Age Of Cynicism: Discussion

[How Brown]

Back in the old days, when Message Board Ripperology was a place filled with wonder and numerous suspects being fitted in here and jammed in there by various methods in order to implicate them, the mood in the field was one of continual speculation...and frankly, at times, exciting. Suspect Ripperology ruled the roost with authors plumping for Barnett, Druitt, Maybrick, you name it...and there seemed to be no end in sight.

Nowadays, one will find it difficult to stress the plausibility of a suspect without the accompanying sturm und drang of facing a barrage of more informed Ripperologists than ever before...due in part to the work done in detailed Ripperology....which has made it no picnic to push someone's candidacy. Even suspect based Ripperologists today provide caveats within their own theories because of the sea change in accumulative knowledge by members of the community.

Is there an across the board cynicism within Ripperology in your view and if so. is it justifiable because of the reasons mentioned above....or a result of something else ?

[admin tim]

To quote the Taliban:

"It is easier to destroy than to create."

It is much easier to pick holes in the candidacy of someone else's suspect than to make a cogent and cohesive case for your own. And that is what has pretty much happened at Casebook, a lurking horde of acerbic ripperologists with scalping knives, waiting on someone, anyone, to promote a suspect, new or existing.

[Scott Nelson]

My stuff was pretty innovative, and still is. If people can't come around to my way of thinking, it's just too bad for them.

[How Brown]

Dear Scott:

Thanks for that. You bring up another point as well....that of the possibility or likelihood of cynicism emanating from theorists who know in advance or from a previous experience that their theory will face the heat from fellow enthusiasts and as a result...opt to lay low and participate only occasionally.

Anyone ?

[Robert Linford]

If this case is to be solved at all - and I cherish the hope that it's still a possibility - then suspects have to be pushed. Then the suspect promoter should say, "OK, now fling all you've got against it." It's in the promoter's interests to do this - e.g. criticism might indicate that he/she has been wasting his time. Alternatively he might be led to tighten up the theory.

Unfair or misguided criticisms won't make any difference to the theory itself - the questions whether X was or was not JTR, and whether the case against X is good or bad, are matters of fact and are totally independent of what anyone believes.

[How Brown]

Thanks for that Bob...and thats a good point too. A lot of people feel that its necessary to push one of the existing suspects to either completely eliminate or investigate further. Good one pal.

Anyone ?

[Roy Corduroy]

Back in the old days

Hi Howie,

For a new person, though, it's all a fresh start.

For instance, the book Clarence which is old hat to many of you, but to me, it's new. JK Stephen. Upper class, but with a head injury. People with head injuries do strange things sometimes.

Roy

[How Brown]

Dear Roy:

Many, in fact a hell of a lot , of serial killers had experienced head trauma.

For Stephen to be involved would mean that PAV would have had some involvement somehow in the WM, correct ?

Wouldn't we need to have some evidence of the latter's connection in order to pursue the former theory on Stephen ?

I'm coming from the angle that in this period of time numerous things have been resolved in the Case and that the general atmosphere is one of caution in terms of the promotion of suspects. It isn't like the old days where someone just haphazardly ( me included ) pushed for a certain suspect based on sourceless or baseless arguments...and can get away with it for too long.

[Mr. Poster]

Hi hi

Im a cynical chappie so I'll have a go....

It is much easier to pick holes in the candidacy of someone else's suspect than to make a cogent and cohesive case for your own

That is true but perhaps its less because people are gits and that picking holes is all thats left? ie. there are no more plausible candidates to find so people cannot propose them and all thats left to do is continue to pick holes in th ealready proposed candidates?

That none are left to propose is perhaps what lies behind the relatively recent tendency towards "some unknown fella" which, whilst avoding putting ones balls on the block, implicitly recognises that all th eother suspects have been done to death and that there are no more lunatics, no more toffs, no more general purpose nutters who can be fitted up as Ripper?

At least Maybrick was a fresh attempt to inject a new candidate.

p

[Roy Corduroy]

For Stephen to be involved would mean that PAV would have had some involvement somehow in the WM, correct ?

Wouldn't we need to have some evidence of the latter's connection in order to pursue the former theory on Stephen ?

I'm coming from the angle that in this period of time numerous things have been resolved in the Case and that the general atmosphere is one of caution in terms of the promotion of suspects. It isn't like the old days where someone just haphazardly ( me included ) pushed for a certain suspect based on sourceless or baseless arguments...and can get away with it for too long.

The idea in Clarence was that he acted alone to avenge his gay buddy Eddie having the syph.

But yes, Howie, you express exactly where old hat club members are at. The suspect scenarios have been raked over the coals a few times. So a new one comes out, take Joe Lis in the Fox and the Flies for example. Ash's review in Ripper Notes basically says - Don't do that. Don't propose a suspect. You can't do that. Do NOT do that.

Roy

[Scott Nelson]

All in all, the next few years should be interesting. The long hiatus in suspect standard revisions of the early 2000's is definitely over, and other target areas are moving fast. Some suspect standards will be stringent enough that inability to EVER demonstrate full consideration in a major topological area is a real possibility unless we can somehow transition to a largely (preferably non-historically based) discursive system in 20 years or so. And without swift movement on that transition it's more likely than not that chronic conformity problems will develop over much of the field before 2020.

[Pilgrim]

To quote the Taliban:

"It is easier to destroy than to create."

It is much easier to pick holes in the candidacy of someone else's suspect than to make a cogent and cohesive case for your own. And that is what has pretty much happened at Casebook, a lurking horde of acerbic ripperologists with scalping knives, waiting on someone, anyone, to promote a suspect, new or existing.In the primitive and archaic world there are rituals of expulsion everywhere, and they give us the impression of enormous cynicism combined with a childish naivete. In the case of the scapegoat the process of substitution is so transparent that we understand it at first glance. It is this comprehension that the modern usage of "scapegoat" expresses; in other words, it is a spontaneous interpretation of the relationship between the ancient Jewish ritual and transferences of hostility in our world today. These latter are no longer part of religious ritual, but they always exist, usually in an attenuated form. The people participating in rituals did not understand these phenomena as we do, but they observed their reconciling results and appreciated them so much, as we have seen, that they attempted to reproduce them without feeling shame. This was the case because the operation of transferring sins from community to victim seemed to occur from beyond, without their own real participation. The modern understanding of "scapegoats" is simply part and parcel of the continually expanding knowledge of the mimetic contagion that governs events of victimization. The Gospels and the entire Bible nourished our ancestors for so long that our heritage enables us to comprehend these phenomena and condemn them. "But never," you will tell me, "does the New Testament resort to the term 'scapegoat' to designate Jesus as the innocent victim of an escalation of mimetic contagion." You are right, no doubt, but it does use an expression equal and even superior to "scapegoat," and this is lamb of God. It eliminates the negative attributes and unsympathetic connotations of the goat. Thereby it better corresponds to the idea of an innocent victim sacrificed unjustly. Jesus applies another expression to himself that is extremely revealing. It is drawn from Psalm 118: "The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone." This verse tells not only of the expulsion of the single victim but of the later reversal that turns the expelled victim into the keystone of the entire community. In a world where violence is no longer subject to ritual and is the object of strict prohibitions, anger and resentment cannot or dare not, as a rule, satisfy their appetites on whatever object directly arouses them. The kick the employee doesn't dare give his boss, he will give his dog when he returns home in the evening. Or maybe he will mistreat his wife and his children, without fully realizing that he is treating them as "scapegoats." Victims substituted for the real target are the equivalent of sacrificial victims in distant times. In talking about this kind of phenomenon, we spontaneously utilize the expression "scapegoat." The real source of victim substitutions is the appetite for violence that awakens in people when anger seizes them and when the true object of their anger is untouchable. The range of objects capable of satisfying the appetite for violence enlarges proportionally to the intensity of the anger. The effectiveness of sacrificial substitutions is increased when many individual scandals come together against one and the same victim. Scapegoat phenomena, therefore, continue to play a definite role in our world at the level of individuals and communities, but they are scarcely studied as such. If we question our sociologists and anthropologists, most of them will recognize the existence and importance of scapegoat phenomena, but they will tell us they aren't sufficiently interested to investigate them. The deeper reason for this attitude is the fear of encountering religion and the sacred, which are really impossible to avoid once we go into the question a little more thoroughly.

An Excerpt from René Girard's I See Satan Fall Like Lightning,
Chapter twelve, "Scapegoat," pages 154-160. (http://girardianlectionary.net/res/iss_12-scapegoat.htm)

http://ibankcoin.com/jakegint/wp-content/imagescaler/df8ee9b824716f36979d271a130a6eb0.jpg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUYbmyQLO0s&feature=related)

~~~

[How Brown]

Solid constructive posts to come home to and mull over...much appreciated. Thanks gentlemen.

Scott...You've been around for some time in the field so I'll ask you this question...because I can sense a condition of conformity will be upon us before 20 years time...either towards suspect theory or the field in general since so much has been resolved over the last 10 years.

Which specific area of research would you suggest to someone who just entered the world of Ripperology ?

[Scott Nelson]

To be honest Howard, I don't remember writing that post. I don't even understand it, having just read it. It may have been a cut and paste effort. I'll stand by it because I wrote it -- I think.

The newcomer should read Sugden, Radka, Evans and Begg -- then they can jack-off to the words of Simon Wood and Jonathan Haw...., fellow conspirators who envision, plots, sub-plots, espionage and all the subversion they see in the historical record--which they are only too glad to re-write. Two peas in a pod.

But I love these guys, they're great. Wonderful articles

[Debbie McDonald]

Hi Howie,

For a new person, though, it's all a fresh start.

For instance, the book Clarence which is old hat to many of you, but to me, it's new. JK Stephen. Upper class, but with a head injury. People with head injuries do strange things sometimes.

Roy

Hi Roy

If you are interested in J K Stephen and Prince Eddy perhaps you might like to read my book 'The Prince, His Tutor and the Ripper'. It gives much more factual evidence regarding Stephen and Eddy compared to Clarence. It is much newer (2007). I managed to find Stephen's mother's diary in which she discusses Stephen's illness, and also much new material on Eddy.

Regards
Deborah McDonald

[SirRobertAnderson]

If you are interested in J K Stephen and Prince Eddy perhaps you might like to read my book 'The Prince, His Tutor and the Ripper'. It gives much more factual evidence regarding Stephen and Eddy compared to Clarence.

An excellent book ! I picked it up at the Woverhampton conference.

JKS is underrated as a suspect IMHO.