Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

They All Love Jack- what did you think of this book?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Fantomas View Post
    'Withnail and I' is a masterpiece of a film that I love, made of disjointed sketch-like scenes and characters. 'TALJ' has an enjoyably-witty-old-soak tone but isn't masterpiece material and is far from it - but I enjoyed it - I just didn't buy any of the arguments. Like Cornwell's ludicrous assassinat de personnage on Sickert - which I enjoy reading - it is worth owning as a stylistic piece of literary folly - nay art - but serious ripperology, it ain't.
    This sums up my views on TALJ perfectly too.

    I thought it was a great read and I loved the passionate, angry tone / writing style.

    I don't agree with Bruce's conclusions, but it's a big, enjoyable tome.

    Despite me not buying the M Maybrick as ripper theory it's one of my favourites.

    I love Withnail and I, and as a rule of thumb always derive pleasure from anything that slags off the freemasons.

    They are weird and don't allow women!

    I was always going to be well disposed to this book!
    Last edited by Ms Diddles; 04-21-2024, 12:48 PM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Ms Diddles View Post
      That said, I always derive pleasure from anything that slags off the freemasons.

      They are weird and don't allow women!
      Without scratching the surface the Freemason angle is a canny one. Not necessarily in connection with the Royal Family of course. Ritualistic killings, the word JUWES and the ritual of Master Mason, Hiram Abif was slain by three ruffians collectively termed The Juwes. I mean if anyone had the power to cover something up it would be that lot in Victorian times.

      Funnily enough my good lady and I visited the local lodge for an open day and apparently women are allowed under certain conditions. IIRC it's if there are at least one man present or something. The other thing he pointed out, the Freemason, was that the 'Freemasons are not a secret society, but rather a society with secrets.'

      The Freemasons being involved is a great get out clause for a lot of issues with Ripperology. Things being covered up, evidence disappearing, certain people not being allowed to tell their story. It's convenient and of course if you throw in scandal of a high level it makes for good telly... do I believe it no, would I like it to be true.. kind of

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Geddy2112 View Post

        Without scratching the surface the Freemason angle is a canny one. Not necessarily in connection with the Royal Family of course. Ritualistic killings, the word JUWES and the ritual of Master Mason, Hiram Abif was slain by three ruffians collectively termed The Juwes. I mean if anyone had the power to cover something up it would be that lot in Victorian times.

        Funnily enough my good lady and I visited the local lodge for an open day and apparently women are allowed under certain conditions. IIRC it's if there are at least one man present or something. The other thing he pointed out, the Freemason, was that the 'Freemasons are not a secret society, but rather a society with secrets.'

        The Freemasons being involved is a great get out clause for a lot of issues with Ripperology. Things being covered up, evidence disappearing, certain people not being allowed to tell their story. It's convenient and of course if you throw in scandal of a high level it makes for good telly... do I believe it no, would I like it to be true.. kind of
        I agree that whilst incredibly far-fetched, the masonic theories do have a certain romantic mystique.

        They make for a great story, and as you state above provide an excellent "explanation " for some of the mysteries of ripperology.

        I seem to recall it was disputed that the three ruffians were referred to as the Juwes in masonic parlance though.

        I'd thought that was pretty much refuted now, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

        Interesting to hear they are now deigning to allow women in "in certain circumstances " when chaperoned by a man.

        How magnanimous of 'em.

        Perhaps the bloke is required to make sure we don't plunder the ceremonial booze or or get into the dressing up box and start trying on their funny robes?!

        Strange!



        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Ms Diddles View Post

          Perhaps the bloke is required to make sure we don't plunder the ceremonial booze or or get into the dressing up box and start trying on their funny robes?!
          Must admit it's the long gloves that took my fancy

          Comment


          • #20
            Yeah I have to say I rather enjoyed the book when I read it a few years back. Completely bonkers but a good read.
            Best wishes,

            Tristan

            Comment


            • #21
              Hi,
              Great read, well the first half anyway.
              The chapter regarding the "Double Event" is a fantastic read .

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Geddy2112 View Post

                Without scratching the surface the Freemason angle is a canny one. Not necessarily in connection with the Royal Family of course. Ritualistic killings, the word JUWES and the ritual of Master Mason, Hiram Abif was slain by three ruffians collectively termed The Juwes. I mean if anyone had the power to cover something up it would be that lot in Victorian times.

                Funnily enough my good lady and I visited the local lodge for an open day and apparently women are allowed under certain conditions. IIRC it's if there are at least one man present or something. The other thing he pointed out, the Freemason, was that the 'Freemasons are not a secret society, but rather a society with secrets.'

                The Freemasons being involved is a great get out clause for a lot of issues with Ripperology. Things being covered up, evidence disappearing, certain people not being allowed to tell their story. It's convenient and of course if you throw in scandal of a high level it makes for good telly... do I believe it no, would I like it to be true.. kind of
                Hi Geddy, always enjoy your posts.

                I have been a freemason now for 28 years and have travelled all the way to the 32 degree. I can state that no ritual that I have been apart of nor any piece of masonic literature has ever used the word JUWES before. Over the years I have acquired a rather large collection of books on the craft and yet I can't find that wording. As an American, I can see where the Grand Lodge of England back in the late 19th century may have used different spellings of some kind for different words than the American Grand Lodges. I have access to the ritual literature that London lodges used from back then and seeing as i have me a rainy weekend ahead, will do further research into this. If i find that spelling I will confess my ignorance and report where its found because all masonic literature is available to the general public, we really don't have any secrets.

                I must confess to never really knowing of these masonic theories relating to JtR until the movie "From Hell" came out years back and what a big bowl of rotten eggs that was, utter nonsense.

                Anywho, hope your weekend is blessed...
                " Still it is an error to argue in front of your data. You find yourself insensibly twisting them round to fit your theories."
                Sherlock Holmes
                ​​​​​

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Duran duren View Post

                  Hi Geddy, always enjoy your posts.
                  Hi Duran, and thank you.

                  Originally posted by Duran duren View Post
                  I have been a freemason now for 28 years and have travelled all the way to the 32 degree. I can state that no ritual that I have been apart of nor any piece of masonic literature has ever used the word JUWES before. Over the years I have acquired a rather large collection of books on the craft and yet I can't find that wording. As an American, I can see where the Grand Lodge of England back in the late 19th century may have used different spellings of some kind for different words than the American Grand Lodges. I have access to the ritual literature that London lodges used from back then and seeing as i have me a rainy weekend ahead, will do further research into this. If i find that spelling I will confess my ignorance and report where its found because all masonic literature is available to the general public, we really don't have any secrets.
                  Ah that will explain it, you have to get to 42 Degree before they let you in on the good stuff

                  I believe the follow website is where I read the story about the Juwes - https://www.masoncode.com/juwes/

                  Originally posted by Duran duren View Post
                  Anywho, hope your weekend is blessed...
                  Likewise, regards.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Well that explains it then, non-fraternal writings.
                    " Still it is an error to argue in front of your data. You find yourself insensibly twisting them round to fit your theories."
                    Sherlock Holmes
                    ​​​​​

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Worth noting that the spelling "Juwes" was in Long and Halses report, although with different sentence structures,.. "Juws" was also suggested by Foster, and Swanson recorded in his notes that it was "Jewes".

                      I still find it interesting that there was not one singular version offered of the spelling or the exact phasing. A few phonetic versions most probably, but not so much verbatim quoting. Its the actual sentence structure though that is vital to our understanding of the intended message...and we cannot be sure what that was.
                      Michael Richards

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I have always felt that possibly the spelling was mistaken because maybe the chalk had smeared or not legible enough. Regardless, the piece of apron was found under this writing. Now we all know that there are such things as true coincidence, but in this case, who knows for sure?

                        No, I am not trying to drag the GSG back out when there is plenty of excellent commentary already on this issue. My issue was just that I have seen that spelling and some secretive Masonic code words that just isn't true.

                        Good post Michael
                        " Still it is an error to argue in front of your data. You find yourself insensibly twisting them round to fit your theories."
                        Sherlock Holmes
                        ​​​​​

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Duran duren View Post
                          I have always felt that possibly the spelling was mistaken because maybe the chalk had smeared or not legible enough.
                          Indeed, I believe 'Juwes' was initially meant to say 'Lech' and got smudged.. the rest they say is history.

                          (On a side note I'm not sure what Holmgren and Stow believe regarding the scribbles...)

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Lol, you are exactly right Geddy
                            " Still it is an error to argue in front of your data. You find yourself insensibly twisting them round to fit your theories."
                            Sherlock Holmes
                            ​​​​​

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Duran duren View Post
                              I have always felt that possibly the spelling was mistaken because maybe the chalk had smeared or not legible enough. Regardless, the piece of apron was found under this writing. Now we all know that there are such things as true coincidence, but in this case, who knows for sure?

                              No, I am not trying to drag the GSG back out when there is plenty of excellent commentary already on this issue. My issue was just that I have seen that spelling and some secretive Masonic code words that just isn't true.

                              Good post Michael
                              There was a description of the writing as being in a "good schoolboy" manner, which for me suggests probably in italics or cursive, and neat.

                              This entrance way led to the Model Homes, where almost all the tenants were Jewish. Its my understanding that the location has some historical reference to being a starting point for past protest marches, which may have been instigated by local Socialists of which many were Immigrant Jews. That location was significant in context with Immigrant Jews. Which is why Im not surprised the message references Jews, and why I believe the location was chosen by the writer...who also had the apron section with him.
                              Michael Richards

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X