Deconstructing Jack in Paperback

[Elamarna]

If you have not read it how do you KNOW it is wrong?

Actually I don't agree with it myself; but I have read it!

However there is no need for the disrespect you show to people and work you consider to be below you.

[John G]

If you have not read it how do you KNOW it is wrong?

Actually I don't agree with it myself; but I have read it!

However there is no need for the disrespect you show to people and work you consider to be below you.

Hi Steve,

Because he prefers the irrational to the rational (he also has an unfortunate tendency to resort to tautological arguments as well.) Thus, even from his own perspective he doesn't know that the person he has in mind is Jack the Ripper because, by his own admission, he has yet to complete his own research, i.e. to confirm his suspicions.

Another example of his irrationality is when he admitted that he didn't mislead anyone when he intentionally stated that his suspect wasn't a police officer, and then subsequently said he was! In fact, he's still equivocating on this point because he sometimes refers to the person as a "police official", which isn't quite the same thing.

Personally, though, I don't have too much of a problem with Pierre, or whatever his name actually is, especially as he appears to have done some genuine research. The trick, however, is not to take him too seriously, which, of course, is just what he wants.

[Elamarna]

John G

if he kept to his own threads i would agree. but look here he is attack someone else on a thread nothing to do with his, because it does not accept his view.
He has started 30 threads since September, it is hard to ignore him.

Steve

[John G]

John G

if he kept to his own threads i would agree. but look here he is attack someone else on a thread nothing to do with his, because it does not accept his view.
He has started 30 threads since September, it is hard to ignore him.

Steve

Hi Steve,

Well, yes, put that way 30 threads is a bit extreme, particularly as much of his reasoning tends to lapse into absurdity! Personally, I think he may be someone who has a grudge against Ripperologists, but who's done a significant amount of research himself-or at least paid someone else to do the research. Someone like Bruce Robinson perhaps?

I know, instead of trying to guess the name of this mythical police officer/official suspect maybe we should start a thread entitled: Guess Pierre's real name!

[Phil Carter]

Pierre,

You are entitled ,to an opinion.
You have made it.

Whilst you are concentrating heavily on trying, quite badly imho, to wind up just about every one and everything on the site, some of us have twigged you...ages ago.

So please leave THIS particular aspect, I. E. The reviewing of works to peers of far greater experience, and in most cases knowledge, of the genre.

Then return to playing your silly games of "now you see me, now you dont" to your other threads.

WHEN...and only when, you produce a book..call yourself an author, and show many years of knowledge, research and dedication to the subject..by producing facts..as this particular book is by the way, THEN no doubt you will be made welcome to comment further.

"I know but I'm not telling" is a common trait amongst those who know nothing.

Just like the Bruce Robinson book..your comments are just hot air. Remarkably similar in fact.

Pierre... .you've been twigged ages ago. I should really be calling you Pierrepont...as you have supplied enough of the rope....

This book is a refreshingly open book which makes the reader think.it draws no certain single conclusion..unlike other books made for the sake of cashing in on a craze.
It is quality.it is classy. It has style. Using an old fashioned term...It is suave.

As I wrote in my review months ago...It is highly recommended to all. A must read if one wishes to understand more in the genre.

Dismissing it is ignorance on a high level. Because this 570 odd page book is full of facts. And there are many here who have said, and openly admitted, that some of the facts were completely unknown to them..long in the tooth interested readers included.

I personally rate this book as one of the top three books ever written on the subject. Possibly the best ever. And I have read hundreds of offerings about the whole case.

What it doesn't do is any favours to the police..no...They didn't all have white coats on..what it doesn't do is favour any proposed suspect..because there is no evidence known to suspect any of them..so their proponents don't wear white coats either.

And finally, it doesn't worry about wheels falling off the eternal "hunt the ripper" bandwagon so heartily pushed along over the years to the present day.

Which rather enhances the genre..not drive it eternally into a muddy trench full of worn out speculation based on supposition. Some fear that this book might cause some sort of "death" of ripperology. (If there wasn't a single crazed killer responsible for all this carnage. .what do we do now about the genre with its hype??)
But fear not..ye of little faith... This book takes the whole business back to basics...and throws out the added rubbish of 127 years so conveniently placed before your eyes as God's honest truth..which has done THE most damage to the subject of all. Because, as shown clearly in this book..It never was God's honest truth. Others may disagree with my opinion..such is their right..However

Agree with the author or not..It is a MUST have book. It makes one think.



Phil

[Elamarna]

Well said Phil,

it is a truly impressive work, and even if like myself you don't agree with all Simon says, the amount of useful research and knowledge is mind blowing.

Steve

[Rosemary]

Well said

Then I shall get it, along with other works from posters here. Hopefully 2016 will be a good year. There's no Derrida in it, is there, dear??

[GUT]

Well said Phil,

it is a truly impressive work, and even if like myself you don't agree with all Simon says, the amount of useful research and knowledge is mind blowing.

Steve

That's when a book is great, when even the bits you disagree with you find great reading and start to think.

[Phil Carter]

That's when a book is great, when even the bits you disagree with you find great reading and start to think.

Hello Gut,

The paperback version has even more details packed inside.
The Book of the Year 2015 title is totally deserved.

Someone should make a film from this book..and not wander away from the written page once in order to juice it up..as has been done so often before. The who done it ending left hanging in the balance of myth. A whole new generation of people would actually start to think after seeing a true crime film.


Phil

[barnflatwyngarde]

I have just received my copy of "Deconstructing Jack", and at 570 pages it is an impressively mighty tome.
A very quick jaunt through the index however, does raise some concern.

Specifically, there is no mention of George Hutchinson, Mrs Cox or Caroline Maxwell in the index.

Having flicked through the book I know that Simon does indeed mention George Hutchinson and Caroline Maxwell (not sure about Mrs Cox).

As many people probably do on these forums, I enjoy cross referencing statements, assertions etc by referring to the indexes of other books dealing with the case. If there is no accurate index, this becomes impossible.

I know that to employ a professional Indexer is expensive, so I can understand if Simon simply couldn't afford it.

I am however looking forward to reading the book and Simon's theories about the case.

Pity about the index though.

[Elamarna]

Hello Gut,

The paperback version has even more details packed inside.
The Book of the Year 2015 title is totally deserved.

Someone should make a film from this book..and not wander away from the written page once in order to juice it up..as has been done so often before. The who done it ending left hanging in the balance of myth. A whole new generation of people would actually start to think after seeing a true crime film.


Phil

Phil
i have the kindle version
you say there is more in the paperback version, do you know if Simon as put the MJK3 stuff in , or is that still waiting on 2nd edition.
don't really want 2 get this and a 2nd edition as well. just cost wise

cheers

Steve

[barnflatwyngarde]

Phil
i have the kindle version
you say there is more in the paperback version, do you know if Simon as put the MJK3 stuff in , or is that still waiting on 2nd edition.
don't really want 2 get this and a 2nd edition as well. just cost wise

cheers

Steve

Elamarna, my copy of the book, which arrived today is the 2nd edition.

Got it from Amazon.

[Elamarna]

thank you

[Phil Carter]

Hello Steve,

Have only just seen your post..It is indeed the updated and expanded version.
I don't wish to spoil the surprises of all the added contents in this edition, but can assure you that the book itself is, in terms of comparison with many books in the field, probably the most informative that I have ever read.
Additionally, the price is remarkably low for such an immense volume. "Well worth it" is an overused phrase, but in this case, it is another reason for this book to be a "must have".
Compelling in many ways. I simply cannot recommend this book highly enough.

Purchase with an assured sense of value for money, new knowledge awaiting and I am sure it will be one of those books that will be constantly referred to again and again by the reader.


Phil

[Elamarna]

thanks Phil

that’s all i was waiting for.

i have the kindle edition, bought a couple of months back.

off to Amazon now

Steve