarcerations were as much a result of his own behavior as anything else, by the time he hit Boys Town at 8-years-old he already had a criminal record -- he was given a chance for structure and guidance many times and refused it. A product of a flawed system? Yes. A victim? Debatable.

Incidentally, I have used your very point when arguing against people who excuse Roman Polanski for his own criminal actions classifying him as a "victim" because of his own childhood in Poland during WW II and the later murder of Sharon Tate.

If Polanski's childhood (and adult) traumas excuse his actions as an adult then so must Manson's. (The very real possibility of overeager prosecutors in the cases of both men don't absolve their own original criminal behaviors).

I don't believe it excuses either man, but then I also believe Lee Harvey Oswald is as guilty as homemade sin.

**I don't believe any of those involved were free of guilt but I also think that Manson was the catalyst and masterminded the whole event.

Shoved a lot into this conversation, didn't we?

I think Manson is guilty, to be clear (of conspiracy in LaBianca). I just don't think he deserves the accolades he gets for being a scary mind controlling villain. I think the people involved in those crimes were as culpable, if not more so, than Manson yet he remains the public scapegoat. It's funny to me that Manson is held to a standard at 8-9 years old (he was guilty, he had a record, etc) yet the 18-24 year old people who carried out the murders escape criticism from the public because the established view is that it was all Manson's fault. Luckily, the legal system at least is holding them responsible and it's not likely that any of them will ever see life outside of prison again.

As for Manson being a victim... we're all a product of our society and no one lives in a vacuum. Would you, me or anyone else have reacted differently to being beaten and raped repeatedly while under the 'protection' of the system? Hard to say (but seemingly easy for some to judge).

Tangent - Oswald was guilty, but I don't think he was the only one. Way too many inconsistencies in the story. I do believe he was the patsy and I do believe he was involved to probably a lesser degree than he himself thought.

If Manson was nothing but a scapegoat, we would have to assume Watson, Krenwinkle, Van Houton, Davis, Beausolei, Atkins and others would all have been murderers anyway. I don't buy that. No one is questioning that Manson is the damaged waste-product of a horrible "up-bringing" and a pathetic social system, but it still doesn't excuse him from his direct link to all those who did the killing. Unlike the rest, Charlie's the only one who won't accept ANY responsibility what-so-ever. He keeps labeling himself as a victim and unfortunately, a lot of people are buying it.

Ironic how we don't hear about all those concentration camp survivors becoming violent felons and they had it worse than Charles Manson did at Father Flanagans.

How can anyone say that its 'societies' fault that Manson is the way he is? I always say that where (and how) you were raised isn't an excuse. Sometimes you have to rise above your raising. That would be like an abuse victim using said abuse to justify them robbing a store. One has nothing to do with the other. There are THOUSANDS of people every day that are victims of a flawed system that become doctors, lawyer, preachers, teachers.

What makes it scary is the man behind the writing and the actions the resulted from the writing. Not just the Bianca/Tate murders, but the assination attempt on Presidant Ford. Plus, the wasted lives of all those young men and women. It's much like Mein Kampf. It's not a riviting or scary read, but insight into an evil mind.

How anyone could lable this book boring, even in the beginning, is beyond me. Is it scary? You better believe it is! In 1969, shortly before the murders of Sharon Tate, and the other poor souls visiting her home that night, this home belonged to Terry Melcher. Terry ( the son of actress Doris Day ) had been approached by Charles Manson, to listen to some of Manson's music. Melcher was ( may still be) a record producer. He worked quite a bit with a rock group called Paul Revere & the Raiders. Their lead singer, Mark Lindsay used to assist in producing the records, he also wrote lyrics. To make a long story a bit shorter, Melcher did not think Manson gad the talent needed to make it in the music world. Manson stewed over this for a while.

In this time frame Manson was listening to some songs off the Beatles latest album, referred to, as "the white album." Manson also was reading in the bible, grossly mistaking how the end of the world should begin. He felt he was chosen to put actions in motion to bring on the end of the world. He chose Melcher's home, as the first home to attack. He ordered the murders, and also made certain his chosen killers left his messages behind....with the blood if the victims. The very beautiful Sharon Tate was expecting her first child. It died before police got to the scene. I have forgotten exactly how many people died at her home that night, I think there were 8 or 9 people. The following night, a random house was chosen, the LaBianca's. They were in their 50's, I believe.

All the murders were over kill, horrific grizzly scenes. I read this book when I was 18, and I was afraid to be alone in the house for years after I read thus book. This is a true story, and if you read it, you will never forget it. Hopefully the monsters responsible for the murders of those innocent people will never get out of prison.

In my reference to the Beatles "white album," there were a couple of songs on that album that Manson mistook the meaning if, of just twisted the lyrics to fit his agenda. Manson is no victim, he has ice running through his veins. The Beatles were under scrutiny, over certain lyrics to certain songs, including the song Helter Skelter. They had no association with Manson, and were more than just a bit upset that their songs were brought into Manson, and his murderous clan's deeds.

i dont think the book itself was a "scary read" thopugh the premise is scary...if you are LOOKING for a scary read try "the serial killer whisperer"...i hate the title but it is pretty scary as there are true quotes/letters from serial killers

Hannah wrote: "It is very scary. I could not sleep for a while after I read it. I have read many, many books. I read this in high school and am now in my 40's, this and In Cold Blood will stay with you for a long..."

Agreeing with Hannah on everything, including when I read it, how old I am now and the two books mentioned. (Did my senior high school paper on Truman Capote/focusing on In Cold Blood)

In our modern world -- where we now look to science and empiricism to provide answers -- sometimes we fail to recognize the profound mystery of Evil. Perhaps we need to keep an open mind; to remember that Evil is a riddle, a dark and complex puzzle our limited intellects can never fully comprehend nor understand, a mysterious force at play in the universe, perhaps even a supernatural entity which we deny at our own peril. We just don't have the answers, now do we? To me, The Manson Family provided the uncomfortable reminder that Evil exists, and it can take possession of some human beings, and that's really scary.

Very Scary- Whenever I was driving alone at night on country roads I would always be scared that a group like them would jump out and get me! What is most scary, is this really happened. One freaky dude sort of mind f*cked these people into killing other people, and the way they killed them was horrible- Honestly the people that killed had to have evil in them to begin with to pull off what they did- Some were released from prison I think, Charlie and his swqatstika on his forehead is going to die in jail which is the only thing he deserves-

Actually, those that were convicted of the murders (Tate/Labianca) are still in prison. Susan Atkins (Sadie) one of the three women sentenced; died of cancer a few years ago (She'd asked for a medical release to die outside prison - denied). Charles Manson will probably NEVER be paroled. Patricia Krenwinkle and Leslie Van Houton remain incarcerated, denied parole each time. Charles (Tex) Watson? Lost track of him, but now that we've discussed this... I am going to look him up!

Marilyn wrote: "How anyone could lable this book boring, even in the beginning, is beyond me. Is it scary? You better believe it is! In 1969, shortly before the murders of Sharon Tate, and the other poor souls vis..."

There were 5 people killed The first night (or 6 in my opinion, considering the practically full-term pregnancy). Sharon Tate, Jay Sebring, Abigail Folger (yes, coffee heiress), her boyfriend Voytek Frykowski, and Steven Parent (a young man, leaving the residence after visiting his friend; the groundskeeper)