Fake!

[Carol]

but the language just doesn't have a Victorian "feel" to me either.

Best wishes,
Steve.

Hi Steve,

I agree with you totally about the language not having a Victorian 'feel'. I've read a large amount of 'Victorian' books, etc., over the years and the Diary does tend to make me squirm a bit at what I feel is someone trying to 'sound' Victorian, but failing dismally. In fact, this is the biggest problem with the Diary in my opinion.

I also get the distinct 'feeling' (if that's the right word!) that more than one person was involved in the writing of the Diary and that one of them was female trying to sound 'tough' and 'mannish'.

I recently re-read the Diary (from Shirley Harrison's book) and actually re-confirmed for myself what I have written above.

Having said all this I'd just like to say that I have no favourite suspect at all for Jack the Ripper and if it can be proved that the Diary is what it purports to be then that's fine by me.

Carol

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

Hi Steve,

I agree with you totally about the language not having a Victorian 'feel'. I've read a large amount of 'Victorian' books, etc., over the years and the Diary does tend to make me squirm a bit at what I feel is someone trying to 'sound' Victorian, but failing dismally. In fact, this is the biggest problem with the Diary in my opinion.

You do know that Jarndyce Booksellers of London is of the firm opinion that the text (as well as the handwriting) is Victorian in nature? They are one of the world's leading dealers in Victorian era documents. (I visited them in 2009 to reconfirm their opinion which was first expressed in 1992.)

[Graham]

When my mother passed away in 2000, she left me a whole load of old family documents, including letters, postcards and greetings cards from about 1880 onwards. Some of the letters are quite formal, but the informal ones - such as my great-aunt writing to my mother's mother about certain rather boring domestic matters - use language which is not all that different to the language used in the 'Diary'. Slightly stiffer than we would use today, but short sentences and rather poor punctuation. This of course doesn't prove anything, but I think we have to get out of our heads the erroneous fact that all Victorians wrote in a completely formal style. They didn't.

The other point to make is that James Maybrick and his brothers were Scousers - yes, they existed in the second half of the 19th century. Michael was 'different' to his brothers, obviously a precocious talent, and was lifted away from the common run-of-the-mill doings of his family. As for James, Edwin and Thomas, I would suspect that as none of them (as far as I know) went to University, they received an ordinary lower-middle-class education, and came out of school with not much more than the basics. How James was able to court and win Florence always surprised me, given that he was a good deal older than she, and from a 'lower' background; I can only suggest that it was money - or the promise of money - talking.

No, I don't think the language of the 'Diary' is questionable - I think it is someone with an ordinary education trying to 'sound posh'. Well, we've all done it, haven't we?

Graham

[Stephen Thomas]

Personally, I don't think forgers write without concern for their audience. They have to "sell" their story in some fashion. The Diarist could care less. He doesn't even bother to name his victims except for Kelly

But he does have the correct initials of the C5 on his girly watch.

[Steven Russell]

Points taken Sir Bob and Graham. It just strikes me as odd that someone with a Victorian middle class education would mistake 'there' for 'their' or 'of' for 'off' etc. Both of my parents had decidedly working class upbringings and neither went on to further education. Yet both would be mortified by mistakes like this. Our diarist does not understand apostrophe use either. One might think that Victorian teaching would have been firmly rooted in the three Rs and simple rules like these would have been drummed into pupils.

Best wishes,
Steve.

Just had a look at the Blucher letter. Unlike the diary, the handwriting is a beautiful copperplate (?) style, there are no spelling mistakes, and no apostrophe mistakes on skimming through it. True, a few full stops appeared to be missing but that was about it. It's much closer to Dear Boss than to the writing in the diary. And, no, I'm not suggesting that JM was the Dear Bosser, just using a document we all know as a comparison.

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

No, I don't think the language of the 'Diary' is questionable - I think it is someone with an ordinary education trying to 'sound posh'. Well, we've all done it, haven't we?

Graham

If folks will take the time to read the Baltic letter they'd realize Maybrick wasn't a rocket scientist. Not to mention he was an industrial strength druggie.

The Maybricks (Flo and James) were not the literary type.

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

Just had a look at the Blucher letter. Unlike the diary, the handwriting is a beautiful copperplate (?) style, there are no spelling mistakes, and no apostrophe mistakes on skimming through it. True, a few full stops appeared to be missing but that was about it. It's much closer to Dear Boss than to the writing in the diary. And, no, I'm not suggesting that JM was the Dear Bosser, just using a document we all know as a comparison.

Blucher is a copy of the original, which is apparently lost. That isn't Maybrick's handwriting. (Neither is the Diary IMHO but that's another issue.)

[Tecs]

Two quick points,

1. Coming from the great city myself I've never heard it but apparently the miscarriage of Florence's trial lingered in Liverpool for many years as an example of injustice against women and how women were kept down by men. Her case became symbolic of womens' struggle and until quite recently many women looked to Florence as an example of a "wronged woman." So to switch events on their head and suggest that far from being the villain she was actually a victim and the man who made her life a misery was none other than JTR was a chance to put things right.

2. Didn't some Ripperologist suggest before the diary ever came out that if a faked document ever surfaced, it would be an old Victorian document such as a photograph album with the first few pages ripped out? Off the top of my head I think it was Stewart Evans but I may be completely wrong about that.

Apologies if this has already been mentioned, I haven't gone through the whole thread.

regards,

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

2. Didn't some Ripperologist suggest before the diary ever came out that if a faked document ever surfaced, it would be an old Victorian document such as a photograph album with the first few pages ripped out? Off the top of my head I think it was Stewart Evans but I may be completely wrong about that.

After the news first broke Melvin Harris predicted that the book 'would be written in a journal or diary with a number of its front pages torn out'.

[ChrisGeorge]

Two quick points,

1. Coming from the great city myself I've never heard it but apparently the miscarriage of Florence's trial lingered in Liverpool for many years as an example of injustice against women and how women were kept down by men. Her case became symbolic of womens' struggle and until quite recently many women looked to Florence as an example of a "wronged woman." So to switch events on their head and suggest that far from being the villain she was actually a victim and the man who made her life a misery was none other than JTR was a chance to put things right. . . .

Hello Tecs

Well I am originally from Liverpool as well, although now a resident of Baltimore in the United States. To be more correct, the mob in Liverpool appears to have been anti-Florence before she was convicted, and anti-verdict after the sentence of death was passed down. Justice Stephen's carriage was mobbed after the verdict as he left the courthouse. But Florence's cause wasn't just a sentiment in Liverpool, it was a worldwide cause celebre, on both sides of the Atlantic.

Best regards

Chris

[Tempus omnia revelat]

After the news first broke Melvin Harris predicted that the book 'would be written in a journal or diary with a number of its front pages torn out'.

To come up with the idea that any faked document centreing around the Jack the Ripper (the Victorian era) would be faked using a Victorian Journal or diary is hardly brain surgery, is it? The torn pages, also, are easy to guess. Especially as any old journal would probably have some stuff already located at the beginning.


Kind regards,


Tempus

[Sally]

Tempus

Well yes, obviously the Diary would probably be written in a Victorian writing book of some sort whether it was genuine, forged, written in the 19th century, or at any time since.

As to the pages having been torn out, that doesn't tell us much either. Except perhaps that a forger would probably have to remove the pages because whatever had been written in the book would prove to have absolutely no connection with the text of the diary whatsoever, and would demonstrate that the diary was a forgery. If the diary was genuine, why remove the pages?

There are still a lot of partially used Victorian writing books around incidentally; it wouldn't have been difficult for a forger to have acquired one. I'm sure that must have been noted many times by now.

[Tempus omnia revelat]

Tempus

Well yes, obviously the Diary would probably be written in a Victorian writing book of some sort whether it was genuine, forged, written in the 19th century, or at any time since.

As to the pages having been torn out, that doesn't tell us much either. Except perhaps that a forger would probably have to remove the pages because whatever had been written in the book would prove to have absolutely no connection with the text of the diary whatsoever, and would demonstrate that the diary was a forgery. If the diary was genuine, why remove the pages?

There are still a lot of partially used Victorian writing books around incidentally; it wouldn't have been difficult for a forger to have acquired one. I'm sure that must have been noted many times by now.

I agree with you Sally, right up to the point where you seem to think that removing pages from the diary proves it a fake. Not sure why you think this. Those pages could've contained anything. They could also have been removed at any time, especially if someone else would have been incriminated or connected to the diary.

I hate calling it a diary, anyway. All it is is a Victorian document that the killer has placed his thougths into. No one knows for sure what it was used for at the time.


Kind regards,


Tempus

[Tecs]

Hello Tecs

Well I am originally from Liverpool as well, although now a resident of Baltimore in the United States. To be more correct, the mob in Liverpool appears to have been anti-Florence before she was convicted, and anti-verdict after the sentence of death was passed down. Justice Stephen's carriage was mobbed after the verdict as he left the courthouse. But Florence's cause wasn't just a sentiment in Liverpool, it was a worldwide cause celebre, on both sides of the Atlantic.

Best regards

Chris

Thanks for this Chris,

So, the editor of Ripperologist is a fellow scouser. I know where to send my manuscript if I ever finish it!!!

Don't think I'm above any cheap nepotism!!!

regards,

[miakaal4]

Grammar

I am sure that when someone is writing about thoughts, images and deeds they would be writing fast, the words pouring out in short bursts, they wouldn't bother with too much formal grammar. They would forget the odd full stop, which he does, and put other punctuation in the wrong place, because it is not important to the content. He was not writing a letter to a severe maiden aunt, or his pal George, he was writing it for HIM and HIM alone. So he could sit in his study and gloat. So he could pour out the poisons that he felt were causing his actions, and ignore the real poisons he was using as medicine because he was addicted to them and he knew it.
It is only towards the very end of the diary that he begins thinking that others might actually read what he has written.
Now he see's the book as his confession. He knows he will soon die, or believes he will. He has scorned God in the book, and perhaps, now close to death he fears retribution. So confess all, leave the book in a place it will be found, and hope that when it is read, the audience will understand his motivation and forgive him.
The tone has changed, regret replaces violent promises and gloating, the need to be wanted by his wife replaces the desire to be alone to hunt.
Fake! ?????????Really?