JTR Exhibition in Docklands

[coral]

[QUOTE=Stewart P Evans;20221]Time to find a new hobby Coral?

I am seriously thinking about doing so.

The local 'knitting circle' comes top of the list at the moment.



Coral

[caz]

Caz,

its a shame that Neal and I didnt get chance to see you on Saturday.

I asked Neal for an impartial view about the colour of the diary ink and everything! ROFL (but true!!)

Anyway, im sorry we didnt bump into you. Its been a while since I have seen you. Hopefully i will see you at a Ws1888 meeting soon

Jenni

Indeed, Jen. It would have been interesting to bump into you and Neal as he was giving you his impartial view. (What's so funny about you asking Neal what he thought? I would have found it odder had you not done so.)

As it was, I wasn't there on Saturday so no chance of bumping into each other.

Love,

Caz
X

[Chris George]

Chris, whilst I agree that there is a 'sociological focus' to the overall exhibition is this not natural and to be expected? Despite this the initial talk event, launching the exhibition series, was focused on the murders and the identity of 'Jack the Ripper.' The embracing of the overall social and cultural history of the East End is relevant and, for academics, tends to lend a greater air of respectability and justification to study of the murders. And this is understandable when looked at in the context of the sensationalism, nonsense, sheer fantasy and prurience that has attached to the subject over the years. It has been an area of study largely ignored by scholars in the past, but plundered by journalists and hack writers.

And why? Well, we all know that if a book has the magical name 'Jack the Ripper' in the title a respectable minimum number of sales is guaranteed. So cash has a part to play in this. 'Jack the Ripper' is an uncomfortable tourist attraction for the East End of London - it doesn't sit easy with those in authority. Those who write what they consider to be respectable works of a relevant historical nature may look down their scholarly noses at the likes of me. But more often than not, the writer of an academic (and maybe very good) work on social conditions will sell far less books than the writer of a work on Jack the Ripper and the Whitechapel murders. I like to think that some of us have brought a certain degree of respectability, seriousness, and scholarly attention to facts, to the field of Ripper writing. Perhaps many of us aren't true, qualified historians but we do have something to offer and I have yet to come across an academic who knows (and understands) more about these murders than I do (and that is not idle boasting - it is a fact). One notable exception is my good friend Phil Sugden.

I think, and many others there on Saturday agreed, that the London Museum has produced a very good and very well balanced view of the murders and the East End. I for one would like to see less criticism of it.

Hi Stewart

I agree that discussion of the milieu of the Victorian East End is relevant, and I go along with much of what you are saying. I am not criticising the exhibition -- I am only reflecting what I am picking up about it. As I have stated, I have not seen it. I would like to be able to afford to get over to London to see it before it ends.

Chris

[Sam Flynn]

The embracing of the overall social and cultural history of the East End is relevant

Indeed so, Stewart - and having enjoyed the accompanying book, which majors more on those topics than those which focus on the Ripper per se, I look forward to seeing the exhibition in a few weeks' time.

Those who write what they consider to be respectable works of a relevant historical nature may look down their scholarly noses at the likes of me.

Their loss, if that is how they choose to behave. Personally I've found that having different approaches to the case can only be a good thing. Indeed, it enlightens and enlivens this field of study, and long may it continue to do so.

[Stewart P Evans]

Social History

Hi Stewart
I haven't seen the exhibition so again I can't judge. It sounds as if there is a lot of good stuff on display and therefore you and John Bennett may well be right that there isn't much else that could have been put on display. I just wanted to make the point that there is a sociological focus to the exhibition as can be judged for example by the following list of the lunchtime talks during the time period the exhibition is showing.
All the best
Chris
A series of Thursday lunchtime talks associated with the exhibition "Jack the Ripper and the East End." In each session an expert speaker will explore a different aspect of the Victorian East End. All talks free, 1:10-2:00pm
5 June Dr Anne Kershen, QMW, ‘Victorian East London, A Bubbling Cauldron’
12 June Dr Richard Dennis, UCL, ‘Housing and the Poor’
3 July Dr Kate Bradley, University of Kent, ‘Philanthropy and the Slums’
17 July Sue Donnelly, LSE, ‘The Booth Enquiry’
24 July Dr Nicholas Evans, University of Hull, ‘The White Slave Trade’
4 September Kate Bradley, University of Kent, ‘Alcohol and Social Morality’
18 September Louise Raw, London Met, ‘The Match Girls strike’
2 October Natasha McEnroe, UCL, ‘“Foul of mouth and evil eyed’: Francis Galton and the Victorian Criminal’
16 October John Marriott, ‘The Imaginative Geography of the Whitechapel Murders’
23 October Peter Higginbotham, ‘Victorian Workhouses’

Chris, whilst I agree that there is a 'sociological focus' to the overall exhibition is this not natural and to be expected? Despite this the initial talk event, launching the exhibition series, was focused on the murders and the identity of 'Jack the Ripper.' The embracing of the overall social and cultural history of the East End is relevant and, for academics, tends to lend a greater air of respectability and justification to study of the murders. And this is understandable when looked at in the context of the sensationalism, nonsense, sheer fantasy and prurience that has attached to the subject over the years. It has been an area of study largely ignored by scholars in the past, but plundered by journalists and hack writers.

And why? Well, we all know that if a book has the magical name 'Jack the Ripper' in the title a respectable minimum number of sales is guaranteed. So cash has a part to play in this. 'Jack the Ripper' is an uncomfortable tourist attraction for the East End of London - it doesn't sit easy with those in authority. Those who write what they consider to be respectable works of a relevant historical nature may look down their scholarly noses at the likes of me. But more often than not, the writer of an academic (and maybe very good) work on social conditions will sell far less books than the writer of a work on Jack the Ripper and the Whitechapel murders. I like to think that some of us have brought a certain degree of respectability, seriousness, and scholarly attention to facts, to the field of Ripper writing. Perhaps many of us aren't true, qualified historians but we do have something to offer and I have yet to come across an academic who knows (and understands) more about these murders than I do (and that is not idle boasting - it is a fact). One notable exception is my good friend Phil Sugden.

I think, and many others there on Saturday agreed, that the London Museum has produced a very good and very well balanced view of the murders and the East End. I for one would like to see less criticism of it.

[Chris George]

So, I ask again, what should they be displaying that wasn't on display?

Hi Stewart

I haven't seen the exhibition so again I can't judge. It sounds as if there is a lot of good stuff on display and therefore you and John Bennett may well be right that there isn't much else that could have been put on display. I just wanted to make the point that there is a sociological focus to the exhibition as can be judged for example by the following list of the lunchtime talks during the time period the exhibition is showing.

All the best

Chris

A series of Thursday lunchtime talks associated with the exhibition "Jack the Ripper and the East End." In each session an expert speaker will explore a different aspect of the Victorian East End. All talks free, 1:10-2:00pm

5 June Dr Anne Kershen, QMW, ‘Victorian East London, A Bubbling Cauldron’
12 June Dr Richard Dennis, UCL, ‘Housing and the Poor’
3 July Dr Kate Bradley, University of Kent, ‘Philanthropy and the Slums’
17 July Sue Donnelly, LSE, ‘The Booth Enquiry’
24 July Dr Nicholas Evans, University of Hull, ‘The White Slave Trade’
4 September Kate Bradley, University of Kent, ‘Alcohol and Social Morality’
18 September Louise Raw, London Met, ‘The Match Girls strike’
2 October Natasha McEnroe, UCL, ‘“Foul of mouth and evil eyed’: Francis Galton and the Victorian Criminal’
16 October John Marriott, ‘The Imaginative Geography of the Whitechapel Murders’
23 October Peter Higginbotham, ‘Victorian Workhouses’

[steje73]

I would love to be able to come down and see all this, but I can't.
The 'Dear Boss' letter for heavens sake!
Even the non-JTR stuff sounds good.

[Tom_Wescott]

Some people get a certain something by looking at an historical item, or holding it, or being inside an old building. It's like you can feel the history. I'm like this, so I would absolutely love attending an exhibit like the one I've seen described. To see the actual Dear Boss letter? Personal items of people I've been reading and writing about for years? Photographic exhibits of the environs? I can't imagine finding anything to be critical of unless perhaps I'd already seen these things in person a million times. And even then, I'd be excited that others would have the opportunity. Some day these items may no longer exist.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Stewart P Evans]

Ostrog

Indeed. In fact, the more I think about this exhibition, the more I think 'what else could they do'?
It seemed to be divided into two sections. The first bit was more about the East End of the time and I have to say the stuff about the early victims did seem a bit lost amongst it.
The second half was more dedicated to JTR and the paraphenalia associated with it. It seemed much more focused.
The longer this debate goes on, the more I think that we should be grateful for what we have here.
JB

Thank you for supporting my contention John. In fact the more I think about it the more I remember. Suspect-wise they also have the original Police Gazette of 1888 opened at the page with Ostrog's photograph on it.

I did hear someone query why the Anderson book containing the 'Swanson marginalia' wasn't on display but the answer to that, I think, is that the Metropolitan Crime Museum does not lend out its artefacts and in this case, anyway, the book is on permanent loan to the Crime Museum from a private individual.

[John Bennett]

So, I ask again, what should they be displaying that wasn't on display?

Indeed. In fact, the more I think about this exhibition, the more I think 'what else could they do'?

It seemed to be divided into two sections. The first bit was more about the East End of the time and I have to say the stuff about the early victims did seem a bit lost amongst it.

The second half was more dedicated to JTR and the paraphenalia associated with it. It seemed much more focused.

The longer this debate goes on, the more I think that we should be grateful for what we have here.

JB

[Stewart P Evans]

What?

So I should think that the exhibition might disappoint some visitors and attendees at the talks (other than those by Stewart, Robin, and Paul) who might be expecting a more suspect- and victims-driven approach.
Chris

So, I ask again, what should they be displaying that wasn't on display?

[Chris George]

Hi Jen,

Were we at the same exhibition??

You knew the thing was being organised, so did you make your own suggestions for a much more ripperish event, clear to Julia when you had the chance at the Wolverhampton conference?

As far as I was concerned there was plenty about the plight of the ripper's typical prey, and their everyday fight for survival, and more than enough about the sad array of murder suspects presented to the public to choose from.

Love,

Caz
X

PS Yes, I'm sorry to have missed the talks on Saturday, but it's not like I haven't heard any related talks by Stewart, Robin and Paul before.

I haven't seen the Docklands exhibition but from what I gather, the intent of the organizers, judging from the full list of presentations and from what I have heard is in the exhibition, is to show the murders within the context of the East End of the day, rather than to focus on the murders themselves and the suspects. So I should think that the exhibition might disappoint some visitors and attendees at the talks (other than those by Stewart, Robin, and Paul) who might be expecting a more suspect- and victims-driven approach.

Chris

[Jenni Shelden]

Caz,

its a shame that Neal and I didnt get chance to see you on Saturday.

I asked Neal for an impartial view about the colour of the diary ink and everything! ROFL (but true!!)

Anyway, im sorry we didnt bump into you. Its been a while since I have seen you. Hopefully i will see you at a Ws1888 meeting soon

Jenni

[caz]

Perhaps you should go into the exhibition-organising game, Jenni.

When you work out what this one lacks, that is.

Hubby knew only the barest bones, and he thought it had just the right amount of detail for him to absorb and didn't take too long to go round. We had time left over for the main galleries (for those who are also interested in the history of the docks and the Thames ('liquid history' - love that phrase) as well as a great lunch overlooking the water - perfect for people coming long distances who want to do it all in a day.

Love,

Caz
X

[Jenni Shelden]

Caz,

yes we were.

There were a lot of artefacts - dont get me wrong - that were ripper related. i am thinking in terms of if i was viewing the exibiton as a lay person, how much my knowldge would be enhanced. Then again, thats hard to know since I am not one.

there was some interesting stuff about the lives of Victorian women and prostitutes in general, but then again, there was very little about his actual prey.

I thought the things on display were in the main of interest. It was more the nature of how they were displayed and the information given that concerned me.

But then again time reveals all and all that. i dont think the exibtion was terrible or rubbish or even uninspired. I just felt it as lacking something. that said I dont know exactly what I mean

Jenni

ps but guess what - i would say that - I am biased, we all know this!!

pps yes, I had breakfast with Julia one day - although i cant remember what I said. She is a nice enough woman, and the organisers seem very enthusiastic, these are both pluses.