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

[Natalie Severn]

Well Stewart,I didnt get to see the exhibition itself-I arrived late and then got side tracked afterwards in a bar with you lot!
But I certainly will go back.I have never been to docklands before and loved just on their own,the marvellous old warehouses,where with the glimpse of the masts of those old ships and the Thames lapping close by ,you could imagine the sugar and cotton being unloaded.I was transported by it all!
I thought the talks were great,the Booth maps too and I look forward to going back and scrutinising the stuff I missed.
Norma

[bolo]

I find some of the comments regarding the LVP and East End orientation of the exhibition surprising to say the least, I always tought that it would be impossible to separate the Ripper from the LVP. Regarding the quality and selection of the exhibits, they seem to be very interesting from what I've read so again, no complaints from me here.

I'd love to be there, visit the exhibition, take a tour and purchase some more JtR books that are difficult to find over here but can't afford it at the moment. Ah well, maybe next time... whenever that will be...

[David Knott]

I visited the exhibition on Saturday morning, and wasn't disappointed in the slightest. I think the title of the thread says it all really.

Of course, all of the Ripper related material was familiar to me thanks to the number of books on the case, and to websites like this, but it was still a once in a lifetime opportunity to see the originals.

The East End material was interesting as well as relevant, and the whole thing was well presented, without any of the usual canards.

The detail on the Kelly photograph is excellent, much better than in the books. There were also a few first editions in the book display that I wouldn't mind getting my hands on.

I would happily recommend the exhibition to anyone, whatever their level of knowledge. Well done to all involved.

David

[Cap'n Jack]

I'm sorry, but I have never thought the subject of the Whitechapel Murders to be suitable for an audience in either an educational or scholastic forum, or even an informational presentation.
We lick around the edges of a society that is more informed and concerned about images and history of a generalized nature, ergo, folks would rather watch 'Britains Got Talent' than view 19th Century documents about some daft kid who killed wimmin.
I accept the fact that I am a leper.

[George Hutchinson]

I have yet to see the exhibition and I will comment on what I personally feel about the results as and when I see them.

However, I do know just a little of the background as to how it came together and I know that Julia had a hard time doing it with often not a great deal of help and much struck me as being prepared at the last minute. The photos I saw that they had put on-line before it opened also seemed to me to be concentrating almost solely on the LVP - yes, Bolo, it is relevant but from what I was seeing on the images it appeared to be all-encompassing.

I have NEVER said it IS this or that - I have always added the caveat that my comments are based on the knowledge I have of the issue.

Personally, I feel any exhibition that had seen the results of Jake's work, was offered it, and turned it down was never going to be able to hit the nail on the head. They were also offered images from The Whitby Collection and in spite of Julia trying to contact me every now and then and me returning her calls which went to answerphone, that never came about either.

It sounds like they have accrued much of the remaining artefacts and for that they are to be applauded. I still feel that it should have more on the LONDON of JtR (of course, I am biased on this matter). Not the people, not the case - the streets and locations. Is there ANYTHING dealing with that?

I hope to be able to respond more positively once I have seen it.

PHILIP

[Jeff Leahy]

Well Stewart,I didnt get to see the exhibition itself-I arrived late and then got side tracked afterwards in a bar with you lot!
But I certainly will go back.I have never been to docklands before and loved just on their own,the marvellous old warehouses,where with the glimpse of the masts of those old ships and the Thames lapping close by ,you could imagine the sugar and cotton being unloaded.I was transported by it all!
I thought the talks were great,the Booth maps too and I look forward to going back and scrutinising the stuff I missed.
Norma

Yeah I heard you ran off the moment I arrived

[Neal Shelden]

Adequate information on the victims with a few photographs included, possibly waxworks images of the victims, reproduction costumes of what the women would have worn, accurate details of the weather conditions in 1888 to destroy the image of foggy Jack the Ripper's London, computer reproductions of the murder sites. Video of people who know about the case rather than people like Eve Pollard.
Something that I thought was brilliant about the Titanic Exhibtion at the Science Museum some years ago was that you were given a card on the way in which identified you with one of the people on Titanic, in the same way you could be given a card on the way in to personalise your visit and you would want to find out more about that victim, suspect, or policeman etc who is named on your card.

[Jeff Leahy]

Actually now you come to mention it Neal did not Andy Alliffe offer the exhibision his complete costume of what cathrine Eddows was wearing?

I new there was something missing..

are you there andy? do you know what happened?

surely this should have been included?

[Sam Flynn]

As a thought experiment, why not turn the whole situation on its head?

Imagine you were a member of the general public who happened to be in town when a Ripper Conference was going on, and obtained entry to the day's lectures/events by paying at the door. You might, I'm sure, find some of the proceedings interesting, but - overall - wouldn't you feel completely baffled by the sort of minutiae to which many of us find ourselves drawn? Wouldn't the drinks interval go something like this:

Sam Flynn [for it is he]: "Look you now, boyo, isn't it. Enjoy the morning, did you?"

Joe/Joanne Public: "Well, it was OK in parts - but strewth! How you can listen spellbound for the best part of an hour to a chap talking about the history of Victorian grafitti is beyond me!"

...that type of thing.

I quote myself. Mainly to emphasise the point that the general public aren't necessarily going to be drawn to the fine-grained detail in which we are interested.

[Supe]

Hi all,

I have not seen this particular exhibit and barring some great bit of good luck coming my way in the near future I shall not get to see it. Still, I once was deeply involved in doing the researching and writing for several major projects, including the permanent exhibit space at the Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library and sveral permanent ditto at the Chicago Museum of Science & Industry, so a few general remarks on my experience may be in order.

First of all, an exhibit will end up as a series of compromises regardless of how good the intentions of the creators and despite the initial vision for the exhibit. Sometimes, key artifacts are simply not available for a variety of reasons. There were several items at other presidential libraries that more reasonably belonged in the Johnson Library, but we were told (in the case of the Truman Library) that any permanent loan would have to await the deaths of certain family members, while the enimity between the Johnson family and that of others with a presidential library made it clear that even after Hell froze over there was no chance.

Then, too, it has been my experience that the final call was always in the hands of the art director (exhibits being in the end a visual event). Thus, if there were no artifacts, no pictures, nothing at all to arrest the vistors' attention, some important aspects of a story would be eliminated. Moreover, even when there were artifacts or images, the visual quality of those items would usually determine the space and importance they were alloted in the exhibit. This often resulted in some skewed emphases in an exhibit.

Further, every exhibit has a theme or interpretation it tries to sell and not only is this arrived at by committee, the intrepretation is often set by those who are backing the exhibit. In one case, the history of newspapers in the United States, the major funding came from the Field Foundation, the philanthropic arm of the then-owners of the Chicago Tribune. This--surprise, surpeise--resulted in instances of interpretation I was not happy with but which made the Tribune look grand.

Finally, this element of the process often led to some great moments of irony. When working on the Johnson Library I once met for lunch with the art director of the design firm, a representaive of the Johnson family foundation and representatives of two liberal foundations. It was by far the fanciest lunch I ever had. Remember, this was more than 20 yerars ago and lunch for the five of us came to well over $600--not counting the one fellow who asked for past-prandial cigar. A portable humidor was wheeled out, he choose a $50 stoogie and the attendant clipped the one end and then dipped iit in brandy before handing it over. Now that is excess, but the whole lunch seemed standard operating proceedure for the three foundation folk.

Anyway, all the foundation reps fought over whose foundation plastic would foot the bill and once that was settled we adjourned to an office suite to work. And what was the first thing that was mentioned: the person whose foundation had just paid for an obscenely expensive lunch turned to me and said "Can't you put a little more pathos in the section on the 'War On Poverty'?" It was hard to keep a straight face.

Anyway, my point is that while there may some problems with this exhibit, everyone should keep in mind that no exhibit--even if you alone organize it--will end up the way you planned at the outset.

Don.

[Stewart P Evans]

Milieu

When I visited the exhibition on Saturday I have to admit that my viewing of the whole thing was very hurried and I do hope to return and spend much more time there taking it all in. But I have to say that the exhibition did not strike me as disappointing in any way. For any visitor wishing to know more there were plenty of pointers as to where to seek information and, of course, the exhibition book which was on sale there and which contained much more information for those who might desire it. Many contemporary newspapers were also on display.

I will say again, however, I don't really know what else, that was available to them, that they could have put on display. No one denies that the victims are important, or that there have been some great finds such as Neal's superb and detailed research on the victims and Philip's great 1960s photographs of the area and sites. But all that, in my opinion, is the greater detail that awaits the interested reader should they decide to pursue further interest in the subject that may be inspired by the exhibition. There is only so much that 'Joe Public' will internalise when visiting an exhibition such as this. There were some audio-visual exhibits running which I did not stop to listen to, one I noticed was showing extracts from the various Jack the Ripper films that have been made. How much emphasis should be given to victims, and suspects for that matter, in exhibitions such as this? Whilst these ideas may be a very personal thing, and we are all bound to have different ideas about it, some based on our own involvement in researching the subject, I still don't think that they have got anything too wrong.

As regards the victims, the whole history of the milieu that produced them - the extreme poverty, deprivation, social unrest etc., etc. is all about the victims and there was a great emphasis on this aspect at the exhibition. Let's not put too fine a point on this, they were poverty and drink stricken casual prostitutes whom we may all now feel great sympathy for. But they were not the only victims of their time as a mere reading of the contemporary newspapers will show with the suicides, other murders, Thames drowning victims etc. But at least these victims are remembered and their names live in history. Apropos of this you only have to look at the exhibit booklet cover (below) to see that all 11 Whitechapel victims are listed and remembered. Surely more than any drink-afflicted casual prostitute could ever have realised would be the case. Obviously they would not have wanted to be remembered because of such a death - but at least they are remembered unlike thousands of their 'sister' victims of East End poverty who are now totally forgotten.

Philip has raised an objection to the inclusion of Sir John Williams as a 'suspect' and, in general, I would agree with him. However, the Royal nonsense, Gull, Sickert, Maybrick etc. are also included and there is no more reason for including any of these other than exampling the fictions that the years have spawned. And this is another aspect of the exhibition - the Ripper's 'legacy' of fiction and entertainment - and these 'suspects' are firmly in their correct 'slot' in the display areas. No, an exhibition like this is never going to keep everyone happy, especially the purists and those with a deep interest in some aspect (such as Neal with the victims and Philip with the East End geography) but overall, I think, they have made a pretty good fist of it and the exhibition should not disappoint the interested visitor.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Stewart

I do agree with you, the exhibition contains some interesting stuff that most Ripperologists are going to want to see, And it certainly does enough to wet the public taste buds and leave them wanting more...

However there does seem to be three over sites that could have been easily corrected:

1. The photo of Annie Chapman in life. I think reminding the public that these were really women murdered by a real killer would have been good.

2. The Costume and artifacts worn by Catherine Eddows. This collection put together by Andy Aliffe at conference was excellent...it really gave you a mental picture of the time and as far as I'm aware was offered..

3. The exclusion of Aaron Kosminski from the suspect board did show a little misunderstanding of the case...the icing on the cake for me, would have been his asylum records..

Yours Jeff

[Stewart P Evans]

Points

Hi Stewart
I do agree with you, the exhibition contains some interesting stuff that most Ripperologists are going to want to see, And it certainly does enough to wet the public taste buds and leave them wanting more...
However there does seem to be three over sites that could have been easily corrected:
1. The photo of Annie Chapman in life. I think reminding the public that these were really women murdered by a real killer would have been good.
2. The Costume and artifacts worn by Catherine Eddows. This collection put together by Andy Aliffe at conference was excellent...it really gave you a mental picture of the time and as far as I'm aware was offered..
3. The exclusion of Aaron Kosminski from the suspect board did show a little misunderstanding of the case...the icing on the cake for me, would have been his asylum records..
Yours Jeff

Jeff, it is very easy to be critical, and I have made one or two comments about the exhibition myself where I felt it missed something. But I do feel that this falls in the area of nitpicking when looking at the overall presentation. I do not know the ins and outs of every aspect of the what was chosen and what was not but to address your points.

1. I do not know the status of the original photograph of Annie Chapman in life and its availability so I cannot comment on its omission.

2. The 'costume and artifacts worn by Catherine Eddowes' are not original nor are they 'true to life.' This has been discussed before, the pristine display of the clothing supposed to be a replica of what Eddowes wore is far from what her filthy and repaired real-life clothing would have looked like. Also there were plenty of illustrations of poor women giving a very good idea of what these women would have looked like anyway.

3. The 'exclusion of Aaron Kosminski from the suspect board' rather escapes me. Was this not because there is no known image of Kosminski, whereas we have images of the others? He certainly is not omitted as a suspect. Also I do not know of the availability of the original asylum records for display for a period of months. As they are in registers containing many others in the archives it may be that they have to remain available for public research purposes in the archives.

As I have said, and continue to say, it is very easy to be critical and, of course, this exhibition, nor any I should imagine, is not perfect and will not totally satisfy everyone. The real judges should be members of the public who have no vested interest or subject bias in this case.

[George Hutchinson]

Hi Stewart - when did I say I objected to John Williams being included as a suspect?

PHILIP

[caz]

Hi Philip,

You and Rob Clack have no need to worry, since your book is on sale in the small merchandise area just as the public walk in, before they decide whether to buy a ticket for the ripper exhibition or simply wander round the permanent Docklands galleries.

To be fair, Julia was in the same situation as you were, if you kept missing each other's calls. She would have felt the same frustration as you did, but probably had to move straight on to her next phone call, hoping it would be more productive.

Don's input is invaluable here, because he makes it clear just how many factors can come into play when these events are organised, and how impossible it is to get the balance right to suit everyone. Some things have to be sacrificed while others have to be improvised, in order to appeal in the right way to the paying public. And much as we might like to think otherwise, ripper enthusiasts alone would not have made such an exhibition a viable proposition.

I must admit that it crossed my mind when tucking into my Jack the Ripper lunch how it could not have been more different from eating out in Whitechapel in 1888. But then, as hubby remarked, nobody would have given it a try if the choice was between a loaf of stale bread, stewed eels or pig's brains. Fortunately, the exhibition itself - which is what matters - deals with all the grim realities of time and place, and does a great job in my opinion of bringing Jack, his territory and his prey to life.

Love,

Caz
X