Chalk and literacy

[c.d.]

[QUOTE=Batman;321721]Graffiti about Jews that isn't antisemitic? Very doubtful in that place at that time. London had a problem with antisemitism.

What about graffiti written by a Jewish person responding to graffiti slurring Jews? You see that sort of thing all the time. In other words, an insult and then an insult hurled back.

c.d.

[Batman]

[QUOTE=c.d.;321827]

Graffiti about Jews that isn't antisemitic? Very doubtful in that place at that time. London had a problem with antisemitism.

What about graffiti written by a Jewish person responding to graffiti slurring Jews? You see that sort of thing all the time. In other words, an insult and then an insult hurled back.

c.d.

Hurled back at 'them'? If your going to do that you would go to their zone and do the graffati.

Its Goulston Street. That's Jewish quarter. So it's being hurled at Jews. That makes it antisemitic.

[lynn cates]

ambiguous

Hello CD.

"It is certainly not a stretch to think that the GSG could have been meant as being Pro-Jewish -- as in "The Jews are tired of being blamed for things they did not do.""

Quite.

"Only the person who wrote it really knows what it means."

Precisely. But, given its EXTREME ambiguity, is it not difficult to see it as a clue?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

preposition

Hello Batman.

"It's Goulston Street. That's Jewish quarter."

Quite.

"So it's being hurled at Jews."

Eh? Why not BY Jews?

Cheers.
LC

[Harry D]

Seeing as Whitechapel had a large community of Jews, I'm not so sure that Schwartz & the GSG can be chalked up (pun intended) to anything more than coincidence.

[Batman]

The only reason its ambiguous is because the uncorroborated accounts of what it says are put into consideration, yet we have Longs corrobotated version.

Corroborated witness accounts win out.

[lynn cates]

ambiguous

Hello Batman. Thanks.

Don't mean to contradict, but it is ambiguous on ANY reading.

Cheers.
LC

[Caligo Umbrator]

There appears to be no evidence that the graffiti existed before the night of the double murder and PC evidence that it only appeared there as did the apron.

Hi, Batman.

Is there evidence for there being no evidence of the graffiti before that night?

I am aware of the statement made by PC Long that at 2:20 that he visited the buildings in Goulston St. and saw nothing there, subsequently he went again at 2:55 and discovered a part of the apron, above which was the graffiti.
The way I read his statement, he seems to be referring to the piece of apron, rather than the graffiti when he says there was nothing there.

So is there other evidence regarding the 'provenance' of the GSG?

Yours, Caligo.

[RockySullivan]

What types of people were writing on the walls in whitechapel with chalk. Gang members or those who were out hustling on the street..

[c.d.]

Hello Batman. Thanks.

Don't mean to contradict, but it is ambiguous on ANY reading.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

Yep.

c.d.

[c.d.]

Hurled back at 'them'? If your going to do that you would go to their zone and do the graffati.

Its Goulston Street. That's Jewish quarter. So it's being hurled at Jews. That makes it antisemitic.

Hello Batman,

I often see examples of two different sets of graffiti coexisting together. If you want to respond to a specific piece of graffiti, you place yours next to it or in the general vicinity. I see examples of that all the time. For example, you might see "send all blacks back to Africa" and directly underneath it will read "but first send all racist ***holes to hell."

So I don't think that we can conclude that it is anti semitic just because of its location and as Lynn says it is ambiguous any way you read it. Anti-Jewish or Pro-Jewish take your pick.

c.d.

[Rosella]

I do believe that this particular piece of graffiti was left by the Ripper only because of its proximity to Eddowes' apron. On the other hand, I certainly don't think that it was the only bit of graffiti around. In a slum district there would be a lot, scrawled over walls, doorways, even pavements, by locals, from children up.

[Rosella]

http://catsmeatshop.blogspot.com.au/2010/09/victorian-graffiti.html

[DVV]

Its Goulston Street. That's Jewish quarter. So it's being hurled at Jews. That makes it antisemitic.
c.d.

Hi CD.
Clearly so.
Double negative or not.

[Batman]

I often see examples of two different sets of graffiti coexisting together. If you want to respond to a specific piece of graffiti, you place yours next to it or in the general vicinity. I see examples of that all the time. For example, you might see "send all blacks back to Africa" and directly underneath it will read "but first send all racist ***holes to hell."

So I don't think that we can conclude that it is anti semitic just because of its location and as Lynn says it is ambiguous any way you read it. Anti-Jewish or Pro-Jewish take your pick.

c.d.

There was no such mention of any coexisting graffiti on Goulston Street. Don't you think they would have noted this?

All arguments against it being antisemitic can't be supported by the fact that Warren who was seeing it, had it washed it out and lost his job because he believed it to be very antisemetic to the point of being capable of starting riots! He thought it was possitively toxic.

Beat that for a piece of antisemetic graffiti let alone saying this is ambigious.