Poll What's the most important aspect of Ripperology?

[Jenni Shelden]

Tom, get you book written, I want to read it
Jenni

[PaulB]

I actually don't know very much about Ripperology, I didn't realise that new stuff was still coming to light.

I thought that in the case of Chapman, it was because not enough research had been done, which would not only uncover the truth but dispel the myths; whereas in the case of the Ripper, obviously millions of hours have been spent on every aspect of the case, leading me to think that there wasn't anything new to discover.

I stand corrected.

Maybe someone should make a new poll with better options than mine?

There's nowt wrong with the options, just that the reason for my interest wasn't among them, that's all. It's a good poll.

[Tom_Wescott]

That Scott Nelson is 'savouring the bloodiness and goriness of the murders' actually made me laugh out loud.

I agree with most sentiments on this thread, though I'm flabbergasted that Helena - who has created more threads on the Casebook in one year than I have in 14 - has remained unaware that new discoveries are constantly being made in Ripperology. Just flabbergasted. But I appreciate the hard work she's put into George Chapman and hope her book is the penultimate Chapman-as-Ripper thesis.

I appreciate Paul's awaiting a study of Le Grand's life, but what he's more likely to get from me is a study of his life from about 1886 (when he was 33) on, because prior to that very little is known for certain. I'm less convinced than I used to be that Christian Nelson was Le Grand. But rest assured it will be amazing. My chapters on the victims might be of the most interest, though. I'm working a little every day on my book, and the new research I'm doing is slowing me down, but it's either take it slow or write just another generic Ripper book like everyone else at the moment, and that had never interested me.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[007]

Agreed, Helena. The guilt would do me in.

As for the voting, it's no big deal really. I think I remember reading something about certain restrictions on accounts until they post a minimum number of times (which in my mind is a good thing, considering trolls, spammers, etc.). I'll eventually get to whatever the minimum is, even if it takes me a couple of years at my current posting rate.

[HelenaWojtczak]

part of it is trying to have even a small understanding of why someone does these things. I also wonder how a person can bring themselves to do such things to another person.

I am with you on this one 007. Even if someone deserved it and I was driven to kill them, I could not live with the guilt of what I'd done. How someone can kill an innocent, or a stranger, and live with it, I just don't know.

Helena

PS Sorry, someone else will have to answer the question about your eligibility to vote.

[007]

Well, I was not allowed to cast a vote (I'm assuming because my total post count is so low). But for myself, I would have to go with trying to understand more about abnormal psychology. For some reason, I've always been fascinated by serial killers. I guess part of it is trying to have even a small understanding of why someone does these things. I also wonder how a person can bring themselves to do such things to another person.

[HelenaWojtczak]

there are oodles of people all working on their own lines of inquiry, furnishing the case with new facts continually.

I count myself among them. Some people have considered George Chapman as a viable suspect, but some of the reasons that make him such are in fact based on misconceptions, mistranslations and fabrications.

One of the reasons for writing my book is to present ripperologists with the truth about Chapman, so that when they weigh him up a suspect they are (at long last) working with facts not fiction.

I am surprised that less than half of those who joined the poll said that the most important thing was to identify the Ripper. I kind of expected it to be more like 70%.

I'm pleased that Jenni Shelden chose option three: women's history is my great passion.

Helena

[HelenaWojtczak]

I wish it was true that the facts had been established, but that's not the case.

I actually don't know very much about Ripperology, I didn't realise that new stuff was still coming to light.

I thought that in the case of Chapman, it was because not enough research had been done, which would not only uncover the truth but dispel the myths; whereas in the case of the Ripper, obviously millions of hours have been spent on every aspect of the case, leading me to think that there wasn't anything new to discover.

I stand corrected.

Maybe someone should make a new poll with better options than mine?

[Dave O]

Hi John and Ruby,

Yes, but the good thing is that the questions get better.

Best,
Dave

[Rubyretro]

There is one problem - sometimes it feels like the more information we glean, the more questions are thrown back at us!

Yes, I think that is the big draw of the whole thing for me.

[John Bennett]

The most impotant,in my opinion,is the investigation,then and now.For it is still being investigated,a nd many have been and are active in that investigation.

Very true. And the establishment of what really happened and what continued to happen for many years after the event is what helps us to understand the case.

And it doesn't really matter whether one is trying to identify the killer, or establish whether there was only one, or what the victims did with their lives or what the police knew or didn't know or what the murder scenes looked like or who lived in the area or how many jews there were or whatever, all these 'quests' are part of the investigation that still continues. There's so much to this case that there are oodles of people all working on their own lines of inquiry, furnishing the case with new facts continually. Theories are another thing, but these of course spring from the knowledge that is being acquired.

There is one problem - sometimes it feels like the more information we glean, the more questions are thrown back at us!

JB

[harry]

The most impotant,in my opinion,is the investigation,then and now.For it is still being investigated,a nd many have been and are active in that investigation.

[PaulB]

Sorry Paul. Had I spent days mulling on it I might have worded the options better.

But, in my defence, I believe that the facts (that is, all the facts that we are now capable of unearthing) HAVE been established, it's just a matter of how we interpret them.

Not intended as a criticism of you Helena. Simply an observation that I think establishing the facts is the most important aspect of Ripperology and that it wasn't an option on the list.

I wish it was true that the facts had been established, but that's not the case. You've said yourself that your research into George Chapman has exposed and corrected a host of errors; we've barely scratched the surface of uncovering the lives, careers and personalities of the policemen involved in the Ripper case; the lives of the non-canonical victims are still pretty much a closed book; I await with considerable interest the promised in-depth study of Le Grand and such like; and new tit-bits of information, like Farquaharson, emerge every now and again to flesh out and revitalise thinking. But, as said, I'm not being critical of you at all, nor intending any criticism.

[HelenaWojtczak]

I'm not attracted the goriness is an essential factor in giving the case its notoriety and the Ripper his legendary status.

This may explain why George Chapman's three murders-by-poisoning have never been the subject of a tv drama, book, etc.

[HelenaWojtczak]

Establishing the facts - but that's not an option on the poll.

Sorry Paul. Had I spent days mulling on it I might have worded the options better.

But, in my defence, I believe that the facts (that is, all the facts that we are now capable of unearthing) HAVE been established, it's just a matter of how we interpret them.