What is the worst Ripper book you've ever read?

[Writerboy]

Veritas, you're a Liar. (Latin joke).

Admittedly, there was much wrong with Knight's book; but, despite its flaws, it is not completely without merit. It was Knight who unearthed Israel Schwartz's testimony, Sgt. Stephen White's report on his interviews with Matthew Packer, Abberline's report on Mary Ann Nichols, and a police copy of the Goulston Street graffito. Knight's fanciful theory also helped reawaken interest in the Whitechapel murders, and the reaction to it led to a great deal of new, and far more accurate, research. Those of us interested in this subject owe at least a small debt of gratitude to Stephen Knight.

Well said. Its a right load of old tosh but well told and probably the book that put the Ripper on the best seller list and made it such a subject for documentary and drama. I've always wanted to read The Ripper File, being a fan of the tv series and because that is the piece that prompted the wonderful Murder by Decree.

For me the worst is definitely the pompous and ridiculous Ripper and the Royals which, if read as fiction, is quite fun but I think I hate it so much because of the amount of people who have read it and think its true.

I think it even claimed Mary Kelly's killers hosed themselves down in her room after the murder.

[DVV]

Hi Sam,
I know that Knight mentions Schwartz!
I was talking of Rumbelow (as you have quoted btw) who ignores our wonderful Hungarian, even in his 2004 "fully revised edition".
That was to point out that Knight, despite his bad reputation, was of some value (an enforcement of the Grave Maurice's post).

Amitiés,
David

[Sam Flynn]

I have Rumbelow's "fully revised and updated" edition (2004), and still there is no mention of Schwartz.

Knight certainly mentions Schwartz and his testimony - from memory, there's even a chapter entitled "Lipski!".

[DVV]

Ah, Fish,
I can't miss this opportunity to agree with you!
What a boring book, both pretentious and empty.
There is more about the Ripper in Caesar's "Guerre des Gaules"!

Amitiés,
David

[Fisherman]

I´m not sure, but my hunch is that Roland Marx book "Jack the Ripper and the Victorian Nightmares" is the worst book ever to have plagued the realms of Ripperology.
The reason I can´t be totally sure is that I have never been able to finish it - I fall asleep long before I´m halfways whenever I give it a try.

The best, all!
Fisherman

[DVV]

It was Knight who unearthed Israel Schwartz's testimony.

I have Rumbelow's "fully revised and updated" edition (2004), and still there is no mention of Schwartz. (I don't mean it's the worst ripper book I've ever read, of course!)

Amitiés all,
David

[The Grave Maurice]

The worst book Was the Stephen Knight book.

Veritas, you're a Liar. (Latin joke).

Admittedly, there was much wrong with Knight's book; but, despite its flaws, it is not completely without merit. It was Knight who unearthed Israel Schwartz's testimony, Sgt. Stephen White's report on his interviews with Matthew Packer, Abberline's report on Mary Ann Nichols, and a police copy of the Goulston Street graffito. Knight's fanciful theory also helped reawaken interest in the Whitechapel murders, and the reaction to it led to a great deal of new, and far more accurate, research. Those of us interested in this subject owe at least a small debt of gratitude to Stephen Knight.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Veritas,

The worst book Was the Stephen Knight book.

But still the most compelling.

We continue to argue its merits [or lack thereof] thirty-something years after publication.

Regards,

Simon

[Veritas]

The worst book Was the Stephen Knight book.

[Bailey]

"Sensible?" Forget it then...

B.

[dmcdonald@onwight.net]

Hey Debbie

Well, I was thinking of the dreaded trinity I read recently of Murder & Madness, Prince Jack and Death Of a Prince. I doubt you'd have much hope of coming off worse than those ones! However, I'm sure you're very interesting Your book is on my must get list... long list, tho, so it make take a while.

B.

I think you will find it much more 'sensible' than those other books - and all based on fact (Stephen's mother's diary, Eddy's hospital data, info re his relationship with Tennyson's daughter in law, info from the Royal Archives and much more). So hope you will enjoy it.

Regards
Debbie

[Mike Covell]

The Graphic novel of "From Hell" is really well done, it is well presented, quite dark, and has footnotes and references. It is quite a heavy read, and in equally graphic, both in terms of the gore factor, and sexual contents, but it is worth getting.

[SaucyJacky]

Paticia Cornwell's book was the first book I ever bought after a visit to the London Dungeon's a couple of years ago and enjoyed it quite a bit when I read it.
Since then I've read better books (Begg, Sugden, Rumbelow) and never even opened Cornwell's again. it's collecting dust on the shelf.

Luckily I can still enjoy some Jack the Ripper related things eventhough I know the theory is rubbish like the Hughes brothers "From Hell" movie (I don't have the graphic novel) for instance

[Bailey]

^ Joan, wasn't there some anagram Wallace made from one of Dodgson's writings naming Mary Jane Kelly, but the poem itself was actually written years before we presume she was born?

PHILIP

No doubt, Sir Phil, this is why she picked that particular pseudonym to hide her real identity so we couldn't find any record of her 120 years later

B.

[George Hutchinson]

^ Joan, wasn't there some anagram Wallace made from one of Dodgson's writings naming Mary Jane Kelly, but the poem itself was actually written years before we presume she was born?

PHILIP