|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Maura
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, March 28, 2003 - 1:57 pm: |       |
This is probably old hat to all the informed here, but I am curious if there are more pronouncements in print, of sexologist Richard von Krafft-Ebing's thoughts on the Ripper, that were contained in his "Psychopathia Sexualis". It was surprising to read his contemporaneous thoughts on the subject, which I think he classified under the category Lust Murder in his writings.
This is the only book of Krafft-Ebing's I have been able to order and read as most are out of print. But his thoughts were quite interesting to read, on all the varied topics of supposed errant behaviour.
Thanks for any thoughts or revelations. |
AP Wolf
Detective Sergeant
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 59
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 28, 2003 - 5:54 pm: | |
Maura
Sorry but I have no thoughts or revelations about Krafft-Ebing's thoughts on the Ripper, but I do enjoy the anglo-saxon translation of his name.
I have met this boy before, a long time ago.
Don't stop here, please tell me what this man meant when he said 'lust murder'.
I know it to be a German term.
Lust equals pleasure etc. 'Ich bin lustig'.
I am funny. Yes I would like another pint of beer with strawberry juice on the top. A good joke. 'Das ist Lustig!'
'Ich habe lust!'
I'll have a go at that.
A lust killer?
Please explain.
I hope that this is not a bottle of Liebfraumilch. |
Eduardo Zinna
Police Constable
Username: Eduardo
Post Number: 1
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 29, 2003 - 8:39 am: | |
Maura, AP
I was somewhat surprised to learn that Krafft-Ebing referred to the Ripper in Psychopathia Sexualis, which I thought was published a couple of years before the Whitechapel murders. That said, I assume that 'lust murder' is a literal translation of the German 'Lustmord', more commonly rendered into English as sexual murder. I am told that the German word 'Lust' - meaning desire and pleasure along with sexual gain - does not correspond precisely to the English 'lust'.
Best,
Eduardo |
R.J. Palmer
Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 20
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 29, 2003 - 12:57 pm: | |
Krafft-Ebing included Fairy Fay as a victim, demonstrating that his study was theoretical and not based on the case evidence per se. A warning to the wise? |
AP Wolf
Detective Sergeant
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 60
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 29, 2003 - 4:25 pm: | |
Krafft-Ebing, Kraft-Ebbing,
I now remember.
This man has left us a legacy.
Something to haunt the JtR world.
It is writers like Dr David Abrahamsen - supposedly a leading expert on the criminal mind and a forensic scientist - author of, and please hold your breath here: 'Murder and Madness, The Secret Life of Jack the Ripper Based on Heretofore Unrevealed Information from Scotland Yard'.
This is a man who not only cut his teeth on Ebing but used to eat out of the same dog bowl.
Following Ebing's Freudian nonsense this modern criminal forensic scientist tells us that the wonderful fairy tale of Sleeping Beauty is nowt but a necrophiliac's fantasy, and that Prince Albert obviously butchered prostitutes because he was in the habit of dressing in collar and cuffs.
It is Mr Ebing who should be cuffed, quite soundly round the head.
Let us please put this silly old man in the dustbin he deserves. |
Maura
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, March 31, 2003 - 1:05 pm: | |
Dear Sirs Wolf, Zinna and Palmer,
I can only assume that the intermittent disdain with which my enquiry into Krafft-Ebing's comments on Jack the Ripper was met here, illustrates the lack of understanding concerning my point at bringing the author up at all in polite discussions.
Certainly if an observer of 1888 was considered impotent or sexually nescient, one might disregard this person's sexual knowledge of pseudo-sexual crimes yet...as an observer alive at the time, I felt it was interesting and instructive to read Krafft-Ebing's thoughts, erroneous or not, on the subject of dear Mr. Ripper.
If we were only to read the reflections of those who are considered correct in "all" their assumptions on Jack the Ripper, then we would be only reading one book...that by a person who has solved the murder. So far...that leaves no book for me to concentrate all my time on, in my respectful judgment.
I would listen to the babblings of a 1888 wino, or the most respected barrister of the times...just to get an historical perspective and overview of the case. Which is why I found interesting Krafft-Ebing's remarks which would be representative of some analysts of his time period. It is so easy to second guess remarks of the past from a future of more enlightened perspective...yet when this current time is fifty years hence..what of what one might say here that sounds enlightened, might be looked upon as silly persiflage?
On the other hand, it seems to me that Martha Mitchell was laughed at when she talked of a conspiracy in the Nixon presidency in the early days of the Watergate investigation by the Washington Post. This knowing what to regard and what not to regard is a bit dicey...so I glean from all the facts and supposed non-facts and don't disregard anything. Some of you being so much wiser than I, can ignore certain issues that I find gives more texture to the bigger picture and historical tapestry.
Thank you for the soapbox! One man's meat is in another man's "dogbowl" obviously, just as one man's fish is another man's poisson.
Maura Pinkerton
P.S. We never sleep nor do we leave even a crackpot's stone unturned.
|
R.J. Palmer
Sergeant
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 21
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 31, 2003 - 11:09 pm: | |
Maura--Let me offer up a quick apology; I certainly wasn't aiming any disdain in your direction. Your words are the words of a true historian. It was somewhat common on the old boards to encounter a loathing for the opinions of the Victorian police, the Victorian alienists, the Victorian medical men &tc. Some even held them in utter contempt. That's a big miskate, in my opinion. In fact, I'd go so far as to say the single biggest mistake any historian can make is to ignore or undervalue contemporary opinion. When in Rome listen to the Romans...in fact, listen very, very carefully. It was their water; they swam in it.
That said, let me give you my own crack-pot low-down on Krafft-Ebing and what I meant by a 'warning to the wise'... [you certainly don't need to agree]
Krafft-Ebing was the pioneer. He is the first scientist to chronical the "lust killers."
But though a scientist, he reminds me of someone... who?
Well, for one, he reminds me a little of Jakob Grimm. He even uses some of the same phrases to describe lust killers that were used to describe werewolves and vampires.
Why does this worry and fascinate me?
Because I think, in some small way, Krafft-Ebing was inventing something. Just as the London press was inventing something.
And yes, the fact that a pioneering book on psychology should include a mythical murder as part of the "evidence" ...should certainly worry and fascinate anyone..
The $1,000, 000 question. Criminals aren't usually known for their creativity---they're usually reifying a recognizable form.
So, who created whom?
Best wishes, RP
|
AP Wolf
Detective Sergeant
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 63
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 12:10 pm: | |
Maura
you are absolutely right, and I enjoyed your note very much indeed, so much that I voted for it and you got two extra votes for your use of the word 'persiflage'.
I apologise profusely for my casual and caustic comments and I go along perfectly with everything you have said in your note.
I am admonished, and quite rightly so.
What you say is fair, reasonable and right.
What I said was unfair, unreasonable and wrong.
But I still don't like the fellah, nor his followers, but as you say to ignore or dismiss him or them would not benefit this quest at all.
Thank you for your resounding common sense and fairness.
You have my respect and time. |
AP Wolf
Detective Sergeant
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 64
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 01, 2003 - 12:16 pm: | |
RP
You got my vote as well.
Your note makes a lot of sense, when applied to either Ebing or Freud, they both invented things.
Things which still plague us today, however I have heeded the call to fair play and reasonable dialogue and will conduct myself in such a manner from now on.
|
Maura
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 02, 2003 - 11:07 am: | |
Gee...when I used the word "disdain" I was really just a bit teasing, in a tongue in cheek manner!
But I am truly heartened by the level of intelligence and savoir faire on this message board regarding Spring Heeled Jack's successor, since it is one of my favorite avocations. As I've rarely had other aficianadoes with which to discuss such sometimes ephemeral issues, it is a real pleasure to have found this erudite website.
Thanks Sergeants R.J. and AP for your most kind comments, and having read a few books on the Brothers Grimm and their rather uncircumspect "collecting" of folk tales, I can well agree with the comparison to Krafft-Ebing, other than at least to give the Lustmord denizen a nod for being more sincere in his motives of extrapolation.
The "warning to the wise" was considered most apt by moi, and I agree most assuredly. I just like to keep all the theories in perspective, whether proper or not. In my years of reading true crime books, occasionally even the most far fetched concoction will contain a grain of truth worth examining.
Much appreciation AP, for giving me two votes for use of the word "persiflage" even though I don't know the logistics yet, of such electoral mandates!
|
Eduardo Zinna
Police Constable
Username: Eduardo
Post Number: 2
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 02, 2003 - 4:20 pm: | |
Maura et al.,
No disdain on my part. Not my style. I was only wondering about the date of publication of Psycopathia Sexualis, which I thought was 1886. My only other remark was that Lustmord had been rendered in English as sexual murder, but that remark was addressed mainly to A P, who I suspect knew it already.
Cheers,
Eduardo |
AP Wolf
Detective Sergeant
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 67
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 02, 2003 - 4:48 pm: | |
RP
You wrote 'the $1,000,000 question. Criminals aren't usually known for their creativity --- they're usually reifying a recognizable form'.
I think what you are saying here is that if I was to write a book about murder - and was to detail those murders in all their blood and gore - then someone who might read that book just might go out and act out a similar crime?
Because if you are I do agree.
I actually spent five years researching and writing a book entirely concerned with this subject, it was called 'The Emperor of Ice Cream' and when I read through the final copy I put it into the bin as I feared publication could well result in the scenario I have just described.
A few days later I picked up a book about the serial killer who specialised in killing young men in London, and was somewhat surprised to find that the book had many examples of his poetry and other artistic work completed while he was serving his sentence in prison. I put that book in the bin as well when I learned that the author and killer were exchanging Christmas cards and the author planned to write an introduction to the killer's book of poetry about to be published and the killer was going to write an introduction for the the latest new work from this author about men who killed.
I found this cosy little relationship decidedly dangerous to anyone who might read any of their publications.
We live in strange times.
This may well be the reason that I am a tad hysterical when it comes to ebings and freuds. |
Maura
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 02, 2003 - 5:09 pm: | |
Though one gets a wee bit frightened as to just what could set someone off on a killing spree..witness Edmund Kemper whose mother's voice so riled him, he killed her and put her larynx down the disposal I think, I do find your thoughts about ideas circulating, AP so to speak, in the air fictionally provoking similar response patterns in reality, most illustrative.
Just like the tome written about an enigmatic ship that went down, called the Titan I think before the Titanic disaster, or Remember Pearl Harbor being chalked somewhere, before it happened.
Or are these all urban legends. I do think some people can behave like automatons and give out what they think is expected of them. Why else would some folks confess to a crime after lengthy interrogations, except for a mentality of pleasing their surveyor. So too any self respecting serial killer would now know how to behave in a way that makes him/her a legend and worthy of countless books, something that might not have motivated the Ripper. Give clues, if the public and police are not following your lead well enuf, as in Son of Sam or the Zodiac.
"For gosh sakes, catch me before I kill again" might be a serial killer's taunting mantra to ensure lasting fame!
|
AP Wolf
Detective Sergeant
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 70
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 03, 2003 - 12:25 pm: | |
Maura
There are definitely a few cases around where it has been shown that the killers had been fired up by the efforts of certain authors - who will remain nameless to prevent any mud slinging - whose writing style and content seems to act on these potential killers much like throwing gasoline on a fire to put it out.
This is something that I thought long and hard about before entering this field of work, and I have always made a painful effort not to use the type of language that I believe acts on certain people in a certain very negative way. If I may give you just a small example where one famous author equates the actions of Jack mutilating a victim as like 'a dog on heat'.
As you know a dog on heat seeks sexual satisfaction, not mutilation and murder, therefore the writer is throwing active and perhaps magical contamination at his sometime vunerable readers.
This is a very low key example but if you wish I could throw some very nasty examples at you.
I believe that when such works are written about the activities of killers the writer should exercise extreme caution, and should attempt to balance his work with a positive element that may have a calming effect on a vunerable reader. This can be done with humour but a large slice of reality often works best.
It is really essential when penning such works to ensure that a vunerable reader is made aware that what might be achieved by a knife can often be bettered by a smile. |
Jon Smyth
Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 26
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 26, 2003 - 12:33 am: | |
Eduardo has questioned the date of the publication of Krafft-Ebing's Psychopathia Sexualis. And, I assume its relevance to the Ripper murders.
Psychpathia Sexualis was first published in 1886 and the thesis proposed, therefore, long before Jack came on the scene. However, Psychopathia Sexualis was republished many times up until as late as 1965.
Stephen (Spry) has even provided a section in his 'The First Fifty Years of Jack the Ripper' Vol II.
Incidently, Krafft-Ebing's inclusion of JtR was based on his selection of murders committed on the following dates.
Dec 1, 1887
July 7, 1888
Aug. 8, 1888
Sept. 30, 1888
"One day in Oct, 1888"
Nov 9, 1888
June 1, 1889
July 17, 1889
and Sept 10, 1889.
and, he concludes....
"the bodies of women were found in various quarters of London ripped open and mutilated in a peculiar fashion. The murderer has never been found.
It is probable that he first cut the throats of his victims, then ripped open the abdomen and groped among the intestines....."
Now, as I have pointed out before, if you are under the impression that all those victims, and consequently the particular details of each murder are the sole act of one individual then you are going to arrive at a conclusion of the state of mind of this killer that is completely at variance with the facts.
In other words a flawed conclusion derived from a false assumption.
We, today, do not know how many of the victims belong to one hand, namely Jack. Therefore if you believe the apparent 'frienzy' delivered to Martha Tabram, to select only one victim, betrays some mental abnormality on behalf of the killer, to only find later that Martha was not a victim of Jack, then your thesis is totally flawed.
And that is the main problem with the work of Krafft-Ebing. His theory concerning Jack the ripper is based on too many victims and consequently, flawed assumptions.
Now, Psychopathia Sexualis, as a general study is/was acceptable, it is where Jack the Ripper is concerned (a later addition) that the work is not necessarily applicable.
Regards, Jon
|
ivan crozier
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, October 03, 2004 - 4:00 pm: | |
Hi All,
I stumbled across this site by accident. I am an historian of psychiatry in the UK.
Anyway, just to clarify some points about Krafft-Ebing: he first discussed 'lustmord' as a sexual crime in an 1877 article (in German); he addressed JtR in the 1890 (and later) edition of his Psychopathia Sexualis, which is the one mainly translated into English (he died in 1902; later editions up until 1917 were compiled by Albert Moll--the 1965 edition simply has the latin translated--it is a cheap publication. Go for the 1892 trans. by Chaddock if you don't read German). This 1890 edition saw the first use of the terms sadism and masochism. K-E's ideas about S&M were based on writing from an American psychiatrist called James Kiernan, who was the first psychiatrist to suggest that JtR was sexually motivated (even before the murders were all committed).
It is important to realise that K-E was using JtR as an example of sadistic murder. He has plenty of other cases on this topic; so it is not a good idea to look on K-E as an expert on JtR (who is one of 400 odd cases of perversion). But he was considered by many (rightly) to be the most important psychiatrist interested in sex in the nineteenth century.
I should emphasise contrary to one of the posts above that K-E was not Freudian. He knew Freud, and was his senior in the Vienna medical school. And Freud took many of his sexual ideas from Krafft-Ebing, but they are not the same at all.
Cheerio, Ivan
|
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
