|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** 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 **
Sickert & The Ripper Crimes - Fuller
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Media: Specific Titles:
Non-Fiction:
Sickert & The Ripper Crimes - Fuller
Author: Tom Wescott
Sunday, 26 August 2001 - 10:14 pm |        | This could have very easily been a bad book, but somehow it wasn't. I'm not too fond of any theory that waxes of Joseph Sickert, although I do believe that he was told something at some time. As authoress Jean Overton Fuller gives us cohoberation in the form of an old woman who knew Joseph's father, the artist Walter Sickert, back in the day, it seems that Joseph didn't make the whole story up after all. What seems likely, though, is that Walter did. Like most artists he was a strange guy and he liked to entertain people with wild stories. He also liked to dress up like Jack the Ripper in later life and play 'make believe'. Ms. Fuller's source, Florence Pash, also claims to have known Mary Kelly. It is just feasible that both Pash and Sickert knew Kelly. That might have been the acorn that his story, and later Joseph's multi-million dollar industry was built on. We will also remember Sickert's tale of a young veterinary student who occupied a room that Sickert later would. Sickert claimed this man was Jack. According to Joseph Sickert's tale, vol. 1 it was Anderson (out of the country), Gull (too freaking old), and Netley (I wonder how Sickert knew him?). Through subsequent books the killers would change, until Fuller settled upon Sickert as the lone killer. Not a likely suspect, but her prose is great, her research is commendable for a 'non-Ripperologist' and it proves a very enjoyable read, which is more than can be said for some Ripper books (cough*Prince Jack*cough). As far as the Ripper books written by women thus far it's the best, although the competition is slight (I'm waiting for Caz's book). Pamela Ball's joke...I mean work...on the case was very pleasing in the eye, but all those pesky words detracting from the great illustrations. In the end, I'm glad I added Sickert and the Ripper Crimes to my collection. Jean Overton Fuller took a potential disaster and turned it into a good book. Fans of art (which I'm not) may especially like it.Has anybody else read it? What'd you think?
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Author: Simon Owen
Sunday, 26 August 2001 - 11:56 pm | | | I've had this one for ages , and its very interesting , if only for the co-oberation of Joe's story. |
Author: Christopher T George
Monday, 27 August 2001 - 09:37 am | | Hi, Tom:
Probably Judith R. Walkowitz's "City of Dreadful Delight: Narratives of Sexual Danger in Late-Victorian London" (originally published by University of Chicago Press, 1992, and since reprinted), stands as the best treatise by a woman on the Whitechapel murders. Walkowitz, a Johns Hopkins University professor, earlier published on "Prostitution in Victorian Society: Women, Class, and the State" (Cambridge University Press, 1980). She looks at the murders from a sociological-feminist point of view not a suspect-oriented perspective. So if you want an analysis of the crimes and their effect on society without the Sickert or other Royal conspiracy or Maybrick mumbo jumbo, it might benefit you to read a book by a writer who has a real understanding of the social conditions of the day. I have asked Judith Walkowitz if she will speak at the Ripper Weekend upcoming in Baltimore next April but have not yet heard back from her.
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: Simon Owen
Monday, 27 August 2001 - 08:42 pm | | Chris , are you saying that Mrs Overton Fuller's book is not a good one ? Have you actually read it ?
The book does not mention anything about Maybrick , having been written before the Diary was published. Secondly , Mrs Overton Fuller makes it clear that she DOES NOT accept the Stephen Knight story at all , therefore the book does not condone any Royal Conspiracy theory whatsoever.
The placement of the blame at Sickert's feet comes from Mrs Overton Fuller's own research and testimony told to her mother by Florence Pash , a friend of Sickert.
Dr Walkowitz's work may be very interesting from a sociological point of view , but since it will not get us any closer to finding out ' whodunnit ' I would say its worth is limited to those of us on the Casebook ; Mrs Overton Fuller's book however contains information from someone who was there at the time and is surely much more important even if one disagrees with her conclusion. Besides , as yet no-one has proved decisively that Walter Sickert was NOT involved with the murders and there IS evidence to suggest that he was.
It would be a ludicrous statement for one to condemn a work which one has not even read , I hope this is not true in this case Mr George. |
Author: Tom Wescott
Monday, 27 August 2001 - 09:25 pm | | Chris,
I know Judith and have her treatise here with me. I didn't consider it in my equation because it's not a book. There's no question it is excellently researched and executed (pardon the pun) even if Walkowitz is a bit off her rocker (in my opinion). I intend to get her book on the East End as I keep hearing good things about it.
Simon,
Where did Chris say anything bad about Fuller's book? Also, where's the evidence to suggest that Sickert had anything to do with the Ripper crimes? I live in the same state that made Garth Brooks and the boy band Hanson. Once they became famous everyone and their uncle suddenly 'knew them when'. Most of the stories are bunk. I think Sickert enjoyed telling similar tales about the celebrity (Jack) from his neck of the woods. However, with Sickert being somewhat of a celebrity himself, his story has been documented better and given more attention. It is possible he knew Kelly, but that doesn't mean he had anything to do with the crimes. I agree, though, there is the possibility of a connection since 'parts' of Joseph's story can be corroborated. But royalty, blackmail, conspiracy, etc. had nothing to do with the killings. It was the work of a serial killer and Sickert was not that man.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Author: Christopher T George
Monday, 27 August 2001 - 11:26 pm | | Hi, Simon:
No I have not read Jean Overton Fuller's work but I was not condemning it unread either. I was just pointing out to Tom Wescott that his survey of books on the Whitechapel murders written by women seemingly missed out an important book by Judith Walkowitz. I didn't think Fuller's book mentioned Maybrick. I was just pointing out that Walkowitz's book, in my opinion, is based on solid research and an academic approach and does not have to rely on either the Royal conspiracy or the Maybrick angle.
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: Simon Owen
Tuesday, 28 August 2001 - 04:57 pm | | The evidence ? coming soon Tom...!  |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Wednesday, 29 August 2001 - 01:50 pm | | Dear Simon,
Gadzooks! You are also authoring...a book? Do I foresee a time when the top-ten books on the international bestseller list are all about Jack the Ripper? And the bestselling film of all time?
And, the longest play on Broadway is Jack the Ripper- the musical? And forty million posters
turn their mouses to the Casebook?
Rosey :-) |
Author: Simon Owen
Wednesday, 29 August 2001 - 05:18 pm | | Fear not Rosie , I am not writing a book !!!!
Simon |
Author: Simon Owen
Thursday, 11 October 2001 - 05:53 pm | | I am hoping to be in touch with Jean Overton Fuller this coming week by telephone , and then to follow this up with a personal visit sometime later.
If anyone has got any questions they would like me to ask her , please post them to this board ( preferably on Ripper topics ! ).
I cannot emphasise enough that this is a very interesting book , if only for the information about Walter Sickert , and you should all buy it !!! The author does not follow the usual conspiracy theory , indeed she completely disbelieves in the Stephen Knight theory of events. Rather she presents her own theory of who the Ripper might have been , based on clues painted into Sickert's paintings and what Florence Pash told her mother about her own personal involvement in the affair.
Simon |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Friday, 12 October 2001 - 04:04 pm | | Simon,
No questions here...seems you are on your own.
Rosey:-)) |
Author: Simon Owen
Friday, 12 October 2001 - 06:45 pm | | | As always Rosey ...sigh |
|
|
|
|
