Feedback for Prisoner 4374

[gnote]

Tom,
The solid evidence is of Cream's whereabouts in 1888. No matter anyone's opinion as to his guilt or innocence of the Ripper murders, nobody has been forthcoming with documents to prove it either way.
I am surprised that anyone would jump to conclusions about Cream not being a Ripper suspect without seeing proof to the contrary.

You used the words "solid evidence" and then declare "nobody has been forthcoming with documents to prove it either way."

Yet somehow you're surprised people might jump to conclusions?

I haven't read the book but this sounds a bit like you want it both ways.

[Tom_Wescott]

You used the words "solid evidence" and then declare "nobody has been forthcoming with documents to prove it either way."

Yet somehow you're surprised people might jump to conclusions?

I haven't read the book but this sounds a bit like you want it both ways.

Hi Gnote. I believe that her comment about people jumping to conclusions was not about her book, but about Cream's candidacy (or lack thereof) for the mantle of Ripper.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Amanda]

Rest my case.

Guys,

Have I once claimed 'Case Closed'? No, I have not.

You ask, have I seen Cream's prison files. The answer to that is yes. They are 181 pages and I have a copy of every single page.
Rumbelow did not show any of those documents in his book, therefore I presume that he did not see those records. I apologise if I am wrong, but I was told by the Archives Dept at Joliet that nobody had ever requested the whole file before. There is a letter from Daniel Cream, written to petition for his brother's release, which has previously been published but that does nothing to prove Cream's whereabouts.

'Prisoner 4374' is Cream's biography, not a book about whether Cream was Jack the Ripper. I just happen to confirm whether he was in prison or not in 1888.

Finally, before criticising my hard work, which includes many years of research, please have the decency to read the book.
Amanda

[John G]

Hi Amanda,

I've yet to purchase the book as I currently have several books unread! However, I intend to do so, especially after the excellent reviews it has received. I also agree with your comments: it seems quite bizarre to me that anyone would consider themselves competent to give an objective review about a book they haven't even read!

[pinkmoon]

My hardback version has just arrived I'm very impressed with the artwork and the photos are excellent Mr cream looks a right nasty piece of work!

[m_w_r]

...it seems quite bizarre to me that anyone would consider themselves competent to give an objective review about a book they haven't even read!

Hi John,

Actually, I think George Bernard Shaw had something to say about that - although, of course, he wasn't aiming for 'objectivity'. Surely reviews are by their very nature subjective?

I think the question Tom was asking was whether Amanda's book tells us something about Cream's whereabouts in 1888 that other books (like Don Rumbelow's) don't. As far as I can tell - and, yes, I did buy it - the answer is 'No'.

Perhaps I'm missing something. If so, someone will have to help me out. I'm not getting it.

Regards,

Mark

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi John,

Actually, I think George Bernard Shaw had something to say about that - although, of course, he wasn't aiming for 'objectivity'. Surely reviews are by their very nature subjective?

I think the question Tom was asking was whether Amanda's book tells us something about Cream's whereabouts in 1888 that other books (like Don Rumbelow's) don't. As far as I can tell - and, yes, I did buy it - the answer is 'No'.

Perhaps I'm missing something. If so, someone will have to help me out. I'm not getting it.

Regards,

Mark

Thanks, Mark. That's precisely my question. I asked it repeatedly and received only the vaguest possible answers from Amanda with the added suggestion that my questions were 'comments' and now 'reviews'. That's absurd, as I've made quite clear that I haven't read it and was only attempting to determine if it was something I should purchase or not. Contrary to what some think I do not purchase every Ripper-related book that comes down the pike (not even close).

It sounds to me like Amanda's written a cracking book for anyone interested in the poisoner Neil Cream and a good answer to anyone swayed by Goulden's 'I Am Jack' (which proclaims Cream the Ripper). That's certainly an achievement, particularly since she's using contemporary documentation not previously made available. However, since it's being marketed as a Ripper book with possible clues to the Ripper's true identity, the truth of this angle needed to be gotten out into the light and I believe it has been.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[pinkmoon]

Simplest thing to do is buy the book and read it I don't think you will disappointed I've read dozens of ripper books and this one certainly stands out.

[Steadmund Brand]

Anytime a book is written about anyone ever named as a "Ripper" that book gets marketed as a ripper book.....however this book is called Prisoner 4374" and not anything "ripper" related.....it is as Amanda said a "Cream biography"...not a "Ripper" biography......and I must add a damn fun one to read...yes I learned about it the thru a Ripper message board....but it is not a RIPPER book per say...which is why in my reviews I always call it a "ripper" (note the quotes!!!) book.......what I can tell you is it made me far more interested in Cream then I ever was.....not as a Ripper suspect...but as the sick bastard he was....for that again I say thank you Amanda....and I encourage everyone to give it a read......much like I did with Toms book...which IS a ripper book in the purest sense and I will add the best one of those lot that I have read in a long time....all in all a good year for reading so far for me...and I look forward to both Tom and Amanda's next efforts....

Steadmund Brand

[Tom_Wescott]

Steadmund,

Well said and quite fair. And thanks for the kind words. Amanda got the impression her work was being criticized, but it wasn't. It was being questioned. There's a BIG difference.

Simplest thing to do is buy the book and read it

Sure, I'll just buy every book that comes out and read it to decide if I want to buy it. That makes sense.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Daisyhall1]

I have just finished reading the book and can recommend it.It is Cream's story told in autobiographical fashion.I really didn't know about him before,but this enlightened me and I want to learn more - the sign of a good book.It is obvious half way through who Cream is and not ( Ripper related),so I appreciated a well researched book ( as was Jack the Ripper At Last?) about a character of the time.

[Amanda]

I have just finished reading the book and can recommend it.It is Cream's story told in autobiographical fashion.I really didn't know about him before,but this enlightened me and I want to learn more - the sign of a good book.It is obvious half way through who Cream is and not ( Ripper related),so I appreciated a well researched book ( as was Jack the Ripper At Last?) about a character of the time.

Thanks Daisy,
Glad you enjoyed the book, appreciate your feedback.
Would you mind leaving a review on Amazon for me please?
Thanks,
Amanda

[m_w_r]

c) I have written a true biographical account of Cream's life

Hi Amanda,

This can't be accurate. The character of 'R' isn't a part of Cream's actual, historical life. It's easy to guess who he is, and I won't spoil it for other readers, but this is an interpolation by the author, and neither 'true' nor 'biographical' in any sense. Am I right?

To me, the first-person perspective, the colloquial narrative voice and the absence of any scholarly apparatus combine to make this 'true' and 'biographical' account look very much like a fiction book, albeit one which is no doubt based on the facts. But I think it's an important distinction to make, and I think that authors have a responsibility to their readers to ensure that there is no confusion about this matter. The identification of knowingly fictional interpolations within the text would be the final straw in this matter, in my view, and anybody intending to buy the book on the basis that it is either 'true' or 'biographical' would be better advised, I think, to keep their money in their pocket.

Regards,

Mark

[Amanda]

Thanks Mark,

Of course you are entitled to your opinion. However, how do you know that 'R' wasn't a part of Cream's life? And how could you possibly guess at his identity?

I think you may be jumping to conclusions. I'm staying tight lipped at the moment but let me just say that my research so far hasn't only involved Cream and I have found some amazing coincidences and hard facts that connect more than one Ripper suspect.
All of this information, including census reports and other documents, will be included in my next 'Ripper-related' publication.

Finally, I appreciate you taking the time to read 'Prisoner 4374' and for that you are fully entitled to criticise my work as much as you please
Amanda

[m_w_r]

Hi Amanda,

Thanks for taking the time to reply. You might be right - perhaps I am jumping to conclusions - but your response is a bit confusing, and, from the point of view of trying to substantiate the book's claim to be both 'true' and 'biographical', not entirely reassuring. Perhaps I should reframe my question:

Have you found irrefutable documentary proof that 'R' was a part of Cream's life? Or is the idea one which you came up with by using your imagination?

Thanks for indulging my curiosity about this.

Regards,

Mark