Julie Wallace

[Marko]

I believe that Mark Russell is working on a book as well.

Very true Stan - for nigh on seven years now! Hopefully complete next year.

[Marko]

In any famous murder case there are always writers who want to make money out of a fresh slant - a new theory on the case - even if that theory is a preposterous one.

I recently visited the National Archives at Kew and copied the complete holdings of Wallace material. I hope to incorporate these into what I have already written. I also managed to view the docu drama from 1975 Who Killed Julia Wallace? I hope to write a chapter on this made for TV programme for inclusion in the book.

You are correct Louisa - unlike some, my book will not have an agenda - something that practically every past Wallace book has been guilty of. Unfortunately this case has become the target of idiotic conspiracy theories by some who are more interested in boosting their own egos than putting a viable case forward. In a letter to me some years ago Jonathan Goodman had this to say: "It is the Wallace Case itself that deserves the praise - not anyone writing about it." It is a pity others (and those using it as a five minute fad, I must add) don't have the same mentality.

[louisa]

So true, Apricot, so true.

No, I meant that I don't agree with Diane Jane's other theories regarding what she says about the previous deaths in the Croydon Poisonings.

I've read about the Luard case (and it's quite an interesting one) but I didn't know Diane J had written a book about it. I don't think I'll bother with it.

[apricot]

My, my, Louisa, you must have ruffled her feathers, six page reply!! Trying to defend the indefensible, eh?

When you say her other theories are bonkers too, does that mean you've read her book I think it's called Edwardian Murder or something like, believe it's about the Luard / Dickman cases, if so am intrigued to know her "take" on that.

Seems to me there doesn't seem to be one classic case that hasn't been the subject of at least one conspiracy theory or miscarriage of justice debate.

KR Angie

[louisa]

I actually took Diane Janes to task over her book. I sent her an email telling her that I totally disagreed with her theories. I was very polite though.

She sent me a reply that covered SIX pages! I still have it. She sounded quite annoyed and tried to justify her theories, but she still didn't manage to convince me of anything other than she wanted to put a new 'slant' on an old case, however ridiculous.

She completely lost me when she gave her theory about the old lady - Violet Sidney - committing suicide (after watching her beloved daughter, Vera, die in agony only a few weeks prior) - by taking some powdered arsenic (which Diane Janes states she probably kept in her face powder box) - then pouring the powder into her medicine bottle (difficult) - then pouring it onto a teaspoon, then into a glass and drinking it - is preposterous. If Mrs. Sidney was going to poison herself with arsenic she would have just put the powder in a glass of water....wouldn't she?

Her other theories were bonkers as well imo.

[apricot]

Hi Louisa,

Indeed I have The Riddle of Birdhurst Rise, in fact it was the very first true crime book I ever bought! Totally agree, for me it is the definative account of the mystery, I don't know if you've read the Diane Jane book, if you haven't, I shouldn't bother, it's one of those that when you read the conclusion you think to yourself, WHAT? Heavens to Betsy, some people have an amazing imagination.

I also wouldn't add my name on a foreword to a book I didn't believe in, for the reasons you state.
KR Angie

[louisa]

Apricot - you've obviously read the Diane Janes book about the Croydon Poisonings.

Please, please try and get hold of a copy of The Riddle Of Birdhurst Rise by Richard Whittington-Egan. It's the definitive and best researched book about the murders.


As for forewards in books. I think that if I was an author I wouldn't want to write a foreward for a book I didn't like or agree with. My reputation would be on the line.

[apricot]

Evenin' again All,


I've been away for a few days and I see there has been much activity on the thread in my absence!!

I'm really not naive enough to think that a foreword by a distinguised author adds more credence to the theory claimed therein, I just like to have books that cover all angles as it were, I've got some books in which the findings are, frankly ludricrous, the Ruth Ellis one, the Croydon Arsenic Mystery spring to mind, not to mention more than a few JTR!!

Anyway, nothing like a good book to wile away cold, dark winter nights and it probably won't be!!

[sdreid]

I believe that Mark Russell is working on a book as well.

[Stewart P Evans]

No need...

...
People are usually exactly what they seem. We like to believe that Wallace was calm and collected on the outside but a maniac lurked within. In my experience if somebody looks and behaves like a cool customer, then they usually are exactly that, even when riled.

There's no need for a 'maniac' to be lurking within. As witness the many, many, horrendous domestic murders that the annals of crime present us with.

[louisa]

I'm 50/50 as to whether Wallace was guilty or not. I think Parry could have committed the murder.

People are usually exactly what they seem. We like to believe that Wallace was calm and collected on the outside but a maniac lurked within. In my experience if somebody looks and behaves like a cool customer, then they usually are exactly that, even when riled.

[Stewart P Evans]

Off Topic

I think we have strayed off topic here, on a thread about the Wallace case in which Wallace was so obviously guilty.

[Stewart P Evans]

book book

...
I would suggest that it is naive to believe that the writer of a foreword automatically agrees with, or endorses, the content of that book. In the case of my own first book book I had offers from a couple of high profile names in Ripperworld happy to write my foreword and they certainly didn't agree with the whole content of the book.
...

'book book' - so good I wrote it twice (sung to the tune of 'New York, New York').

[Stewart P Evans]

Publishing

...
In the academic environment it can even end up having negative connotations. Currently I'm sitting on the dilemma of if I should ask my German boss (who's an authority on a certain field) to write a foreword for my upcoming book, and I'm hesitating. I'm sure he'll write something beautiful, but do I need to advertize the fact that we're close, and get his numerous enemies on my back? Already due to him (due to a legal dispute he won) I had to change my publisher (which went bankrupt after the legal dispute). And already there's a certain (illustrous in the past, sh*tty today) German University and a certain (very rich and powerful) German organisation with whom I can't do business cuz of him! (For the latter, I have it in mind to attach myself to an additional boss in the future.)
What's hilarious is that if the author happens to be a young woman, there's also the voices “He wrote a brilliant review for her, ergo he's doing her“. But noone really pays attention to such, and at any rate a book will speak for itself.

We have to recognise the difference between publishing in 'an academic environment' and publishing a popular work in the commercial field. Commercial publishing is very different from academic publishing although, today there may be a degree of overlap which, incidentally, in the crime field has certainly seen academic presses publishing some works that lack academic qualities.

Much depends, of course, on the content of a book, the way it is written, and what the writer of the foreword has to say about the book and the subject matter. Many forewords, and introductions, contain very relevant and sometimes new information on the subject. Or they may give a unique insight on an authoritative writer's own views of, or opinions on, a subject or, in the case of the Ripper, a new suspect.

As you say, a book should speak for itself, and I am sure that most readers realise that.

[Stewart P Evans]

Aware

It might be all-encompassing, but it's also totally accurate. That's why you and RW-E are asked to do forewords all the time, and not Dr. John Pope de Locksley. Your reputations reflect on the book and increase it's credibility, and therefore sales. The author and the publishers like that. My point with the last statement is that someone might write a foreword for someone else's book, but not necessarily agree with its conclusions, so readers should be aware of that and not expect the book their purchasing to live up to the work put out by the guy writing the foreword. It very well may, but not necessarily.
...
Tom Wescott

I am, obviously, aware of the reasons that an author or publisher might want a particular noted author to write a foreword to their book. It also gives the opportunity for that authority's name to be used on the cover of a book.

However, the person writing the foreword obviously has the option of declining to write it and the decision is his/hers. There may be any number of reasons why the author/authority would wish to write the foreword and that, I would suggest, rarely includes the fact that they agree with all that is written in the book. That is often clear from the content of the foreword. This is particularly true in the field of Ripper studies. It is very unfair to suggest that the writer of a foreword is doing it for 'cash'. I have never been paid for writing a foreword and have only received a gratis copy of the book (which I would have received anyway for the help I had given).

I would suggest that it is naive to believe that the writer of a foreword automatically agrees with, or endorses, the content of that book. In the case of my own first book book I had offers from a couple of high profile names in Ripperworld happy to write my foreword and they certainly didn't agree with the whole content of the book. In the event I asked Nick Warren to write it and he was relatively little known in Ripper studies in 1994 but I respected his work and opinion.

So, I don't agree that that an author's credibility transfers to the book he writes a foreword for, even if that is what you believe. But I think that most readers are intelligent and discerning enough to know all this anyway and that there is more in their decision to buy a book than the name of the writer of the foreword.