Hello! New here. I have been interested in the Ripper subject for many years and have read and own a few Ripper books. Have considered searching out a venue to discuss my interest but never took the time until now. I do not consider myself a "Ripperologist". I leave that title to others who are far more conversant in the subject.
What led me here, now, is that I had not searched out any new Ripper books for a few years and have only just read Patricia Cornwell's "Portrait of a Killer". My disappointment with this book compelled me to find a site to discuss it. So here I am - on this site and on this board.
I will not, at this time, remark upon the CONTENT of the book. I will leave that until later. I do want to comment upon the presentation. I found this book to be very disjointed and rambling. There is, in my opinion, no cohesive thought pattern. PC jumps back and forth in her time lines, plops a canonical murder in here, then talking about watermarks, then skipping to drawings/paintings, then hops to where Sickert may have been at any one time, then to the Virginia Forensics lab, now plop in another canonical murder, then talks about handwriting, then another murder (which may or may not be the Ripper), then.....
While I do not contest that PC has the right to propose a suspect and back that proposition up with research and reasoning, the least she could do is to present her findings and conclusions in a coherent way. This she has not done.
I sure picked a contentious thread to start posting! I read through the first 26 pages then decided to scroll through the last pages as I found most of the posts had degenerated into bashing other posters as well as presenting disparaging remarks about Ms Cornwell. While I am no longer a PC fan (of her fiction), I will refrain from commenting upon her person or character.
I will comment on her research and conclusions as she has put those to the public to review.
I do want to say that, having found this site, I feel like the proverbial kid in the candy store. What an amazing source of information and insight. What fun!
Court Jester
What led me here, now, is that I had not searched out any new Ripper books for a few years and have only just read Patricia Cornwell's "Portrait of a Killer". My disappointment with this book compelled me to find a site to discuss it. So here I am - on this site and on this board.
I will not, at this time, remark upon the CONTENT of the book. I will leave that until later. I do want to comment upon the presentation. I found this book to be very disjointed and rambling. There is, in my opinion, no cohesive thought pattern. PC jumps back and forth in her time lines, plops a canonical murder in here, then talking about watermarks, then skipping to drawings/paintings, then hops to where Sickert may have been at any one time, then to the Virginia Forensics lab, now plop in another canonical murder, then talks about handwriting, then another murder (which may or may not be the Ripper), then.....
While I do not contest that PC has the right to propose a suspect and back that proposition up with research and reasoning, the least she could do is to present her findings and conclusions in a coherent way. This she has not done.
I sure picked a contentious thread to start posting! I read through the first 26 pages then decided to scroll through the last pages as I found most of the posts had degenerated into bashing other posters as well as presenting disparaging remarks about Ms Cornwell. While I am no longer a PC fan (of her fiction), I will refrain from commenting upon her person or character.
I will comment on her research and conclusions as she has put those to the public to review.
I do want to say that, having found this site, I feel like the proverbial kid in the candy store. What an amazing source of information and insight. What fun!
Court Jester
Comment