The meaning of the GSG wording

[Rob Clack]

If its a case of stating I'm better than you then why no reference to the murder, Eddowes, Mitre Square etc in the text?

'Nothing'

Rob

[Monty]

Maria,

I can see why you think that. I feel its simple due to the fact it was written on the jamb and space necessitated its construction.

For what its worth, I personally do not see it as a blame but rather as defiant statement.

Monty

[Steven Russell]

That's interesting, Maria. Now you mention it, the thing does have a certain musicality to it.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Monty]

Not sure it is such a simple question.

The act of writing the message and depositing the apron (if a deliberate and purposeful set of actions) isn't synonymous with the text of the message. The one is a scene, the other is part of that scene.

It's the scene that says 'I'm better than you' not the message in itself. Without the apron, there is no association with the killer of Eddowes, as I'm sure you already know. Without the apron, the message could be a reference to, if not anything, then several other things at least.

It's the coincidence of the message and the apron which was and is striking isn't it.

If you're asking why, if the killer wrote the message, he didn't put explicit references in the message to his crimes - in other words, why it isn't a different message altogether - then there are several possible alternatives. Here's one though - it wouldn't have been nearly so effective.

Sally,

Yes, the only reason why we are discussing the writing is because of its proximity to the apron piece.

Its association by location. And due to that assumptions were made and caution, on behalf of the police, was acted upon. Warren was fully aware of the anti semitic attacks made just after the Chapman murder and made a call on its removal. Other writing in the area is irrelevant because they did not have that apron piece laying near it. Howver, that's more for Abbys benefit.

I personally feel an inclusion of any info regarding the murders more striking. The Zodiac did it with Stines shirt. He left the police in no doubt who he was, what he did and what he was saying. Attention was grasped. Yet Jack, if he indeed is the writings author, failed to do that. I see no reasonable reason why.

It could have been oh so more effective.

Monty

[mariab]

then why no reference to the murder, Eddowes, Mitre Square etc in the text?

Simple question to which no one has provided an answer.

Monty, what if the perp was simply letting off steam about being interrupted with Stride, hence linking the Berner Street to the Mitre Square murder? The reference to Mitre Square at Wentworth might have simply been the apron piece.
Monty, I'd be very interested in your take on the fact that (as I've noticed) the GSG happens to be a VERSE. In my opinion, the verse rhythm alone explains the length of the line and the double negative. Recently I've been wondering if “The X are the men that won't be blamed for nothing“ might not have perhaps been a quote – from some newspaper headline/article or something else, a rhyme perhaps, Whitechapel related? Eventually I'll look around for this (in newspapers and lit).
I'd be endlessly interested in your opinion on this (the verse as a quote), Monty, but please don't feel bound to comment.

[Sally]

No Sally.

Simple question to which no one has provided an answer.

Monty

Not sure it is such a simple question.

The act of writing the message and depositing the apron (if a deliberate and purposeful set of actions) isn't synonymous with the text of the message. The one is a scene, the other is part of that scene.

It's the scene that says 'I'm better than you' not the message in itself. Without the apron, there is no association with the killer of Eddowes, as I'm sure you already know. Without the apron, the message could be a reference to, if not anything, then several other things at least.

It's the coincidence of the message and the apron which was and is striking isn't it.

If you're asking why, if the killer wrote the message, he didn't put explicit references in the message to his crimes - in other words, why it isn't a different message altogether - then there are several possible alternatives. Here's one though - it wouldn't have been nearly so effective.

[Monty]

No Sally.

Simple question to which no one has provided an answer.

Monty

[Abby Normal]

To Tom and Sally
Bingo on both your posts.

I would also point out:
-that he had not cut and taken away clothing on any other victim.
-He had not been seen as well and by as many witnesses on the night of the double event.
-He had been interupted/knew he had been seen by up to five Jews that night.
-The subject of the GSG is Jews.
-The police make no mention of other graffiti, nor clean away other graffiti that night.

Too many "coincidences" for them all to be random and unrelated.

[Sally]

I noticed Tom,

Sally,

If its a case of stating I'm better than you then why no reference to the murder, Eddowes, Mitre Square etc in the text?

Monty

Is that a trick question?

[Monty]

I noticed Tom,

Sally,

If its a case of stating I'm better than you then why no reference to the murder, Eddowes, Mitre Square etc in the text?

Monty

[Sally]

The only reason for the killer to be writing the message and leaving the apron with it as a deliberate set of actions is to draw attention to his deeds, isn't it. It's saying 'Look at me - not only can I do two on the same night but I can also do this, right under your noses - and you still don't catch me out' It's saying. 'I'm so good at this, and I'm so much better than you that I have time to stop and write you a little note'

For an attention seeker of that order, it'd be part of the game, part of the whole performance.

In my view.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Harry. It's not a matter of whether we can see the neccesity or , as you put it, the urgency of the message. It's why was it important to the Ripper. That's the question. I don't see the necessity for remaining over a dead body and nicking eye lids, or cutting off a portion of apron when her many clean knapkins were lying around, after he pulled them from her cut pockets. But this is what happened. Of course, the purpose of cutting and taking the apron away is that it could be uniquely identified with the corpse, whereas as a random sanitary knapkin or hand towel could not.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

I can see the need to dispose of the apron,but I cannot see an urgency to compose and write messages at that particular time.Sure it could have been a sudden urge to do so,with little thought given on the outcome

I don't see any urgency either, what I could see is the perp's frustration after having been forced by Diemshitz and his cart (AKA the Jewish of the anarchist club) to leave Stride's dead body earlier than he planned.
I have twice remarked on the fact that the GSG is a VERSE (here and on another related thread), and noone seems to be interested! In my opinion, the verse rhythm alone explains the double negative. Anyone has an idea if “The X are the men that won't be blamed for nothing“ might have even been a quote – from some newspaper or something else, a rhyme perhaps, Whitechapel related?

but once started ,I would have expected a follow up of such practice at the Kelly murder scene.

Not necessarily, as the new situation of being inside and having more time in his disposition with MJK would have obliterated any other urges.

[harry]

Tom,
I can see the need to dispose of the apron,but I cannot see an urgency to compose and write messages at that particular time.Sure it could have been a sudden urge to do so,with little thought given on the outcome,but once started ,I would have expected a follow up of such practice at the Kelly murder scene.

[mariab]

"The minimalistic approach to Ripperology that has been the trend the past 10 years or so" is a very accurate characterization of Ripperology in the 00's, with its lack of suspectology and determined attention to detail while avoiding “the big picture“. Maybe someone oughta write a second meta-analysis book on Ripperology, after – Robin Odell I think it was?

Honestly, I'm not trying to one-up Carol. Someone's been called a “writer“ and then a “meta-analyst“... Kinda cracks me up.