What was your first Ripper book?

[RedBundy13]

Thanks

Thanks for the post Tom, it was much appreciated. Knowing that the researchers such as yourself, who know quite a bit about the case, can understand that alot of us would not be on this site or even interested in the subject right now if it wasnt for her book. I know Im one of those.

[The Good Michael]

Cornwell's book was definitely better than her fiction... though it too, was fictitious.


Mike

[mariab]

Cornwell's book was definitely better than her fiction

I'd beg to differ, Michael. Postmortem and The Body Farm are real good. All that remains features an excellent plot, very well constructed, Cornwell just dumbs it down with that Mark dude character as a love interest for Scarpetta, whom she didn't manage to construct in an interesting fashion. (Plus she gave him all the boring exposition quotes. :-) Wise of her to make him die in a bombing and to develop further the more interesting Benton Wesley.)

David is not wrong talking about Mickey Mouse, as Cornwell is not an author with great literary style, she's a thriller author, capable of creating fascinating characters, such as Scarpetta and Marino. Plus the forensic and medical research she's done is top notch.

As for her Sickert book, I find the prose flowery and silly. I was not at all convinced when I read it, even without knowing hardly anything about Ripperology apart from Kozminsky.

[DVV]

My first book was a little-known one called: Of Mice and Giants. It was about a pair of guys, one stupid and 6'7" and the other slight and much shorter. Their names were Lenny Fleming and George Hutchinson. The book was full of humorous get-rich schemes such as pretending to be witnesses to a murder. I laughed uproariously when the big knucklehead went into his girlfriend's apartment to tell her of the plan to make it look as if she were murdered, only to find that someone actually had killed her. It took him ten minutes of talking to her before he realized that he had been talking to a pair of ears and eyes. It gave me fits to read that.

For some reason, the book never made the big time. In fact, I may have the only copy.

Mike

That's hilarious, Mike, but completely meaningless, and more so than ever since Debra's recent and persuasive suggestion as to explain the obvious height mistake.

That suggestion being based on serious research and relevant sources, as always with Debra.

You should certainly ask yourself why a non-biased and respected researcher like her is taking the pain to ascertain the real height of Fleming.

Apparently, although she has checked tons of documents, she's never met any healthy giant weighting less than 70 kg. But she might have come accross many mistakes, which is just human (more than your own and biased skinniest giant ever).

[DVV]

As for her Sickert book, I find the prose flowery and silly. I was not at all convinced when I read it, even without knowing hardly anything about Ripperology apart from Kozminsky.

Hello Maria, exactly so. What is more ridiculous than that scene in which she tells her friend/editor she would never forgive herself if Sickert turned out to be innocent ?
I believe it is in the first chapter, which makes the case promptly closed closed : stupid pompous book. (Yes, truly pompous, among other shortcomings.)

Now I must admit I'm not fan of her novels either. There are so many better thriller authors in my opinion.

[The Good Michael]

That's hilarious, Mike, but completely meaningless, and more so than ever since Debra's recent and persuasive suggestion as to explain the obvious height mistake.

You mean the book wasn't good? Hmmm. Well I do have another one about a group of Fenians all dressed as Randolph Churchill who go around and kill hapless women while attempting to blame the Jews. Since they are Irish, most of them end up drunk on Guinness and forget to plant incriminating evidence and the whole thing turns into a comedic farce of finger-pointing. At one point, one of the drunken Fenians is supposed to drop an astrakhan coat at the scene of a crime, but after forgetting about it, suddenly remembers and figures Goulston is close enough, and drops the wife's apron that she'd been using as a tampon by mistake. That just set me rolling in the aisles.

I may have the only copy of that one too.

[DVV]

Not that Guinness is bad, Mike, but Murphy's first.

[caz]

You mean the book wasn't good? Hmmm. Well I do have another one about a group of Fenians all dressed as Randolph Churchill who go around and kill hapless women while attempting to blame the Jews. Since they are Irish, most of them end up drunk on Guinness and forget to plant incriminating evidence and the whole thing turns into a comedic farce of finger-pointing. At one point, one of the drunken Fenians is supposed to drop an astrakhan coat at the scene of a crime, but after forgetting about it, suddenly remembers and figures Goulston is close enough, and drops the wife's apron that she'd been using as a tampon by mistake. That just set me rolling in the aisles.

I may have the only copy of that one too.

And to think they used to make do with the mad midwife theory whenever they needed a good chuckle. We now have more comedians writing in the field than we know what to do with. I think that could be called progress - of a sort.

Love,

Caz
X

[mariab]

Hello Maria, exactly so. What is more ridiculous than that scene in which she tells her friend/editor she would never forgive herself if Sickert turned out to be innocent ?

Yes, I know!

Now I must admit I'm not fan of her novels either. There are so many better thriller authors in my opinion.

Actually I do enjoy her thrillers, even the bad ones coming in the last couple years.

[The Good Michael]

And to think they used to make do with the mad midwife theory whenever they needed a good chuckle. We now have more comedians writing in the field than we know what to do with. I think that could be called progress - of a sort.

It's true, but it isn't often intentional comedy.

Mike

[caz]

"It's true, but it isn't often intentional comedy."

That's what I meant, Mike.

[Tom_Wescott]

That's hilarious, Mike, but completely meaningless, and more so than ever since Debra's recent and persuasive suggestion as to explain the obvious height mistake.

That suggestion being based on serious research and relevant sources, as always with Debra.

You should certainly ask yourself why a non-biased and respected researcher like her is taking the pain to ascertain the real height of Fleming.

Apparently, although she has checked tons of documents, she's never met any healthy giant weighting less than 70 kg. But she might have come accross many mistakes, which is just human (more than your own and biased skinniest giant ever).

Who the hell is Debra?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[DVV]

Who the hell is Debra?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Here is a clue, Tom : she's writing the Complete JtR A to F.

[Bridewell]

Me Too

My first was Donald Rumbelow's Complete Jack the Ripper in the late 1970s. At the time, it was probably the best that was out and wasn't published to tout a particular suspect. It was also my second Ripper book because a person I loaned the first copy too moved away without returning it and I had to go out and purchase a replacement.

Me too, although my interest was originally stirred by an article in Police Review, from about 1981, so perhaps that should be mentioned too, although I'm ashamed to say that I can't recall who wrote it.

[booth]

hi, I'm new to posting on the forums, though I've been reading them for a loooong time. Hello!

The first time I read anything about Jack the Ripper was in the Hamlyn Book of Horror, by Dan Farson. It didn't really go into any graphic detail as it was a book aimed at kids! I remember there was quite a good painted illustration of Liz Stride's body being found as a shadowy Jack slipped away in the background.

The first book I intentionally bought and read over and over about the killings was Martin Fido's The Crimes, Detection and Death of Jack The Ripper. I remember the shock I had when I read the descriptions of the disembowellments and especially the chapter about Mary Kelly. I couldn't imagine how anyone could do that to someone ( I was about 14 at the time). I truly believed for a long time that Mr Fido had discovered who Jack was. I then found a copy of Donald Rumbelow's excellent book in our local library, with the now infamous photograph of Mary, and being literally shocked to the spot. I had that awful sick feeling in the stomach when you've just seen something and you know that you can't [I]"unsee"[I] it....