|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Kurt Wagner
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, May 02, 2003 - 1:45 pm: |       |
hi I'm fairly new to all this, I'm looking for books on JtR, yesterday I went looking for "A Handbook for Attendants on the Insane" and to my dismay the local book store didn't have it, instead I picked up "Jack the Ripper: An Encyclopaedia" by John J. Eddleston. What I'm looking for exactly is what would seasoned Ripperologists suggest as required reading? I hope to become just as learned on this subject as some of you seem to be, thank you for your time  if anyone wishes to contact me on this subject, heres my E-mail address orbitsfallingfromthesky@hotmail.com
thanks again
|
Christopher DiGrazia
Police Constable
Username: Cmd
Post Number: 7
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 02, 2003 - 4:02 pm: | |
Kurt -
While Eddleston's Encyclopaediais a fairly decent omnibus book, it is unfortunately rife with errors which could cause you to trip up later on. However, any 'seasoned Ripperologist' would recommend Philip Sugden's The Complete History of Jack the Ripper as the best primer on the case. It also has the advantage of being the most readily available book on the Whitechapel Murders.
'Required reading,' of course, depends upon the compiler of lists, so any two Ripperologists will have a different take on what ought to be read immediately and what put aside for another day. However, were I asked, beyond CH I would also suggest for you:
- Donald Rumbelow, JTR: The Complete Casebook
- Stewart Evans and Keith Skinner, JTR: Letters From Hell
- Paul Begg, Martin Fido, Keith Skinner: The JTR A to Z
Those four books will give you all the grounding you need in the case. I would also recommend Bob Hinton's From Hell, Fido's The Crimes, Death and Detection of JTR, Bill Beadle's JTR: Anatomy of a Myth, Evans' JTR: First American Serial Killer, Skinner and Martin Howells' The Ripper Legacy and Begg's JTR: The Uncensored Facts (which is currently being revised for a new edition) as good follow-up books, though every year sees a new crop of books which are 'must-haves' in one way or another. And of course, I would also suggest a subscription to one or more of the Ripper magazines, Ripper Notes, Ripperologist, Ripperana or Ripperoo in order to keep up with the latest developments.
I hope this helps.
Best wishes,
Christopher-Michael |
Brian W. Schoeneman
Inspector
Username: Deltaxi65
Post Number: 202
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 02, 2003 - 4:56 pm: | |
Kurt,
I'd throw onto Chris' list Stewart Evan's "Ultimate Companion", as it's got all of the relevant primary documents. I'm slowly wearing mine out - it will soon be in almost as bad shape as my Sugden. 
B |
Steven G. Harsch
Police Constable
Username: Mrsteve74656
Post Number: 4
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 23, 2003 - 10:24 pm: | |
Hi. Was just wondering if anyone here as read the book advertised on the home page of this site. A Handbook for Attendants on the Insane: The Autobiography of Jack the Ripper as Revealed to Clanash Farjeon If anyone has read it, I'd love to hear some thoughts on it. I'm about halfway through it, but I'm not thrilled with it at all. I find most of it dull and drab. Aside from the accounts of the murders, the narrator just seems to be rambling on, randomly jumping from one thought to another. I considered dropping the book, but, as I've paid for it, I feel compelled to trudge through it's pages until the end. Who knows, it's possible it gets better, but right now it doesn't look optomisitic! Would love to hear other views on this - especially from someone who liked the book. Maybe I'm just not 'reading it right' Maybe I need another point of view to open my eyes! LOL Thanks everyone!
~STEVE~
 |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2728
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Saturday, May 24, 2003 - 7:37 am: | |
Hi Steven -
Personally, I liked the book - everything perhaps except for the ending which I thought a bit contrived. I suppose what I enjoyed most about it was the writing style. Not only was it beautifully crafted, but it was spot-on Victorian as well. Of course, part of being "spot-on Victorian" involves a certain level of 19th century pontification and self-aggrandizement - which may be what's turning you off. Poor Forbes Winslow does tend to rattle on, doesn't he?
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
Phoebe Rouse
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 03, 2003 - 2:47 pm: | |
Hey,
I have a question...I was just wondering out of all the books on 'Jack the Ripper' which is the most accurate ? I'm looking at "Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper", "Yours Truely, Jack the Ripper", and "The Diary of Jack The Ripper" are any of these worth checking out?
If someone could e-mail (imjustadrummer@weezer.org) me or post something to help me out that would be great!
Thanks...
Phoebs |
Robert Clack
Detective Sergeant
Username: Rclack
Post Number: 121
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 06, 2003 - 6:13 pm: | |
Hi Phoebe
The most accurate books are those that don't concentrate on a specific suspect.
Books like Phillip Sugden's "The Complete History of Jack the Ripper" or Stewart Evans and Keith Skinners "The Ultimate Jack the Ripper Sourcebook". deal with the known facts straight from the police and inquest reports. Books that deal with a specific suspect tend to be a bit light on evidence and tend to be mostly speculative.
If you want to get rid of your 'Portrait of a Killer' I need something to prop up my bed.
All the best
Rob |
Glenn L Andersson
Inspector
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 194
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 06, 2003 - 7:09 pm: | |
Hi Phoebe
I totally agree with Robert here. Those two books, Sugden's book and Evans'/Skinner's The Ultimate Sourcebook (or "Companion") are the one's most interesting, I feel, since they are strict factual books, without trying to push any special suspect, and that is the most contributive characteristics of a book when you want to start studying a case. The others can be an interest read as well, but don't start with them -- wait until you studied the facts (especially regarding Cornwell's book).
Apart from the two books mentioned by Clack, I can also recommend Donald Rumbelow's The Complete Jack the Ripper (watch out for the near identical title with Sugden's book) and Fido's, Begg's & Skinner's Jack the Ripper A-Z -- these are a bit out of date to some extent, but quite worth reading.
Good luck and all the best
Glenn L Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Alan Sharp
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 10, 2003 - 6:24 pm: | |
As well as the ones here (particularly The Complete Casebook) I'd recommend reading one book that isn't specifically Ripper related. It's "The Cases that Haunt Us" by John Douglas and Mark Olshaker. Douglas was a leading FBI profiler and head of the Behavioural Science Unit for many years and pretty much (in fact literally) wrote the book on criminal profiling. In the book he presents his profile of the Ripper which he readily admits is not complete as he was asked to do it for a television programme and followed his usual rules of basing the profile entirely on the evidence he was given, in this case by the programme producers. He also goes through his entire process in coming up with the profile. It makes for interesting reading, (even if the book does have a recommendation from Patricia Cornwell, hilariously mis-spelled Patrica, on the back!)
As for Portrait of a Killer, this book could come in handy. You never know when you might run out of toilet paper. |
Peter R. A. Birchwood
Sergeant
Username: Pbirchwood
Post Number: 23
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, November 29, 2003 - 5:42 am: | |
Jack the Ripper - the American Connection by Shirley Harrison
If you have Shirley's earlier edition, you only need this if you collect every possible edition of every possible Ripper Book. There are 8 pages about the Austin, TX murders of 1884-85 with the suggestion that Maybrick might have been a few hundred miles from Austin at the time and could get there by train in a day or so. That's it.
Expect next year: "Jack the Ripper - the Western Samoa Connection." |
Saddam
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, November 29, 2003 - 7:46 pm: | |
'I'd recommend reading one book that isn't specifically Ripper related. It's "The Cases that Haunt Us" by John Douglas and Mark Olshaker.'
>>Douglas, schmouglas. He isn't even close on the organized/disorganized dichotomy. It's not his fault, however. He is a profiler, not a philosopher. His work entails catching living criminals, not mediating oppositions.
Use your own mind.
Saddam |
Alan Sharp
Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 205
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 02, 2003 - 5:16 am: | |
Well that's got to be one of the longest periods between post and reply!
I do use my own mind and think for myself as you keep exhorting us to do David, but that's not really what you mean is it? What you really mean is that we should all use your mind and think like you.
In using my own mind, I choose to listen to the opinions and experience of others who have knowledge in areas that I do not, such as John Douglas or Philip Sugden or even Stephen Knight or even you! That doesn't mean swallow everything they say whole, it just means listen to what they have to say and then form your own opinion.
Or is that against the whole David Radka "I am right and everyone else is wrong" dogma? |
Sarah Long
Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 199
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 02, 2003 - 11:14 am: | |
David,
If none of us used our own minds then we would all have the same opinion, which we all quite clearly do.
Sarah |
Jason Scott Mullins
Sergeant
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 39
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 02, 2003 - 6:38 pm: | |
David -
Quick question: You think that a philosopher will crack the case and not anyone else?
crix0r |
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 511
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 03, 2003 - 11:55 am: | |
Surely philosophers don’t ‘crack’ cases like these. Don’t they hang on in there asking awkward questions for all eternity when they see a case they know will not be cracked by any of the non-philosophers who come to the board with answers?
I don’t actually see much wrong with that if it gets us to think again about any of our preconceptions – all of which have got us precisely nowhere so far.
Love,
Caz
|
Jason Scott Mullins
Sergeant
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 40
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 03, 2003 - 12:52 pm: | |
Hello Caz -
Perhaps.. though I was not by implication saying that it was a bad thing. I was more curious to see if that was what David had in mind when he typed that statement.
I'm all for thinking differently. I'm also almost always all for things that cause us to do so. There are some instances though, where as much as I'd like to wear the hat of philosopher, my instinct tells me that it's going to be evidence that proves anything one way or another. As it stands right now, unfortunately, evidence is lacking >=/
crix0r
P.S. Nice to finally meet you |
Sarah Long
Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 230
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 04, 2003 - 6:44 am: | |
Jason,
I like the fact that you said that about thinking differently. Many people think the same all the time and where did that get anyone? Nowhere. It is annoying when I think differently and there are so many people stuck in their ways that they laugh of any other variations to their own opinions.
Just wanted to say that.
Sarah |
Saddam
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 03, 2003 - 3:03 pm: | |
1. "If none of us used our own minds then we would all have the same opinion, which we all quite clearly do."
>>I agree. NONE of you use your own minds, and all of you do have essentially (to me at least) the SAME opinion. Therefore, the case is NOT solved (except privately, by me.)
2. "Quick question: You think that a philosopher will crack the case and not anyone else?"
>>Quick questions are for the most part asked by con artists and answered by suckers. Deeper reflection is the province of the more refined. But <yawn> yes, I do feel that philosophical thought is more or less required to get a handle on the epistemological trail here. At least it was for me. Basically, all I know is me. As John Lennon said: "I write about me because I know me."
3. As usual, Caz is correct. The more awkward the questions I ask, the better to get you to think with. Perspective solves the case.
4. "...as much as I'd like to wear the hat of philosopher, my instinct tells me that it's going to be evidence that proves anything one way or another."
>>The problem here is that you DON'T KNOW HOW to "wear the hat of the philosopher." Who says that philosophy interferes with or takes the place of the case evidence? All it does, as far as I can see, is invistigate what the evidence might be of. And as far as proof goes: Proof, schmoof! If you think Ripperology leads to proof, you're in the wrong field. Ripperology leads to satisfaction.
Saddam
|
Sarah Long
Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 231
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 04, 2003 - 6:56 am: | |
David,
Why should we care what you say? We do use our own minds. I have many different opinions to everyone on here, in fact there probably isn't one person on here who agrees with all I say, if any of it.
Therefore, the case is NOT solved (except privately, by me.) - Are you sure you're not Patricia Cornwall in disguise? You have your own OPINION. The only way for you to know the whole and proper truth is to travel back in time and witness Jack actually killing the victims.
You say you want to make us think. You mean, you want us all to think like you. When you finally publish your thoughts I'm sure people will find fault with your ideas too. You cannot claim to close to case unless you want people to slate you like Patricia Cornwall, you can only give your ideas and opinions no matter how convincing they might be. You cannot claim it is fact as you weren't there and neither were any of us.
Sarah
P.S. Being arrogant is NOT an attractive quality.
(Message edited by sarah on December 04, 2003) |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 222
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 04, 2003 - 8:02 am: | |
Philosophy is for the defeated.
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 515
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 04, 2003 - 8:17 am: | |
Hi RJ,
Philosophy is for us then, since the case defeats us all at present.
Nice to see you agreeing with David for once. 
(Unless of course the case hasn’t defeated you – do tell, or have you privately solved it?  )
Love,
Caz
|
Jason Scott Mullins
Sergeant
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 42
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 04, 2003 - 9:23 am: | |
David -
You know, I had a nice, long lucid and well thought out response... but I soon realized that it would only fuel your shriveled ego. Perhaps one day I will tire of your silly games and give you the digital pimp slap® you deserve. However, since arguing with you is like screwing for virginity.. at this time it just doesn't make sense to waste anymore cycles on you.
Since I refuse to get into a battle of wits with an unarmed man, I'm going to leave you with that thought.
Everyone:
Might I suggest we stop letting David here hijack threads? I, for one, will not bite when he comes into a thread with comments that have nothing to do with the given topic anymore.. seems ol David here just _craaaaaaaaaves_ attention and I don't think that I will contribute to his attaining it anymore. Anyone else with me?
Of course, we could always start a "Why David is so full of crap his eye's are brown" thread, but really, aside from personal satisfaction (both his and ours. Remember, David here isn't paid much attention to in real life.), what good would it do? Wait a sec.. David seems to think that this whole thing is about satisfaction.. perhaps that's what he wants. We've already established that he's only in this because, oh how did you put it david, ah yes "To get my ass kissed".
David: You are probably fairly smart, and sometimes I really want to like you and your idea's.. however most times you exhibit an intellect rivaled only by garden tools. This coupled with the fact that you seem to be very thick headed about changing your point of view makes it difficult to listen to anything you have to say.
Your's truly,
crix0r
P.S. If you choose to try to belittle me again, do not because surprised when I start fighting back. Also, please do so via email or another method. I do not want to clutter the boards.
|
Sarah Long
Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 242
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 04, 2003 - 9:36 am: | |
Jason,
I don't usually lash out at David anymore but his comment about having solved the case just got to me. I've known many arrogant people in my life and they are the MOST irritating people on this planet.
Anyway, I agree with you Jason, we should just ignore him.
Sarah |
Jason Scott Mullins
Sergeant
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 43
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 04, 2003 - 9:41 am: | |
Hey there Sarah -
Thanks I try to make my posts well thought out and have meaning.. otherwise, what's the point in opening my mouth!!
Oh, and to save you time and hair loss, I wouldn't worry much with trying to respond to David anymore. To me, it's simply a question of mind over matter. I no longer MIND because he no longer MATTERS.
Perhaps I'm being to harsh??? Nah, I don't think so.
Oh, and to get back on topic. I haven't picked up "Letters from hell yet" Is it any good? I've heard mixed reviews, so I'm not sure if I should go get it or not. What do you guy's think? Remembering of course that at this point, I'm more into it for the evidence side of things (as lacking as they are, I know) instead of the suspect side of things.
crix0r |
Jason Scott Mullins
Sergeant
Username: Crix0r
Post Number: 44
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 04, 2003 - 9:46 am: | |
Sarah -
Heheh, sorry.. I didn't get your last response until after I had posted my last response.. so I was kinda in limbo there for a moment.
Yes, I do not normally lash out either.. However, I felt someone had to stand up to him or we just might be forced to listen to him go on for ages to come.
crix0r |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
