change in modus operandi

[Sam Flynn]

It doesnt stop me speculating that somebody like Klosowski could have disguised himself during the rippings with borrowed or stolen attire.

Do you think that would be possible?

It's possible, BB, but - as I pointed out to R Michael Gordon - why on earth would he bother dressing up or disguising himself? It's not as if he'd have run the risk of being identified north of Commercial Road, given that he'd certainly spent most of his brief London life well to the south of that thoroughfare. At the time of the Ripper murders, the very closest we can place him is in Cable Street, and that was at a safe distance away from nearly every one of the Ripper's scenes of crime. He'd simply have had no need of a disguise.

Remember that it's only Hutchinson's controversial description that one could reasonably describe as "la de da". Most of the other witnesses describe decidedly ordinary clothing. Ironically, perhaps, such "shabby genteel" attire might have been more in keeping with what a slum barber might have worn.

[m_w_r]

A La De Da

Hi all,

Just to clarify Levisohn's remark, here is the relevant extract from the Times, Thursday 08 January 1903.



Surely this is clear - Levisohn is saying that he lost track of Klosowski for four years or so after 1890 and, when he caught up with him in Tottenham, Klosowski had undergone a change of image, becoming a "la de da". To go along with the change of image, Klosowski had shed the trappings (Polish wife, kids) of his previous existence: in effect, he had reinvented himself. However, his image in 1903 remained that he had affected sometime between 1890 and 1894 - he had not reinvented himself in the meantime.

So - in sequence:

In the East End - Levisohn meets Klosowski (by his own estimation in 1888), keeping his acquaintance until 1890.

In Tottenham in 1894 - Levisohn meets Klosowski again, and notes his change of image, and the absence of his Polish wife and his children.

In court in 1903 - Levisohn identifies Klosowski, giving a history of their acquaintance to substantiate his identification, and noting that Klosowski still presents with the same affectations he had adopted in the "missing years" between 1890 and 1894.

Simple. The inevitable corollary is that Chapman's "la de da" image was not the one he presented in the East End in (c.)1888-1890.

Regards,

Mark

[babybird67]

hi Sam and Mark

thanks very much for your points and clarification. You have helped me to see that what Levisohn said most probably meant Klosowski wasnt la di da during 1888, so you have helped me greatly.

hope you are enjoying the weekend, despite the rain

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks bb for your kind comments about my article.
Thanks Mark for posting this extract from The Times which puts Levisohn"s remark in a clearer context.
From the various witnesses accounts ,including the one by Levisohn above, it appears that Klosowski in 1888 was working as a Jobbing barber in The basement of the White Hart public house,which is on the corner of George Yard where MarthaTabram was murdered in August 1888.This can link him with the MarthaTabram murder site.

He also,some time in 1888 and before the end of that year,became the proprietor of a barber shop in Cable Street as well.
Cable Street is the other side of " the railway" that Schwartz said he ran "incontinently" to, from Berner Street [when he thought he was being chased by pipeman].Its very close to the Dutfields Yard murder site.
Cable Street is also right next to Pinchin Street where the headless torso was found under the railway arch in September 1889.Klosowski"s address in September 1889 was 126 Cable Street-----just round the corner from the headless torso.

A young man who,by 1889 had become proprietor of two barber shops had things going for him money wise.He could well have spent any spare cash he had putting on the style.

[Sam Flynn]

A young man who,by 1889 had become proprietor of two barber shops ...

...at different times, and both were located in desperately poor areas of London. Also, we don't know that he owned the Cable Street shop - he could have been managing it, and he was almost certainly renting it. Whatever, his next move up the entrepreneurial ladder was to be an assistant at, before running, a barber shop in the cellar of a slum-district pub!

In the light of the above, any illusions that he was well-off in the 1880s, to the extent of being a "la de da", should be tempered with more than a grain of salt. Or tartar-emetic, as the case may be.

[Natalie Severn]

...at different times, and both were located in desperately poor areas of London. Also, we don't know that he owned the Cable Street shop - he could have been managing it, and he was almost certainly renting it. Whatever, his next move up the entrepreneurial ladder was to be an assistant at, before running, a barber shop in the cellar of a slum-district pub!

In the light of the above, any illusions that he was well-off in the 1880s, to the extent of being a "la de da", should be tempered with more than a grain of salt. Or tartar-emetic, as the case may be.

Correction:Whitechapel High Street,according to chronicler of the time and Macnaghten"s friend George Sims,was NOT "Desperately poor".Sims rubbishes such claims and says the Jewish women dressed very finely indeed in this street where they paraded!---there are other accounts apart from his too.
Cable Street,like Berner Street,was not "desperately poor" .It consisted for the most part of a strip of shops facing a stretch of railway arches.

FACT: The section of Whitechapel High Street ,where Rev Barnett lived in the Toynbee Hall complex and where the White Hart Public House-and its basement barber shop was situated, was not a Slum area of Whitechapel in 1888.

[Sam Flynn]

The section of Whitechapel High Street ,where Rev Barnett lived in the Toynbee Hall complex and where the White Hart Public House-and its basement barber shop was situated, was not a Slum area of Whitechapel in 1888.

Where were the "non-slum" areas, Nats? Was there an invisible force-field around the White Hart and Toynbee Hall that shielded them from the filth, poverty and degradation in the adjoining streets? Apart from which, I doubt that Revd Barnett ever had to work in the basement of a poky pub.

[Natalie Severn]

Where were the "non-slum" areas, Nats? Was there an invisible force-field around the White Hart and Toynbee Hall that shielded them from the filth, poverty and degradation in the adjoining streets? Apart from which, I doubt that Revd Barnett ever had to work in the basement of a poky pub.

Just out of curiosity,have you ever visited the Toynbee Hall Complex and taken a look at the lovely quadrangle modelled on Oxbridge Colleges[built in 1884]? I also called your attention to the great "myth debunker" George Sims,who rich as he was loved nothing more than to get to Whitechapel High Street in the 1880"s and enjoy its vibrancy,colourful shops and cosmopolitan atmosphere.He lived in Regents Park in an elegant town house but he dismissed the idea that Whitechapel was just one great dreary grey slum,particularly around the area of which we speak,where Chapman worked in 1888.
I admit Sims was one of several high placed journalists who spoke -and wrote moving poems about -about the dreadful poverty and conditions that existed in parts of Whitechapel[ one third of Whitechapel lived below the poverty level at the time].But he made every effort to be precise about where people were worst hit and enthused about Whitechapel High Street being as enjoyable for him as a trip to the continent in terms of its atmosphere, the richly ornamented young jewesses who paraded there at the weekend----in several journals.

[John Bennett]

I have to agree with Nats on this point.

I think a lot of work has gone into telling us how awful the conditions were in the East End in the LVP and I do not doubt for a second that certain areas (Flower & Dean St, Dorset St , Great Pearl St , Thrawl St and Bell Lane to name but a few) were pretty awful, but it often seems that the whole of Whitechapel and Spitalfields seems to be tarred with the same 'slum' brush.

TV documentaries in particular only seem to concentrate on these conditions to the point where one is forgiven for believing that the whole district east of Aldgate was a feral nightmare were 'life was cheap'.

The Booth maps and reports (for example) indicate 'comfortably-off' folk (coloured red) on the main thoroughfares, but this would be because they ran shops. The local businessmen, if you like. That would include Commercial Street and Whitechapel High Street. And yet I thoroughly understand that terrible conditions prevailed mere yards from these roads. Such differences of living exist today - how many of us here live in what is considered a 'nice' part of town with a 'dodgy' district over the road. I know I have.

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks John,
and regarding living in areas where rich rub shoulders with poor-nowhere could be more illustrative than Notting Hill next to Ladbroke Grove;Holland Park next to Shepherds Bush and in today"s Spitalfields places like Fournier Street next to the bits of Brick Lane where just a bit East you come across real hardship and over crowding still.
Cheers
Norma

[John Bennett]

That's London for ya!

(and probably most cities, actually...)

[Natalie Severn]

true!
Must get your book when I get back to London [from Wales]---really looking forward to it!
x

[Sam Flynn]

but it often seems that the whole of Whitechapel and Spitalfields seems to be tarred with the same 'slum' brush.

Agreed, John, but yours (and Nats') cogent observations relate to an entirely different point to the one I'm making. That there were the odd pockets of (comparative) wealth in the East End is quite true - even so, as a whole, it was a desperately poor area.

My point is that it's absurd to believe that Klosowski would have been raking in vast sums of money as an immigrant Polish barber in the basement of a Whitechapel pub, a stone's throw away from some of the most squalid slums in the history of Britain, and surrounded on all sides by impoverished immigrants (stick-makers, boot repairers and sweated tailors) who almost certainly comprised the bulk of his clientele.

[Natalie Severn]

Now now Sam---you do some great big grasshopping here.Nobody said anything about him making "huge sums" of money.I know you are referring again to the astrakhan fur collar on the coat of Mr Spats in Commercial Street.
Ever heard the expression "all fur coat and no knickers?"---- it certainly fits Chapman who seems to have spent spent spent on boats,bicycles,guns and cool clothes!

[Sam Flynn]

Ever heard the expression "all fur coat and no knickers?"---- it certainly fits Chapman who seems to have spent spent spent on boats,bicycles,guns and cool clothes!

... in the mid/late 1890s, Nats. I just can't see a newly-arrived Eastern European immigrant barber getting similarly kitted-out during his first year in London.