Tweet
Hello all,
The title of this thread comes from Philip Sugden's excellent, almost all encompassing work, The Complete History of Jack the Ripper".
I think I am correct that almost every person that has looked into, researched or read of this case, has the same feeling about Mr.Sugden's work on the subject.... that it is one of if not THE book on the subject. I am among those who agree wholeheartedly with this view. There are a few other books, which measure up to these exacting standards. And I am equally grateful, as we all are, for the works that have followed on from Sugden's that are of such equally high calibre.
However, I return to the above mentioned book from Mr.Sugden.
On pages 12 and 13 of my revised paperback edition from 1995, I quote the following...
".... this whole field of research has degenerated into a mass of conflicting claims and is now held in widespread and well-earned disrepute..."
".... When I began this book, I realised that a new study of the Whitchapel murders would have to do two things. First it must have the courage to dispense with the books and research the subject from scratch. And second, it must proceed without any preconcieved theory. In short, the conclusions must follow from the facts and not the other way around...."
He continues...
"....In rejecting the the names dangled before us by MacNaghten in 1894, I have challenged the whole drift of serious Ripper studies since 1959. This has not been prompted by any desire for sensation. I have simply followed where the evidence has led me...."
and further...
"....If you prefer facts to journalism, if you want to know the truth about Jack the Ripper and are tired of being humbugged...."
Well, Mr.Sugden, things have improved a little since your wise words. Or have they?
There is STILL a mass of conflicting claims.
People STILL stick to MacNaghten's "dangled names".
"Preconcieved theories" still abound.
We are still being humbugged at times.
And where people try to find alternative answers, NOT for sensation I might add, nor for financial gain, accusations are quick to come in and people are labled as "sensationalist".
There is a growing number of people who are readily trying to reject the old, worn out, over-used views and are trying to show a different angle. And they are being both ridiculed and fobbed-off with a never ending string of reasons and excuses why NOTHING must be allowed to change.
These things are being done in almost army-like fashion, with each "department" of the case being answered by one or two individuals scattered around. It seems that, at all costs, nothing must be allowed to tip the balance of sway.
CONVERSELY, there are some FANTASTIC researchers on this site. Truly dedicated and wonderful people who work like crazy to dig an inch further, for everyone's benefit. People uncover the most wonderful things, and yet when something "unseen" is unearthed, from some literary source, that contains questionable information, instead of a logical investigation into it, more often than not the immediate covering up of the uncovered "problem" occurs.
Speaking personally, I have always tried to keep a very open mind to possibilities. I have ideas, which others, for that is their right, disagree upon. I have never said that I am CORRECT, or that I KNOW that what I have said to be 100% true. But I do know that I am already "labelled" as a "conspiracy-theorist". Utter twaddle. I dislike the word conspiracy, but I DO use the words "disinformation" and "smokescreen".
Recently, someone even suggested, when I used these words that any "disinformation" and the use of a "smokescreen" was totally unused by the CID/SD/Special Branch. To expect anyone to believe the CID didnt use such tactics with Anderson in charge, is in my opinion, way, totally unrealistic. It was a way of life for the man!
When I pateintly and respectfully point out that when the "head" of the Whitechapel murders case gives a revealing interview in a foreign newspaper, then he must have been misquoted or his meaning is lost in the translation.
That is when I start to depair. Because that is clutching at straws and could even be deemed as a ridiculous excuse.
Yes Mr. Sugden, I am sick and tired of all the humbug too.
And it about time some started realising that it doesn't wash any more. This isn't a game. There are people that are using their valuable time, energy and in some cases money, and have been, for many many years, to try and further this case. Yet some deliberately and willingly act as spoilers, almost, it seems, mockingly. That is insulting to many. Some of the viciously personal and insulting comments, (thankfully few in number) are frankly, a disgrace to read. We are supposed to be a community on THE best website in the world investigating and discussing the case. And there are thousands upon thousands of people visiting this website every year, who read our posts, our threads, our thoughts and our comments.
Younger generations are now encouraged to learn about JTR through their schoolwork, and many come here to access and refer to the "experts" and their views, as well as the "facts" of the case. We have a duty to reflect the seriousness of our research and investigations. Not cross-insult each other.
This thread may well be regarded as "another Carter diatribe"... It makes no odds to me. Because I am going nowhere, whatever the pressures. And guess what? I ain't giving in either. I will continue to ask "awkward" questions, continue to ask "against the flow" and continue to point out pure logical reasoning. And I am not the only one the numbers are growing.
Because pointing out holes in established given answers will inevitably rock the boat.... some had better tie themselves down and batten the hatches. Because there is much, much more to come.
It will be done, I humbly and repectfully suggest, in the same vein as others have done before us. Mr. Sugden having helped and encouraged those with courage to do exactly that.
Respectfully, and with best wishes to ALL
Phil
The title of this thread comes from Philip Sugden's excellent, almost all encompassing work, The Complete History of Jack the Ripper".
I think I am correct that almost every person that has looked into, researched or read of this case, has the same feeling about Mr.Sugden's work on the subject.... that it is one of if not THE book on the subject. I am among those who agree wholeheartedly with this view. There are a few other books, which measure up to these exacting standards. And I am equally grateful, as we all are, for the works that have followed on from Sugden's that are of such equally high calibre.
However, I return to the above mentioned book from Mr.Sugden.
On pages 12 and 13 of my revised paperback edition from 1995, I quote the following...
".... this whole field of research has degenerated into a mass of conflicting claims and is now held in widespread and well-earned disrepute..."
".... When I began this book, I realised that a new study of the Whitchapel murders would have to do two things. First it must have the courage to dispense with the books and research the subject from scratch. And second, it must proceed without any preconcieved theory. In short, the conclusions must follow from the facts and not the other way around...."
He continues...
"....In rejecting the the names dangled before us by MacNaghten in 1894, I have challenged the whole drift of serious Ripper studies since 1959. This has not been prompted by any desire for sensation. I have simply followed where the evidence has led me...."
and further...
"....If you prefer facts to journalism, if you want to know the truth about Jack the Ripper and are tired of being humbugged...."
Well, Mr.Sugden, things have improved a little since your wise words. Or have they?
There is STILL a mass of conflicting claims.
People STILL stick to MacNaghten's "dangled names".
"Preconcieved theories" still abound.
We are still being humbugged at times.
And where people try to find alternative answers, NOT for sensation I might add, nor for financial gain, accusations are quick to come in and people are labled as "sensationalist".
There is a growing number of people who are readily trying to reject the old, worn out, over-used views and are trying to show a different angle. And they are being both ridiculed and fobbed-off with a never ending string of reasons and excuses why NOTHING must be allowed to change.
These things are being done in almost army-like fashion, with each "department" of the case being answered by one or two individuals scattered around. It seems that, at all costs, nothing must be allowed to tip the balance of sway.
CONVERSELY, there are some FANTASTIC researchers on this site. Truly dedicated and wonderful people who work like crazy to dig an inch further, for everyone's benefit. People uncover the most wonderful things, and yet when something "unseen" is unearthed, from some literary source, that contains questionable information, instead of a logical investigation into it, more often than not the immediate covering up of the uncovered "problem" occurs.
Speaking personally, I have always tried to keep a very open mind to possibilities. I have ideas, which others, for that is their right, disagree upon. I have never said that I am CORRECT, or that I KNOW that what I have said to be 100% true. But I do know that I am already "labelled" as a "conspiracy-theorist". Utter twaddle. I dislike the word conspiracy, but I DO use the words "disinformation" and "smokescreen".
Recently, someone even suggested, when I used these words that any "disinformation" and the use of a "smokescreen" was totally unused by the CID/SD/Special Branch. To expect anyone to believe the CID didnt use such tactics with Anderson in charge, is in my opinion, way, totally unrealistic. It was a way of life for the man!
When I pateintly and respectfully point out that when the "head" of the Whitechapel murders case gives a revealing interview in a foreign newspaper, then he must have been misquoted or his meaning is lost in the translation.
That is when I start to depair. Because that is clutching at straws and could even be deemed as a ridiculous excuse.
Yes Mr. Sugden, I am sick and tired of all the humbug too.
And it about time some started realising that it doesn't wash any more. This isn't a game. There are people that are using their valuable time, energy and in some cases money, and have been, for many many years, to try and further this case. Yet some deliberately and willingly act as spoilers, almost, it seems, mockingly. That is insulting to many. Some of the viciously personal and insulting comments, (thankfully few in number) are frankly, a disgrace to read. We are supposed to be a community on THE best website in the world investigating and discussing the case. And there are thousands upon thousands of people visiting this website every year, who read our posts, our threads, our thoughts and our comments.
Younger generations are now encouraged to learn about JTR through their schoolwork, and many come here to access and refer to the "experts" and their views, as well as the "facts" of the case. We have a duty to reflect the seriousness of our research and investigations. Not cross-insult each other.
This thread may well be regarded as "another Carter diatribe"... It makes no odds to me. Because I am going nowhere, whatever the pressures. And guess what? I ain't giving in either. I will continue to ask "awkward" questions, continue to ask "against the flow" and continue to point out pure logical reasoning. And I am not the only one the numbers are growing.
Because pointing out holes in established given answers will inevitably rock the boat.... some had better tie themselves down and batten the hatches. Because there is much, much more to come.
It will be done, I humbly and repectfully suggest, in the same vein as others have done before us. Mr. Sugden having helped and encouraged those with courage to do exactly that.
Respectfully, and with best wishes to ALL
Phil
Comment