WS Magazine Dec 2009

[Natalie Severn]

Good to see you back Coral,
missed you at conference,
All the Best
Norma

[coral]

I can't belive that a missing 'r' has created all this debate.

We've been to the 2090 Conference, publications lodged at the BL depositry, critique of an article Bill Beadle wrote yonks ago, money raised for the Beadle Charity etc etc

This started off as Phil Hutchinson winding up his co-writer Rob Clack. Lets all calm down here.


And as an aside I have just heard that 1 hour ago I became a grandmother for the 3rd time.

Time to go and celebrate - the first drink is on me and to wish a long life to Elliott.

Coral

[Tom_Wescott]

I have scanned Bill's article again and find no problem with it, nor can anyone else!

Are we talking about the same article? I'm speaking about more than one article, all on Stride, published a couple of years ago. I can assure you I'm not the only one who read it who found problems with it.

I'm very aware of Bill's reputation as a great guy, and I own a first edition of his book as well as his most recent book on Bury. I'll probably buy his next as well. But Bill's reputation and literary output are not what I'm discussing here, though it seems to be your primary area of interest.

I do not at all understand your comment that I might have a problem with Bill or his work because he doesn't post on the Casebook? I hope you were not inferring that, because that's outrageous.

If I were to post a lengthy response to Bill's essays, it would be very embarrassing to him, so I'm shocked you would suggest that about your friend and chairman. It would also make me look like the 'pedant' you seem to think we Casebook posters already are.

You are the editor of the journal, are you not? You should post a warning in the upcoming issues to let readers know that if they offer any criticism on a piece they will be called names, have their character questioned, be told they were wrong, and encouraged not to subscribe to the journal. Of course, that might just be me, because I'm an American, and maybe you feel as Nick Warren does that we Yanks should stay out of 'your' perenial mystery. But I hope not.

Anyway, I don't feel I warranted such rudeness simply because I commented on a series of unworthy articles, particularly from the editor of the journal.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[adrian]

There you go Tom Westcot,

I have scanned Bill's article again and find no problem with it, nor can anyone else! Is it that you disagree with his interpretations? This is different from factual errors.

Bill is fastidious in his research and his standing in the Ripper world, and the literary world in general, is immense. His recent Ripper book was published to strong reviews and he has another book due to be published later this year.

Bill is a published author of incredible standing inside and outside the Ripper world. His reputation is based mainly on his integrity. His talent goes beyond the pedantry postings on message boards - which might be the genesis of your original criticism.

If you know of any mistakes in Bill's original Stride article you can post them up on the Casebook as an article.

Adrian.

[Chris]

Just a small point.

I tend to think that the best thing is to publish the results of research on Casebook rather than in one of the Ripper journals. The danger of significant research "getting lost" on the discussion boards has been more or less eliminated by the addition of the Wiki section.

The only remaining potential advantage of paper publication - as far as I can see - is that material can be preserved in libraries. But as far as I can judge from the online catalogue, the only one of the surviving printed Ripper magazines that is deposited in the British Library is Ripperana. I've always been puzzled by that.

[adrian]

For all those who have emailed me over the last week asking about how to subscribe and prices, you can find them on the WS1888 website:

https://www.whitechapelsociety.com

But to help you out I will recapitulate: for six issues delivered to your door

UK £10 per year.

Europe £13 per year.

Rest of the World £19 per year.

Post and packaging inclusive. Our web site accepts Paypal.

ADRIAN.

"We might not be free, but at least we are cheap!"
Frank Zappa

[Cap'n Jack]

Try knitting instead, Tom, it will keep your fingers off the keyboard.
You got spunk, I'll give you that, you cheeky bastard.

[Tom_Wescott]

Adrian,

I considered writing you at the time, but my correction list would have been almost as long as Bill's essays, so I didn't see the point. You misunderstood me if you thought I said I disagreed with Bill's research. It's not a matter of disagreeing, it's a matter of factual accuracy and arriving at conclusions that possess some modicum of logic and sense. That particular series did not.

People get involved with your club and magazine for Jack the Ripper. Plain and simple. That's it. They tolerate the fluff. Your suspect series sounds interesting, and I applaud what you do. In spite of your encouraging me not to subscribe to your journal again, I might pick up some issues any way.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[adrian]

For all those who have emailed me over the last week asking about how to subscribe and prices, you can find them on the WS1888 website:

https://www.whitechapelsociety.com

But to help you out I will recapitulate: for six issues delivered to your door

UK £10 per year.

Europe £13 per year.

Rest of the World £19 per year.

Post and packaging inclusive. Our web site accepts Paypal.

ADRIAN.

[adrian]

Tom,

Thanks for your rather colourful comments.

The [I]WS Journal[I] covers East End history as well as Ripperology. Last year, however, we embarked on a victims' series, this year we will embark on a suspects series, so the Ripper content has been upped. However, we do not cater only for the Ripper community and I would suggest you look elsewhere. If we are to get a continuous stream of good articles then people have to be prepared to write them.

Bill Beadle is a very serious researcher and writer. You may disagree with his work. I am not a Ripperologist, and proud of that, (I mean life is to short!) but I would say that if you felt like this, then why did you not write a critique for us to publish? Caz did this very thing with one of Bill's articles.

I do not beg people to subscribe, and never will, the choice is yours. We offer six copies a year at very cheap rates.

But to anyone who feels the same way, put pen to paper, point out the historical errors, reassess the data and send it in. "He who can does.." and that sort of thing.

Thanks for your kind comments about Coral and myself.

Love, peace and Guinness.

Adrian

[Tom_Wescott]

Interesting thread. I was a subscriber and supporter of WSJ for a while when it was brand new, and even contributed an article on Tabram, which I thought they did a fine job in presenting. However, I let my subscription lapse for two reasons - 1) Very little Ripper material, and 2) What Ripper material that was published was among the worst and most factually inaccurate that I have ever read. Bill Beadle's series on Stride remains the worst published Stride literature ever, and will likely remain so. I was shocked not only that someone who has studied the case for so long and as closely as Bill could produce such crap, but that no one on the editorial staff was familiar enough with the facts to have done something about it.

Material this full of factual errors and sloppy theorizing hurts the field and sends would-be Ripperologists to the casebook boards to get torn up by people like myself who are tired of correcting other writers' errors.

Having gotten that off my chest, I think Coral is the salt of the earth and Adrian seem like an amazing guy, and if the Ripper content and quality of research has risen (as one would expect) since the journal's first couple of years, I would love to resubscribe.

Any readers want to comment here or by PM?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jeff Leahy]

Blimmey that is a star stud'id list of speakers. Count me in Adrian how do I join?

I think I will be at next meeting with DVD's anyway, so grab me then

Jeff

[Sam Flynn]

Ah... the dangers of joining a thread too late!

[caz]

Er no, Sam. That's been the whole point of this little discussion. Keep up!

First post in the thread:

Congratulations again to Clacky on his award, though I was a bit puzzled by the mag's comment "This award couldn't have gone to a nice man."

I think there is an 'r' missing - unless they thought Rob couldn't be 'r'sed.

Love,

Caz
X

[Sam Flynn]

If anything, the 'mockery' was directed at Rob Clack, for getting an award that couldn't go to a nice man.

... nicER man, surely!