|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2772
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2003 - 12:03 pm: |       |
The Ripper Diary: The Inside Story
Keith Skinner, Seth Linder and Caroline Morris
Sutton Publishing, 2003.
Hardcover, 320pp., illus.
From Sutton Publishing:
"Every bit as mysterious as the Whitechapel murders themselves, the "Ripper Diaries" have intrigued and infuriated both historical researchers and the "Ripperologists" since they first came to light in 1992. Either one of the most sensational finds of the 20th century or one of its most brilliant literary hoaxes, the diary of Jack the Ripper has created its own tangled and tortuous history. It is this history which Keith Skinner, Seth Linder and Caroline Morris disentangle in a work of literary sleuthing which offers a reassessment of the evidence and insight into the personalities involved in Ripper research. "
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
Scott Nelson
Sergeant
Username: Snelson
Post Number: 20
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, July 10, 2003 - 11:24 pm: | |
I'm eagerly awaiting the publication of this new book. The diary debate has been pretty stale, if not non-existent in the last year or so. One of the new book's authors is well-known to these boards for her even-handed viewpoints, logic, humour, and an unrelentling veracity to her posts. I'm looking forward to reading the book, even more to the possibility of reading an autographed copy :-} [but I'll buy it-Stephen, please release more info when it becomes available]
Congratulations Caz, and to Keith and the mysterious Mr. Linder |
Martin Fido
Detective Sergeant
Username: Fido
Post Number: 73
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 11, 2003 - 3:38 am: | |
Why is Amazon telling me this is not available until November?
Martin F |
Kevin Braun
Sergeant
Username: Kbraun
Post Number: 46
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 11, 2003 - 9:36 am: | |
Congratulations Caz,
I look foward to reading "The Ripper Diary: The Inside Story", even if it isn't available until November. I'm getting the same message from Amazon.
Take care,
Kevin
|
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 230
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 11, 2003 - 10:43 am: | |
Hi, all--
Indeed, congratulations to Keith, Caroline, and Seth on the imminent appearance of this forthcoming title which will be a boon to the Ripper world as well as representing the fruit of their hard work on chronicling the history of this controversial document. Martin, I understand from Paul Begg that arrangements have been made to have the British publishers Sutton have the book launch at the UK Ripper convention in Liverpool next month. However perhaps the American publisher's book launch will be later? Just a thought. In any case, it will be great to have this much anticipated book out.
Could somebody please explain to me why, why, is the Maybrick Diary so often referred to as "the Ripper Diaries"?????
The Sutton blurb says 'Every bit as mysterious as the Whitechapel murders themselves, the "Ripper Diaries" have intrigued and infuriated both historical researchers and the "Ripperologists" since they first came to light in 1992.'
There is only one "Diary" is there not.... unless that is the new pages supposedly found by Mike Barrett constitute another diary? However, that is a relatively new phenomenon and I have seen the term "Ripper Diaries" down through the years usually in British press reports, or I think, possibly in publishers blurbs like this one. Hmmmmmm. 
All the best
Chris |
Christopher T George
Inspector
Username: Chrisg
Post Number: 231
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 11, 2003 - 11:19 am: | |
Hi, all--
I wanted to bring up something about the cover of The Ripper Diary: The Inside Story as shown above. As most of you know, I do not believe the Maybrick Diary is the real deal. I believe it to be a fake concocted by persons or a person unknown. So in effect, to my mind, the Ripper case, and the Diary case are two different things. The Maybrick Diary purports to be a diary written by a man who was or thought he was the Ripper. Why then, might I ask, does the script handwritten "Jack the Ripper" that has been used on the left hand side of the cover appear I believe, but may be mistaken, to come from one of the many "genuine" letters of 1888 or thereabouts in the PRO and City of London Record Office that purported to come from the Ripper? Why was the script handwritten "Jack the Ripper" not the one that appears at the end of the Diary?
I realize that this question is linked to the promotional and artistic choices made by Sutton Publishing, possibly something over which the authors had no control, though might I conjecture that Keith Skinner, as the co-author (with Stewart Evans) of a book on the Ripper letters, possibly supplied this image? Possibly also the authors and Sutton were not able to use images from the Diary?
I am a bit perturbed that a genuine artifact from the case might have been used to promote this book about a document that might have only been concocted as recently as the period following the Ripper centenary in 1988. I mean no major criticism of the authors of what is I know going to prove an interesting if possibly itself controversial look at the Diary, but do question the esthetic/artistic/historical choice made for the cover as shown on these boards.
Best regards
Chris George |
Caroline Anne Morris
Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 206
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 14, 2003 - 6:10 am: | |
Hi All,
Please do not click on 'Caroline Morris' on the Amazon site expecting to find details of other stuff I've written. Apparently I've done a book on the NHS that I know nothing about! Obviously my name is far too common. 
All I would ask is that no one prejudge or presume anything about the book until or unless you see the finished article up close and personal. Then of course, you will be absolutely entitled, and expected, to let rip with all your individual concerns.
Thank you for all the kind comments so far.
Love,
Caz |
Monty
Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 235
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 11:07 am: | |
My fellow Woolybacks,
Just for those who care, this book (The Ripper Diary: The Inside Story) is now a-selling in the Shires branch of a well known bookstore in Leicester.
Thats The Ripper Diary: The Inside Story...
...got it ? its in Leicester..........now !!!!!!
Get The Ripper Diary: The Inside Story before stocks run out !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Anyway, I guess this post is for Young Jenni Pegg (her being the only Leicestershire lass I know who frequents these boards).
Later
Monty
PS Caz, was that ok ?? I didnt over do it did I ???
Usual fee 
|
Thomas C. Wescott
Police Constable
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 7
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 2:02 pm: | |
Caz,
I haven't been regularly visiting the Casebook as of late, but I haven't entirely disappeared, either. I wanted to take this opportunity to congratulate you and your co-authors on the publication of your book. This is one I definitely look forward to reading. Any other projects on the horizon?
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Caroline Anne Morris
Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 297
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - 2:40 pm: | |
Thanks Monty and Tom,
It's a mighty strange feeling for me, having walked to the local Post Office clutching the final proofs in my hot little hand to return to the publisher, then all of a sudden finding the finished product has begun to reach the shops!
No other projects yet, Tom. Let me get me breath back first.
Love,
Caz
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 87
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 4:21 pm: | |
which well jknown store would that be???
i'm guessing i know where to look, thanks!
i didn't realise this was out already!
anyway i hope there was more than one copy left when you left the store monty! (how many copir=es are you hogging!!!!!) |
Steve Stanley
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, August 28, 2003 - 2:07 pm: | |
Monty, Leicester Library also has a copy..got it today,
Steve |
Monty
Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 240
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 11:59 am: | |
Steve,
You swine !!!!!
Monty
 |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 90
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 02, 2003 - 2:24 pm: | |
steve
you swine
remember me and monty can always reserve it!
jp |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 91
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 07, 2003 - 12:14 pm: | |
hi,
having just brought this book and read it over the weekend there are some things i would like to ask. remeber i was too young to read heavy weight newspapers in 1993 so sorry if i ask something obvious!!!!!!
i must first say i throughly enjoyed the book it was informative and a v. good read i would recomend it to a friend.
firstly i must state that i am once again concerned by the notion in a diary book that some evidence that did not come to light until the late 80s or early ninties must mean that the diary was euther a modern forgery or a real genuwine article. this inforemation was somewhere it was not in a vacum someone had it and access to it. even if we are talking about stuff in the pro then all manner of people have access to these supossedly closed documents (not that i am accusing anyonew of anything but these things need to be considered. as does the prospect of police at the time knowing these things. if we can know it now surely it was in theory possible to know it at other points in history?
i am also confused (its being a student for you!) as to what the authors actually think about the diary (i assume thay are remaining non commited to any theory).
what about the rest of the peole involved are their likely to be any updates to books
jennifer |
Caroline Anne Morris
Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 313
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 08, 2003 - 5:44 am: | |
Hi Jennifer,
Can I please make it clear for other potential readers that the authors do not express any opinions, or come to any conclusions, regarding the internal content of the diary, or the potential implications of certain information not being in the public domain before the late 1980s.
Nor do we explore any argument made by others that this 'must mean' the diary is either a modern forgery or the true confession of James Maybrick.
The book is not about what the authors think. It was written in an attempt to provide a clearer picture of events over the ten years since the diary and watch came to light, and a greater insight into the people who were or are involved with both. Some myths about both may be exploded along the way, and some suspicions may be confirmed, by our reporting of what was actually said and done. It will be interesting to see if this leads anyone with previously strong beliefs or assumptions to have a rethink, or feel even surer of their ground, but at least it should be the documented facts doing the work, without the authors' individual or combined powers of persuasion getting in the way.
Obviously I can't answer for Seth or Keith, but even if I felt the information we have to date allowed me to commit to a particular theory to explain both the artefacts' origins (which I don't, and it's within the realms of possibility that I never will, which for some reason bugs those who insist that the explanation was always easy and obvious, and don't think that having more detailed information is likely to change anything), I hope I would still be reluctant to muddy the waters by airing my own views. In the absence of any conclusive proof, that's all it would amount to - one more viewpoint.
Shirley Harrison's updated edition of her diary book should be available any time now from Blake Publishing.
Love,
Caz |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 92
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, September 08, 2003 - 1:59 pm: | |
thanks caz
your book was so good that when i bropught it (friday) with two others i had read it (third) by sunday!
jennifer |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2839
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 09, 2003 - 12:15 am: | |
Here's the Casebook review...
__________________________________________________
"Objectivity requires taking subjectivity into account."
- Lorraine Code
There's simply no middle ground when it comes to the Maybrick diary. You're either for it or against it. Even those who fancy themselves to be "on the fence" generally angle their disposition toward one of the two rival camps. And so it is with the authors of Ripper Diary: The Inside Story, who proclaim their work to be "the first to examine the diary objectively." Linder, Morris and Skinner admirably show no direct support for either side of the argument, but it becomes abundantly clear after only a few pages that their collective compass tilts ever so slightly toward the pro-diary claimants.
That's not to say that the journalistic threesome believe the diary to be the real McCoy; not by a long-shot. But it is important to note that their numerous analyses are noticeably more forgiving when discussing various pro-Diary claims than vice-versa. So be it. As I said, everyone has their bias in this emotionally-charged dispute. (My own bias, for the record, is against the diary - I believe it to be a modern forgery - and perhaps that colors my perception)
"Sometimes we remain true to a cause simply because its opponents are unfailingly tasteless."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
For the benefit of those who are not familiar with the general outlines of the diary controversy, I'll try to summarize the major players briefly. There are, in the most general terms, three competing research camps - two feuding pro-diary groups, and one vociferously anti-diary group.
Shirley Harrison heads the first "pro" group. She contends that the diary is absolutely genuine, but has generally been pragmatic enough in publication to admit that it is "a belief, not a proven fact." Harrison was the first to investigate the diary, and the first to publish her findings.
The second pro-diary group is, or was, headed by Paul Feldman, a "relentlessly driven human dynamo" according to the authors of Ripper Diary. Feldman agrees that the diary is genuine, and has no qualms about publishing that opinion as absolute fact. His research methods are wide-reaching, but also chaotic and, at times, amateurish. On several occasions, Feldman refuses to share his research with the Harrison group, and although both camps are technically on the same side, there is a great deal of antagonism between them.
The most vocal of the anti-diary contingents is headed by Melvin Harris, himself a Ripper author and self-proclaimed hoax buster. Harris unequivocally proclaims the diary to be a modern forgery. Though intellectually at opposite ends of the spectrum, Harris and Feldman share the same dogged determination to prove their case and outwit the rival camp. As a result, the most bitterly vituperative aspects of the diary controversy center around their clash of personalities. At times - indeed at most times - it is difficult to discern whether their goal is to demolish their rival's argument… or simply to demolish their rival.
"What a long, strange trip its been."
- The Grateful Dead
The eleven-year saga of the Maybrick diary is confusing, complicated and inescapably tortuous. That the authors of Ripper Diary were able to compile all of it into such a surprisingly readable text is nothing short of miraculous. It may not be as riveting as the latest Patricia Cornwell novel (ahem), but for anyone who's been following the various twists and turns of the diary controversy over the past decade, it really is a near-perfect chronological summation of events.
Every ink test, paper examination, handwriting comparison, and ion migration test is meticulously covered, as are the various media battles between Robert Smith, The Sunday Times, Warner Books and other corporations who came into contact with the diary. Arguments from all sides are examined and contrasted. For every claim, there is a counter-claim. The first Baxendale report stated that the diary could not have been written before 1945 - but Baxendale later retracted this statement and conceded that it could date as far back as 1889. Ion migration testing placed the diary at 1921, plus or minus twelve years - but later it was admitted that the range could be more like thirty years in either direction.
The Sunday Times claimed phrases used in the diary such as "one off instance" and "top myself" were singularly 20th century expressions. Not so, says Shirley Harrison, who claims to have found Victorian-era documents using these expressions. The handwriting doesn't match Maybrick's will. No problem, his will was forged. But it also doesn't match the Dear Boss letter. Ah, well that's because Maybrick had multiple personality syndrome.
Michael Barrett confessed to forging the diary… then he retracted his confession. Then he retracted his retraction. Then he … well, you get the idea. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
The diary came from Tony Devereux. No, wait. It came from Anne Graham, who got it from Billy Graham. Michael Barrett isn't really Michael Barrett (oh wait, he is), and Anne Graham isn't really Anne Graham (no, wait, that's wrong too). Anne Graham was part of a government cover-up because of an illicit affair with a member of the IRA - or wait, on second thought, that was just a joke. Billy Graham is a descendant of James Maybrick… no wait, Florie Maybrick. Yes, that one seems to fit. Except the birth records are missing - but (of course!) that's because Anne went to Australia in the 1970s. And didn't you know that Robbie Johnson was murdered?
"Dogs got personality. Personality goes a long way"
- Jules Winnfield (Pulp Fiction)
The whole of the story, for anyone brave enough (or foolish enough) to ingest it all, is delicately laid out in Ripper Diary. It's a story driven more by personalities than by academic inquiry - and really, that's why the book succeeds. The book is being marketed as an objective, academic record of how the Maybrick diary has been tested and investigated, and on that level it achieves a certain success. But that's not its best selling point.
Outside of a few dozen isolated Ripper fanatics, no one is really debating the diary anymore. The general public and academia have moved on to greener pastures. Sutton Publishing should have done more to market the human aspect of Ripper Diary. That's what makes the book so engaging. Its Feldman and Harris, Barrett and Graham, Dangar and Warren and all the rest who make the story so interesting. Its their collective obsessions and psychoses, their ambitions and theories and faults that keep the reader's interest. Its the human story that the larger audience will connect with. The diary story stopped being about the diary years ago… today, it's the circus of personalities that prevails.
And that may not be a bad thing. Hollywood may have backed out on Feldman's lucrative movie deals, but I'll wager there's a still great film in all of this. A comedy, of course. The Maybrick Follies…
Maybe Woody Allen would direct?
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
John V. Omlor
Detective Sergeant
Username: Omlor
Post Number: 116
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 09, 2003 - 8:01 am: | |
Yup.
Nice job. 
Many thanks,
--John (who can hear the clarinet now)
PS: RIP Warren Zevon, who has hastened down the wind. Keep him in your heart for a while. He made London even more famous than it already was, and his hair was perfect.
"Roland was a warrior..." |
David O'Flaherty
Detective Sergeant
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 135
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 09, 2003 - 8:56 am: | |
Still not available in the US until November, eh? What causes the wide disparity between release dates--some kind of international customs rigmarole?
Dave |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 2840
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 09, 2003 - 9:09 am: | |
Why not just order it from Amazon.UK? Shipping is only an extra $2US than it would be from Amazon.com, and you'll have it within a week.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0750929545/casebojacktherip
Never understood the American reticence to purchase items from non-American web sites...
Stephen P. Ryder, Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper |
David O'Flaherty
Detective Sergeant
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 136
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 09, 2003 - 9:12 am: | |
You know, I never even thought of it. Thanks, Stephen!
Dave |
Gary Alan Weatherhead
Inspector
Username: Garyw
Post Number: 349
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 30, 2003 - 7:44 am: | |
Hi All
I found a Ist U.K. ed. at my my local bookseller. It was apparantly imported either by accident or for someone who ordered it and failed to pick it up.
I am flying Keith, Seth and Caz over from England to autograph it.
Best
Gary |
R.J. Palmer
Inspector
Username: Rjpalmer
Post Number: 248
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 03, 2004 - 1:22 pm: | |
Awhile back, I had promised someone associated with the above title to give my comments on the book, once I had a chance to study it. Since learning of the sad death of Melvin Harris, I somehow feel less inclined to bring the matter up. So many of those associated with the Diary (now almost ten years ago) have now died, or have flatly announced their desire to turned their backs on it. Perhaps now is the best time to finally “let it go.” I’ve followed the strange saga very closely for a number of years, and, in that spirit, I consider the following my own final assessment, as well as an effort to keep my promise. My apologies if my thoughts are a bit jumbled.
One of the first things that struck me when reading this book was the statement by Robert E. Davis, a crime and history buff from Texas (who also recently passed away) who sought to buy the so-called Maybrick watch. As I remember it, one of the long-standing arguments by those in the Diary 'camp' has been that Mr. Johnson had never sought to profit from the watch. Shirley Harrison, for instance, reported this as follows (Blake ed., pg. 247): "Meanwhile Albert--who was living on a very modest income--turned down an offer from America for $40,000 for the watch. He was not interested in money." This seems a bit coy in retrospect, for reading the actual statements by Mr. Davis in the book, one is left with a very different impression. (pg. 78-79 of Skinner, Linder, Morris) "I would be very interested in working out some arrangement to purchase the watch for my collection" (Mr. Davis writes to the Johnson's solicitor) "but after our conversation it was apparent that your clients place a much greater value on the watch than I feel it is worth." The authors of the book go on to state: "the (unquoted) figure the Johnsons had in mind was clearly well beyond [Davis's] own estimation." In other words, the apparent fact is that it really wasn't so much a matter of the Johnsons not 'being interested in money" (as was sometimes reported) but that they were, in fact, looking for a 'better price.' The whole thing is confounded by a further revelation that Robert Smith was particularly concerned with the selling of the watch to a third party since it was part of the alleged confirmation of the diary’s worth and that Mr. Smith actively sought (although the outcome is not made clear) to have the Johnsons sign an agreement not to sell the watch. True, this, in itself, doesn’t tell us much about the watch or the watch’s provenance. Maybe it doesn't even tell us much about Mr. Johnson's honesty; but it does put grave doubts on the argument that the watch’s owners did not ever attempt to profit from it.
The book spends quite a bit of space re-living the strange and convoluted theories of Paul Feldman, and perhaps this is the most trying aspect of the book. The authors go to a great deal of trouble to accurately portray what was going on at the time Feldman’s investigation, yet, through no fault of their own, the section dealing with the Anne/Billy Graham provenance is as confusing and unconvincing as ever. Ms. Graham even seems to completely contradict her father (p. 127). She states “He said his Granny’s friend had given it to her and his mother had given it to him.” As a point of fact, Billy Graham stated on three different occasions that his Granny made no mention whatsoever of where she had received the diary. At one point he explicitly states Granny said nothing; at another he denies even remembering the book, except that Ann found it. Thus, the Formby/Yapp provenance seems to be entirely a confabulation on the part of Ms. Graham, and no documentation of any connection between these two characters has ever been show to exist. The timing of her revelation is damning, as well as the strange statement to the assembled researchers, authors and publishers that she now “gives them back” the Diary; ie., which I took to mean that she was pumping life back into it after Barrett’s initial confession dealt it a death-blow.
But enough of that, I suppose. The book in general is an interesting, if bizarre and unflattering look at the world of publishing. It also, to be honest, left me quite sad. It is, at its heart, a rather tawdry tale of bickering, alcoholism, invoices and counter-invoices, legal suits, threats and counter-threats, bizarre theorizing, and money squabbles. It is not far removed from Chaucer’s Pardoner’s Tale in points of morality. Reading the text, one is left with the implication that for a book that apparently sold 250,000 copies or more, no one made a dime off it. The money seems to have evaporated into thin air or into the pockets of laywers; Ms. Harrison was not allotted enough advance money to properly research the diary; Barrett was left without furniture and eventually without a house; Feldman went broke and perhaps was once on the verge of being suicidal; the various researchers dunned other researchers, and on and on. The promise of a Hollywood Movie about Maybrick stands in the shadows like the elephant in the room that no one talks about, and I had the impression that that promise of Californian money kept propelling the characters foward.
If I had one major criticism of the book, it would be that the authors needed to spend more time looking critically at the statements of the various people associated with the Diary. Perhaps this is a bit unfair, for that, of course, was not their aim. But should the graphologist Reed Haye’s opinions (based on an admittedly poor quality photocopy) really stand in opposition to Maureen Casey Owens, Kenneth Rendell, and Joe Nickell--experts in their field?
By and large, the authos leave the various strange characters to tell their own stories, in their own words. I understand that this was a conscious choice by the authors, but I feel this sort of thing would have been entirely appropriate for a book dealing with life in the trenches during World War I, or some similar topic. It works, in so far as it gives a look into the strange happens in 1992-1995. But here, I think, what the average reader is probably really interested in is the solution to the 'mystery'; they would appreciate guidance to help clear-up the muddle. Instead, the waters are left muddy...almost as if by design. Extraordinary statements go unchallenged or unexplored. One small example. Stanley Dangar is quoted making statements about tests in Spain that corroborated the UK watch tests. But is this true? No details are given; not the slightest hint as to whether this is fact or whether it was a statement made with the taste of sour grapes on Mr. Dangar’s lips. Another example. The authors quote Evemy and Harrison at length, "Where did [the author of the diary] find the reference to the hitherto unknown character of Mrs Hammersmith mentioned in the journal? * * * How did he know about * * * Maybrick's great friend George Davidson?" . but do not point out that Mrs. Hammersmith's existance has never been proven to be based on reality, and that George Davidson wasn't as obscure as is implied, but is mentioned four times in popular book on the Maybricks (published in 1977).
I don’t know precisely how the authors feel about their subject, but by honestly re-living those strange years of 1994-95, and giving (often verbatum) conversations of the key-players, they ultimately could not help but caste serious doubts upon the diary’s authenticity. Perhaps this wasn’t their aim. But when there is so much smoke, there is undoubtedly a fire; and to me, Mr. Warren’s diagnosis of “Korsakov’s syndrome” to one of the key players, seemed rather apt and probably explains a great deal.
Overall, on finishing the book, I was left with that still unpleasant feeling that I was being hoodwinked by the Barretts, and probably that the conspiracy went a bit further but that I was not (and never will be) given enough information to pin anyone to the wall. On page 70 of the book the authors wrote about Rendell’s study, “Sadly, the report gave no indication of any desire to solve the mystery”, and, in the end, this book does not do so either. Perhaps it doesn’t really matter much anymore.
On a human level, I can surely understand the curiosity and excitement that Shirley Harrison and Doreen Montgomery felt when Barrett showed up in their office. I can even perhaps understand Barrett's odd desire to escape the dreary life in Liverpool. I can appreciate Nick Warren's and Melvin Harris's efforts to discredit what they believed to be a tawdry hoax at the public's expense. Somehow, though, very little good came from any of it. Things went awry as they are wont to do, and the whole affair is quite sad to witness. RP
(Message edited by rjpalmer on January 03, 2004) |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 679
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 03, 2004 - 5:17 pm: | |
I very much like your style Mr Palmer.
I enjoyed your review far more than the book.
If we ever meet I should like to buy you a brandy. |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
