|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Jeffrey Bloomfied
Inspector
Username: Mayerling
Post Number: 328
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 04, 2004 - 11:55 am: |       |
Hi all,
To me the article just reinforces my pity for these victims and their fellows (not only the five or so ladies in Whitechapel in 1888, but
"Old Shakespeare" and Neill Cream's victims of 1891 and 92, and later victims like Olive Young, the victim of Ronald True in 1922). Bad circumstances lead to many dire results, but besides from the dirt, poverty and disease they ended up facing these ladies had the additional problem of facing a Ripper, a Cream, or a True at the end.
One can make the point (as Glenn did) that it is
a business deal between two willing agents in any
transaction between a whore and a "John". But no
intelligent whore makes a deal with a "John" to
enable him to become a "Jack". Also, as the whores are acting to survive on their wages, and
they know the normal threats and realities they face - their business bargaining position is relatively weak to begin with. It is not like two successful merchants negociating a contract
for the sale of 10,000 crates of widgets or
whatever. Both of such parties would have their own key strengths as bargaining chips. What is
the strength of the whore - that the John is
anxious to have sex NOW, and she is available NOW.
Not quite the same. It's an immediate transaction, with little opportunity to think about all possible ramifications.
One other point - I rather liked the incursion of the discussion of Sophists v. Platonists that was
briefly on this thread. Yes it has little to do with the fine article on Long Liz's youth, but it
was interesting all the same. Particularly the reminder that more is missing than the Ripper files, and various papers and photographs and
Dr. Dutton's books in this world. We don't have
many reliable fragments of Protagoras and the Sophists. I like to note the rediscovery of items (I just posted the possible rediscovery of an actual photograph of Vincent Van Gogh on another thread). In the last year the newspapers reported the discovery of 200 lines of a previously unknown Menander play in a monastic
transcription in the Vatican Archives, and earlier
large portions of a trilogy by Aeschylus of plays about the Trojan War were prepared for possible dramatization on Crete. Maybe, one day, old Protagoras or one of the other Sophists will finally turn up!
Jeff |
Natalie Severn
Chief Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 613
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 04, 2004 - 3:53 pm: | |
Hi Glenn,I do agree with what you are saying about getting at the truth through rigorous research.Its probably the only way that will yield up the secrets of the past.
Also I can well understand your exasperation when you were at university and no reasonable dialogue or interaction was allowed!
Cheers Glenn
Natalie. |
Bullwinkle
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, April 04, 2004 - 6:17 pm: | |
Plato's dialogues appeared during the lifetimes of many people who had personally known Protagoras and other sophists, and therefore must have contained adequate descriptions of their positions insofar as they held debate with Socrates. If Plato had written his dialogues misrepresenting the positions of the sophists, those people would have actively complained about the matter and rubbished the dialogues, and Plato wouldn't have adequate published material to offer and use in his Academe. After all, Plato wrote the dialogues primarily as a schoolmaster to use in his school, and wealthy Athenians wouldn't send their sons to him if they thought he were teaching them in a biased manner. Further, Protagoras saw himself basically as a teacher or consultant, not a writer. He made himself available for a high fee to men, one at a time or in small groups I believe, who wished to learn his sophistical techniques to advance themselves in government, the courts, politics, etc. Therefore it wouldn't seem likely that Protagoras would write down his key sophistical secrets, fearing a loss of revenue. Whereas philosophy was available to anyone free of charge from Socrates in the Agora, sophistry was a high-priced matter, available for the most part in secret directly from the "master."
If you want to read a book by a sophist, read "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" by Robert Pirsig. Real sophistry by a real sophist, taken for the most part straight from Plato's "Phaedrus." The notion that Pirsig uses Phaedrus' name as if he really knows what he is talking about in his book has never sat well with many Platonists, incidentally. They basically think you need to read Plato for thirty years to be able to understand.
So why do you need to read Protagoras to read sophistry?
B.
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1463
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 05, 2004 - 5:03 pm: | |
Swell. Just what I needed on a Monday night... Hardcore philosophy...
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on April 05, 2004)
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jeffrey Bloomfied
Inspector
Username: Mayerling
Post Number: 329
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 05, 2004 - 10:04 pm: | |
Hi Glenn and David,
My comment was meant as an honest reaction. If
Protagoras did leave any complete that were uncovered, I'd be curious to see them. Similarly,
if they found some of the plays of Agathon, the dramatist who is the subject of the party in THE
SYMPOSIUM (and who is spoofed in one of plays of Aristophanes - who is also in THE SYMPOSIUM) I would be interested in them as well.
The story of surviving ancient Greek and Roman texts is a fascinating one. Two interesting aspects to it is that many of the recently discovered fragments (of Menander and that Aeschylus trilogy mentioned previously) are found in the linens that wrap mummies in certain dry areas of Egypt (Fayum for example, where Menander's sole complete play, DYSCOLOS, was found). The other is the problems of getting funding for more work in this area. There is a
controversy (or was one about three or four years back) in Pompeii, Italy, where funding for further archeological work was being disputed by
two scholar groups - one of which wanted to use it on a massive library in a building called THE
HOUSE OF PAPYRI, which houses a huge collection of philosophical tracks by a minor philospher (I can't remember his name - I believe he is an
epicurean). The money did not go to the House of Papyri unfortunately.
I have to say I do enjoy discussing ancient writings and writers (did you know that the playwrite Terence, who left us six complete comedies, died of an emotional setback because a ship carrying three new plays of his was lost with the manuscripts - tragic loss for Roman Comic Theatre!). However, I have to agree with Glenn that this really does not get us closer to settling anything about Whitechapel. Sorry for the "frolic and banter" detour here, but I did enjoy it. Thank you for your patience.
Best wishes,
Jeff |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1464
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 05, 2004 - 11:51 pm: | |
Ah, never mind, Jeffrey. I don't own the thread anyway.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Natalie Severn
Chief Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 615
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 4:51 am: | |
Plato called Sappho the tenth muse.It is necessary to place Sappho in her historical context,to examine the importance of her gender and sexuality and to ask what was the nature of her genius and the extent of her achievement.
But a]most of her work has been lost and only fragments left
b]at the present time I"d rather play at finding the ripper.
Still I thought I"d put her name in this
discussion.A few lines from one of her poems
.....I know I must die.....
yet I love the intensity of life
and this and desire keep me here in
the brightness and beauty of the sun
[and not with Hades...]
Maybe dear old Elizabeth could have related to those lines.
|
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 363
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 06, 2004 - 11:53 pm: | |
AP--A wild theory for you. Do you think it's possible that Stride was working for the police? Some later newspaper releases (post 1888) claim that the Met used police decoys. There seems to be no reference for this in the existing records. But what if??
Something odd was asked of Michael Kidney at Liz Stride's Inquest. To my knowledge, very little comment has ever been given to it.
"Did the deceased have a child by you? No.
Or by a policeman? --She told me that a policeman used to court her when she was at Hyde Park, before she was married to Stride. Stride and the policeman courted her at the same time, but I never heard of her having a child by the policeman. --Daily Telegraph.
This is interesting. Stride evidently had some past relationship with a policeman. There is also some evidence that she spoke Yiddish; Kidney claims she did, and she worked among the Jews.
Somewhat of an ideal candidate for one of these mythical 'decoys.'
On the night in question, she's hanging out in front of the Working Men's club--- just the sort of organization the Yard would have been clsoely watching. The radical Der Arbeter Fraint is published out back.
A case might even be made that the tall bloke standing in the doorway of the Nelson is watching her.
So here's how it goes down. When all hell breaks loose and Stride cries out, the Nelson man botches it badly; he chases Schwartz --a Jewish looking chap---down the road, nearly to the railway arch. It's the wrong man, of course. By the time he realizes his mistake, Stride is killed. The whole thing is a dismal c*ck-up, and any mention of it, of course, has to be purged from existance.
Truth or fiction?
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1466
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 5:55 am: | |
Palmer,
A very interesting and intriguing idea -- fiction or not.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jim DiPalma
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jimd
Post Number: 79
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 11:23 am: | |
Hi RJ,
I second Glenn's comments, very interesting indeed. It's also a very plausible explanation for Pipeman's actions. I've never been comfortable with other explanations that have been offered.
If he was an innocent bystander just trying to get away, as Schwartz was, why not just pop back into the Nelson, or run around the corner onto Fairclough Street?
If he was an accomplice and was chasing Schwartz, he knew Schwartz would be able to give descriptions of both him and Stride's attacker, and could have ended up with a rope around his neck as a result. Yet, he seemed to have given up the chase after a very short distance. If you look at a map, the "as far as the railway arch" doesn't seem to be very far at all. Very odd behavior for a supposed accomplice.
Interesting indeed.
Jim |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 983
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 11:54 am: | |
Guys,
Interesting yeah but realistic ?
Imagine the outcry if this got out. A decoy killed !
Despite the purge I cannot see how something like that would have been hushed up. An op like that would have been committed in Jacks then known killing field...of which Berner st wouldnt have been classed as such (I cite Met search area).
We only have Schwartz's word this event happend how it happend...and there are discrepencies in that anyway. But Im not one for doubting a man, much, and on that I must admit Pipemans actions are odd.
Monty
Our little group has always been and always will until the end... |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1008
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 2:14 pm: | |
RJ
I’m not really your man or woman for wild theories when it comes to the factual elements of the case. I prefer to look at the whole thing through an evolutionary and or biological angle these days.
Sort of an early retirement.
But - there is always a ‘but’ thank god - when one studies the movements of Stride and here companion/s on the night in question, one is presented with a very restless scene. It must be obvious to one and all that this was no quick exchange between prostitute and client. For here we have a couple taking their own sweet time, visiting pubs and shops, purchasing items - look at the plethora of witness reports - and the behaviour of Stride before the tragic events of the night leads one to the rapid conclusion that she had a ‘purpose’ that night.
All the other encounters in this saga are hidden to a certain extent, they have the realistic quality that is associated with sudden murder, whereas in the case of Stride we could be looking at a well-worn script from East-Enders… Billy you stand there, Phil just punch that chap on the chin will you, Dot scream loudly, Dennis run away, Andy cross the road and give that chap some grief, sorry Billy you are going to have slit Mo’s throat.
Do you see what I mean?
Yes, I am prepared to believe that the police of the time may well have been stupid enough to have got an innocent girl murdered.
I mean for Christ’s sake they employed Charles Henry Cutbush!
|
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 364
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 4:52 pm: | |
I of course agree that the toff seen with Stride doesn't fit the general idea of a client of an East End prostitute, nor does it remotely resemble the quick transaction and knee trembler. Something odd seems to be going on.
I don't really wish to push this too far; it's only a suggestion, and I can appreciate the down-side. It's wild stuff, but it does seem to offer a possible explanation for a number of enigmas.
I also don't think that the fact that the 'op' was outside of the 'killing field' is a particularly damning objection. As I said, the Working Men's Club was just the sort of place the Yard would have watched (Diemshutz, for instance, ended up in political trouble later on). Sir Robert Anderson wrote specifically about Eastern European Anarchists and Socialists as a menance. The suspect he eventually discusses (vaguely) was a Jew from Eastern Europe, described one place as of the 'learned class.' Indeed, if the man watching from the Nelson had a preconceived idea that the attacker would be a Jew, it would explain why he chased Schwartz. And yes, I do say chased. Both the Star report and Swanson's report agree on this point; the doubt doesn't arrise until Abberline hazards his own guess about what was going on.
If the Swanson Marginalia can be believed, it seems to me that there has to be a rather dramatic reason why the identification described took place in Hove. It makes no sense to drag a Jewish witness and an insane Jewish chap down to some little police home in Brighton. If the whole identification was covert, it was covert up for a reason. Something somewhere went wrong, and someone somewhere was covering someone's ass. Or at least I suspect.
Regardless, I think Stride's connection to the policeman is interesting. He is described as living near Hyde Park. Another paper's covereage of the inquest quotes Kidney again, who is asked about his recent split with Stride.
Coronor: "Do you know whether she picked up with anyone?"
Kidney: "I have seen the address of the brother of the gentleman with whom she lived as a servant somewhere near Hyde Park, but I cannot find it now."
Hyde Park again. Is this somehow connected to the policeman mentioned earlier? RP
|
Bullwinkle
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 11:54 am: | |
To say that Stride was working for the police without any evidence is premature. If you want to have theoretical explanations for case events that's fine, but in the absence of direct evidence you need to tie your theoretical evidence together with considerable ancillary case evidence, and make something of it that tells us more about the case than we already know. For example, if you want to say that Stride was working for the police, you'd then show how she is mentioned somehow in the Lusk letter. You CAN'T just say "Stride was working for the police" and leave it at that without confirmation of some kind. You have no leg on which to stand. It's simple arrogance on your part.
B.
|
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 366
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - 11:32 pm: | |
Yawn. Don't be so tiresome, old man. Tell me something I don't already know.
There are any number of unexplainables in the case evidence that such a theory might hope to reconcile. Why wasn't Schwartz at the Inquest? Why did the Pipe-smoker evidently chase Schwartz? (You gave us the silver-back theory some months ago, but you were merely regurgitating Abberline's version, Swanson doesn't deny Schwartz was chased). Why an apparent covert operation in Hove? Why was Anderson so circumspect about details? Who was this toff Stride was milling about with? Certainly it wasn't the quick four-pence transaction and a knee-trembler? Why was this shadowy policeman from Hyde park mentioned at the Inquest?
Now, as I freely admitted, as it now stands it's merely wild speculation. But I can imagine how something along these lines might fit in with a wider theory of the case. What you always dishonestly ignore in your crticisms is the fact that all speculations such as this are admissions of ignorance. It's the concept of a "working theory" (a fairly basic idea), groping towards some reconcilliation of the imponderables. But your criticisms, my dear Radka, always strike me as being particularly still-born. On one hand, you rail against those who are 'dismissive' (perhaps you ought to go join them now?) and on the otherhand you snub all speculation that is not your own. But if you offer up nought in return, your critiques are fundamentally barren.
As for arrogance, I suppose I must accept it. I can hardly argue the point with a connoisseur. RP |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2305
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 08, 2004 - 3:30 am: | |
The policeman story is a strange one. Why should Stride mention to anyone that she'd once been involved with a policeman? Given her social setting, wouldn't this invite suspicion against herself? That makes me wonder if it was true after all.
Kidney's reply to the Coroner is odd. Why should he be concerned about the address? It would have been more natural to say that he couldn't remember the name.
Robert |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1010
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 08, 2004 - 1:30 pm: | |
I have always felt that the Metropolitan Force had a lot more personal knowledge of the victims than they admitted to.
As far as I know only one senior police officer ever admitted this, Walter Dew, and that was in his memoirs concerning Pearly Poll - Mary Ann Connelly - where he remarked that the one-legged prostitute had 'legged' it out of Whitechapel after the murder of Martha Tabram in the genuine fear that she would be the next victim.
Interestingly enough Pearly Poll lived at Crossinghams lodging house along with many other prostitutes connected to the case.
I have also always felt that Super. Charles Henry Cutbush was somehow moving with the events of 1888, for he was directly in charge of the Whitechapel division investigating the murder of Tabram, and after this was of course in charge of all the lodging houses of Whitechapel, which one supposes could have brought him into personal when not intimate contact with many of the victims. This has never really been examined.
Whatever, I do honestly believe that even the most harmless connection to a serving officer of the MPF with regard to this case would have been hushed up because of the political climate prevailing in that year.
The Seaside Home. You may have missed the humorous chapter I wrote on that a few months ago, but it was probably closer to the truth than Macnaghten's ravings. |
Dan Norder
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, April 08, 2004 - 12:55 am: | |
Sounds like a good story, but I'd find it difficult to believe that they'd have such a difficult time identifying poor Liz's body if she'd been working for them. If it were a coverup, they were especially good at covering their tracks. If it were true, with all the animosity between various officials I'd guess that someone would have used the mess to put the blame on someone else.
But, as comspiracy theories goes, it's not as crazy as most of the ones trotted out about the case. |
Harry Mann
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, April 08, 2004 - 6:21 am: | |
A suggestion.Study the photo of Berner St,and try to guage the distance from where pipeman stood to the entrance of Dutfield yard.
I would put it at about 25-30 feet,but even allowing for a few feet more,and the night being dark,pipeman would have had a good sight of what happened there.Stride and accoster would have been silhouetted against lights further down the street.
Anyone aware of visual distances at night?. |
Bullwinkle
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, April 08, 2004 - 9:18 am: | |
"...you snub all speculation that is not your own."
>>You are criticizing me based on how much of my theory I've written here now. But I have always freely allowed that I'm not writing all of my theory here now. You feel that I must write it all here now, but I don't have to do that. You are, I believe, essentially trying to take advantage of me. When I write it, it will solve the case and be free. Being free is an essential part of solving the case.
What I try to do here now is work out, from the perspective of knowing how to solve the case, what kinds of strategies seem to work and which don't. The kind of strategy that works is a citicically-derived epistemological center holding up a range of explanations of case evidence which are in turn logically interrelated. It works something like a bicycle wheel. The center holds the evidence together like the spokes, and then the evidence is itself interconnected like the tire--both tensions are necessary for the roundness, integrity, and function. The tensions are logical.
What else would you have me do? Remain silent while good people have troubles without helping them? I react to life like a good person does--I do not have a basis in the world, as do some, of crass advantage-taking.
Bullwinkle
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page