The GSG. What Does It Mean??

[Wickerman]

Excuse me, Man O' Straw...

The "G" had 3/4 inch capital letters and its height has been mentioned before.

Seeing as I'm apparently among a bunch of pro-GSG'ers, who prefer to see something positive to connect this scribble with the murders, here's my honest-to-goodness two cents about the true size of the GSG.

I don't think it was 3/4" high, it's a mistake.

It's too precise, what are we to believe, someone got out a tape measure and measured all the characters?
Nope, if the principal characters really had been 3/4" tall we would just have read they were about 1" tall.

I can't remember what my source was for that statement, but I'm sure it was a type-written source, like a newspaper, not a handwritten source. Anyone, correct me if I'm wrong.

I would be willing to wager that the 'slash' mark "/" in the original handwritten source that the typed article was written up from, was a 'dash' "-".
Someone misread a 'dash' for a 'slash', and we end up reading that the capital letters in the Goulston Street Graffiti were 3/4 (three-quarters) of an inch tall, when in actual fact, I believe it really said they were 3-4 (three-to-four) inches tall.
Nobody measured the characters, it was an estimate.
Three-quarters is a definite measurement, three-to-four inches is an estimate, I'll wager that be the truth!

So ok, you pro-GSG'ers, I'll give that ta-youz-all for free..(coz I think it's thee most believeable interpretation) - but I still don't think it has anything to do with the murders.
Fresh could be 2 hrs old, it could be 3 hrs old and still fresh-looking, fresh doesn't automatically mean it has to be 1hr and 10mins old precisely. It could still have been written the night before and remain 'fresh-looking'.


All the best, Jon.S

[Sam Flynn]

The guy wrote specifically on a black surface, not all the walls were suitable for writing that would stand out.

What's particularly "non-standout" about redbrick walls, or grey ones, Mike? I've seen plenty of graffiti on such surfaces, and it stands out starkly enough under any lighting conditions.

Also, the black brick dado was at shoulder-height, as was the graffito - I wouldn't have expected its author to go out of his way to crouch or stand on tiptoe to write it. Ergo, if anyone of average height had decided to chalk a message on that wall, chances are the graffito would have ended up on a black bit anyway.

[Monty]

How,

They also have to explain all the hoopla the flatfoots made about it....if it was a "random" graffiti.

The writings location near to the apron ensured the right and proper thing to do was to investigate it.

Monty

[Fisherman]

"The guy wrote specifically..."

Or girl, Michael.

Fisherman

Wickerman,

It is odd that the changing of a word can make such a difference. I never said that graffiti was 'quite rare'. I said, "Relatively rare." That means in comparison to today and to modern large population centers, it was relatively rare as in, not a bombardment of messages that you might see in such places as London, New York, L.A., or Philadelphia today. If you want to believe that one could walk anywhere in the East End in 1888 and see all sorts of messages, I can't disprove that, as I wasn't there. If you can prove it, go ahead. Let me remind you that this I have no agenda for thinking this, except that it is logical to me.

Cheers,

Mike

Hi Mike,

I think that is a good point to raise, and it puts white chalk writing on a black dado without much if any surrounding graffiti near it into perspective I believe.

Graffiti like you intended to address, like a New York subway car, was not like this entranceway, and any message there wouldnt be just the authors desire to have his thoughts placed with others like him, or above them....as some is in the early scenario.

The guy wrote specifically on a black surface, not all the walls were suitable for writing that would stand out.

Best regards Mikey.

[The Good Michael]

Wickerman,

It is odd that the changing of a word can make such a difference. I never said that graffiti was 'quite rare'. I said, "Relatively rare." That means in comparison to today and to modern large population centers, it was relatively rare as in, not a bombardment of messages that you might see in such places as London, New York, L.A., or Philadelphia today. If you want to believe that one could walk anywhere in the East End in 1888 and see all sorts of messages, I can't disprove that, as I wasn't there. If you can prove it, go ahead. Let me remind you that this I have no agenda for thinking this, except that it is logical to me.

Cheers,

Mike

[Wickerman]

The Good Mike:

You aren't wrong. No one at that time mentioned graffiti being on the building itself, which Wick knows full well.

The argument was, that graffiti in general was quite rare, implying this graffiti was special.
I want to know what this assertion is based on. Something more than wishfull thinking I hope.
An assertion such as this requires a quote, a reference. ...I'm waiting for one.

Who shivs a git if graffiti was down on Mrs. Cohen's house 5 doors down? Its irrelevant.

Because, that would help determine how proliferant graffiti was in the immediate area.

Wickerman,like all the heathen who dispute the provenance of the G...have to explain why a detective, not an armchair Ripperologist, stated that it was "fresh" as in it was just put there.

Halse also tried to tell us where the apron was found, even though, by his own admission, he never saw the apron in situ.

So, lets define 'fresh', you said "just put there", define 'just',...24 minutes old?, 24 hrs old?, 48 hrs old?

They also have to explain all the hoopla the flatfoots made about it....if it was a "random" graffiti.

Why?
Are you saying the police 'knew' it was recent?
Of course they didn't, so why does anyone have to explain the 'beliefs' of someone else. Beliefs are not facts!, but the only fact we can all agree to is that no-one knew how old that graffiti was.
Imaginations, then as now, were running wild!

A bloodstained knife turned up in Whitechapel road on the night of Strides murder, so what!!

Wickerman...God bless him ...wasn't there. Detective Constable Dan Halse was.

Thats argumentative. I quoted a contemporary source, Dew who was familiar with Whitechapel. I quoted someone who saw the proliferation of graffiti after the Chapman murder.
I want to know who 'said' graffiti was rare in the area.
It's obvious the premise behind these type of arguments are to subversively add credence to the GSG. This technique of employing false arguments is how myths are created.

[Howard Brown]

The Good Mike:

You aren't wrong. No one at that time mentioned graffiti being on the building itself, which Wick knows full well. Who shivs a git if graffiti was down on Mrs. Cohen's house 5 doors down? Its irrelevant.

Wickerman,like all the heathen who dispute the provenance of the G...have to explain why a detective, not an armchair Ripperologist, stated that it was "fresh" as in it was just put there. They also have to explain all the hoopla the flatfoots made about it....if it was a "random" graffiti.

Wickerman...God bless him ...wasn't there. Detective Constable Dan Halse was.

[Pippin Joan]

But "Master" was definately a word referring to a dominant relationship with African slaves in America though. As was the term "Boss" when used by the slave.

I don't connect "boss" as a term used in a master-slave relationship in the US, but with a northeastern US relationship as in the dictionary entry above. It was one of the Dutch borrowings. "Boss" was common in the Northeast in the latter half of the 1800s, as we can see from the nicknames of the corrupt political bosses of the day. I'm sure it wasn't unused in England either, but very slangy. A totally unconnected question -- at least where I grew up in New England, the pet name for a cow is always Bossy. Why is that? Is it because a cow acts bossy?

[Wickerman]

Dew is more anecdotal than trustworthy. However, 'many' can mean 5 or more, and 'district' doesn't mean only Goulston and only that particular building block where, as far as I know, there was no other graffiti discovered, nor was there mention of small, neat handwrting being used elsewhere.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Mike

Have you ever bothered to enter 'chalk' into the Newspaper search window?
You will find a good number of chalked graffiti quotes beginning, as Dew say's, with the Chapman murder.

This idea that graffiti was rare, did you come up with this on your own or do you have a quote from the time that declares it was rare?

Whether you trust Dew's recollections of the murders or not, I can't see what reason you would have for not believing his comments about graffiti.
At least Dew was there, he isn't sat at a computer 120 yrs later just thinking he knows.
So, I would like to know what your opinion is based on because, I don't think you've researched it - so go ahead, surprise me.

Hi Michael

Well, the article says that it came back to the UK from America with this added meaning of master, or something similar. Obviously no two words have exactly the same meaning, but "master" was used in Britain in the sense of "master to a servant" rather than to a slave. E.g. Joseph in "Wuthering Heights" says "T' maister's i' the laith."

I know, and Depeche Mode has a great tune title I wouldnt want to mess with either. But "Master" was definately a word referring to a dominant relationship with African slaves in America though. As was the term "Boss" when used by the slave.

All the best Robert.

[Robert]

Hi Michael

Well, the article says that it came back to the UK from America with this added meaning of master, or something similar. Obviously no two words have exactly the same meaning, but "master" was used in Britain in the sense of "master to a servant" rather than to a slave. E.g. Joseph in "Wuthering Heights" says "T' maister's i' the laith."

According to this, in the UK the word acquired its meaning of "master" in the mid 19th century :

http://www.worldwidewords.org/topicalwords/tw-bos1.htm

Hi Robert,

I think still likely filtered from "the colonies", I believe thats where people from the United Kingdom were exposed to slaves, rather than servants, which for centuries were the accepted means of getting your tracts work done. Im sure the people working in the fields all felt abused, but servitude and slavery are different mindsets.

I think a "Master" infers slaves, and a "Mister/Boss", servants....though they may not get treated a speck differently.

Cheers Robert.

[Robert]

According to this, in the UK the word acquired its meaning of "master" in the mid 19th century :

http://www.worldwidewords.org/topicalwords/tw-bos1.htm

[Sam Flynn]

Thanks for the contemporary back-up, Stewart. I note, from the slang dictionary, that boss as "head man" had become the number one definition. I can only assume that the term had been in reasonably common usage in Britain for some time previously, in order to have attained that "number 1" status.

Out of interest, was the slang dictionary also published in 1887?