Jack the Ripper and the East End (Intro Peter Ackroyd)

[revpetero]

Just being sent this by a friend.

Any views before I read it?

Ta

Peter

[Sam Flynn]

I can thoroughly recommend the book as a collection of interesting essays and useful background material to the case. It's not a "Ripper book" as such, so don't expect too much discussion of suspects or victims, except in Peter Ackroyd's introduction - which is pretty underwhelming by Ackroyd's standards, I have to say. The essays and copious illustrations that make up the bulk of the book make perfect "dipping material" for those fascinated by the history and social dynamics of that time and place.

One thing I particularly liked was that the book contains relevant sections of the Booth poverty map of 1889 in much better definition than I've been used to, better even than the London Topographical Society's full-size reproduction. I will only add here (© R. Anderson) that being able to see these better-defined maps casts an interesting light on the case.

[The Grave Maurice]

Sam is right about the Booth maps but, other than that, I was disappointed with this book. It appears to have been written by a handful of academics who know nothing about JtR, with an intended audience of other academics who share their disinterest. The majority of comments in the essays can be grouped into one of three categories: simply wrong; blindingly obvious; completely unrelated to the supposed topic.

I did enjoy the photographs, but you would think that a museum could provide a little more information about material from its own collection: many of the locations are only vaguely identified, and surely the dating on most of them could be a little more specific than simply "c. 1900".

The review in the latest Ripperologist pretty much hits the nail on the head. The book has a few good points, but it has very little to do with JtR. A different title might have made it more palatable.

[Monty]

I personally prefer Fishman.

Monty

[truebluedub]

I have to say I disagree (with Maurice) I was of the opinion the book was brilliant but that could be because the Marriott chapter is relevant to my own (non ripper) research. Perhaps the Jack the Ripper elements should not have been
the major marketing focus. "The Late Victorian East End: real and imagined" sound like a better title.
Chris Lowe

[Sam Flynn]

...or, The East End of Jack the Ripper, perhaps. That's closer to what the book's all about, but with one fewer letter. Bargain!

[Chris George]

Hi All

As subscribers of Ripperologist will know, we reviewed this book in the May issue of the Rip. Our reviewer found the book to be misleadingly titled, because despite the implied promise in the title that the book is on Jack the Ripper and the East End, it contains no essay about the Ripper as such. The reviewer wrote that nonetheless the volume contains some good discussion of social conditions in the East End at the time. The amount of knowledge that the different contributors show about the crimes is minimal and in his introduction to the book, Mr. Ackroyd makes a number of mistakes in his discussion of the case. So the book is recommended -- although not as a book on the Whitechapel murders per se.

Best regards

Chris George