News Flash!! . . . VINCENT VAN GOGH WAS JACK THE RIPPER!!

[Bridewell]

Evidence

To Bridewell
I hope you've got evidence of all this if only to shut Mr Larner up.
Cheers
John

Hi John,

This is what I posted earlier (Post 195):

http://www.vggallery.com/painting/p_0463.htm

From 5th to 8th September 1888 he was working on a painting in Arles, and the following day he sent his brother a letter, also from Arles. He's demonstrably in Arles from 5th to 9th September inclusive, so he can't have killed Annie Chapman on the 8th September in Spitalfields. I don't see how its possible. There is no plausible explanation which would allow for his being in London.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Phil Carter]

Hi John,

This is what I posted earlier (Post 195):

http://www.vggallery.com/painting/p_0463.htm

From 5th to 8th September 1888 he was working on a painting in Arles, and the following day he sent his brother a letter, also from Arles. He's demonstrably in Arles from 5th to 9th September inclusive, so he can't have killed Annie Chapman on the 8th September in Spitalfields. I don't see how its possible. There is no plausible explanation which would allow for his being in London.

Regards, Bridewell.

Hello Bridewell,

Indeed. Absinthe on parade for this old Dutch.
Can we now let this painter rest in peace together with Sickert and LeTrec?

Who's next in the artistic "sign of 4" I wonder ??
This world was never meant for painters- their own world was painful enough without involving them in atrocious slaying of the poor.

these colour composers are long gone.
I partly quote Monty Python...

"They're decomposing, composers.
There's less of them every year...
You can say what you like to dear Vincent-
But the chances are that he won't hear"

best wishes

Phil

[Henry Flower]

Continuing the Python line, Phil, I'm now tempted to write Mr Larner off as spam spam spam and spam.

[Bridewell]

Alibis

Continuing the Python line, Phil, I'm now tempted to write Mr Larner off as spam spam spam and spam.

Hi Henry,

I don't understand how someone can go to the trouble of writing (allegedly) a whole book, which postulates Van Gogh as JtR, without a process of due diligence which checks to see whether or not he has an alibi for any of the murders.

Regards, Bridewell

[lynn cates]

why?

Hello Dale. I am curious about clues surfacing in the paintings. This has baffled me with regards to our chaps who espouse Sickert and Lautrec.

I have asked before about this phenomenon but have received no reply as yet. Permit me to ask you.

Why would a murderer plant clues that could, if properly interpreted, result in getting him sent to the gallows?

Cheers.
LC

[Henry Flower]

Bridewell, I'm as baffled by that as you are.

There is still the scintilla of a chance that Mr Larner has remarkable and so-far undisclosed evidence. But I'm not holding my breath.

I suppose he just finds Vincent interesting. And the Ripper. And enjoys posing as a writer. And hopes there's money to be made by putting all his vegetables in one pot.

Given how easily disproved his theory is, and how fact-lite his book must therefore be, I'm more and more tempted to read it for its potential comic value. Baudelaire enjoined all creative people to cultivate a taste for third-rate writing and the conversation of idiots, for the relief and pleasure they would bring.

Mr Larner, any news on a publication date???

[Henry Flower]

Lynn,

It's all beautifully circular. Mr Larner et al can always claim that the hidden 'clues' are deliberately so vague and subjective that they would be inadmissably useless as evidence in a real murder trial.

Which is of course, from another angle, an admission that the clues he claims to have found are by their nature so vague and subjective that they might - just might - not be clues at all, but quite literally pigments of his imagination.

I mean to say, imagine the prosecutor standing in a packed courtroom at the trial of the century, pointing out his principal evidence: three dogheads, a doorknocker, and a wolf-faced policeman wearing a woman's bonnet, hidden in the brushmarks of a painting of some flowers. He'd be laughed out of court.

As would any author presenting that as his solution to the case. Which is why we can be sure that Dale has some conclusive solid evidence he has yet to share with the world.

Dale? You there, Dale? Hello?

[lynn cates]

clues

Hello Michael.

"pigments of his imagination"

Lovely pun.

But it seems that if one chap can unravel Van Gogh's "clues," so could anyone. And in that case, Vincent would have died a year earlier.

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

But, like all artists, wasn't it Vincents overarching ambition to be hung?

(Groan...I'll get me coat shall I?)

Dave

[Henry Flower]

Dave, you think three shakeheads was sufficient? Really???



Let me get that coat for you

[lynn cates]

linguistic considerations

Hello Dave. Um, some day I shall explain the distinction "to be hung"/"to be hanged" just as it was explained to me.

Cheers.
LC

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

Though his favorite color was yellow,
Van Gogh cut off, not feeling mellow,
his right ear, that bled,
which made his face red,
and gifted it in his bordello.

The tart Rachel, to whom Vincent gave it,
asked him: “D’you want me to save it? ”
He said, “Yes, but don’t lend it
to Romans, but mend it.
Though of me it’s deprived, don’t deprave it.”

To bloody ears not well adapted,
she passed out when she first unwrapped it.
The moral is clear:
don’t cut off an ear,
unless with a spare you’re earflapted.

Some people now claim it was Gauguin
who cut the left ear off Van Gogh.
The cut was an ictus
which I would depict as
a high blow that’s worse than a low.

Gershon Hepner.

Regards,

Simon

[Cogidubnus]

Quite Lynn and I shall look forward to it, (although I shan't get hung up about it either!)...

Hi Henry...well I thought five might've been seen as excessive (or alternatively as an unduly significant number)

All the best

Dave

[Henry Flower]

But Lynn, is it not the case that when someone is executed for a particularly heinous crime they are said to be 'hung like a horse'?

Or is that.... oh no. Hang on.....

[lynn cates]

got it

Hello Michael. I think you perceive the gist of the distinction.

Cheers.
LC