| Author |
Message |
    
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3255
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Monday, June 06, 2005 - 9:27 am: | 
|
Family questions 'Welsh ripper' claim
Jun 6 2005
Robin Turner, Western Mail
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/ripper--claim-name_page.html
(Message edited by admin on June 06, 2005)
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1526
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 06, 2005 - 10:59 am: |
|
Thanks for this, Spry, I also found this prior and related article on the same website--
Is Jack the Ripper's knife on show in Wales?
May 28 2005
Robin Turner, Western Mail
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200wales/tm_objectid=15567326%26method=full%26siteid=50082-name_page.html
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 584
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 06, 2005 - 5:12 pm: |
|
Chris e,
Hey, you think that's bad stop a moment and consider what they say about haggis. I let them have their jokes and figure it means that much more haggis and other Scots delights I don't have to share.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 302
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 7:26 am: |
|
Dear Chris E,
You say there is as much evidence to support this suspect as any other suspect.
Would you be so kind as to list the evidence, because I cannot find any!
Bob |
chris e
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 08, 2005 - 3:31 pm: |
|
Have you read the book?
The guy carried out abortions on some of the victims. His medical speciality was uterine operations - these were missing from all women. The murders stopped when he had a breakdown and gave up performing these operations. The author also established his connection with Mary Kelly and established her background more than any other researcher has done to date. He worked in the institute which binds all the victims. He kept a diary of many years as he was a keen archivist but the year of the ripper are all torn out - and these have been archived at the NWL and would not have been later doctored. His description of his coat with the red button exactly matches descriptions from witnesses who saw a mysterious figure before the killing. One of the police noted that a certain doctor could answer a lot more questions about the killings, hinting strongly that a doctor was involved in the killings. You really cannot expect more than circumstantial evidence so late after the crime but surely the amount of circumstantial evidence against John Williams causes an even minded person to wonder. You cannot read this book and not be impressed. What would convince you of anyone being the killer besides CCTV coverage? |
AIP
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 2:20 am: |
|
There is no evidence to support any of the suspects - so I guess the remark by Chris E is correct, in a negative sort of way. |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1041
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 4:03 pm: |
|
The guy carried out abortions on some of the victims.
My impression was that he tried to correct the effects of botched abortions. Is that wrong? Obviously abortion per se would have been illegal in Victorian times.
And of course, whatever the nature of the operation, there is evidence only that he treated a woman with the same rather common name as one of the victims ...
The author also established his connection with Mary Kelly and established her background more than any other researcher has done to date.
From what's been posted here, the author's suggestion about the identity of her husband is plain wrong, and the error wasn't hard to discover - a few minutes with online databases.
His description of his coat with the red button exactly matches descriptions from witnesses who saw a mysterious figure before the killing.
Robin Odell's review of the book says:
Reference is made to a "red stone on the man`s coat" allegedly mentioned by Hutchinson, which matched up with a description of Dr Williams who favoured wearing a "dark silk tie held by a pin set with a red stone". Anyone familiar with the text of Hutchinson`s statement made to the police on 12 November 1888 will know that he made no such reference.
What the witness Hutchinson did say was, "His watch chain had a big seal, with a red stone, hanging from it".
Apparently, to Mr Williams's defenders, the distinction between a button, a tie pin and a watch chain is too subtle to notice.
Chris Phillips
(Message edited by cgp100 on June 09, 2005) |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2509
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 4:21 pm: |
|
Hi Chris e,
this might seem a little harsh but here goes.
The guy carried out abortions on some of the victims.
No, the guy may have carried out an abortion/ (in fact as you say Chris P more likely helped on a botched abortion), of one of the victims. In all seriousness the names Mary Ann(e) and Nichols are surely not that uncommon.
His medical speciality was uterine operations - these were missing from all women.
First of all, leaving aside the fact that uteri werent missing from all the victims, thats not evidence. There's no evidence of medical expertise being required IMHO. Even if there was Sir John Williams was not the only one who had such knowledge its pure speculation. Its totally circumstantial - he cant help it!
The author also established his connection with Mary Kelly and established her background more than any other researcher has done to date.
Again, it was more speculation, maybe John Williams had a mistress called Mary. Maybe that Mary was called Mary Kelly, Maybe it was the Mary Kelly,
maybe lots of things.
He kept a diary of many years as he was a keen archivist but the year of the ripper are all torn out - and these have been archived at the NWL and would not have been later doctored.
I think its best I try not to mention diaries.
You really cannot expect more than circumstantial evidence so late after the crime but surely the amount of circumstantial evidence against John Williams causes an even minded person to wonder.
I don't think much (any even) of the circumstantial evidence exists. In some cases even the authors couldnt find the evidence - that didnt stop them speculating. That is something well interesting.
And don't get me started on the knife/DNA thing.
You cannot read this book and not be impressed
I managed it myself.
What would convince you of anyone being the killer besides CCTV coverage?
Don't be silly CCTV didn't exist!!!
BUT!!
Perhaps a signed confession written by the drug crazed killer would do the trick, oh no wait...
Hey did I mention I don't think John Williams did it.
Cheers
Jenni
ps and there isnt any evidence at all that SJW knew any of the others.
pps I cannot believe that someone would do that to their first cousin five times removed on such flimsey evidence!
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2511
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 4:36 pm: |
|
ppps he's not his Uncle either, but maybe i'm being pickey! |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 304
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 5:05 am: |
|
Dear Chris E.
Thank you for taking the time and trouble to reply. Now let me answer some of your questions.
Yes I have read the book.
The uterus was not missing from all victims. Polly Nicholls, Elizabeth Stride, and Mary Kelly did not have the uterus missing. Thats 3 out of the canonical five. So how does only 40% of the victims with the uterus missing suddenly become 'all' the victims.
How do you know the murders ceased with Dr Williams breakdown? No definite dates for the supposed breakdown are given - just sometime in late 1888.
The author has not established any connection with the suspect and Mary Kelly. The family he puts forwards as Mary's doesn't fit the accepted knowledge of Mary's relatives.
He worked in an institute which may have been visited by the victims. By default this could apply to everyone who worked in this institute.
I have several diaries which I use for scrap paper. It just so happens that I have used several pages covering the exact period a murder was committed in Britain. That doesn't mean I did it. Besides if Dr Williams wanted to destroy any record of his committing the murders ask the following.
Why write it down in the first place? Why not just toss the whole diary?
Assuming when you are referring to a red button you are in fact talking about the red seal which one newspaper reported Hutchinson as mentioning, so what?
Watch seals were a very common form of jewelry in the Victorian era. I have one on my watch chain and my wife has one on her charm bracelet.
One of the police said a certain doctor .......
Oh come on. Which certain doctor are you talking about? The mysterious American doctor? Dr Davies? Tumblety? PC Spicers suspect? Dr Gull...the list just keeps going on and on.
Of course I can read this book and not be impressed - I did and I wasn't.
Personally I think that Mr Williams would have written a far better and more accurate book if he had written a biography of his illustrious ancestor, however the sales would have been minimal.
The fact is apart from Dr Williams presence in the area at the approximate time of the murders, there is not a single point which connects him either to any of the victims or any of the murders.
Bob Hinton |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 305
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 5:09 am: |
|
Sorry I just noticed another point right at the beginning. You say he carried out abortions on some of the victims.
Where on earth do you get this from? The book only mentions the name Mary Anne Nicholls written on a scrap of paper. Apart from the fact there were over 80 people with the same name in London at the time - how do you arrive at the conclusion the doctor performed an abortion on her?
|
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 640
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 10:47 am: |
|
This is how the myths start.
Interesting to see one at the chrysalis stage.
Phil |
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1546
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 11:37 am: |
|
Hi Phil
Might we say that Mr. Williams mythed the point about his illustrious kinsman? 
Or perhaps the myth got in his eyes from the famous peasouper fogs that undoubtedly allowed Sir John to slip clean away into the night and not have to sign autographs for fans. Oh, where are the paparazzi when you need them? 
By the way, I do find it curious how both Tony Williams and Steve Hodel (see the "Black Dahlia" thread) are so willing to "shop" their blood relatives for some of that filthy lucre. Human nature!
Have a good weekend, everyone.
All my best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2521
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 4:45 pm: |
|
i don't so much find it interesting as somewhat disturbing! |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2594
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 5:34 pm: |
|
VERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRY disturbing!
There is EVIDENCE Concrete unasailable evidence and there is complete toot!!!!
I hate to say it but I'm going to stick to evidence that 'sticks!'
Checking ebay today there were 7 copies of the good 'Doctor' on! ..........Wow! a record! where's the Leonard Matters when you want him for 0.01p?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Suzi
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2595
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 5:41 pm: |
|
Bob
This 'Mary Ann Nichols' thing is again something else.... I dont hold out to be a graphologist, but I am an art teacher and recognise a hand when I see it.......... there is NO WAY that that 'entry' is from the same 'accredited' hand of Dr W I have NEVER sen such an OBVIOUS shall we say 'cover up'!!!!
Suzi |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2596
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, June 10, 2005 - 5:45 pm: |
|
or seen one either!!!!!!!! Oh well won't be putting mine on ebay ........yet!....it doesn't scare me...............MUCH!!!!
Suzi |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2523
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 11, 2005 - 7:29 am: |
|
Suzi,
indeed, something like that it is true
Jenni |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2617
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, June 11, 2005 - 4:53 pm: |
|
Hi
Now look...
There's all this talk of abortions......I'm sure the good Doctor carried out a fair few and on a good day wrote them down in his 'Diary',
I imagine most doctors kept these 'diaries' at the time.....do they now?....I doubt it,but I imagine there was a reason for that at the time without those tantalising brown folders that your doctor has now and pulls out, going right back to when you had measles at the age of two!
It appears to me, that apart from a 'fancy' to be 'involved' there is no reason why the 'connection ' with Dr Williams should be of any relevance....I'm sure that the good doctor was a worthy Welshman,with a great library but.....................not Jack!
Suzi
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2533
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 12, 2005 - 4:39 pm: |
|
Suzi,
i think you are being too nice
Jenni |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2640
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, June 12, 2005 - 5:21 pm: |
|
Jenni
Building up to not being so 'nice' soon!!!!!!
There is so much in this book that needs to be taken to task ...Really I think we could have a separate thread on each one!!!!
Ooooh God lets keep it all here! 
Suzi |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2538
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 9:03 am: |
|
One thread is all i can cope with !!
Jenni |
AAW
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, June 11, 2005 - 2:58 am: |
|
It does seem rather obvious from the picture in the book that the entry on Nichols is in a totally different writing to that above it. |
Lobot
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, June 11, 2005 - 10:17 am: |
|
Can someone explain why Sir John Williams has not earned his spot on the suspect file where we should be disscussing him? |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2539
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 9:30 am: |
|
I am sure the Nichols entry is something that can be cleared up
Jenni
ps lobot - we are discussing this under suspects! |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1057
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 10:21 am: |
|
Jenni
But how do you know that Dr Williams didn't suffer from multiple personality disorder?
Just kidding ...
Chris Phillips
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2542
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 11:04 am: |
|
Chris,
I don't but i know he was not JtR!
Jenni |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2548
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 4:43 pm: |
|
Everyone,
I've been re-reading Sir John Williams: My First Cousin Five Times Removed (aka Uncle Jack!)
i particularly enjoyed pp 41 and this line
'There is no evidence of this'
This book holds a special place for me.
Jenni
ps do you like my new name for it and check out the new sig!
"be just and fear not"
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2645
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 5:01 pm: |
|
I've said that the handwriting re the 'Nicholls '....Nichols!!!!!!is so bad as to be laughable before!!!!!!
As to THE BOOK..... on page 207 when the conversation is on MJK we read...'We cannot rely on the rumours that abounded in the press at the time'......
Well OK, as today one has to be a tad wary of the tabloids...but at the end of the day re Mary I think maybe we should look at this again..............OK ,sensationalism is one thing, but the Kelly case was lets face it was pretty sensational!
Reading on............
The heart was missing.......this is still a line that hangs in the mind of course....but?.....kettles and all that.....................................
Suzi |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1059
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 5:19 pm: |
|
Thinking about it further, ridiculous though it is, I regret being a bit flippant about this.
If someone has really tampered with records in the keeping of the National Library of Wales in the furtherance of this nonsense, they should be prosecuted.
Has anyone informed the Library of the suspicion?
Chris Phillips
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2646
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 5:25 pm: |
|
Or the line that sticks in the mind...'absent' I KNOW ..whether from the body or the room is an old chestnut B U T all we have is that line at the end of the day... As Dr Bond said.. ....."The Pericardium was open below & the Heart absent" where from we will never know.......ok wrong thread here but........
Have just been re reading agin Dr Bond's statement....... The 'defense wounds' he refers to..............could they not have been inflicted post or during mutilation.........would be very convincing I think,even down to the thumb cut....nice move Jack! puts you out of the frame here!!!!
Just a thought!!!
(wrong thread I know!)
Suzi
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2647
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 5:26 pm: |
|
Chris
Thats a thought
and a good one too..................
Suzi |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2649
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 5:48 pm: |
|
Have moved this rant to MJK thread!!!
Suzi x |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1060
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, June 13, 2005 - 5:54 pm: |
|
Suzi
Well, I've lost count of how many times I've looked at a completely frivolous accusation against a perfectly respectable and wildly unlikely suspect, and thought "there should be a law against this".
If someone has gone so far as to falsify archival documents, then they have committed a criminal offence, and I think it should be treated very severely.
Chris Phillips
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2552
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 5:27 am: |
|
Suzi,
do you know what the numbers refer to?
Chris,
I will email you.
Jenni
"be just and fear not"
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2555
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 6:23 am: |
|
HELP!
would anyone with a copy of this book be as kind as to do the following things,
turn to page 16, what does it say?(IT being the photo of the entry which is in a box out)
In particular second line down of said entry.
Thanks
Jenni
(Message edited by jdpegg on June 14, 2005)
"be just and fear not"
|
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1551
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 2:37 pm: |
|
Hi All--
Suzi wrote:
As to THE BOOK..... on page 207 when the conversation is on MJK we read...'We cannot rely on the rumours that abounded in the press at the time'......
Well, sometimes you can't rely on what is between two covers either. And this actually does bring up an important point. Because a lot of people are apt to believe something in a book just because it is published, despite the vast variance of research standards between different authors.... Sigh. 
Unfortunately, the field of studies concerned with the Whitechapel murders is particularly marked with a wide disparity in authors' research standards. Without naming authors, with a few exceptions (we know who they are), standards appear to have dropped in this field in terms of books published on this topic during the last several years. 
All my best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 930
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 3:08 pm: |
|
Hi Chris,
There does seem to be a wide disparity, doesn't there? However, I think solid contributions outweigh the poorer ones--unfortunately it appears that the questionable research often gets more publicity than the good stuff. You hear so much about the garbage after awhile it's easy to think you are living in a dump.
Here's my wish list of what I've heard are recently released good books (there are more, this is off the top of my head):
1) Jekyll & Hyde Dramatized, Chisholm & Danahay (I actually have this one already. I add it because I feel it's not discussed enough).
2) Executioner: The Chronicles of James Berry Stewart Evans
3) London Correspondence: Jack the Ripper and the Irish Press, Alan Sharp
4) Chris Scott's Cast of Thousands e-book and Mary Jane Kelly books
5) Robert McLaughlin's upcoming The First Jack the Ripper Victim Photographs
6)Ripperology by Robin Odell
7) John Malcom's book, which is billed as a subjective look into the crimes. Doesn't sound like a research book, but I liked Malcolm's Mary Jane Kelly article and writing style so it makes my list (hopefully it will be available someday).
8) Paul Begg's Jack the Ripper: The Facts
Also add some of the researchers who sometimes frequent this site and write articles for the various magazines. Neil Bell is an up and comer, I feel. Vanderlinden is also solid.
With the evolving digitalization of documents, cooperation between researchers via the Internet, and self-publishing (which is becoming more acceptable), I think standard is going to continue to be an issue. You will see the emergence of good amateur work, although it will be coupled, as always, with bad efforts too.
Cheers,
Dave
|
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1552
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 3:31 pm: |
|
Hi Dave
I have been definitely cheered by the appearance of books by Begg, Skinner, Evans, Rumbelow, Sugden, and the new Odell. Newcomers Chris Scott and Alan Sharpe of course also are making solid contributions. But at the same time I find that my heart sinks at the spate of poorly researched and poorly thought-out books, titles in which the authors are very quick to fault prior research but fall down in doing the essential work themselves.
All my best
Chris
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 931
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 3:40 pm: |
|
Hi Chris,
Yes, I agree with you. The turds seem to float to the top.
Dave |
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 721
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 4:30 pm: |
|
Hi Chris,
But like Stephen pointed out with Cornwell's book a while back, it's not like poorly researched tomes pointing the finger at someone for no solid reason whatsoever by twisting the facts and getting others completely wrong is a new phenomenon. That's been going on for ages. If anything there are a lot more quality books recently than there used to be.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website
|
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1553
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 5:13 pm: |
|
Hi Dan and Dave
Let me explain myself in more detail.
My point is that although we all know that the Whitechapel Murders have been subject to quite a number of poorly researched books going back decades, there was an improvement with
1) Rumbelow's book and Whittington-Egan's in the 1970's
2) an even more marked improvement around the time of the 1988 Centennial when the books by Begg, Wilson and Odell, and Howell and Skinner came out,
3) even better the Ripper literature coming into the 1990's with Sugden's Complete History, Begg et al.'s A to Z, and Evans and Gainey's book on Tumblety, which although a suspect-directed book was well researched, though it is true that at the same time that these books came out appeared the Maybrick Diary books by Harrison and Feldman,
4) then Hallelujah! almost a "Golden Age" of Ripper books with a series of fine titles: Evans & Connell's The Man Who Hunted Jack the Ripper, Evans & Skinner's Ultimate Sourcebook and Letters from Hell, Chisholm, Yost, and DiGrazia's News from Whitechapel, and Eddleston's encyclopedia.
5) Now we are now in another period entirely:
Although new books have continued to come out, as mentioned in my last post, they have been overshadowed by a series of high profile less well done books that have grabbed publicity over their better researched counterparts. I am talking about the books by Cornwell, Marriott, and Williams.
Best regards
Chris George
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2565
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 5:22 pm: |
|
The trouble with this book is that i cant see how anyone could read it and believe it. yet there has been evidence of this.
Cornwell i can see, she had a fanbase who loved her already.
Feldman/Harrison, I can see at least there was some solid looking documentation.
I mean maybe its just me but when the blurb contradicts the title and,
well i could go on all night but hey
Jenni
"be just and fear not"
|
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 723
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 5:32 pm: |
|
Chris,
You are taking good old books and ignoring the bad ones and trying to compare that to recent bad books while ignoring the good ones. That's not a fair comparison.
If we want to talk publicity, the Royal Conspiracy, Lewis Carroll and the supposed Ripper Diary far overshadow pretty much anything else that came out. The only exception to that I can think of is that the Tumblety theory did get a fair amount of press. The rest of your titles were pretty much AWOL when it came to the kind of publicity you are complaining about with Cornwell, Williams and Marriott.
Same as always, the books with the best PR staffs behind them are generally the worst ones of the lot. Nothing has really changed other than we have a lot more Ripper books now, good and bad, than we had in the past.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Profile Email Dissertations Website
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2653
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 5:41 pm: |
|
Hi all
There are many books that for better or worse are better or not than others.....
Rumbelow (as ever ) and WE, The A-Z ofcourse is a bible, The Source book and Pauls new book brilliant but of course there are many others ,which I could quote ,that are well worth more than a passing read!!!
Not sure that Uncle J fits that though........ but if you want a good read have a go at
Night of the Ripper by Robert Bloch....a lot of fun..... a relaxy before the Conf!!!
Suzi
|
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 932
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 14, 2005 - 6:12 pm: |
|
"Although new books have continued to come out, as mentioned in my last post, they have been overshadowed by a series of high profile less well done books that have grabbed publicity over their better researched counterparts."
Absolutely you're right; I thought that's what I said? I just cheerfully disagree when earlier you wrote "with a few exceptions (we know who they are), standards appear to have dropped in this field in terms of books published on this topic during the last several years."
In a way I think standards have actually risen and not fallen. Let me explain: thanks to the solid contributions (like Sugden, Sourcebook, and Stephen's site here), readers today are a lot more savvy than previously. Nobody really has to rely on anybody's word or judgement since they can check a lot of primary material (or at least transcripts of it) for themselves. I mean, the readers with a real interest can--you cannot let the lazy ones dictate condition of the field. I believe that there is an up and coming generation of researchers who may yet make great contributions, the people who have cut their teeth on Sourcebook and Sugden and not Knight.
As far as a Golden Age, ok, you'll never out-Sugden Sugden, or top what Stewart Evans has done; maybe in that sense, there is a state of decline (I count Sugden as beginning "A Golden Age" and then Sourcebook as being the peak), but somehow I don't think we've quite slipped out of the "Golden Age" since we do have some good researchers maturing (considering that it takes decades to absorb the material): Bell, Sharp, Vanderlinden, etc. And most of the major researchers are still in their prime: Begg and Evans haven't even hit sixty yet, (I'm guessing, I don't personally know). Chisholm is just a wee spanking lad and has already produced two valuable books; Neal Stubbings hasn't even gone through all the victims yet (I am hoping for an anthology from him as well).
I don't explain myself particularly well, but do you see what I mean? The sexy cynical books will always get the most attention because they're designed to. But underneath the crud, I think the field is in good shape. It just might not look that way if you only go by what really sells. That's show business, I guess. Ashlee Simpson is a star and the Innocence Mission are making great records in their kitchen.
Dave |
zazaz
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 2:08 am: |
|
>>What will we all do if the mystery is solved?
Get a life?
|
Christopher T George
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 1571
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 2:22 pm: |
|
Hi zazaz
The same question keeps coming up. Since the question of the identity of Jack the Ripper will probably never be satisfactorily be solved, we may never need to get a life. 
Chris George
(Message edited by ChrisG on June 28, 2005)
Christopher T. George
North American Editor
Ripperologist
http://www.ripperologist.info
See "Jack--The Musical" by Chris George & Erik Sitbon
The Drama of Jack the Ripper Weekend
Charlotte, NC, September 16-18, 2005
http://www.actorssceneunseen.com/ripper.asp
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1747
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 04, 2005 - 3:23 am: |
|
Zazaz,
I suggest you do the same.
Monty
I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die.
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page