Help needed deciphering RMG

[HelenaWojtczak]

I have read this over and over and I cannot make sense of it so am begging for assistance.

My problem is, first he says "Godley wrote this" then underneath he says "someone else made this up and Godley would not have liked it".

So is RMG saying that Godley wrote it --- or not?

And does anyone here own the cited publication?

And yes, before anyone says it, I know to be wary of Gordon

Helena

[Steven Russell]

It doesn't seem to make sense. Unless he means "... ostensibly written by Inspector Godley..." [but actually written by the unknown authors mentioned later].

This would explain the relevance of mentioning Godley's retirement and possible reaction to the piece.

That's the only way I can make sense of it (interesting use of the plural "authors" by the way) but as it stands, you are right - it is contradictory.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[The Good Michael]

They are talking about two accounts. First they say Godley made a report, for the 1908 magazine/newspaper and then a fictional account appeared. It seems to be telling us that there was a real one and then a fictional piece that was contradictory that Godley probably wouldn't have approved of. It makes sense if they are two separate things, but just.

Mike

[HelenaWojtczak]

It doesn't seem to make sense. Unless he means "... ostensibly written by Inspector Godley..." [but actually written by the unknown authors mentioned later].

This would explain the relevance of mentioning Godley's retirement and possible reaction to the piece.

That's the only way I can make sense of it (interesting use of the plural "authors" by the way) but as it stands, you are right - it is contradictory.

Best wishes,
Steve.

Thanks for your input Steve. What if the indented block quote ISN'T the piece in the "Police Review and Parade Gossip"? Would that work?

Writing this full biog of Chapman, I feel I can't just ignore this. But I don't suppose there is a hope in hell of me getting to read that magazine unless I go to London again - ugh.

Helena

[Steven Russell]

Yes, I believe that might work as Mike suggests. This looks, on reflection, better than my idea.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[HelenaWojtczak]

They are talking about two accounts. First they say Godley made a report, for the 1908 magazine/newspaper and then a fictional account appeared. It seems to be telling us that there was a real one and then a fictional piece that was contradictory that Godley probably wouldn't have approved of. It makes sense if they are two separate things, but just.

Mike

I see what you mean Mike. But Gordon then gives no citation for the fictional piece quoted, no author, no publication, nowt. Terribly annoying, most especially since I have seen that same quote in a newspaper, again with no source referenced.

Helena

[Monty]

As someone who has been in the cellar of The White HarT I find the 'fictional' account very interesting.

Though the description is brief, it does recollect in my head. The cellar is indeed two rooms with Chapmans shop at the back.

Of course, this may not be the same cellar however it does sound similar. I've photos if anyone is interested.

Monty

[HelenaWojtczak]

As someone who has been in the cellar of The White HarT I find the 'fictional' account very interesting.

Though the description is brief, it does recollect in my head. The cellar is indeed two rooms with Chapmans shop at the back.

Of course, this may not be the same cellar however it does sound similar. I've photos if anyone is interested.

Monty

Alas, the quote related to The Crown, 213 Borough High Street, where he was arrested. But I would LOVE to see photos of the White Hart email me please hastings.press@gmail.com I have always been intrigued by this idea of a barbershop under a pub!

Helena

[Monty]

I suspected as much Helena, however the passage described is very similar re the layout.

I shall upload the images here when I've located them.

Monty

[ChrisGeorge]

I have read this over and over and I cannot make sense of it so am begging for assistance.

My problem is, first he says "Godley wrote this" then underneath he says "someone else made this up and Godley would not have liked it".

So is RMG saying that Godley wrote it --- or not?

And does anyone here own the cited publication?

And yes, before anyone says it, I know to be wary of Gordon

Helena

Hello Helena

Gordon's account of the arrest of Chapman, on page 105 of The Poison Murders of Jack the Ripper: His Final Crimes, Trial and Execution, indicates that the suspect was arrested quietly. So it's the lurid story of Chapman fleeing to the cellar with the pistols that's the piece of fiction that is attributed to Godley. Gordon is saying that it is not known what the retired Scotland Yard man's reaction was to this account that was attributed to him.

All the best

Chris

[HelenaWojtczak]

Hello Helena

Gordon's account of the arrest of Chapman, on page 105 of The Poison Murders of Jack the Ripper: His Final Crimes, Trial and Execution, indicates that the suspect was arrested quietly. So it's the lurid story of Chapman fleeing to the cellar with the pistols that's the piece of fiction that is attributed to Godley. Gordon is saying that it is not known what the retired Scotland Yard man's reaction was to this account that was attributed to him.

All the best

Chris

Hello Chris!

If that is so then (as Steve pointed out) Gordon would surely say "purportedly written by Godley" not "written by Godley". He gives the citation of Godley's story, and omits the citation for the other story, which lends credence to the notion that the two are the same, which makes no sense.


What are my chances of ever finding out who wrote that fictionalised account? R. M Gordon must know, since as you say he quoted it in one of his books.

I hope I am not being misunderstood on here again.

I know the true account of the arrest, I would love to know who wrote the fiction. It's all part of creating a biog that covers everything - the truth, the myths. I am diligent and that means citing references.

[ChrisGeorge]

Hello Chris!

If that is so then (as Steve pointed out) Gordon would surely say "purportedly written by Godley" not "written by Godley". He gives the citation of Godley's story, and omits the citation for the other story, which lends credence to the notion that the two are the same, which makes no sense.


What are my chances of ever finding out who wrote that fictionalised account? R. M Gordon must know, since as you say he quoted it in one of his books.

I hope I am not being misunderstood on here again.

I know the true account of the arrest, I would love to know who wrote the fiction. It's all part of creating a biog that covers everything - the truth, the myths. I am diligent and that means citing references.

Hi Helena

I think it's more likely that it's just another newspaperman being creative. By the same token we might begin to doubt those quotes about Chapman credited to Abberline that appeared in the PMG. I don't think Gordon necessarily knows who wrote the article with comments credited to Godley. The passage in his book just isn't well well written so that I think is part of the reason for your confusion.

All the best

Chris

[HelenaWojtczak]

I don't think Gordon necessarily knows who wrote the article with comments credited to Godley.

But he must know where it comes from, he must have seen something (book, mag, paper) in order to have sat and copy-typed it. Occasonally one gets a cutting or scan which has no source. If it were me I'd put a footnote saying, the source of this article has been lost.

Mark Oldridge has written to me and he thinks the opposite of you -- that it's one article not two.

So we are all pretty confused

Best wishes

Helena

[HelenaWojtczak]

Metropolitan Police administrative officer Debra Gosling, based at Blackfriars, Southwark, researched and wrote a double page article on Inspector Godley's career and another on George Chapman for the Southwark News of 24th April 2003.

She did not get this story from the cutting in my first posting, that is from the Poison Murders of Jack the Ripper published five years later in 2008.

Note that in HER version, both guns are discharged. If both Gosling and Gordon are quoting from the same source, where did she get the information from that he actually fired shots?

Her piece was supposed to be a serious piece of historical research, by the way, and it cited her police employment to make her seem like a diligent, trustworthy, in-the-know author.

(Apologies for not putting the source of the first cutting! I did put it on Photobucket where the image is uploaded, thinking you could all see the reference. I am clearly still a novice at uploading images for his board.)

[HelenaWojtczak]

Mark sent me this link to a page from 2003 where Gosling herself claims that she did not embellish the articles she found in the Police Review and her local paper. She did not explain why her version is different, however.I have the local Southwark cuttings downstairs and will look at them in the morning.

http://www.casebook.org/forum/messages/4924/6026.html