Just What Do People Expect From a Jack the Ripper Exhibition?

[Monty]

Hi Neal

I know exactly how you feel. Julia spent a lot of time with members of the Whitechapel Society at the Wolverhampton conference - giving us a lot of 'promises'.

Not only have we been completely ignored since then but they will not even let us leave our flyers at the exhibition.

Please keep me informed of your venture for the summer. You will be well supported by our members.

Coral

Neal,

Id like to back up Corals request by asking if you would keep this site updated of any venture you may have this summer.

Theres a lot of us, me included, who would love to see it with keen interest.

Monty

[George Hutchinson]

I'm with stupid. ^

PHILIP

[Monty]

Thats no way to talk bout Rob.

Monty

[Clive]

It is perhaps difficult for those with more than just a cursory interest in JTR, such as regular contributors/readers of Casebook, to give a truly objective view of the exhibition. Having visited today and given it some thought, my personal views, where I have tried to be as objective as possible, are as follows (and I fully appreciate that some of these have been subject to observation or debate in other posts):

(1) There are undoubtedly some highlights, including The "Maybrick" Diary, the policing memorabilia (including Abberline's walking cane), the mortuary cart, original police reports and of course, the "Dear Boss"letter. (Although as pointed out on another thread, it is not at all clear that the label of "facsimile" relates only to the second page because the original is a two sided document and, surely it would have been better to show the signature page of the original and have the first page as the facsimile).

(2) Overall and regardless of the content, the exhibition is quite well displayed. Despite being suggestions in this thread that it is very "eighties" in style, this worked for me in that it was not gimmicky, sensationalist or too dry. The only thing that didn't work (and doesn't in any exhibition for me) is the use of "talking head" videos, unless they are first hand oral history. I tend to find them superficial, inane and insulting to the intelligence to the point that they have no added value, even if you are not familiar with the subject.

(3) The pamphlet given out exorts us to "remember the tragic lives of the murdered women". To be honest, I didn't come out with any sense of knowing much about the victims as individuals. This was a lost opportunity and I do sympathise with Neal that his possible contributions (and book), along with the excellent work by Chris Scott on Mary kelly, (even if just to reinforce what is not known), could have made a huge difference here in adding the personal touch.

(4) Other than identifying names, at least the exhibition doesn't give much space to theories (crazy or otherwise) about the specific identity of JTR, and by so doing doesn't endorse any of them. However, another lost opportunity is that some space could perhaps have been given over to demolishing universally accepted myths which are still strong in the public consciousness. Sadly, and has been pointed out, the cover of the "Official book" actually serves to further two of these myths, ie the foggy nights and that JTR undoubtedly wore a top hat (see also (6) below).

(5) To me, a successful exhibition not only informs but encourages the visitor to go away with a desire to learn more about the subject. A good starting point is the selection of literature available in the shop. In this respect, what was available was extremely disappointing in its range. The fact that there are hundreds of copies of the "official" book but very little else suggested to me that commercial reasons alone dictated what was sold and not any intention to encourage further exploration. (Compare for example the range of literature on sale which supports the Imperial War Museum's Holocaust exhibition, even if this is permanent).

(6) On the subject of the official book, I looked forward to getting it with anticipation, but was very disappointed. Although it is undoubtedly well illustrated, I can't decide whether it is supposed to be a collection of serious academic essays or is somehow aimed at the more general market, ie the "average" visitor to the exhibition. Personally, I don't think it succeeds on either front. As well as the content itself, I look to the sources used and the "further reading" list to help assess credibility and value. Unless I have missed it somewhere, I was baffled for example that such a work makes no reference whatsoever to Jack London's "People of the Abyss", neither in the text nor the further reading list. By contrast, the latter does have room for Raphael Samuel's "East End Underworld: Chapters in the Life of Arthur Harding" (whose recollections incidentally need to be taken with a huge cellar of salt). Alarm Bells also rang in Peter Ackroyd's introduction where it states that the Goulston Street graffiti was erased on the orders of a police superintendent. (Or is there a revisionist view that Warren didn't have any role in this decision)?

In summary, my view is that the exhibition is a real "curate's egg", ie good in parts. However, I think it could have been better, although it is not likely to please everbody whatever is included or omitted. It was at least a very good way to spend a wet Bank Holiday Sunday for someone who has been interested (and open minded but not expert) in the subject of JTR for a few years.

[George Hutchinson]

Welcome, Clive. That was an EXCELLENT first post here. Extremely illuminating - many thanks for that. I'm sure there'll be a stream of regulars agreeing with me.

PHILIP

[RJM]

Does anyone have any photographs of the exhibition or is that verboten?

Robert

[chrisjd]

Hi Robert,

mir wurde gesagt, es sei verboten. :-)

(Jenny posted that info as a reply to my question)


C

[Limehouse]

I visited the Ripper exhibition this weekend and thought it waqs very good. Unlike Clive, I actually liked the 'talking heads' and the video extracts by various contributors.

The exhibits themselves were interesting but i liked the way the social background to the killings was also explored (although I realise that most contributors to this Forum will be more than familiar with that).

I also visited the rest of the museum and for 7 quid, I thought it was very good value.

[RJM]

Sorry, Christian. I didn't get the memo. Thanks for the reply.

Clive,

That was an excellent post... unlike Phil's... or mine.

Cheers,

Robert

p.s. If this Stewart fellow is a newbie, what does that make the rest of us

[George Hutchinson]

Leave me alone, Canadian man.

I'm feeling all zygote-y today.

PHILIP

(Award winner for the first considered use of the word 'zygote' on Casebook)

[caz]

If you are going to "educate" Caz, then please "educate" dont bring the subject up if you need to leave out the "uncomfortable bits".And I am speaking now as a teacher ,having taught London kids for over twenty years.
Norma

Hi Nats,

Only just caught up with this thread.

I agree entirely with what you say. As far as I am concerned, no unbiased, wholly factual information about Jack's victims should be seen as "uncomfortable" and swept under the carpet by those who seek to educate us. I can speak only as a pupil, since I have never taught (except once in Sunday School, as a teenager - can you believe that??? ) despite coming from a long line of teachers and headmasters. But I'm not sure what you mean by the "uncomfortable bits". Uncomfortable for whom and why? When discussing all this with hubby, he was a bit miffed at the idea that the public may be considered so brain dead that they cannot use what is on show at the exhibition to seek out more information on any aspect that is of particular interest to them, and educate themselves accordingly.

You could say it was the London Dungeon that first attracted me in a serious way to this subject, when my daughter chose to go there with some friends for her 11th birthday, ten years ago. But I sincerely hope that anyone who has visited both the London Dungeon and the Docklands JtR Exhibition would see almost instantly that the former is the "popular" face of JtR, while the latter is the "serious" face by comparison. And it is a matter of comparisons, since nobody and nothing can be perfect, and no exhibition will cover every aspect in as much detail as we purists might like to see.

I absolutely do appreciate why Neal feels a lot more emphasis should be placed on the lives of the individual murder victims, and I'm deeply saddened that he has had such a lousy experience. But we also have to find room in our hearts and minds for today's potential victims of violence and the sex, drugs and alcohol industries, otherwise what have we really learned from Jack's? Would his victims not want us to remember them by keeping one eye firmly on all those who may already be doomed to share a similar fate? That may be "unpopular" or "uncomfortable" for some people, but the Docklands Exhibition certainly made me think about it.

The picture of Annie and a paragraph or two about the lives of each victim (and the life claimed for MJK) before they ended up on the streets of Spitalfields would have been the proverbial icing on the cake. I can see that. But it's still a cake we get to eat without having to sell ourselves body and soul for it.

Love,

Caz
X

[George Hutchinson]

Caz - it was exactly ten years ago that I was working as one of the actors at the London Dungeon. I wonder...?

Would it have been your daughter's actual birthday you went there? If so, I was keeping a diary then and I'd be able to find out if I was working there that day.

PHILIP

[John Bennett]

Caz - it was exactly ten years ago that I was working as one of the actors at the London Dungeon. I wonder...?

Would it have been your daughter's actual birthday you went there? If so, I was keeping a diary then and I'd be able to find out if I was working there that day.

PHILIP

Spoooooooky!!!!

[Chris George]

(5) To me, a successful exhibition not only informs but encourages the visitor to go away with a desire to learn more about the subject. A good starting point is the selection of literature available in the shop. In this respect, what was available was extremely disappointing in its range. The fact that there are hundreds of copies of the "official" book but very little else suggested to me that commercial reasons alone dictated what was sold and not any intention to encourage further exploration. (Compare for example the range of literature on sale which supports the Imperial War Museum's Holocaust exhibition, even if this is permanent).

Hello Clive et al.

Isn't the Docklands Museum looking ahead to the museum's ongoing book sales once the Ripper exhibition is over? This will probably disappoint Neal Sheldon and other Ripper book authors, and Neal has already expressed his views about his book not being carried at the museum, but why should they stock up with Ripper titles that might not sell once the exhibition is over?

By contrast, you mention the Imperial War Museum, and the range of literature there. Yet military titles and also books on the Holocaust are meat and drink to what such a museum is all about, and the interest among visitors to purchase such books would be ongoing after a specific exhibition on the Holocaust will have finished.

I am not defending the decision of the Docklands Museum not to carry Ripper titles other than the exhibition book introduced by Peter Ackroyd. Just trying to see the situation from their point of view.

However, if the Docklands Museum were, as I suggested some days ago, to make the Ripper exhibition permanent, which I still urge would be a very worthwhile project, then the stocking of Ripper titles on a long-term basis at the museum would make eminent sense.

All the best

Chris George

[John Bennett]

There are so many Ripper books, aren't there? What would you expect the Museum to stock? It would be impossible not to offend somebody by not including something - and I don't just mean the authors, either.

So many opinions....