The Whitechapel Society 1888 Victims Conference 8 Sept. 2018

[Debra A]

Same here.

As did the comments that she decided to go tramping, such assumptions, and presented as fact.

So my overall response is there is some new info, but the talk at least was full of assumptions.


Steve

What was the context of the tramping comments please, Steve? I don't remember offhand and can't listed again at the moment.
Gary and I discussed both Polly and Kate's 'vagrant' lifestyle a few times in the past and Polly's possible use of Newington casual ward over a period before 1881. I documented the possible stays at Newington casual ward somewhere.

Edit -here is the thread
http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=30377

[Hunter]

While there seems to be nothing new about Mary Kelly other than maybe not speaking with an accent, as mentioned, Ms Rubenhold did flesh out the life and times of these women -- and as Gareth noted -- quite well. She adds some information and much speculation, but that's fine and appears reasonable.


She has obviously done much independent research, even if a large portion pertained to the times and social conditions as they existed. All of that is necessary and is an asset compared to many authors I have read concerning the Whitechapel murders who had little knowledge of the broader picture.


It is unfortunate that Ms. Rubenhold instigated the apparent riff with "Ripperology" as a whole and even at the end of her speech she reinterates that these women had been forgotten, which is not the case as far as those who have studied this are concerned. As she speculates on certain aspects of their lives, she does not go as far concerning the night of their deaths or what brought them to their fate at the hand of an apparent serial murderer. The exception may be her mention of Annie Chapman sleeping out and that the back yard of 29 Hanbury St. was used for such purposes. Of course, we know that young Richardson admitted that the yard was used for 'immoral purposes' as well.


Nevertheless, from her talk I can gather that she will emphasize the limited options women of such class had in Victorian times outside of marriage and how difficult life could be for such women if that marriage collapsed. Though still speculative, her point about Mary Ann "Polly" Nichols was well presented and provocative. Her explanation of couples living out of wedlock, much to the chagrin of 'higher society', but as a means of survival is well presented, even if already known to those of us who have studied beyond the suspect aspect of the genre.


While I still believe some of Ms. Rubenhold's promotional tactics were calculated sensationalism at the unnecessary expense of others -- controversy sells -- her book may be a welcome addition for anyone seeking a broader perspective outside of the admittedly 'Whodunnit' aspect that has been so prevalent.

[MrBarnett]

I’ve now listened to the whole thing and there is some very interesting stuff there. Can’t wait to get my hands on the book.

[Elamarna]

No more assumptions, in fairness, than yer average Ripper theory, and arguably fewer. She seems to have had access to various documentary sources, and no doubt the book will be fully referenced and annotated.

I fully expect it to be fully Referenced given the author.
Having just the talk to go on it is hard to say what sources have been used.

And we will see just how many assumptions their are when it's published.

So far its better than i was fearing it may be.

Time will tell.


Steve

[Sam Flynn]

So my overall response is there is some new info, but the talk at least was full of assumptions.

No more assumptions, in fairness, than yer average Ripper theory, and arguably fewer. She seems to have had access to various documentary sources, and no doubt the book will be fully referenced and annotated.

[Elamarna]

The idea that Polly’s drinking couldn’t have been the cause of her marital problems because she lived in a Peabody flat where excessive drinking was not tolerated made me smile.

Same here.

As did the comments that she decided to go tramping, such assumptions, and presented as fact.

So my overall response is there is some new info, but the talk at least was full of assumptions.


Steve

[Elamarna]

The leaving school at 15 is probably based on the 1861 census where she is shown as a scholar.

To be honest I have not noticed that.

[MrBarnett]

The leaving school at 15 is probably based on the 1861 census where she is shown as a scholar.

[MrBarnett]

And me.
The same with leaving school at 15.

But as I said there are mistakes, which I hope have been corrected in the book.

The degree of supposition seems very high. I hope such is not presented as fact in the publication.



Steve

The idea that Polly’s drinking couldn’t have been the cause of her marital problems because she lived in a Peabody flat where excessive drinking was not tolerated made me smile.

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

The birth of WEW Nichols in Clerkenwell is new to me.

Gary

And me.
The same with leaving school at 15.

But as I said there are mistakes, which I hope have been corrected in the book.

The degree of supposition seems very high. I hope such is not presented as fact in the publication.



Steve

[MrBarnett]

Hi Jonathan,

Just listen to the talk, and obviously my attention was on the first section about Polly.
Some possible new info included.
The old story about the White House is given for her last address. However it has now been shown that her last address was Dorset street, it's on her death certificate, Tom of course pointed this out in his last book.


Steve

Hi Steve,

The birth of WEW Nichols in Clerkenwell is new to me.

Gary

[Elamarna]

I really enjoyed that talk. Some fascinating nuggets of information, and I look forward to reading more in the book.

Hi Jonathan,

Just listen to the talk, and obviously my attention was on the first section about Polly.
Some possible new info included.
The old story about the White House is given for her last address. However it has now been shown that her last address was Dorset street, it's on her death certificate, Tom of course pointed this out in his last book.


Steve

[Sam Flynn]

I really enjoyed that talk. Some fascinating nuggets of information, and I look forward to reading more in the book.

[jmenges]

There is some new stuff - new to me at least. And a lot of padding and guesswork.

And, I have to say, a certain amount of sleight of hand.

See, we're agreeing already.

I can't wait for you to read the book.

JM

[MrBarnett]

Water under the bridge, Gary.
In two months you might find something else to be upset about, and then I'll probably be in agreement with you.

Enjoy the show,

JM

Patronising as ever, JM.

I am enjoying the ‘show’. There is some new stuff - new to me at least. And a lot of padding and guesswork.

And, I have to say, a certain amount of sleight of hand.

I had a listen to the Polly section, and then ff to MJK. HR seems to have identified a Mrs McCarthy at 1, Breezers Hill in 1885/6. If she has, I will doff my cap to her.