Sir Jim and Sir Arthur

[Arthur F]

Say it ain't so. Not our Arthur Sullivan!

Arthur Sullivan was a Mason but I don’t think anyone is suggesting he was the Ripper and he doesn’t really help the case for Donston. If anything, the idea helps Maybrickians. I’d look for a lurking Maybrickian being behind this theory because James Maybrick was the brother of Michael Maybrick, the composer. Hoaxmuseum Forum

[Paul Butler]

That explains why some of the diary verses seem to fit certain G & S tunes then...........:flypig:

Paul

[Sam Flynn]

That explains why some of the diary verses seem to fit certain G & S tunes then.Do they, though, Paul? Perhaps Stravinsky might have had a shot at setting such irregular rhythms - although, in his vocal music, even he preferred to work with poets who understood how to construct verse along metric principles. But Sullivan benefitted enormously from Gilbert's mastery of rhythmic form and alliteration:

"To sit in solemn silence in a dull dark dock
In a pestilential prison with a life-long lock;
Awaiting the sensation of a short, sharp shock
From a cheap and chippy chopper on a big black block".

[Paul Butler]

One or two yes SamF.

Try the irregularly structured "I have a song to sing O" on for size.

I can't read "Have you seen the devle with his mikerskope" these days without singing it to the tune of the original act II finale to Ruddigore. It fits beautifully. That's it. I've cracked it. We can all go home now.

Years ago on casebook I remember someone seriously proposed that they had solved the case based on a subtext in HMS Pinafore that framed Maybrick.

It seems that if you were famous in around 1888, you're now fair game for a crackpot ripper theory.

I've made a point of collecting as much of Michael Maybrick as Stephen Adams music as I could in the past few years just out of interest. As a writer of drawing room ballads he wasn't half bad, an excellent tunesmith and a cut above most of the others. He was certainly no Arthur Sullivan though.

regards,

Paul

[Sam Flynn]

One or two yes SamF.

Try the irregularly structured "I have a song to sing O" on for size.Indeed, Paul, but that was deliberately constructed in the form of a "cumulative verse"; other examples being "The Old Lady that Swallowed a Fly" or the "Court of King Caractacus". I recall reading that Sullivan had the devle's own job trying to find music to fit, and complained to Gilbert at the time and, if I remember correctly, it was Gilbert himself who came up with the solution. By and large, Gilbertian verse is the model of rhythmic precision and ingenious rhymes - even where the emPHAses are on the wrong syLLAbles or rhymes are forced it's always done with consummate cleverness (the one cop-out that doesn't work for me being "strategy" and "sat-a-gee" :)).I can't read "Have you seen the devle with his mikerskope" these days without singing it to the tune of the original act II finale to Ruddigore. It fits beautifully.That's because the Openshaw verse isn't strictly original in the first place - it's lifted from a folk-song, with one or two words swopped out. See this post (http://www.jtrforums.com/showpost.php?p=43904&postcount=3), where you'll also find a link to an MP3 file I made of the fiddle tune in question.

[Paul Butler]

But each a card shall draw,
And he who draws the lowest
Shall (so 'twas said)
Be henceforth dead –
In fact, a legal "ghoest"
(When exigence of rhyme compels,
Orthography forgoes her spells,
And "ghost" is written "ghoest").

From The Grand Duke.

My favourite "Gilbertism".

But Sullivan benefitted enormously from Gilbert's mastery of rhythmic form and alliteration:

Couldn't agree more samF. That has to be a first. If it hadn't been for the execrable lyrics they used, it's unlikely that we would still be neglecting some of the terrific music from the likes of Balfe and Wallace in favour of Sullivan, as we do today.

Paul

[ferret]

Arthur was initiated into the Studholme (slightly aristocratic ) Lodge in 1865
I love the fact that on his tombstone it quotes the Yeomen
'Is life a boon..if so,it must befall that Death when'er he call must call too soon'
...delightful!

Just some AS pics here- listening to a Music hall prog on radio 4 here with Roy Hudd so not concentrating too hard

5574 Arthur in 1870


5575 Arthur by Millais


5576 The tomb!

and incidently-W.S Gilbert was initiated into the Abbey Lodge- Abingdon Oxon...Brothers obviously


If interested- Google 'Were Gilbert and Sullivan Masons?'
xx

[Caroline Morris]

...even where the emPHAses are on the wrong syLLAbles or rhymes are forced it's always done with consummate cleverness (the one cop-out that doesn't work for me being "strategy" and "sat-a-gee" :))...

So, Sam, how clever would one have had to be in Gilbert's time, to have set out to make Sir Jim's attempts atrocious - indeed, the very opposite of the model of a consummately clever rhymester: a minstrel whose efforts can be found wand'ring all over the shop, if you will - and ended up doing such a good bad job of it that they even managed to pull the wool thickly over thine eyes? :playball:

Love,

Caz
X

PS Incidentally, do you think our diarist may have been familiar with the writings of James Boswell (1740-1795)?

[Chris G.]

PS Incidentally, do you think our diarist may have been familiar with the writings of James Boswell (1740-1795)?

Another clue for us all? :rolleyes:

Think of Boswell, and who do we think of but. . . . Dr Samuel Johnson (1709-1784).

Are the Johnson brothers the link to Battlecrease and the Diary and the watch? The electricians who did the work at Battlecrease. Find the Diary. The Diary passes through the hands of the late Robbie Johnson. And on to the Barretts. The rest as they say is. . . . er, history?

:playball:

:playball:

:playball:

Chris

[Sam Flynn]

So, Sam, how clever would one have had to be in Gilbert's time, to have set out to make Sir Jim's attempts atrocious - indeed, the very opposite of the model of a consummately clever rhymesterI can't really buy into the notion that the diary author somehow wanted to make James Maybrick come across like ee cummings on Mogadon, Caz. Why on earth would anyone wish to do that, for one thing? For another, given the uniformly dismal quality of the prose, I have little doubt that those cata-strophic (pun!) verses represented the best the hoaxers could manage. They might even have been proud of one or two of them.

[SirRobertAnderson]

Are the Johnson brothers the link to Battlecrease and the Diary and the watch? The electricians who did the work at Battlecrease. Find the Diary. The Diary passes through the hands of the late Robbie Johnson. And on to the Barretts. The rest as they say is. . . . er, history?



I hope this is posted facetiously, especially since Albert just passed away.

Dangar made some X-Files efforts to connect Robbie and Feldman to the hoaxing of the Watch, but this is a new one.

[Caroline Morris]

I can't really buy into the notion that the diary author somehow wanted to make James Maybrick come across like ee cummings on Mogadon, Caz. Why on earth would anyone wish to do that, for one thing? For another, given the uniformly dismal quality of the prose, I have little doubt that those cata-strophic (pun!) verses represented the best the hoaxers could manage. They might even have been proud of one or two of them.

Well, Sam, I can't help it if your imagination is that limited, despite your protestations to the contrary. :)

Why on earth would anyone think it funny to write that Punch article posted on another thread recently, which is spelled atrociously throughout to the point of pure daftness?

Why on earth would anyone portray another poster as an ignorant buffoon, by collecting genuine examples of their buffoonery and concentrating them in one post of pure daftness?

Why on earth would anyone in the world in 1889 wish to play a practical joke on the Maybrick family by portraying their late relative as a useless and utter bastard, who dragged Florie down and plunged her and her children into a living hell, on account of his selfish indulgences and ideas way above his station?

Why on earth would a modern hoaxer, with such a low standard of English that their best efforts are represented in this diary text, not even use a poxy dictionary to produce 63 pages of the thoughts of a Victorian businessman?

The question won't go away, Sam.

Love,

Caz
X

PS Chris, Sir Robert, I'm sorry my reference to James Boswell caused the late Johnson brothers to be dragged in here. Nothing could have been further from my mind than this. Thankfully, even my imagination has its limits. I'll explain Boswell anon.

[Chris G.]

Are the Johnson brothers the link to Battlecrease and the Diary and the watch? The electricians who did the work at Battlecrease. Find the Diary. The Diary passes through the hands of the late Robbie Johnson. And on to the Barretts. The rest as they say is. . . . er, history?



I hope this is posted facetiously, especially since Albert just passed away.

Dangar made some X-Files efforts to connect Robbie and Feldman to the hoaxing of the Watch, but this is a new one.

Hi Sir Bob

Since Caz has said that the new Battlecrease connection came out of existing documentation, there has to be something in the past history of the Diary investigation, so I am going over past loose ends. Robbie Johnson is one of them. Nothing against Albert Johnson. It has been said often enough that he appeared to be an innocent party, though his brother had a shadier side apparently.

Chris

[Paul Butler]

Hi Chris.

I don't see how the Johnsons could have had any link with Battlecrease.

Surely we are missing the obvious here? Shirley Harrison was contacted by a firm of solicitors, in the early 90s I believe. They supposedly had evidence that the diary and a ring were found at Battlecrease by workmen in 1991, but the lead went cold when everyone clammed up.

There were all sorts of allegations flying around, and a possible fraud investigation in the offing so perhaps that's not surprising.

Could this be the start of the Battlecrease evidence? Now that the dust has settled are people at long last talking in confidence? I think so.

regards.

Paul

[Caroline Morris]

Since Caz has said that the new Battlecrease connection came out of existing documentation...

...I am going over past loose ends. Robbie Johnson is one of them...

Hi Chris,

With respect, that's not what I said and not what I meant. All I said (which is no different from what I've been saying ever since the Maybrick Trial) was that something I came across in the existing documentation persuaded me to put a case to Keith for investigating a certain avenue, which then led him to his Battlecrease findings.

You are welcome to go over any of your own loose ends, but there is nothing about Robbie Johnson that makes him one as far as I am concerned. I am 100% confident, from everything Albert has said about the watch, the circumstances in which the scratches were discovered and what happened subsequently, that Robbie didn't even know Albert had bought a watch until the latter told him about what he and his work colleagues had found inside it.

The coincidental timing, as I see it, is not in the discovery of the scratches, shortly after the initial diary publicity (but before an independent hoaxer would even have known what was in the diary), but in the fact that Albert must have seen the watch for the first time on display in the jeweller's window at around the same time as Mike was trying to flog the diary to the highest bidder. I have no idea whether it means anything, but it does strike me as mighty peculiar.

Love,

Caz
X

PS Now then, Sir Jim and Sir Arthur anyone?? :)

[SirRobertAnderson]

Hi Chris.

I don't see how the Johnsons could have had any link with Battlecrease.



While I think it's important to not reject any theory out of hand, the Johnsons would be tough to connect to the Diary.

More to the point, IF you postulate that Robbie was involved with the Diary, it is very difficult to avoid the conclusion that Albert was in on it as well. Hey, he "found" the Watch. Two artifacts, two brothers. They would have had to be working together, unless one believes in miracles.

You would probably have to toss Feldman in as well, as he became good friends with Robbie if memory serves as well.

I don't think this pig flies, but as I said it is wise to consider all the angles.

[Arthur F]

I pulled this off Hoaxmuseum forum. It might be time to start studying Arthur Sullivan's Diary. Enjoy!

"I wouldn’t doubt Arthur shagged Mary if she was within 100 miles of the Savoy. She is said to have had a gentleman friend who took her to France in 1884. Arthur went to France in 1884. She also said she had a relative on the stage and lived in Knightsbridge. It’s hard to dismiss offhand. QUOTE Fou Cault"

If she’s recorded as going to France in 1884 and he can be proved to have been in France in 1884 at the same time then yes, that is perhaps something.

But it still has nothing whatsoever to do with Dan Brown. Like I said:

1. Mary is a common name because it’s used in the Bible. Especially popular amongst poor Irish Catholic girls, who comprised most of the protitutes in Whitechapel. There would have been literally thousands of prostitutes called ‘Mary’.

2. A secret baby is a very, very, very common cliche in fiction. And in real life, thousands of girls of good families got knocked up, had the child in secret which was sent to an orphanage and the mother usually to a convent. Conversely the amount of royals who’ve sired bastards is beyond measure. Nil points.

3. Two people called ‘Brown’. One of the most common names possible. There must be hundreds of thousands of people called ‘Brown’ in the world right now.
Renquist, Glasgow, avatar Sean Connery, Hoaxmuseum Forum

[Sam Flynn]

Well, Sam, I can't help it if your imagination is that limited, despite your protestations to the contrary.My fancy can take many and varied flights, Caz, but there comes a point where even that has to step aside in favour of pragmatism. Would a would-be forger of an "Audio Diary of Paderewski" go out of his way to make his subject sound like Les Dawson? I don't think so. Ditto, why would a would-be hoaxer of a "Maybrick Diary" deliberately make him so bad at English prose and poetry? Why on earth would anyone think it funny to write that Punch article posted on another thread recently, which is spelled atrociously throughout to the point of pure daftness?We don't see this anywhere, though - we just get error-strewn English, pure and simple, in almost every paragraph and verse.Why on earth would a modern hoaxer, with such a low standard of English that their best efforts are represented in this diary text, not even use a poxy dictionary to produce 63 pages of the thoughts of a Victorian businessman?

The question won't go away, Sam.
And the simplest answer, it seems, doesn't either; namely, that the hoaxer(s) really weren't very clever at all.

[Arthur F]

Ditto, why would a would-be hoaxer of a "Maybrick Diary" deliberately make him so bad at English prose and poetry? .
It's not like writing verse runs in Jim's family. Maybe he should have stuck with music like his brother.
Have you ever read Arthur Sullivan's Diary? It's an itinerary and a score card. At least he doesn't try free verse.
I met a girl from Wales....

[Sam Flynn]

It's not like writing verse runs in Jim's family.Perhaps not, Arthur, but that neither explains nor excuses prose writing as bad as this - nor, indeed, the clueless sense of rhythm.

[Caroline Morris]

Try the irregularly structured "I have a song to sing O" on for size.


Hi Paul,

Back in 1999 I thought I saw G&S influences in the diary and I still think its author would have been a silly faker indeed not to have put any in, if creating the text in modern times.

I showed no fright and indeed no light

has always struck me (ha ha) as very reminiscent of Jack Point "who sipped no sup and who craved no crumb", and of course it appears in the diary shortly after the double event, which could hardly fit more perfectly with the opening night of Yeomen on October 3rd 1888.

Someone was certainly smiling down on our thick as pigshi* hoaxer, when he sat down with no dictionary, no Victorian Ditties For Dummies, but an invaluable volume featuring a 17th century poet - oh and a book or two on the ripper and Maybrick cases for good measure.

I have always felt that the shabby modern hoax theory is only marginally less ludicrous, when put under the spotlight, than Feldy's flights of fancy.

Love,

Caz
X

[Arthur F]

Jack Point is a good example, Caroline. Everyone knows the Zodiac's penchant for the Mikado.

Who says a cultured criminal like Hannibal Lecter or John Doe from SE7EN is pure fiction?

Arthur Sullivan's diary does mention the Double Event*, so maybe a JtR Diary would give Sir Arthur a nod in return.

*Mary Kelly is not mentioned but there is an abortionist referred to as M. I wonder....