|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
Thread |
Last Poster |
Posts |
Pages |
Last Post |
  | Archive through April 15, 2004 | Caroline Anne Morris | 25 | 1 | 4-15-04 10:42 am |
| |
 Closed: New threads not accepted on this page |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1538
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 15, 2004 - 11:00 am: |       |
Hi Caz,
I knew it! I knew it!
As soon as the diary was mentioned... Hihihi 
No, don't worry. I have promised not to involve myself any further in the Diary threads and I intend to keep it, I just made a short comment on Paul's post.
"Cornwell, on the other hand, should take her own deserved punishment like a woman - with good grace."
Hmmm... I wonder what could be appropriate..? Any suggestions?
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 993
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 15, 2004 - 11:51 am: | |
Hi Glenn,
Well, if she had any good grace, and good will toward men, Cornwell could afford to make it a front page story one day - "How I got hold of the wrong end of the ripper stick then used it to beat up a whole lot of good people who are only doing their best with the facts of the case." 
I was in fact here on this thread already, before Paul used the d word. No one expects Caz not to notice, surely?
Bowing out with the best will and the best grace I can muster right now ('Young' is doing amazing things with his tonsils, and 'Amazing' is currently being serenaded by George Michael),
Love,
Caz, Will & Grace
XX
PS See ya next week - my lovely ma-in-law is coming tomorrow afternoon to stay for the weekend, and I have a job interview in the morning, so I have to practise my cooking skills and my sitting-on-the-boss's-lap skills and try not to confuse one with the other.  |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1539
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 15, 2004 - 12:34 pm: | |
Hi Caz,
Ah, that would be a nice gesture of her indeed, but well... Ha! To paraphrase Buddy Holly: That'll be the day!.
Good luck with the job interview. I'll give you ten pounds if you can prove you sat his on lap...
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Kris Law
Inspector
Username: Kris
Post Number: 243
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 15, 2004 - 1:12 pm: | |
Hello all,
I know I'm jumping in a bit late here, but for my two cents it came to two things: firstly, the title Case Closed. And yes, I know most books about the Ripper have some equally inane subtitle but that one takes the cake. Secondly, her entire argument was based on the letters! Ok, so at the end she might haven proven that Sickert forged some letters, so what? So did half of England. That doesn't make a killer in my books.
-K |
Jason Scott Mullins
Inspector
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 198
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 10:38 am: | |
Caz -
Did you know, for instance, that Jack liked to treat his victims to a little something from the missus to make them look - how should I say - more deserving of their punishment?
Might I ask what you are referring to?
Oh, and to answer the question, I don't know. I haven't read it yet as it pushes a suspect.
crix0r |
Jason Scott Mullins
Inspector
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 199
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 11:03 am: | |
Hey There Stephen -
Personally, gender doesn't play a large role in any decision I make. I could care less whether she was a women, man, or marmot. Attitude, however, does. I haven't read the book, but from what I've read about her (in passing, I don't have much interest in her subject matter) she's a little to over inflated for her own good (per Scott Medine's dissertation).
This alone could put people off. Especially when she won't admit to being wrong (as I've heard she has done).
As Captain Hook would say... Bad Form.
Since I have't read the book, or met her personally, I can't say. I know I don't dislike her.. Hell, I don't even know her :P
crix0r |
Chris Michetti
Detective Sergeant
Username: Pl4tinum
Post Number: 122
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, April 16, 2004 - 2:11 pm: | |
I was looking at one of the pictures in her book; the one where the old man is at the table drinking and reading a newspaper, and the woman is leaning on the counter behind him. Her figure casts a very small shadow on the wall in front of her. When I say small, I mean... smaller than the size of her hand, let's say. Meanwhile, she says that the shadow is the shadow of a man creeping up from behind her.
First of all it bears no resemblance to a man, nor is the shadow behind her. She's a nut!
Chris 
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 997
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 19, 2004 - 10:18 am: | |
Hi Jason,
You might ask, but as I explained to Paul and Glenn, it would be better if any diary related questions appeared on the appropriate thread - or better still via email if you'd like me to answer them personally, as I will not be able to visit the boards as frequently in future.
Hi Glenn,
Thanks, the good luck wishes paid off cos I got the job (I start officially next week) and I didn't even need to sit on his lap to get it. Keep wishing me luck and hold onto your ten pounds, and I may never have to sit on his lap to keep the job.
There's a moral there somewhere.
Lots of love and bags of luck,
Caz
X
|
Alan Sharp
Chief Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 545
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 19, 2004 - 11:19 am: | |
Quick twopennyworth
I have been pretty vocal on my condemnation of Cornwell's book in the past, I won't go into it all again. I will point out the one crime that I consider unforgivable which has nothing to do with the sloppy research, hectoring tone or the obvious fabrications within the text.
It comes at the end of the book. The very end. In fact, the last five words. It's where she praises all those investigators who have gone before her. The words are "we have solved it together".
I don't think I need to say why, do I? |
Jason Scott Mullins
Inspector
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 200
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 19, 2004 - 11:35 am: | |
You might ask, but as I explained to Paul and Glenn, it would be better if any diary related questions appeared on the appropriate thread - or better still via email if you'd like me to answer them personally, as I will not be able to visit the boards as frequently in future.
So if it would be better if it wasn't mentioned here, why did you mention it (Indirectly)
I had no idea it was in reference to the diary. I do own a copy of the book, but I have yet to open it. No need to taint my research with it. It does live under the fiction section of my bookcase, if that tells you anything.
Since I'm now curious, I'll bite and take you up on that offer of email correspondence :P However, you'll have to find a way of getting your E-Mail address to me.. it's hidden.
crix0r |
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 211
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 19, 2004 - 11:12 pm: | |
Stephen,
Good question. To be begin with, the old vaudeville lines "How's your wife?" "Compared to what?" actually have relevance here. That is, the book can only be meaningfully compared to other "single-suspect advocacy books." The short answer to the question, then, is that the Cornwell book is certainly no worse than the norm and in some areas better.
Written by a prolific and successful author of detective fiction, the book is literate. And that is no small plus compared to some books within the genre. Obviously, if someone were to have the iron-clad goods on Jack and the case were made in a pamphlet that was poorly translated from an ill-written treatise in Serbo-Croat we would all gobble it up anyway, but until that should happen a book with a decent prose style is welcome.
Again, in comparison to other single-suspect books, Portait of a Killer is no worse than most of the others in that category in terms of logic and reasoning. That, however, does not say much since all such books are sadly deficient in regard to their arguments: picking, omiting and tailoring the facts to fit a suspect is simply an exercise in sophistry.
Finally, the author does deserve some credit in pursuing the DNA and paper-lot evidence of the letters. The odds are still large enough to suggest no more than a moderately possible match between a few Ripper letters and the Sickert standards, but that still probably brings us closer to naming the writer of a couple letters than we have been before.
That said, to adduce those possible matches as proof of Sickert's culpability as the Ripper (which the author does) is sheer nonsense. Still, if there truly is a match, that fact could provide valuable insights into understanding why so many people were moved to write hoaxing letters.
The author's other arguments are sheer fantasy and in the end tell us much more about the author than either Sickert or the Ripper. The author depends almost entirely upon "possibility" in order not to exclude Sickert as a suspect. Although by his own accounts and those of others Sickert was in France during much of the time of the Ripper depredations, the author shows that it was just barely possible for Sickert to have commuted between France and London in order to have committed the murders. Hesto-presto, since the author believes Sickert did it, what is possible suddenly becomes certainty.
That sort of reasoning is a staple of detective fiction (of which I too have been guilty) and makes for a lot of fun -- though in such stories there is almost always a moment where the murderers alibi totally unravels, and that was not so in her Sickert tale. The real world is quite different, however, and that sort of playing fast and loose with logic the author has previously employed to entertain readers of fiction cannot survive the scrutiny of a fact-based analysis. The author's instincts for fiction betrayed the quest for fact.
Secondly, the author relied heavily upon subjective analysis of Sickert's art. Depravity, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder only -- you say tomAto, I say tomAHto and 'twas ever thus. Aliens don't communcate by means of crop circles and artists don't confess to murder with ambiguous drawings. There is an irony to the author's argument, however. To suggest that an artist who may have been obsessed with crime was therefore a serial killer is rather strange when it comes from an author obsessed with crime. As it is, those who write about crime are generally less violence prone than most people (perhaps the writing about violence is cathartic) and the same would seem to hold for the sort of paintings Sickert occasionally turned out.
Why, then has Patricia Cornwell been so excoriated on the boards? You will note this paragraph is the first in which I have mentioned the author's sex. I did so consciously since I don't think the fact the author is female has much bearing. There may be a few misogynists around, but only a few. In fact, I have detected more unfavorable comments because she is an American.
I suspect much of the negative reaction to Cornwell was because her book was full of small errors of fact about the Ripper crimes, the sort of facts that are committed to memory like a catechism for real Ripperologists. Clearly, Cornwell's Ripper research was only superficial (and most probably done by aides). Despite that, her name-fame not only secured her a healthy book contract but also resulted in exciting sales numbers worldwide.
Rather unfair, especially to real students of JtR, but so what else is new? And we should all keep in mind that, just like the proverbial blind pig that occasionally finds an acorn, someone with even less knowledge of the Ripper crimes could someday stumble upon the solution. An author's arguments rather than mastery of Ripper minutiae should be what is important. Cornwell and her book, however, fail on both counts.
Added to that, I suspect Cornwell is in ill-repute among most on these boards because many of her champions here not only parrot her deficient theories but mirror many of her abrasive, dismissive and off-putting attitudes toward those who find the book's arguments less than persuasive.
Was the book mostly nonsense? Yes. Was it more egregious nonsense than most similar books provide? Nah.
Don.
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1001
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 3:16 am: | |
Hi Jason,
I don't know why the d word was mentioned here, but when Glenn admitted that he could learn nothing new about the crimes from reading the diary, I simply couldn't let it pass without comment - my bad.
Anyway, no harm done, and I don't know why my email address is hidden on my profile - I didn't hide it deliberately and don't know how to un-hide it. In case it's supposed to be that way, just click on the 'send a private message' feature, if you are still interested, include your own email address (yours is hidden too), and I can then talk with you - about blind pigs and acorns.
Love,
Caz
X
(Message edited by caz on April 20, 2004) |
Jason Scott Mullins
Inspector
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 203
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 9:53 am: | |
Hey There Caz -
Check thy private message. Oh, you saw the profile.. whatcha think of the pic?
crix0r |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1002
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 12:36 pm: | |
Confusing, to be honest.
You describe yourself as male - so far so good - then you go and call yourself a dirty blonde (with an e, implying you're female) with hazel eyes, hence my confusion.
Love,
Caz
X
PS Got your message - I'll try to respond tomorrow if that's ok. |
Jason Scott Mullins
Inspector
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 206
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 - 1:01 pm: | |
Oh no, that wasn't my intent. I personally had no idea that the e on the end of 'blonde' denoted gender. I've always spelled it that way.
I was more asking about the picture.. thought you might get a kick out of that. As for my eye color, Hazel, I have lived most of my english speaking life to think that it meant "all colors", meaning if I wear a blue shirt, the dominant color seems to be blue, but if I wear a black shirt, they turn sort of a brown, etc.
However, dictionary.com labels it a yellowish brown. Hmmm.. More research is required.
Take your time on the response, no need to rush.
crix0r |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1011
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2004 - 8:28 am: | |
Hi Jason,
I get a kick out of photos full stop. Your choice is no exception. No probs about the dirty blonde misunderstanding - wasn't sure if it was really your hair colour or some secret desire to find yourself one - called Hazel perhaps!
Shall we give this thread back to the dirty blonde Cornwell gal now, who may have only thought she knew, just like so many others?
Love,
Caz
X
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1591
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2004 - 9:35 am: | |
Hi Caz,
Since you asked about the hidden mail address. I asked Stephen about it earlier myself, and apparently the reason for this (all of our mail addresses are now hidden) is some crank and vicious mails delivered to some on the Boards, so therefore Stephen (rightly so, I suppose) choose to hide the addresses and e-mail lists from the general public.
Still, we are free to use the special contact service through the profile pages as usual.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1014
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2004 - 1:18 pm: | |
Hi Glenn,
Thanks - yes, I only just heard about these vicious mails today, when someone thought I'd been sending them viruses deliberately via email. I didn't know this person, and their email address wasn't even in my address book until they complained to me. I wouldn't have a clue how to send a virus to anyone and there is no one in the world who could possibly deserve one to be thrust upon them, from me or from anyone else.
Just wanted to make that clear, in case anyone else had received something like this and harboured suspicions about the apparent 'sender'.
Nasty stuff indeed.
Love,
Caz
X
PS Now back to Cornwell?
|
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 214
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 21, 2004 - 3:30 pm: | |
Caz,
"I wouldn't have a clue how to send a virus to anyone..."
Try sneezing on the letter just before you put it in the envelope. Oh, computer virus -- never mind.
Don. |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1015
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 22, 2004 - 11:51 am: | |
Hi Don,
Apparently, there are a limited number of cold viruses (something like 200 of the blighters I believe), and you can't catch each one more than once. That's why people in middle age tend to suffer less with colds than youngsters - they've probably had most of the 200 by then!
So my sneezes are hopefully just as harmless as hubby's computer.
Love,
Caz
X
PS Poor old Pat won't recognise this thread as her own soon, the only similarity being the useless information. 
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
