|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
RosemaryO'Ryan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, February 07, 2004 - 7:48 pm: |       |
Hi All,
During my detailed study of the Sickert painting, "Jack the Ripper's Bedroom", I was struck by the source of the interior lighting of the the bedroom scene. It appears to enter via a window with a 'venetian blind'...outlining the upper torso of a man /woman, giving the figure a 'spectral' glow.
I know of his abiding love of Venice where he painted many pictures, visited art galleries, and, of course, met other artists/artistes. One can see a connection between Venetian light and that 'venetian blind' central to the composition of "JtR's Bedroom" scene.
During the course of the last forty years (that old! Coincidently, I was born at the hour of Walter Sickert's death!), I have been researching that item of furniture known as the Armoire of the Black Moriah, which came down through the family of the Ziani's, Sebastian Ziani was born in 1173, and after a distinguished career in the service of the Venetian Republic he was elected Doge of Venice becoming the richest and most influential personality in the State. Venice was at this particular period more than any other the world centre for culture, literary, philosophical, and artistic dissertations. In this illuminating and prestigious intellectual climate the monastery of San Giorgio rose to maximum religious importance, its benefactor was Doge Sebastian Ziani. In 1177, Pope Alexander III met Emperor Federico (Barbarossa)at San Giorgio Maggiore, the mediator of this historic meeting was Sebastian Ziani. It is claimed that this was the moment when the notorious secret society The Brotherhood of the Seven Kings sent forth their emissaries who in turn set others to work on their secret printing presses, artists to canvas, poets to parchment...assasins to create discord!
In 1888, across the river Thames as the crow flies from Mr Sickert's studio was another Sebastian Ziani...the owner of the Armoire of the Black Moriah, depicting four women with their throats cut and their lower abdomens slit in the shape of a crescent! After many years of contemplating the complex iconography I discovered its extraordinary secret...a hidden compartment within the carcasse of this ancient artifact!
What was discovered inside this secret compartment will be the subject of "Jack the Ripper's Throne of Blood."
Rosey :-)
|
Mark Starr
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, February 09, 2004 - 7:43 pm: | |
Hello Rosey:
Despite the fact that I know Venice like the back of my hand, have been to San Giorgio many times, and I am quite familiar with the history of Doge Sebastiano Ziani, I have never heard of the Armoire of the Black Moriah. The Brotherhood of the Seven Kings is a novel by Edwardian authoress L T Meade, who wrote role model books for young girls but who occasionally ventured into detective fiction. Your post is the first I've seen that the Brotherhood of the Seven Kings was anything more than fiction. But please go on. Do tell.
I would also be interested to hear the details of your 40 year study of Jack The Ripper's Bedroom. I am especially interested to know about the outline of a man in the shadows. Could you describe it in greated detail. Also, I've read that the word "blood" can be seen in this painting. Please describe how it is painted, and how visible is it. Finally, I've read the initials W S are also embedded into this painting. Can you describe these initials and anything else that is not easily seen? I am assuming the initials W S are not Sickert's signature. Is the painting signed? Where and how?
You mentioned once that this painting is published in A-Z, by which I gather you mean Paul Begg's book Jack The RIpper A-Z. Did you have anythingto do with the painting's publication, besides take the photo? I am curious about how Begg obtained permission to publish a photo of this painting, from whom and how much it costs to use a photo of one of Sickert's paintings. Do you know if this and other Sickert paintings are protected now by copyright in the UK -- and if they are, when will this protection expire?
Regards,
Mark Starr |
RosemaryO'Ryan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 9:43 pm: | |
Dear Mr Starr,
Ah, you have undertaken a valiant task in keeping abreast of my ramblings. Sir, I salute you!
Firstly, you are correct when pointing to the novel, The Brotherhood of the Seven Kings, as categorised as a work of 'fiction'.However, I must point out that this website is premised on five (maybe more!) FACTS. Namely, the so-called five canonical murders in Whitechapel in 1888... nothing more and nothing less! The only other fact concerns the existence of the Armoire of the Black Moriah in Deptford in 1888. All else, including the existence of "Jack the Ripper", is in my humble opinion, FICTION. But sir, this is the preference of mankind since Adam and Eve (not forgetting Abraham :-)) In between the terms "fact" and "fiction", we have FACTION which seems a reasonable notion...in the circumstances?
[To doubt or not to doubt, that is the question.]
No, I have not studied the painting "Jack the Ripper's Bedroom" for forty years. I did not see anything in the painting that could be recognised
as the word "blood". The central figure is, lets say, 'ambiguous', but thats Walter for you.
Copyright belongs to the owner of the painting.
Since Walter believed in his own reincarnation, I suppose he could be called heretical, atheist, or pagan. Hmm.
"Except seven, none will return."
Rosey :-)
|
Mark Starr
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 4:13 am: | |
Hello Rosey:
I am very curious about what you said concerning the word "blood" in Jack The Ripper's Bedroom. I have yet to locate a good color reproduction of this painting (I can't find Begg's book in any local library or bookstore.) Yet I have read in a post on Casebook.org and another elsewhere that the word "blood" and the initials W S are indeed embedded into the paint. There are several Sickert paintings in which barely visible features are embedded into extremely dark backgrounds -- for example, Minnie Cunningham Sings At The Old Bedford, in which several men's heads in the audience are barely detectable in the darkened theatre. I wonder whether the word "blood" and the initials W. S. might be in the brushed texture of the thick paint, but they are not visible from afar because Sickert used the same color paint for both the letters and the background. It certainly would be of great interest if it were true. I wonder whether anyone in Manchester could inspect the painting very closely to find out. There is also the matter of a signature. Is the painting signed?
From the muddy sepia-tone print in Cornwell's book, I can't make out a figure of a man, just some unrecognizeable shapes in front of the window. Can you definitely recognize these shapes as a man? Is he standing, or sitting on the bed? What can you tell of his face? Is it another self-portrait of Sickert? Or is it a frail youth dying of consumption?
On what do you base your statement that Sickert believed in his own reincarnation? Are there any writing to this effect?
When you wrote "Copyright belongs to the owner of the painting," I'm afraid you were repeating a common fallacy -- unless in this case the owner of the painting also contracted with Walter Sickert to purchase the copyright. Ownership of a copyright of an image on a painting is legally separate from ownership of the painting. When you buy a painting, you own paint and canvas -- and nothing more. This is true of copyright laws in every country that signed the Berne Copyright Treaty. The copyright of any intellectual work goes to the author or artist or composer who created it, and it passes to others by contract or inheritance -- independent of the manuscript or canvas, etc. Sickert's copyrights were, and perhaps still are, controlled by a legal entity called The Sickert Trust. But I have no information whether this trust is still in existence and where it is located. One thing that interests me is who gets the money that Sickert's copyrights have generated and possibly continue to generate?
Regards,
Mark Starr
|
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 893
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 5:22 pm: | |
When you say there was a Sebastian Ziani in London - Deptford to be precise - in 1888, you are of course correct. The man in question would be better known under his more familiar name of Sebastian Ziani de Ferranti of electronics fame. The reason I knew somewhat about him was that he was educated in my home town:-)
the best summary of his life I have found for this period (Deptford in 1888) can be found at:
http://www.emep-486.telinco.co.uk/swehs/docs/news25su.html
|
RosemaryO'Ryan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 8:07 pm: | |
Dear Chris Scott,
Possibly one of the best summaries of Sebastian Ziani de Ferranti and the electrification of Britian! Interesting to note, The Pall Mall Gazette reporting Jack the Ripper on one page and on the other page, the exploits of Sebastian de Voltage Tripper :-)
Incidentally, when Stephen Knight viewed Sebastian's 'cupboard'many years ago, he looked awfully like Walter's self-portrait! Amazed. Later, Sebastian becomes the central character in that Knightly tale of The Deptford Strangler...
"Requiem at Regano". And of course, that episode of Babylon 5 when Sebastian is Jack the Ripper. Its been great fun!
Rosey :-)) |
Mark Starr
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 2:24 pm: | |
Hi Rosey:
How about a favor, Luv, not just for me but for everyone on Casebook? I gather from what you have written that you have a color copy of Sickert's painting Jack The Ripper's Bedroom. I also see now that it is possible to post attachments, such as pictures, to postings in these message board. Dan Norder, on another thread, says that UK copyrights were life plus 50 years in Sickert's day. Since Sickert died in 1942, they all expired in 1992. In the US, there is no question there is no active copyright. Every work before 1923 is PD, the painter's date of death was irrelevant. So a copy posted on Casebook would not infringe on any copyright. How about it, Rosey? Could you scan your copy of the picture and post it in this thread? In order to be useful for detailed study, the scan should be 800 x 600 pixels or bigger at 32 bit color in JPG format. Then we could all hunt for the "blood" amd WS that at least one Casebook contributor swears is hidden in the painting.
Regards,
Mark Starr |
RosemaryO'Ryan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, February 15, 2004 - 5:14 am: | |
Dear Mr Starr,
Sorry can not supply copy of photograph.I no longer have it. You could try Mr Skinner or Mr Begg for their copy.
Incidentally, it is a black and white photo not colour.
Rosey :-) |
Chris Scott
Chief Inspector
Username: Chris
Post Number: 901
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, February 15, 2004 - 7:52 pm: | |
Here are some pics of "Jack the Ripper's Bedroom"(1908)
Sorry the quality is not of the best but they may be useful
One general view and two closer of the middle section:
   |
Mark Starr
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, February 15, 2004 - 1:57 pm: | |
Rosey wrote:
>Sorry can not supply copy of photograph.I no longer have it. You could try Mr Skinner or Mr Begg for their copy. Incidentally, it is a black and white photo not colour.
This is awful! Who out there has a color copy of Sickert's "Jack The Ripper's Bedroom"? Is anyone located in Manchester, England -- where the painting hangs in the museum? Here is potentially the key surviving evidence to the identity of Jack The Ripper, and no one has access to a high-resolution color copy of this painting that they can post on Casebook.org????????
Walter Sickert, a prime suspect in several theories, stated emphatically (to Sir Osbert Sitwell) that he knew the identity of Jack The Ripper, and he wrote the name into a book at the time he learned Jack's identity from his landlady. Then is it not possible that somewhere in this painting Sickert left a clue about the veterinary's student's name? What about the mysterious "W blood S" reported by one Casebook poster that may be embedded into the brush textures or the dark background, a technique that Sickert used in other paintings.
And Rosey tells me that all anyone has been looking at all these years is either a black & white photo in A-Z!!! Or the miserable, muddy sepiatone photo in Cornwell!!!! Hasn't anyone taken the trouble to examine the original of this painting with a magnifying glass? If someone has, no one here seems to know about it. This painting is hanging in a public museum. There are reports on 57 ripper suspects on Casebook.org -- and the only one who ever painted a painting entitled Jack The Ripper's Bedroom is Walter Sickert. Yet it seems no one has thoroughly inspected this painting for hidden clues.
Regards,
Mark Starr |
Mark Starr
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, February 16, 2004 - 4:19 am: | |
Chris:
A heartfelt thanks for you posting your scans of Sickert's Jack The Ripper's Bedroom.
Evidently, between Cornwell's muddy sepiatone copy and your scans, the painting is just to dark to photograph without special lighting. I know the problem well. I have a black Scotch terrier. I also have dozens of photos of her, some in broad daylight, where she appears as a solid black blob. Even closeups. And that is almost what we have here. I have tried every manipulation in Photoshop I could think of, but I still can't bring out the details. The figure in front of the window might be a man, but to me it appears that he has no head. The ray of light that appears to be one eye is the same as other beams that come through the Venetian blinds. There is a vague suggestion of the shape of a head, but that could be the blinds. Certainly no identifiable features are discernible to determine if the man is Sickert or the consumptive veterinary student. I tried lightening the colors and changing the color balance, but still it is not possible to make out any details in the darkness.
As for determining whether any letters might be embedded into the brushwork, that is impossible to examine with this scan. It is also impossible to determine if there might be any small object in the room that might symbolically indicate the identity of the man in front of the window.
Many thanks again for all your time and trouble,
Mark Starr |
Mark Starr
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, February 16, 2004 - 4:16 pm: | |
I think I can make out now what is in front of the window. It is NOT a man standing. The object covering half of the window is not a man. If there is a man in the picture at all, and that is still very unclear, he must be sitting with his back toward the viewer.
There appears to be a low desk with a small bookcase on top in front of the window. In front of the desk is a three-legged stool. If that is indeed the back of a man sitting at the desk, then his feet and legs would have to be in front of the stool, and they would be obscured to the viewer.
However, I think it is more likely that the object in front of the desk on top of the stool is NOT the back of a man sitting. Rather, upon close examination, it appears to be a big dark leather satchel filled with stuff. You can make out the brown carrying handle at the top. Is this satchel the notorious Gladstone bag in which Jack supposedly carried his knife and possibly costumes and disguises?
Behind this satchel, laying on the desk, is another dark object. To me it appears to be a covered bird cage. In addition to the shape of the birdcage, one can make out a metal loop at the top that would be used to hang the birdcage from a wallhook or a floorstand. Is this birdcage Sickert's allusion to the veterinary student?
In front of the window, there is a man's jacket or tailcoat. It is hung upon a clothes tree -- those clothing stands some people use to hang up their clothes overnight so they don't get rumpled and they can wear them again the next day. One can see the wooden rounded form at the top of the clothes tree where a man could pose his hat. Since the light source emanates from behind through the windows, the coat is very dark. Nevertheless, one can make out several buttons in the front. But the front of the coat is too dark in this copy to examen it for bloodstains or anything else.
Now here is an interesting detail. It appears that the window is in two sections that open like french doors -- and the side on the right is partly swung open. The Venetian blinds are adjusted flat enough not only for some light to enter, but also for fresh air to enter. The clothes tree with the coat has been placed directly in front of this open window. Why? Could it be to dry out or air out the coat from any moisture and odors? For example, from sweat? From alcohol? For example, from blood?
One obvious aspect of the painting, which quite possibly had symbolic significance for Sickert, is the fact that we, the viewers are looking at the partial contents of this room through an open door. We are not inside the room, as the viewer is in Sickert's l'Ennui. From the light through the windows, it appears to be morning. Who opened the door? Jack The Ripper, returning after one of his murderous night excursions, or Walter Sickert, entering his own bedroom. This is a very important question to answer, together with: when did the scene shown in the painting occur: in the autumn of 1888, when the Whitechapel Murders occurred, or in 1908, when Sickert painted this painting, or perhaps a few years before 1908 when Sickert's landlady told him the about the veterinary student from Bornemouth.
Also, I would like to determine where this rooming house was located. From what I have read, the rooming house was located in Camden Town, a suburb, and not in or near the Whitechapel district of London. Now we know that Sickert lived in Camden Town between 1906-1908. The Camden Town Murders took place in 1906. Why would Jack The Ripper have lived in Camden Town in 1888? Why wouldn't he have rented a room closer to Whitechapel? Anyone could rent a furnished room for pittance in or near Whitechapel. Also to determine: was there any school of veterinary medicine in 1888 near Camden Town. Why would a poor, weak veterinary student have rented a room in Camden Town if there was no school of veterinary medicine within easy and cheap commuting distance?
One thing that I cannot find in this copy of the painting is an artist's signature. Maybe there is one around the door handle, but I can't make it out. Nor can I examine that door handle for signs of blood. The possibility of clues embedded in Sickert's brushwork is impossible to determine in a photograph.
There is some kind of light sitting on the desk, and it is illuminating 4-5 strange colored objects floating to the right of the birdcage. I have no idea yet what these objects could be. They are light green and pink -- which suggests birds, but the shapes have nothing birdlike about them. The light on the desk or bookcase looks like a small desk lamp with an electric bulb. I'm sure there were electric lamps in London by 1908, but how about 1888? When did private homes in London get electrified? Maybe it is a candle. I can't tell.
The most recognizeable feature in the painting is Sickert's metal headboard. This resembles metal headboards that appear in many of Sickert's paintings, expecially paintings of prostitutes who may or may not be dead. It also resembles, according to Cornwell, the headboard of one of The Ripper's victims. Did most of the people in London at the turn of the century use this particular metal headboard? You can tell the headboard is metal by the glint of the light. (The "glint of evil.") :<)
Lastly, it remains to point out once again what Sickert did with painting. He did not keep it. He did not try to sell it by placing it with any of his dealers. He gave it away. He gave it to one of his former students, the artist Cicely Hey -- who kept it herself, out of public view, until after Sickert's death in 1942. These facts are very revealing in any effort to determine what was Sickert's intention in this painting. There is also the fact, as Rosie saw with her own eyes, that Sickert wrote the title in pencil on the back of the painting -- so Sickert could rest assured that a viewer knew exactly what he/she was looking at, and not just a dark painting of any old bedroom. Unlike some other Sickert paintings, there is no alternative title for Jack The Ripper's Bedroom.
There is obviously a great deal of content in this painting that deserves very careful observation and analysis. And it is just as obvious to me that no one has yet done such an examination and analysis in print. No one has taken this painting seriously for almost a century. When I can get my hands on either a well-illumated high resolution copy or a report of a first-hand examination, there will be more to come.
Regards,
Mark Starr |
Tommy Nilsson
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, March 29, 2004 - 4:38 am: | |
Did Mark get the answers to all of his questions? Is there a good copy of Jack the Rippers bedroom available? It is hard to analyse the painting without one.
The room must be the one used in several paintings from the time around “Camden Town Murder” (at Mornington Crescent), from them we can get a clue or two.
The figure in the middle of the painting is so short that he (I think it is a man, maybe a young one) may be sitting, but it looks to me as if he is standing (we can see his feet?). In the other paintings from the room there is a mirror standing on a drawer. The mirror is often central in the paintings and shows different images. The black image behind the man is much bigger than then that mirror (in the other paintings), so it must be something else. I get the feeling that it is a black image looking at us…but of course that must be my imagination…C. G. Jung might have called that image a “daimon”?
In the other paintings the bed is placed in the middle of the room. In this painting the bed and the floor seems to be one image.
The lights in the Venetian blind must be the clue to something, one of the lights looks like a head to that black image and it also indicates that the time is early morning?!
Walter Sickert wrote to young painter and friend Nina Hamnett: “The one thing in all my experience I cling to is my coolness and leisurely exhilarated contemplation.…Let this advice be my perpetual and most solemn legacy to you” (Richard Shone; Walter Sickert, Oxford 1988, page 28).
Regards, Tommy
|
RosemaryO'Ryan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, March 29, 2004 - 6:10 pm: | |
Dear Mr Nilsson,
Ah, yes, those ubiquitous mirrors! Interesting that you find time to reflect upon these...but what do they mean? Have you seen the painting, "The Glass Wardrobe"? More work!
Rosey :-) |
Tommy Nilsson
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, April 05, 2004 - 8:34 am: | |
Dear Rosemary!
Nihil sine labore! I see many years of work with Mr Sickerts paintings in the future...
This weekend I was in Copenhagen (but I told my old mother I was going to London) and I visited Glyptoteket and got a lot of impressions.
Did not find any dead women in the paintings, but of course it was Degas, Monet and Renoir...;-)
The painting you refer to must be "L`armoire á Glace" (1924) and there is also one sketch and a study from 1922.
As always (almost) you can find the image of a woman in the mirror, as always (almost) she looks a bit tired...
Mr Sickert was, after all, a literally painter so there is always at least one story. With a mirror you can show two scenes in one painting and you may even see yourself..:-)
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
