Mary Kelly - Profile

[lynn cates]

talking

Hello Hunter. Although I'm not sure why someone with a room would take to the streets, I will agree with you that she "talked the talk."

Cheers.
LC

[Hunter]

Hi Lynn,

You're not sure why someone with a room would take to the streets ?
Have you ever been in the bad part of town? Women walk the streets and take men back to their rooms all of the time. Ain't nothin' changed there... except maybe its now crack instead of alcohol.

Do you really think Mary took Blotchy back to her room just to serenade him?
Kelly was a prostitute. So was Cox and Prater and Lord knows who else living there. Chris Scott found infirmary records that listed other prostitutes that gave their addresses at Miller's Court.

[jason_c]

Hello Jason.

"Prostitution, alcoholism, and doing a runner from her last accom[m]odation without paying her arrears."

I wonder if there is any verification of these 3 items--apart from Barnett?

Cheers.
LC

Well she(and Barnett) were headed in the same direction at Millers Court. Rent arrears, which in all likelihood wouldnt have been paid.

[lynn cates]

points of view

Hello Hunter.

"Do you really think Mary took Blotchy back to her room just to serenade him?"

Certainly not. In like manner, neither do I think that sex had ANYTHING to do with her meeting with Blotchy. If we are to advert to typical prostitute behaviour--as you seem to prefer to do--then, of course, 45 minutes of Irish folk music is not typical behaviour.

"Kelly was a prostitute."

Possibly. At least, there is no doubt that she played, and intended to play, that role.

"So was Cox and Prater and Lord knows who else living there."

Now HERE I can certainly agree. Of course, merely living in Miller's Court was no guarantee of profession, as witness McCarthy.

From the majority point of view, prostitution played a central role in not only Polly and Annie's deaths (which I readily grant), but also in Liz, Kate and MJ's.

From MY point of view, however, interpolating sex into the cases of C3-C5 is more consonant with male fantasy than the exigencies of the case/s at hand. But it makes for some interesting movies.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

ye are fallen from grace

Hello Jason. MJ's fall from grace was primarily a matter of getting behind on the rent, then?

Very well.

Cheers.
LC

[jason_c]

Hello Jason. MJ's fall from grace was primarily a matter of getting behind on the rent, then?

Very well.

Cheers.
LC

Thank you for the flippancy.


You specifically asked for an example of Kellys "going bad" other than the ones cited by Barnett. I simply gave a different source to a trend of non payment of rent.

[lynn cates]

arrears

Hello Jason. My point is that getting behind on the rent may not necessarily be a proof of badness.

But you are right that this tends to confirm the other story about her being in arrears.

Thanks.

Cheers.
LC

[caz]

Hi Lynn,

But spending potential rent money on luxuries like getting drunk would not have been the behaviour of a good or bad girl trying to be better, would it?

I do not begrudge her a drink for a second, but more than enough to quench her thirst is one thing, and enough to get her singing her heart out (pun not intended but gratefully received) in her bedroom with Blotchy Features is another.

"Kelly was a prostitute."

Possibly. At least, there is no doubt that she played, and intended to play, that role...

...From MY point of view, however, interpolating sex into the cases of C3-C5 is more consonant with male fantasy than the exigencies of the case/s at hand. But it makes for some interesting movies.

I can assure you I am not coming from any male fantasy (definitely no pun intended!) when I offer a bit of insight into the female condition.

Women who have no need to prostitute themselves do not tend to give a deliberate but false impression that they are making ends meet by "making ends meet" (forgive the pun - that one was intentional). Even a known prostitute liked to give the impression, whenever she got the chance, of being a poor but honest and thoroughly respectable "widow woman", hard-working seamstress or decent scrubber, fallen on hard times through no fault of her own. But she would rarely have fooled anyone in her company who was not open to be so fooled or quick to turn the old blind eye. Walk the streets of Whitechapel today and there won't be much doubt which women mean business and which don't. Why on earth would anyone just play at it?

In fact I've never heard of any woman intentionally 'playing the role' of a prostitute without doing it for real - unless it's obvious to everyone that it's just for jolly, like at a vicars and tarts party, or the Christmas WS1888 bash.

Only joking. Liza and I don't do it just for jolly - we charge for the knee tremblers. Victorian prices mind.

What could have driven Mary Kelly to play at "going bad", to the extent that she was only ever likely to be remembered for that, if she was remembered at all? The only evidence that she could have been some kind of LVP SOE, or Fenian Mata Hari, working under the grimmest cover imaginable, is that there is no evidence for it and never will be.

Love,

Caz
X

[Hunter]

.
From MY point of view, however, interpolating sex into the cases of C3-C5 is more consonant with male fantasy than the exigencies of the case/s at hand. But it makes for some interesting movies.

Hi Lynn,

What do you know about these women that their contemporaries didn't?

Male fantasy and movies?

Every credible book (and there ain't many) denotes these women as at least part time prostitutes based on contemporary accounts and evidence. That includes authors such as Evans, Rumbelow, Skinner, Jones, Sugden and Begg.

Mc'Carthy and Mrs. Richardson are poor barometers to gage the activities that went on at their premises for obvious reasons.

[The Good Michael]

I see a hope here that kelly was some kind of Irish informant or Bristish informant against the Irish and was only playing the role of prostitute. That would have meant that she was a good enough actress to have fooled Barnett for a long time who knew of her travel to France as a hooker and her life in a gay house in London before here current siutuation. It was also a great idea to set her up in a $hitty little hellhole with broken windows and to make it look as if she was arrears in rent. The acting drunk every night and the pretend carousing were brilliant bits of thespianism as well. To top things off, she even fooled policemen who knew of her and Bowyer, though McCarthy had to have been on the spy payroll as well, and why not as it was such a lucrative occupation for Kelly dispite the minor setback of being butchered.

Mike

[Hunter]

You've got to stop being practical, Michael. There's no room for that in conspiracy or most suspect theories.

[lynn cates]

the little actor cons another part

Hello Caz.

"Even a known prostitute liked to give the impression, whenever she got the chance, of being a poor but honest and thoroughly respectable "widow woman", hard-working seamstress or decent scrubber, fallen on hard times through no fault of her own. But she would rarely have fooled anyone in her company who was not open to be so fooled or quick to turn the old blind eye. Walk the streets of Whitechapel today and there won't be much doubt which women mean business and which don't. Why on earth would anyone just play at it?"

Excellent question. We agree that, in the normal case, even the hard core hooker would try to maintain respectability. And on those occasions in which she had a friend, s/he would often try to help with that attempt. In fact, look at how some of the other "friends" of the other 4 ladies went out of their collective ways to enforce the notion that, "No, she was NOT doing THAT."

Now, let's ask ourselves a question. Why is the good Mr. Barnett practically holding up a neon sign reading, "Fallen woman here"? This chap goes out of his way to let us know that MJ was a whore--in West London, in France, in Whitechapel. And this, given his proclivity to be revulsed by such activity.

Now Caz, you are a very discerning and astute person. Don't you catch even a tiny sniff of a fishy (sorry, Christer, didn't mean to take your name in vain), say, ruber herringensis?

Evidence? Well, what do you know? It's all pulped and/or burned or sealed against the advent of a conundrum with a descendant (heh-heh). But, I am not ready to give up just yet. Hope springs eternal.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

repeat after me, "2 + 2 = 5"

Hello Hunter.

"What do you know about these women that their contemporaries didn't?"

Better: "What do you know about these women that their contemporaries didn't speculate about?"

Have you ever noticed how bloody many sites there are on the internet that regurgitate, unashamedly, the "information" from Wikipaedia?

Now, let's do a thought experiment. Suppose it is just barely possible that Wiki has an article with a single error (heh-heh). Now, given the proliferation of sites uncritically copying such "information," what do you think is subsequently being propagated?

(Hint: if you responded "an error," score one point; else, score zero.)

Now, in my curious profession, it is not uncommon for a scholar to "follow" other scholars--this happens even to the best of us. Sometimes, the results are not exactly as we wish--an error is propagated.

Same possibility with WCM scholarship.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

a word a day keeps the lexicographer away

Hello Michael. Why would she have to fool Barnett? Has it ever occurred to you that this bloke is nearly as hard to trace as MJ herself? Why is that? Why is everything so transparent with Polly and Annie, but the others are shrouded in mystery?

Today's word is "collusion."

Cheers.
LC

[corey123]

Hello Lynn,

What you say is true, though, what we also follow is contemporary information, error is not to be seen in it.

Yours truly,

Corey