Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Those Damned Cachous

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

  • The Oxford Companion to food says 1890

    Twenty years in the making, the first edition of this bestselling reference work appeared in 1999 to worldwide acclaim. Combining serious and meticulously researched facts with entertaining and witty commentary, it has been deemed unique by chefs and reviewers around the globe. It contains both a comprehensive catalog of foodstuffs - crackers and cookies named for battles and divas; body parts from toe to cerebellum; breads from Asia to the Mediterranean - and a richly allusive account of the culture of food, whether expressed in literature and cook books, or as dishes special to a country or community. Retaining Alan Davidson's wisdom and wit, this new edition also covers the latest developments across the whole spectrum of this subject. Tom Jaine has taken the opportunity to update the text and alert readers to new perspectives in food studies. There is new coverage on attitudes towards food consumption, production and perception, such as food and genetics, food and sociology, and obesity. New entries include terms such as convenience foods, gastronomy, fusion food, leftovers, obesity, local food, and many more. There are also new entries on important personalities who are of special significance within the world of food, among them Clarence Birdseye, Henri Nestle, and Louis Pasteur. Now in its third edition the Companion maintains its place as the foremost food reference resource for study and home use.


    As does the French article by Alain Le Pestipon (a prominent Toulouse historian) published in The Auta, No. 61, March 2005, p. 104-112, though my French is a bit sloppy I read it as saying 1890 [http://www.lastree.net/fragmentslog/.../Lajaunie.pdf] though I'm willing to stand corrected as said my French is not what it once never was.
    G U T

    There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Ginger View Post
      I'm afraid I haven't a clue. Somewhere in that huge pile of 'Arbeiter's Fraint' that Lynn Cates had translated, it may say.




      Perhaps the rain discouraged them. Perhaps they had a 'regular' casual who couldn't make it for some reason, and told Liz about the chance. Perhaps Liz got there first, and that established her right to the spot amongst the others. Maybe they never hired casuals, but Liz was hoping to get lucky. I'm flailing away wildly here, but I think they're all at least plausible.
      I don't disagree that they are plausible, but one would expect that if in Whitechapel there was the chance going for some unskilled paid work more than one woman would have been waiting around to grab it up.
      G U T

      There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

      Comment


      • could liz have been hanging out in the yard taking clients from the club?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by RockySullivan View Post
          Hm maybe your right then. But why would the packet be wrapped in tissue paper?
          When I think of packets, I think of condiments, like a packet of sweetener for coffee. So some candies in a small paper bag, twisted in tissue paper. Which is not an uncommon presentation from pharmacies. We probably aren't looking at individually wrapped candies here, so moisture would be an issue.
          The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

          Comment


          • together again

            Hi Rocky.

            "I don't think the cachous rule out BS man but I kind of think pipeman was with him."

            Why? And in what sense? And if they were together, why was PM standing south of the action and BSM coming from some distance away to the north?

            Cheers.
            LC

            Comment


            • Flowers in her hair, flowers everywhere . . .

              Hello Mike. Why would someone clean with a flower pinned to her breast?

              Cheers.
              LC

              Comment


              • bounced

                Hello Abby.

                "If she can hold onto them to death while getting her throat cut, surely she could hold onto them through the B-man attack."

                Not at all. An action to the throat causes the hand to clench. Being bounced on the ground, the opposite. Try it. Fall (on a cushion) and see. Of course, it is more realistic if unexpected.

                Cheers.
                LC

                Comment


                • thanks

                  Hello Tom.

                  "There were six and seven loose pieces wrapped in tissue paper lodged between her thumb and forefinger. No plastic bag or tin."

                  Thanks for posting that. Saved me the trouble.

                  Cheers.
                  LC

                  Comment


                  • problems

                    Hello Rocky.

                    "Could Liz have been hanging out in the yard taking clients from the club?"

                    1. Penniless anarchists?

                    2. Where did she fulfill her end (no pun intended) of the bargain? The privy, perhaps?

                    3. Where was the money she would have earned?

                    Cheers.
                    LC

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
                      Hello Abby.

                      "If she can hold onto them to death while getting her throat cut, surely she could hold onto them through the B-man attack."

                      Not at all. An action to the throat causes the hand to clench. Being bounced on the ground, the opposite. Try it. Fall (on a cushion) and see. Of course, it is more realistic if unexpected.

                      Cheers.
                      LC
                      Hi Lynn
                      The bs man attack I could see her holding on to through choice. Being a woman of little means, I'm sure she found them quite valuable, and clutched them eventhough she was pushed to the ground.

                      Comment


                      • Stride was not at the club looking for work, nor was she out actively solicitating in prostitution, she was out for pleasure and probably keeping an eye out for a new boyfriend.

                        She had recently broken up with kidney, and may have bought the flower and caschous to freshen herself up a bit. She was seen with the same peaked cap man, who was relatively well dressed, meandering about over the course of several hours. She may have been hoping he might be her new sugar daddy which is why she was reluctant to accompany him to a secluded spot for the sex act. Unfortunately for her, he was the ripper, who eventually got angered by her reluctance and lost his temper, attacking her in a more public setting than usual.

                        I know it's impossible for many posters to think that murderers and prostitutes of the Victorian era were not one dimensional robots, who acted differently at times than their stereotypes, but theyre human and can behave in other ways depending on the circumstances.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                          Stride was not at the club looking for work, nor was she out actively solicitating in prostitution, she was out for pleasure and probably keeping an eye out for a new boyfriend.

                          She had recently broken up with kidney, and may have bought the flower and caschous to freshen herself up a bit. She was seen with the same peaked cap man, who was relatively well dressed, meandering about over the course of several hours. She may have been hoping he might be her new sugar daddy which is why she was reluctant to accompany him to a secluded spot for the sex act. Unfortunately for her, he was the ripper, who eventually got angered by her reluctance and lost his temper, attacking her in a more public setting than usual.

                          I know it's impossible for many posters to think that murderers and prostitutes of the Victorian era were not one dimensional robots, who acted differently at times than their stereotypes, but theyre human and can behave in other ways depending on the circumstances.
                          That could have been a post of mine in the olden days, Abby! You are making a lot of sense here, at any rate ...

                          We should not forget in this context that this was the first Saturday night victim. There is a fair cahnce that the killer could have planned the early weekday slayings, while improvising this one after having gobbled down a few beers and gins in his local pub. Or former local pub.
                          That could well explain the brazen approach, if BS man was the Ripper.

                          The best,
                          Fisherman

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
                            Hello Rocky.

                            "Could Liz have been hanging out in the yard taking clients from the club?"

                            1. Penniless anarchists?

                            2. Where did she fulfill her end (no pun intended) of the bargain? The privy, perhaps?

                            3. Where was the money she would have earned?

                            Cheers.
                            LC
                            1. Penniless anarchists who were drawing in people with money. Oh, and they had a bunch of free alcohol on hand.

                            2. That was a big yard, with side cottages and dark corners.

                            3. The Ripper robbed her as he did the other victims, hence the packet of cachous in her hand, the items at Chapman's feet and head, and the thimble next to Eddowes' hand.

                            Abby's view of Stride is sweet and romantic but not altogether supported by the facts, which point most likely to an evening of prostitution with numerous men.

                            Yours truly,

                            Tom Wescott

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by GUT View Post
                              The Oxford Companion to food says 1890

                              Twenty years in the making, the first edition of this bestselling reference work appeared in 1999 to worldwide acclaim. Combining serious and meticulously researched facts with entertaining and witty commentary, it has been deemed unique by chefs and reviewers around the globe. It contains both a comprehensive catalog of foodstuffs - crackers and cookies named for battles and divas; body parts from toe to cerebellum; breads from Asia to the Mediterranean - and a richly allusive account of the culture of food, whether expressed in literature and cook books, or as dishes special to a country or community. Retaining Alan Davidson's wisdom and wit, this new edition also covers the latest developments across the whole spectrum of this subject. Tom Jaine has taken the opportunity to update the text and alert readers to new perspectives in food studies. There is new coverage on attitudes towards food consumption, production and perception, such as food and genetics, food and sociology, and obesity. New entries include terms such as convenience foods, gastronomy, fusion food, leftovers, obesity, local food, and many more. There are also new entries on important personalities who are of special significance within the world of food, among them Clarence Birdseye, Henri Nestle, and Louis Pasteur. Now in its third edition the Companion maintains its place as the foremost food reference resource for study and home use.


                              As does the French article by Alain Le Pestipon (a prominent Toulouse historian) published in The Auta, No. 61, March 2005, p. 104-112, though my French is a bit sloppy I read it as saying 1890 [http://www.lastree.net/fragmentslog/.../Lajaunie.pdf] though I'm willing to stand corrected as said my French is not what it once never was.
                              yeah, from the French pdf it says 1890.

                              OMG WIKIPEDIA WAS WRONG!
                              Is it progress when a cannibal uses a fork?
                              - Stanislaw Jerzy Lee

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                                Hi Lynn
                                The bs man attack I could see her holding on to through choice. Being a woman of little means, I'm sure she found them quite valuable, and clutched them eventhough she was pushed to the ground.
                                They were inexpensive breath mints not family heirlooms made of spun glass. Protecting them would mean risking breaking your wrists in the fall. She would also have had to protect them in getting up since the natural inclination is to put your weight on your hands as you are pushing yourself up. And if she fended off the B.S. man after that again she would have to protect the cachous. That all seems very unlikely.

                                c.d.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X