The GSG. What Does It Mean??

[claire]

You know if the Ripper didn't write that message then someone else did, and that person in the days following the messages discovery would surely have realised the importance it held in the inquiry. I wonder why they never came forward to claim responsibility? Although on second thoughts they would have realised that they would have to encounter a police grilling. The fact that they never ventured forward might also point to the fact that they were alone at the time of writing, obviously the more people who witnessed the writing the more chance of the author being discovered.

But how would the message writer know that the police were interested in this message? Would the police, having determined that the message would likely be inflammatory, then go round or put out press releases saying, 'Would the person who wrote, 'The Juwes are the men who will not be blamed for nothing,' please come forward?' I mean, maybe they did...but it doesn't seem the most prudent strategy. Perhaps someone who's more familiar with the contemporary reports can clarify this.

[The Good Michael]

It's clear the police interpreted the message as anti Semitic, and so there was no need to mention whether the message was finished or not, they believed it was complete.

I don't know that that is clear. The police feared antisemitic repercussions, to be sure. You need to ask yourself what would set off Gentiles. Surely it would not be a little, obscure (not message, but location) bit of graffiti that said, "Jews don't like being blamed." That would create nary a stir in an already antisemitic bunch. Something that seemed to absolve Jews of blame, just might, though I think that's a stretch too. It had to have been a combination of the GSG and the killer's route home, dropping the apron on the way, that gave the coppers the fits. In my mind, it has to be a Pro-Jew message that, combined with the murder, might get the local lads thinking.

Cheers,

Mike

[The Good Michael]

The SVO structure is typical of English, French, Polish or Russian, say,

Gareth,

You just had to bring the French into it! I agree with you here, and I favor Russian, only because I know no Polish, and the French make good pastries. It was written by someone comfortable in English IMO, but not native to it. Just a guess, of course because, what do I know?

Mike

[Howard Brown]

Thanks Observer and Mike for the comments. Much appreciated. As you both know,I am convinced of the authenticity of the G as it relates to the Ripper.

Mike:

"To me, the translation of the message is clear. It doesn't seem unfinished at all, and I would think that the police would have mentioned such a thing if they thought so."

Sor, the translation is definitely clear and Halse mentioned the characteristics/quality ( good schoolboy handwriting..even estimating the height of the message) of the G. Thats not the issue, is it?

I'd think that by now someone would have given a better explanation than what Mr. Fido provided...and again,I am not being critical of his counterargument as it is at least an attempt to explain what it means emanating from someone who disputes or dismisses its relationship to the depositer of the apron half. However, no one in the 120 years since its placement has done so. It simply has no meaning to it without either being an interrupted, partial message...or a complete message accompanying the apron,albeit in a maddeningly obscure and almost "inside joke" context.

I cannot see anyone taking the time during the day to place a message on a wall where Jews live to hassle Jews and not expect it to either be physically or verbally countered...and subsequently erased during the day or at least while Jews are still vending their goods on Goulston Street and they,along with fellow Jews of all ages are walking about. If he had the chutzpah to write a message under these circumstances, one would think that he would have written a message with more clarity and of a specific beef with a Jew.

This leaves us with a nighttime message writer...who takes the time to place the message in an obviously visible place...but wastes his time with a 12 word sentiment that cannot be understood 120 years later. In other words, he took the time to waste his time. In this circumstance, he could run roughshod over the Wentworth wall...and blast the offending party to high heaven...but he didn't. Thats the key issue in the "effort" of writing this message...that he didn't, if it went down as Mr. Fido posited.

It does make sense or at least more sense that a message would be left and perhaps hastily at that with a reference at least to the apron for those in the know, in example, the police. Try and envision someone randomly putting up a message without any meaning on a wall. Its too bizarre otherwise.

Mike, one more thing buddy...

Although the police were on the scene and I was not, I am not so sure that there was an indicator ( in this case, a period at the end of the word,"nothing"), which would have definitely demonstrated that the Message was complete.

I don't think that we will ever satisfy ourselves with what it means only that at best we could accept it as evidence along with the apron. Thats all. No agendas. No conspiratorial,suspect based theory cookin' over here. In the scheme of things,it can't be explained...yet... and may never be.

But to discount it based on the view that the presence of other graffiti in the area diminishes its value to me has always been shortsighted and an easy way out as well as the ideas expressed that it was a retaliatory message either written in the daytime where it would have been erased prior to the discovery of the apron or in the night when the non-Ripper author had all the time in the world to express his gripe with a vendor who happened to be a nogoodnik but didn't.

[Observer]

Hi Claire

But how would the message writer know that the police were interested in this message? Would the police, having determined that the message would likely be inflammatory, then go round or put out press releases saying, 'Would the person who wrote, 'The Juwes are the men who will not be blamed for nothing,' please come forward?' I mean, maybe they did...but it doesn't seem the most prudent strategy. Perhaps someone who's more familiar with the contemporary reports can clarify this.

Yes we need someone who is more familiar with contemporary reports. I am not, but I think the message was reported in the newspapers. I might be wrong however, but if it was, surely the author would realise the messages importance.

all the best

Observer

[Howard Brown]

There's also the issue of whether there was any other anti-Jewish graffiti in the area among the other graffiti that some have reminded us of from time to time..

Certainly one of the beat cops/ Met policemen would have been familiar with the presence of such graffiti. Here again, we come up blank. Considering that the area had a majority immigrant Jewish population and mercantile class operating, why one would think we'd be practically tripping over anti-Jewish slogans and messages

But we ain't and we isn't.

[Observer]

Hi Micheal

It had to have been a combination of the GSG and the killer's route home, dropping the apron on the way, that gave the coppers the fits. In my mind, it has to be a Pro-Jew message that, combined with the murder, might get the local lads thinking.

Cheers,

Mike

I agree, and I'm sure certain high ranking officers on the ground thought the same way.

all the best

Observer

[Howard Brown]

Dear Claire:

The connectivity of the message and apron could well have been assumed on the part of the author/Ripper to be easily identifiable, not necessarily understood,by the police. We're dealing with a guy who ( theoretically,if he wrote the Message) was just up to his upper forearm in internal body parts. He ain't playing with a full deck.

[claire]

But to discount it based on the view that the presence of other graffiti in the area diminishes its value to me has always been shortsighted and an easy way out as well as the ideas expressed that it was a retaliatory message either written in the daytime where it would have been erased prior to the discovery of the apron or in the night when the non-Ripper author had all the time in the world to express his gripe with a vendor who happened to be a nogoodnik but didn't.

Well, to me this here's the problem. There is a (natural enough) tendency to interpret the GSG from a perspective of hindsight. But saying, 'it would have been erased prior to the discovery of the apron' or 'the non-Ripper author had all the time in the world' places the apron dumping, and the murders, at the centre of the interpretive approach. There's no real reason to suppose that the writer considered or cared whether message would be erased (although if anyone suggests JtR wrote it at his leisure in advance, this would imply he lived very locally and knew he had to pass through that archway to get home).

I don't think the message is incomplete. I think that, to the writer, it seemed perfectly comprehensible: I've read enough student work to realise that, when it comes to written English, there are many people who are not as clear as they think they are. Nor do I think that the writer has to point the finger at a particular Jew for a gripe theory to hold--them flippin' Jews: last week my meat was off and they wouldn't replace it, today that flamin' watch I bought of that other b*gger stops and they says it ain't got nothin to do with them. They don't take the blame for bleedin' nothin, the lot of em.

Thinking about it, I think it was a woman who wrote it.

[claire]

Dear Claire:

The connectivity of the message and apron could well have been assumed on the part of the author/Ripper to be easily identifiable, not necessarily understood,by the police. We're dealing with a guy who ( theoretically,if he wrote the Message) was just up to his upper forearm in internal body parts. He ain't playing with a full deck.

Hi Howard,

Oh for sure. I was just wondering, in response to the suggestion that an author (presumably not JtR, unless he remembered writing the message but completely forgotten the other small matter of a nasty bit of apron and a mutilated woman...) would have come forward to claim ownership of the message, would or could have known that the police were even interested in it. Even if they knew the apron piece had been found near where they'd been scribbling, isn't it more likely they would just say to the person next to them, blow me if that weren't where I was just the other day. Think I even wrote a bit of a message on a wall there. Funny old world, eh.

So I wondered if there had been publicity about the GSG...or if the police would even bother, given their priority appeared to have been the potential inflammation rather than the putative link to the apron itself.

[The Good Michael]

I'd think that by now someone would have given a better explanation than what Mr. Fido provided...

I think I did. Oh, you mean a disputer of it... never mind.

or a complete message accompanying the apron,albeit in a maddeningly obscure and almost "inside joke" context.

I still see it as a message he thought would be understood, and not an inside joke. I see kids write the same kinds of sentences every day, after I've told them that they are incorrect and I fix them. They get it, but the next day it happens again. They are sure they are right and that all is clear. Of course I'm talking about Koreans, but I think the same clarity of mistakes exists in all second language speakers to an extent. My grandfather came over from Sicily when he was 12. Until his dying day he said, "Fruitier than a nutcake." He wasn't being funny. He thought this was right. I corrected him all the time, but it never sunk in. I'm pretty sure the GSGer wrote with a clear message in mind that he knew everyone would understand.

I cannot see anyone taking the time during the day to place a message on a wall where Jews live to hassle Jews and not expect it to either be physically or verbally countered...and subsequently erased during the day or at least while Jews are still vending their goods on Goulston Street and they,along with fellow Jews of all ages are walking about. If he had the chutzpah to write a message under these circumstances, one would think that he would have written a message with more clarity and of a specific beef with a Jew.

This is my contention as well, and I have added that I don't think he would sit down after a murder, or maybe even a double murder and write a message. I just don't see how he could maintain control, but I'm not a serial killer... just a couple, but unrelated, so I don't really know. It seems like the excitement would be so high that he couldn't do such a thing and then maybe a crash where he wouldn't do such a thing.

Oh yeah. No period on the wall, eh? That we know of. I would give anything to see the structure of the writing. That might tell us a bit more.

Cheers,

Mike

[Observer]

Hi Sam

I disagree. The graffito - whatever it means - seems to be a complete sentence and, bloat and double-negative notwithstanding, gramatically self-contained. It boils down to a classic SVO ("subject, verb, object") structure:

[The] Juwes (subject) [will be] blamed (verb) [for] nothing (object)

[My] son (subject) [won't] take (verb) [his] medicine (object)

The SVO structure is typical of English, French, Polish or Russian, say, but not typical of German or Yiddish, which are predominantly SOV:

[The] Juwes (subject) [for] nothing (object) [will be] blamed (verb)

[My] son (subject) [won't his] medicine (object) take (verb).

But can you see some disgruntled gentile writing such a message complaining about the Jews? It's so tame, it's pathectic. I'm sure an Englishman would have written something more lively, it's almost philosophical.

all the best

Observer

[Sam Flynn]

Certainly one of the beat cops/ Met policemen would have been familiar with the presence of such graffiti. Here again, we come up blank. Considering that the area had a majority immigrant Jewish population and mercantile class operating, why one would think we'd be practically tripping over anti-Jewish slogans and messages.

It's easy to forget that our "window" on the East End is somewhat constrained to a narrow aperture, largely centred on the sensational events of the latter half of 1888. There are newspaper articles, which largely focus on such events, and more mundane things like advertisements - the Times, for example, only mentions on Goulston Street 79 occasions throughout the 19th Century, and many of those entries are mere advertisements.

Beyond that, there are books which concentrate largely on moral and utilitarian issues, many with a quasi-socialist, or certainly a "social reform", agenda. There are also photographs, not too many of them close-ups, and of those primarily focusing on people and the rags that they wear rather than the walls behind them. Small wonder that we have no real idea about the preponderance of graffiti in those days, bearing those factors in mind.

[Howard Brown]

Sammy & Mike

Don't misunderstand me,as I respect your views and HAVE considered them as reasonable explanations for the G ( which of course isn't a big deal what I consider in the scheme of things...). Let me close with this idea:

If anti-Jewish graffiti was present, from 1888 onward,wouldn't someone have mentioned that at some point? Yes, graffiti was pretty low on the priority totem pole but PC Long walked that beat and could have chimed in at some point, "Oh,this stuff again..we getta lotta that."

[The Good Michael]

How,

The answer is, yes it would have been mentioned and I agree with where you are going with it.

Cheers,

Mike