|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
Archive through March 1, 1999
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Letters: General Discussion:
"From Hell" - What Might It Mean?:
Archive through March 1, 1999
Author: Yazoo
Monday, 16 November 1998 - 09:34 am |        | Always keeping in mind the issue that the Lusk letter might be a fake, if we read that letter again, what is the meaning of the writer's address being given as "From Hell?" Two thoughts:
1) The most obvious to me (and most others I read) is that the writer is from Hell, indicating his evil, malevolent, diabolical, etc etc nature. A scare tactic, in short.
2) Is it possible to also read that address along these lines: that the writer consciously or subconsciously thinks of himself in Hell? Here the connotations are of torment, punishment, etc etc.
Combine item number two with a couple of other odd phrases from that letter: the offer of sending the knife/murder weapon (with the implication that the user won't need it again), and the very odd salutation "Catch me when you can. Note the "when" not the indeterminate, challenging "if."
Psychobabble nonsense. Take it as you will.
Yaz |
Author: Bob_c
Tuesday, 17 November 1998 - 05:24 am | | Hello Yazoo,
Your board from 16.11.98
Presuming the letter to be real, I could think that Jack just wanted to give some address (a 'real' letter has a 'return' address) and the word 'Hell'passed pretty well to the purpose of the letter, which was a challenge to Lusk et.al. to catch Jack. Did Jack say "To catch me you'll have to go (come) to Hell too?"
About the 'when' instead of 'if'. I and my brother/sisters as children often said "Catch me when you can" as an insult. The 'when', instead of the 'if' says more or less "If you were not so daft, you'd have already caught me, I've made it easy enough for you."
Seen together with the challenges from Jack (if from Jack) in other letters, not quite as strange as it otherwise could have been.
I am a complete newling to the Ripper interest and haven't read much except here in the Ripper Board, I hope that that isn't too painfully obvious. I swear improvement with time
Bob C |
Author: Yazoo
Tuesday, 17 November 1998 - 06:02 am | | Hi, Bob_C. Welcome. Nothing is ever too painfully obvious to stand a chance to sink into my pea brain.
I wondered if the "If" and "When" could be thought of as interchangable. I wish I knew how common this interchangability is and was. Would it be an anachronism to interpret the transposition of "if" and "when" to East Enders in 1888?
The idea of following some convention in giving a return address has less force with me though. After all, IF GENUINE, no one would expect the murderer to give a return address.
I hope you stay around this little backwater of the Casebook, Bob.
Yaz |
Author: Bob_c
Tuesday, 17 November 1998 - 07:11 am | | Thanks, Yaz.
Maybe the answer to 'when' being used for 'if' is yes. I lived after I got married in 1967 in Leyton/Leytonstone. Although no Londoner myself, my (now ex-) wife (and 3 from 4 daughters) are real cockneys (born within the sounds of Bow Bells) and indeed the 'when' was used for the 'if' by them sometimes. Example. "Just lemme catcher when yer do'at 'gain".
I think, however, that use of the 'if' for 'when' is less likely.
Of course I can't speak for 1888 but some people I knew then in the area were alive in 1888 and probably still spoke the same cockney.
Re. address. Yes, you're probably right, but I like to think of Jack being (excuse the rather pointent expression) a human being having conceits, hopes and other desires as just that to rip the innards out of fallen Ladies. If he wanted to show that he is not ignorant, than perhaps so, although of course no address that could lead a path to him.
O.K. A weak point I know.
Interesting is that Jack in his 'Dear Boss' letter makes a, for the times, pretty educated impression on me. My wife, although not dumb, would have made more mistakes (spelling, grammar)in the letter as he did because of her cockney speech, and that in the late 1960's. (No insult intended, Mo,. No, I don't think you are Jill the ripper. Greetings on the kids. XXX Bob.)
Could that be a reason for the police to have probably decided it were a hoax (written by some journalist, as example?)
Phew!
Bob |
Author: Yazoo
Tuesday, 17 November 1998 - 08:52 am | | Hey, Bob.
It's an unfortunate circumstance -- that time and Stephen's hard work will rectify -- that you couldn't see the arguments about the 'personas' of the Dear Boss letter writer and the Lusk letter writer.
Stay tuned and check it out. Then see if any more thoughts come to mind.
Yaz |
Author: Bob_c
Wednesday, 18 November 1998 - 05:32 am | | O.K. Yaz,
I have already read a bit about the Personae, but can't remember it all. I'll check it out and do more, better some, research and come back to you.
Bob |
Author: Yazoo
Wednesday, 18 November 1998 - 06:59 am | | "More, better research?" You underestimate yourself, Bob.
Yaz |
Author: Annabel Carr
Wednesday, 20 January 1999 - 06:57 pm | | I don't know that ANY of the supposed letters were of the Ripper's hand. In my years of Ripper experience, I find it 'out of character' for Jack to invite anyone to look for him. Leaving clues? - It's just so tacky. It frustrates me so much to know that every letter and each body must have been riddled with fingerprints - unfortunately of which meant nothing to forensic investigators. Do you know if the Ripper's Letters are among the missing files or whether they are available for investigation? It would be fascinating to have a forensic scientist check them out.
Misty.
P.S. - I heard briefly on the news in Sydney only last week that they have reopened the files as evidence is being re-examined and they reckon they know who 'he' is. What the hell? PLEASE EXPLAIN!! |
Author: Bob_c
Thursday, 21 January 1999 - 04:26 am | | Hi Annabel,
The same thoughts as many of us, too 'tacky' for Jack. The thoughts that the letters could have been written by some journalist/s or other hoaxers are never far away.
I believe I have read somewhere that the original letters have all been lost, and they're the only ones that count. There are people on the board who will let us know if that isn't true (Bawl Shriek). It would be really interesting if the originals could be investigated with today's available sciences but I submit that that would already have been done if it were possible. Even then, many of the spurs would have disappeared with time, or have been covered up by the scores of grubby fingers, creases, tea stains etc. that regular administrative handling leaves behind it.
To prove that all letters were written by the same hand or not were indeed of the greatest interest, but not having Jack's dabs at hand, would not definitely lead to his conviction.
The stuff about 'knowing who he is' in the news, I haven't heard anything but such reports are about as regular as UFO-sightings and about as reliable.
Regards
Bob |
Author: Christopher T. George
Thursday, 21 January 1999 - 08:57 am | | Hello Misty (Annabel) and Bob:
I believe Stewart Evans told me that the original Dear Boss letter of 25 September 1888 still exists at the PRO, although apparently the Saucy Jack postcard and the Lusk letter are lost. I believe that is the case. If not, I am sure the esteemed Mr. Begg will set us straight. In any case, even if the original Dear Boss letter still exists, Stewart for one believes that series of communications to have been the work of journalist Tom Bulling. The Lusk letter with its darker tone and the question of the possibly genuine kidney (official opinion at the time was contradictory on that) may have more possibility of being the Real McCoy--but would Jack have bothered writing? And, Bob, I am convinced that you are quite right that the Dear Boss letter has undoubtedly been handled by so many thousands of curious police and Ripperologists by this time that any modern forensic examination would probably be valueless.
Chris George |
Author: Yazoo
Thursday, 21 January 1999 - 04:44 pm | | Hey, Misty and Co.,
I believe two men who are responsible for the JtR series of murders wrote those letters.
I cannot prove they did.
No one in 1888 or now can prove they did not.
With the arrival of the third letter, I believe Bulling challenged the police to prove their insinuations against him as the hoaxer-journalist supposedly writing those letters by transcribing that third letter, not sending the original, allowing the police to compare his handwriting to the handwriting on the first letter and postcard. Littlechild's rather droll comment that he believed Bulling created the letters but that the police had "no hard evidence" against Bulling just about sums up what the 1888-era police could and did do with those communications.
I predict that someday poor Tom Bulling and/or Charles Moore (his editor-boss) will be the next two people who are suspected of being the Ripper.
I hope someday someone will take these letters into account when they try to model the psychopathology of the person or persons unknown who killed at least 5 women in Whitechapel in 1888. It would be merely one model, but it would have some grounding in evidence -- even if the "evidence" is rather cooly dismissed as a hoax.
And it's lovely to be back at this topic. I only wish I could gauge the silence toward our arguments in favor of considering these letters, even hypothetically, as genuine.
Yaz |
Author: Christopher T. George
Thursday, 21 January 1999 - 08:45 pm | | Yaz: As you know I view the subject of the Jack the Ripper letters as a juicy little topic all on its own, and a little mystery inside a mystery in the world of JtR. As you and I have discussed before, certainly the large majority of the letters can be dismissed as crude hoaxes, but is it wise to dismiss them all out of hand? And as for your comment on studying the psychopathology of the letters, in a sense that is exactly what Prof. David Cantor has been doing in studying the Maybrick diary, which whether its proponents like it or not is actually a trumped up, fictionalized version of a number of the Ripper letters, from Dear Boss to Lusk onward. Also as an aside, there is a nice little discussion of letters by a supposed Ripper-like murderer in Caleb Carr's "The Alienist". Quite obviously, the novelist drew his inspiration from the Lusk letter with it similarly obvious mispellings.
Chris George |
Author: Yazoo
Friday, 22 January 1999 - 06:28 am | | Hey, Chris!
It's like a home-away-from-home here, isn't it? Thanks again for bringing me to the message boards -- though the multitude may curse you.
I read Alienist a long time ago and I can't remember any letters in it. Didn't like his second book but I remember that more.
I've never read the "Maybrick" diary, but I'd bet the psychpathology of these few letters is more complex and interesting than anything in those pages, similar challenges too -- are they "real" serial killer letters; if yes, is there multiple personality disorder or severe schizophrenia involved; on and on. Maybe Canter will look at the few letters we discussed here next, eh? In my dreams maybe.
Yaz |
Author: Caroline
Friday, 22 January 1999 - 11:12 am | | Hi Yaz!
I'm with you regarding those 'yours truly' letters.
I wish you could read the Maybrick diary, you would then be able to give us all your version of how and why it was written. I don't think Maybrick wrote it, but I also think I know who could have done!
How anyone could make bets on the complexity and interest of a document based purely on other people's opinions of it is beyond me, however one respects those whose opinions have been given, so for once Yaz my old friend, shame on you!
Please don't take umbrage though, you can have a pop back at me whenever you like!
Love, Caroline |
Author: Yazoo
Friday, 22 January 1999 - 02:54 pm | | Hey, Caroline!
It's raining here, so I took my umbrage to work and forgot it at my desk -- I'm a dope!!
Seriously though, my wish for the Maybrick Diary is that it could indeed be traced back to Maybrick and that Maybrick actually expressed those or similar thoughts. If Maybrick could be proven to be a JtR wannabe, I think that would be as fascinating and interesting as finding the real JtR. If it could be shown that a chain of "evidence" exists where someone close to Maybrick recorded his thoughts and utterances, and then a process began where people copied and recopied that Ur-document, I'd be a happy camper...I'd even bring Anonymous and The Good Doctor along for campfire company (or fuel; I'll decide which after I meet 'em). And I don't know that arsenic or other drug use need have been the inspiration for the writings...obviously if they are forged. Most people think this is the same as believing Maybrick was JtR (which I do not) or that I believe the Diary is genuine (which I cannot accept with the available evidence).
My comment on the psychopathology is just my nervousness that psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologist, social workers, crimonologists all seem to think you can superimpose modern theories of serial killers onto another historical period. If Canter can look at the Maybrick Diary, he could spend a few moments on these letters. However, I'd be dubious of his conclusions in either case until he could satisfy a real historian like Paul Begg, Phillip Sugden, et al. that no anachronisms are clouding his work.
I can't wait to read your paper on the letters.
Yaz
P.S., Someday I'll actually read the Diary, but I'm waiting for Feldman's book to come out in paperback as I gather it provides "additional support" (some folks will choke on that oxymoron) for the Diary -- get away from me, you Maybrick Thought-Police Officers. Everybody deserves a fair hearing. |
Author: Caroline
Saturday, 23 January 1999 - 05:24 am | | Hi Yaz!
Don’t forget it’s bad luck to open your umbrage indoors, I do it all the time and look where it’s got me!
Please don’t read Feldman’s version of the Diary story, Shirley Harrison’s is a whole lot easier to digest and far more rational to boot, and do read the facsimile of the actual Diary first if poss.
I’m working on your chain of evidence (yes, real tangible evidence, the stuff to make your toes curl up!), but don’t bring The Good Doctor along, anyone who refers to JtR’s mumsy as ‘mom’ has seriously lost the plot, my JtR/JtRs are quintessential Englishmen (as in Greenwich – Meantime, not Village).
Do we know if that old ‘enterprising journalist’ comment was based on evidence or theory? We are all quite rightly quick to jump on theory-only comments, yet people are very willing to believe this particular one when it comes to the ripper letters.
I do hope that no-one who used to think some of the letters were genuine has changed their mind because of the Diary content, this would be bizarre in my view. We know those letters were contemporary, whoever penned them, we don’t know yet when the Diary was devised. I’ve narrowed it down to a period of 31 years, but I’m not telling the start or end dates yet!
I, for one, do not believe Bulling and co. come into this at all.
Strangely enough, I may need someone to delve into certain records in New York to help me confirm one of my pieces of evidence, I’m not talking Tumblety here.
Also, digressing slightly, do we know if there were any murders committed in New York or Philadelphia between the second week of October and 8th November 1888?
Love, Caroline |
Author: Yazoo
Saturday, 23 January 1999 - 06:39 am | | Hey, Caroline,
I've got the original Harrison book, so...someday.
Littlechild's comments seem to infer that the police performed some kind of investigation but they found "no hard evidence." The other police comments are similar but without the inference that an investigation took place. Did the police investigate? I don't know.
I wish I knew how Bulling ended up being the one to get the letters...what was the chain of authority at the CNA. Did the mail room pass it to an editor first, then to Bulling to write a story about it? Or Bulling was handed the letter by whoever opened the mail, thinking there was a story in it, then Bulling took it to Moore? Who knows?
Can't help with the NY or Philedelphia dates and murders.
Yaz |
Author: Rose Graser
Saturday, 06 February 1999 - 09:54 pm | | Has anyone ever done a handwriting com-
parison between the "letters" and any correspondence of MJD's? Just wondering. |
Author: Lindsay
Saturday, 27 February 1999 - 12:57 pm | | | I, too, am one of the many individuals that is forced to question the legitimacy of the letters that were sent to the police, newspapers, etc. Ripper was obviously a very organized killer. Whoever Jack was, he knew his anatomy, and he knew how to be subtle in his conquests. I have to question the possibilty of Jack being a doctor. If the letters are facitious, isn't it possible that they were that for a reason? For example, if one analyzes the letters (and it doesn't have to be done in depth), one is able to see that "Ripper" was not very literate. What if "Jack" intentionally mailed these letters to the public (with so many obvious mistakes) for the very reasons he was never caught...and the very reasons we continue to search for his identity. One, by mailing these horrid letters to the public, he was able to achieve at least one goal: He had control because the populace feared him...and after all, isn't that what serial killers are after? Two, by mailing these letters with such an appearance of ignorance,he planted the seed of doubt in the minds of many...just as he is still doing. He knew the police would not pursue such empty threats. Three,the technique in which he removed the victims' organs was almost flawless, and he knew from the beginning what he was going after. So, I'm forced to wonder, out of all of the suspects, who had the intelligence, the background, the interests in humans...or, at least the human body??? |
Author: Caroline
Monday, 01 March 1999 - 05:28 am | | Hi Lindsay,
My suspect married a doctor's daughter after the last known ripper-style murder. He was also extremely intelligent. One of the books I have ordered from the library is mentioned in the source notes of a biography related to my suspect. It was written in 1857 and concerns amputations and suchlike. I am curious as to its relevance.
Very interesting post by the way, thanks.
Best wishes,
Caroline |
|
|
|
|
