Hehe. I actually didn’t read the whole ad, but a whole-page ad to deny an obsession sounds like not so much a product of an obsession but of a wounded ego and too much money on her hands.
-----
Posted by Yusuf Smith on 08/30 at 01:08 AM
I heard about the book and was curious but never got around to reading it. I guess I was skeptical about her, with her extensive fiction background, of doing the mystery justice. I did however read an interview with her and she does seem convinced that it was Sickert. Maybe someone should writeabout Cornwell’s fixation on Sickert. That might be an interesting read.
Regarding the Ripper, I guess I always assumed the truth was more vast than that.
What do you think?
Posted by coe on 08/31 at 05:45 PM
Hi Coe, Sickert was an odd character for sure and doubtless had a Ripper fixation himself but really I can’t see him as the murderer. The Ripper stopped killing and Sickert was still alive for decades for one thing.
He painted a picture called ‘Jack the Ripper’s bedroom’ which ostensibly was his bedroom but apparently his landlady had told him that the previous tenant had been the Ripper. That’s probably as far as it goes.
I think the major interest (for me anyway) comes in the last murder - there are numerous fascinating aspects, not least of which is the alleged victim was definitely seen after her supposed death.
Imo, the best site on all this is Casebook.org, very detailed and accurate - evaluates the Sickert theory too iirc.
Posted by on 08/31 at 06:30 PM
Links
Godbothering
Techieness &
Design
Mystic Mayhem
ParaPolitics
Everything Else
Archives
Recent Entries
Meta
Patricia Cornwell
I have been a student of the Ripper murders for a number of years - just don’t use the word ‘Ripperologist’ - and there are many anomalous facets to the crimes which I may (or may not) get round to posting on eventually. But as it so often does, something else odd has happened in our twee Victorian-wannabe (yes) world.
I see that Patricia Cornwell, who wrote a rather ludicrous book
alleging that the artist Walter Sickert was the Ripper - this book is unbelievably bad actually and for all the research provides virtually no new evidence of any kind (except perhaps the guest book doodles but more on those another time maybe) - has seen fit to take out full page adverts in two national newspapers in order to deny that she is obsessed with Jack the Ripper!
Now this is funny and could almost be an esoteric teaching story! She apparently spent 10K (GBP) on each ad and all too prove she doesn’t have an obsession! And this in addition to $6M so far alleged to have gone into research into the Whitechapel murders - whether or not this includes the $1M which she is alleged to have spent on a Sickert painting which she then destroyed in a hunt for clues is unclear - as is whether or not that story is actually true.
But this seems more like a cynical publicity stunt (or is it me that’s the cynic?) as it turns out (please God no) that she has a sequel to the Sickert book due out shortly. The worst part is that I know I’m going to have to read it.