A.P. Wolf

[Natalie Severn]

AP, you're forgetting that I too have a very nice copy - and it is signed.

Anyway I"ve got a signed copy of "Who was Jack the Ripper" ---so there!

[Natalie Severn]

I once had a copy of a sign. It said "Please refrain from disposing nasal waste on the lavatory wall".

P*ss off pooh face!

[Sam Flynn]

P*ss off pooh face!

'Tis true, Nats - these signs were placed in the gents' toilet cubicles at work, with a view to stopping the more piggish representatives of my sex from voiding their nostrils on the tiles whilst having a gipsy's.

[Robert]

How come people are deleting their own messages? It seems to happen quite often.

[Cap'n Jack]

So that's where it is, Robert, thank you for reminding me.
A better home I could not imagine.
I've just been promised retirement to Australia in two years time, so perhaps then me and you will get that revised edition out?

[Natalie Severn]

I remember -it was only a few years ago that Robert was awarded this gem as a prize for his poetry-lucky so and so!

[Natalie Severn]

Returning to the cause of Dr Bond"s suicide,was there an orbituary of any kind?

[Robert]

Absolutely, AP.

[Robert]

Yes Nats, it's a treasured possession.

I won't be following AP to Australia, for you know what the Aussies say : "Only poofs write poetry."

[Natalie Severn]

........ are you feeling a bit silly then Robert?

[Robert]

Nats, it's a line from an Aussie sketch show. It goes something like :

"The Britiah say..." (lines from Shakespeare quoted)
"The Americans say..." (lines from Whitman or some such)
"The Australians say : only poofs write poetry."

Nice and self-deprecatory.

[Natalie Severn]

Oh I thought it might be from something like that---but didnt know the quote ---sorry!
Night Robert

[Canucco dei Mergi]

The book seems to be a very valid one.
It is unfortunate for the author (but I am not sure about the exact timing) that it was published in the same period than the famous faked diary which clearly must have absorbed (usurpating it) a lot of potential attention.

A great chunk of its added value to 'Ripperology' is due to its aggressive stance contra the sexual aspects classical 'Ripperologues' are attributing to the crimes (at least the reputed 'canonical' ones out of the 'Whitechapel list').

Unfortunately the too agressive stance renders that added value less valuable since the destructive aspect of it is not compensated enough by something more constructive (positive explanations of the fact that would support the justified destruction work on the pavented sexual aspect of the horrible homicides in question).

Any way a good attack that could have been able (it was not) to shake the weak fundamental basis of the serial killer model integration in the events of 1888 in Whitechapel.

A second very good point of the book to be found in explaining how the behaviour of the woman Stride just before her killing as we know it from the Schwarz testimony is to be considered very bewildering for a would-be-JtR victim.

A third very good point in pointing the finger to the very extraordinary way of behaving of some people at Scotland Yard (I would recall the obtrusive McNaghten - for his Memo but not only for that - and the coercitive Supt Cutbush who chose to shoot himself very conveniently right in front of his daughter).

All in all an interesting book from someone that is due to think outside the box except....that even if his mind want to go out his body stays in (the box I mean).

Once again, to solve all the mysterious aspects of these events the author, while presenting an astute way to cast doubt into the classical serial-killer-with-a-sexual-motive thing, stay put with a serial-killer-with-another-motive thing.

Bond to this theory the mountain delivers a mouse.

Not sexual the motives ? But psychopatho anyway preserving the serial killer bla bla bla.

Strange the behaviour of the woman Stride ? She likely knew the guy who attacked her (very very strong point) ? OK, a domestic affair (oh la la, how boring)

Extraordinary the events at Scotland Yard ? Well, all that to hide the identity of the serial killer who was a nephew of one Superintendent.

Mmmmmmmmm.....what a pity, what a waste.


The case of AP Wolf is nevertheless very interesting.
A talented thinker who is promised to a hell of a lot committs suicide himself by sticking to the serial killer theory.
Theory which doesn't give the right answers because it doesn't ask the right questions.

Probably, to the satisfaction of many and who knows...even a few at Scotland Yard.

But this lot of AP Wolf has been the lot of many other authors.

One of them is among the posters of this board.
Bob Hinton.
He too is a very talented thinker.
His treatment of Hutchinson testimony is one of the best piece of Ripperology ever.
Whatever the critics, he builds a case with logic and, as far as he can do it after more than a century, materially supports it by bringing circumstances to the events.
He brings in the case a new kind of flow of idea (the only one before him I think was Bruce Paley) - do not take words for what they mean, he tells us.
Brilliant!
The Hutchinson thing is stinking, from Hutchinson to Abberline (see the link here with thze McNaghten of AP Wolf).

But....

where all that brilliancy (I will never stress it too much) leads the author ?

Nowhere since he sticks to the classical interpretation of the affair:

Hutchinson was a (the) serial killer!!!!!!!!!

Yes, you guessed right, like AP Wolf, Bob Hinton committed his Ripperological suicide.

What a pity I say.

Jack the Ripper might have killed 5 prostitutes (ahem....that's what we are told) but he has killed so many more authors up to today that he would I think well better be remembered as a mass murderer than as a serial killer.

Canucco dei Mergi.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Canucco dei Mergi,

You're right. The "classical serial-killer-with-a-sexual-motive thing" doesn't hold water. I imply no criticism of any author, but any suspect-based book confirms the fact.

The question we should be asking ourselves is not "WHO was Jack the Ripper?", but rather "WHAT was Jack the Ripper?"

There is a BIG difference.

Regards,

Simon

[Ben]

Thanks, Canucco, for another one of your entertaining "Listen to me, and I'll show you where you're all going wrong" posts, but I'm not sure I follow your logic. You acknowledge that Hinton built a logical case, but then assert with no explanatory reasoning that his ultimate conclusion is tantamount to "Ripperological suicide".

I don't see it that way at all.

Best regards,
Ben