Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post

    The writing is lame, formulaic and repetitious, with even the grammar leaving a lot to be desired - the author doesn't even know when to use "me" or "I" properly.
    Seriously, Sam, I can't believe you have used the language's most common misunderstanding (possibly up there ahead of the grocer's apostrophe) as a case against authenticity. Why could James Maybrick not have misunderstood the 'You-and-I'-'You-and-me' distinction (or indeed any writer in the late 1980s, early 1990s) when more or less the entire English-speaking world makes the same mistake?

    I once employed someone who insisted to me that - grammatically - you could use either form and you would be correct! It is so badly understood that you will find this error cropping up in all walks of life and in all social circles and therefore its misuse in the scrapbook simply has no relevance whatsoever.

    And, Purkis, I think you are absolutely spot-on about the 'tone' of the scrapbook. It is the least likely hoax I could ever imagine and - in that regard - if it is a hoax it is a smply brilliant one.

    Ike
    Iconoclast
    Soldier of Fortune, Man of Peace, Destroyer of Images, Nice Guy, Genius

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post

      The writing is lame, formulaic and repetitious, with even the grammar leaving a lot to be desired - the author doesn't even know when to use "me" or "I" properly.
      I disagree, but that aside, you're critiquing it as a work of creative fiction made for public consumption as opposed to the delusional ramblings of a disintegrating mind.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Purkis View Post

        I disagree, but that aside, you're critiquing it as a work of creative fiction made for public consumption as opposed to the delusional ramblings of a disintegrating mind.
        It works in neither capacity as far as I'm concerned, and I'm making no assumptions one way or another about its purpose. Whichever way I look at the text, it's sheer doggerel from start to finish - and I don't just mean the risible attempts at poetry.
        Kind regards, Sam Flynn

        "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
          It works in neither capacity as far as I'm concerned, and I'm making no assumptions one way or another about its purpose. Whichever way I look at the text, it's sheer doggerel from start to finish - and I don't just mean the risible attempts at poetry.
          Your position - once again - confuses me, Sam.

          Are you saying that the "risible attempts at poetry" are too risible for a cotton merchant or not risible enough? You have mentioned this so often down the years that it must be more to you than simply 'risible' in its own right. If James Maybrick - a cotton merchant not otherwise known for his poetic skills, unlike his famous brother - wrote 'risible' poetry, what do you care? And if a hoaxer in the late 1980s wrote 'risible' poetry, what do you care? How does the risibility of the doggerel give us any insight at all into the authenticity (or not) of the work? Is it not the case that you so frequently cite irrelevancies such as the 'risibility' of the text in an attempt to flesh out what is deep down a very weak argument you keep putting forward? You know - more words must equal more fact?

          By the way, I'm not attacking you here, Sam, merely the relevance of your oft-repeated argument.

          Ike
          Iconoclast
          Soldier of Fortune, Man of Peace, Destroyer of Images, Nice Guy, Genius

          Comment


          • >> ... as opposed to the delusional ramblings of a disintegrating mind.<<

            Like Michael Barrett?
            dustymiller
            aka drstrange

            Comment


            • The so called diary purports to be a confession of guilt,That is how we should treat it.Confessions to murder are investigated by police.They are the ones that give a decision as to whether the confession warrants further action. This would hold true whether the confessor was alive or dead.Have police authenticated the confession?Also,as it is a case of murder,then the' Proven beyond a reasonable doubt',should be the standard needed.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by harry View Post
                The so called diary purports to be a confession of guilt,That is how we should treat it.Confessions to murder are investigated by police.They are the ones that give a decision as to whether the confession warrants further action. This would hold true whether the confessor was alive or dead.Have police authenticated the confession?Also,as it is a case of murder,then the' Proven beyond a reasonable doubt',should be the standard needed.
                You think the police should arbitrate here - 130 years after the crimes? I think they closed their enquiries a while ago. So of course the police have not authenticated the confession. There is no need for a proven-beyond-reasonable-doubt as the case will never again be investigated by the police. The ‘so-called’ diary is a scrapbook and it reveals to the world that James Maybrick was Jack the Ripper. The scrapbook and the watch and the endless circumstantial evidence demonstrate this to be true beyond any reasonable doubt.
                Iconoclast
                Soldier of Fortune, Man of Peace, Destroyer of Images, Nice Guy, Genius

                Comment

                Working...
                X