Ripperologist Magazine March 2010 Issue # 112

[Howard Brown]

Any magazine...and I mean any magazine...that has a Brown on the cover...with a moustache...has to be good.:cool:....

Not only that, but Jon Rees, Mike Covell, John Bennett, Rob Clack & Whatshisface...Simon Wood...Chris G....

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/rip112.jpg

[Mike Covell]

Letters to t'the city police, that's how us Yorkshireman talk. I'm of t'history centre to do my ripper lecture t'hull connection. :becky:

[Big Jon]

Monty has just put on Facebook that there is a "school boy error" on the back page.

After a couple of seconds looking for it, I noticed it too. Amused me slightly.

Any one else see it?

[Monty]

I must stress this is very much tongue in cheek.

Whatshisface
;)

[Big Jon]

Of course.

We all have the utmost respect and admiration for the staff at the Rip (even when they call me Jonathan).

[Howard Brown]

From the interview with Simon Wood ( A really well done piece if I may say so)...
...with the exception of the following:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/simonsays.jpg

[Howard Brown]

Simon:

Since you haven't been able to locate SRA in New York, doesn't that "foot stomping denial" make a little more sense now ?

The fact is...Anderson cannot be credited with writing that article.

I'm curious as to who here on the Forums criticized you personally, as in being rude or snide...when the criticism was directed ( at least from me ) towards your unswerving resolution that this article...the March 20th, 1910 article....definitely came from the pen of Anderson.

[Howard Brown]

Is this first comment basically "artistic license" or has someone offered to go to the knuckles with you Simon ? I've got your back,buddy.
http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/simsays.jpg


You seem to be suggesting that no one presented an intelligent argument to the basis of your presentation ( again, the March 20,1910 article).

I thought we had a decent discussion on the matter..

[Donald Souden]

Howard,

To your credit you pointed out that Simon deliberately altered a quotation to falsely bolster his argument. This, of course, is a capital sin for any researcher. Great job by you, unpardonable sin by Simon that puts in question his entire thesis.

Don.

[Tom_Wescott]

Simon altered a quotation in one of his essays? Can someone point me towards the thread where this was discussed? This is news to me.

[Howard Brown]

T.Colwell:

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=8272

Just to make it clear here...I wasn't trying to pick an argument with Simon for his comments in this month's Rip...and had put the alteration behind me.

I was just curious whether me asking questions constitutes aggression.

Because it reminds me when I asked questions on a no-longer viable suspect a few years back.

[Tom_Wescott]

Thanks, Howard. Simon took a pretty good 'ripping' at the Casebook, so perhaps he wasn't thinking just about you when he said that. Anyway, it seems be getting harder and harder to get things past you!

[Howard Brown]

Bump up.

I know it just came out yesterday...but if anyone who has read any of issue 112 cared to discuss the articles (J.B.'s, the editorial, Rob Clack and Neil Bell's article...), please feel free to do so.

[Tom_Wescott]

To your credit you pointed out that Simon deliberately altered a quotation to falsely bolster his argument. This, of course, is a capital sin for any researcher. Great job by you, unpardonable sin by Simon that puts in question his entire thesis.I took a look at the link Howard provided and the offending passage. Don being a historian, editor, author, etc. I can see why this would chap his hide, but frankly I didn't see how Simon's insertion of 'says Anderson' was a literary crime. Wasn't the article itself presenting these words as being from Anderson? It struck as just a literary device utilized by Simon for flow, and not the alteration of a quote, which would of course be unforgiveable.

[Howard Brown]

It struck as just a literary device utilized by Simon for flow, and not the alteration of a quote, which would of course be unforgiveable. T.C.W.

This may be true... in instances where we know...say, D'Onston or Warren...or whomever...is narrating ( the Dec.1st PMG article...or a memo to Matthews from Warren).

We don't know that Anderson is responsible for the article at all, Tom.

If thats the case, then any alteration ( albeit not maliciously or with intent to obfuscate on Simon's part...just to point that out ) cannot be accepted.

IF the article had been definitely ascribable to Anderson...then, what Simon altered, could be seen in a different light.

Thats just my take on the matter.

I still maintain that SRA did not write that article.

[Donald Souden]

Tom,

The argument about Simon's article centers on whether Anderson wrote it. Simon says "yes" and his critics say "no." Thus, to deliberately insert "said Anderson" is to change the game entirely and unethically.

Don.

[Howard Brown]

Tom:

Its actually misleading since it appears right off the bat when you begin to read the article. You are lead to believe SRA wrote it, when there is no proof that he wrote it without that add on.

[Tom_Wescott]

Okay, I see what you're talking about.

[Monty]

A misleading Ripperologist?

We'll I'll be.....

Whatshisface.
:)

[Howard Brown]

Dear Whats:

Nina is printing out the latest issue so I will have something to read while she does my toenails tonight. The sumbitches cut through a pair o' workboots.

Lucky I don't wear socks or I'd have to buy a second pair.

I'll check out the Clack/Whoozits article tonight buddy.;)

[Tom_Wescott]

Well, I'll be a misleading Ripperologist! Monty's quote has just been Simonized! :p

[Monty]

Monty's quote has just been Simonized! :p

I must get glasses. For a moment I thought you wrote 'sodomised' there Tom.

Whoosit.
:)

[Howard Brown]

Rob & Neil's article on Dr. Brown mentions a Dr. John Churton Collins.

Here is the relevant text and a photo of the man, which deals with Brown & Collins.

Not much to it, but just in case anyone was interested.....

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/jcc4.jpg
http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/jcc1.jpg
http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/jcc2.jpg
http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/Photo%20Thanksgiving/jcc3.jpg

[Nemo]

Very interesting Howard

The reference to "Caliban" is a bit harsh on the denizens of Petticoat Lane as Caliban is a Shakespearean character who is the epitome of the lowest brute, gross in nature. For him to turn his nose up must mean that Petticoat Lane was pretty dire (at the time)

Wouldn't these affluent people possess a camera between them?

[Howard Brown]

John Bennett's article, "Letters To The City Police: The Prospective Elucidator" was also very interesting.

John Francis Hunt was one of many letter writers to the City Police ( as were L.F.Winslow,R.D.Stephenson,etc...) and according to J.B., Hunt was the most prolific. Hunt, a self described "Sensitive". comes off like another E.L.Larkins....

Whats interesting as well is the statement in John's article on how many items are available. Nearly 400.

I wonder how many are available that we have yet to see....

Any other thoughts on John's article ?

[Jimmy]

Whats interesting as well is the statement in John's article on how many items are available. Nearly 400.

I wonder how many are available that we have yet to see....



How,

Many of these letters run for more than one page, so when I photographed them in September last year, I had to take nearly 700 pictures to cover everything! Took me 4 hours with help from LMA staff too.

This is the first in a series of articles and each one will cover a different theme. The JF Hunt saga was a handy way of getting into the swing of it.

There is indeed more to come.

[Howard Brown]

Thank you for the response John ! This indeed is terrific news.

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

Don Souden wrote that, "The argument about Simon's article centers on whether Anderson wrote it. Simon says 'yes' and his critics say 'no'. Thus, to deliberately insert 'said Anderson' is to change the game entirely and unethically."

Simon does not say "yes" to Anderson having written the NYT article, so how can his critics say "no"? Read my article again.

Don pressed his case. " . . . Simon deliberately altered a quotation to falsely bolster his argument. This, of course, is a capital sin for any researcher. Great job by you [Howard], unpardonable sin by Simon that puts in question his entire thesis."

Listen up, chaps. The facts are these. There were two people involved in the NYT article: Sir Frederick Cunliffe Owen who wrote it, and Sir Robert Anderson who was the subject.

Unless a convincing case can put be put together for Sir Frederick Cunliffe Owen having invented the whole article, whose words other than Sir Robert Anderson's could he have possibly been reporting?

Regards,

Simon

[Howard Brown]

"Listen up, chaps. The facts are these. There were two people involved in the NYT article: Sir Frederick Cunliffe Owen who wrote it, and Sir Robert Anderson who was the subject"-- Simon

Who's denying that ? You have it down that SRA is responsible for the content when that has not been established.

Its not a mere case of 6 or 1/2 dozen of the other...it has yet to be proven that SRA is responsible for the content in its entirety.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Howard,

Give me one good reason why SRA was not responsible for the content.

Regards,

Simon

[Howard Brown]

Simon;

No one ( well, not me at least ) is disputing that material found in the article came from the career of Sir Robert Anderson.

The problem as I see it is that we do not know if he contributed all of the material in the article and how much of it was artistic license or embellishment on part of the author, this Frederick Owen.

There was really no need to add the "says Anderson", Simon and I'm not trying to be disrespectful to you . I'm glad you wrote the article.

As it stands, and others may disagree with me, I do not feel SRA authorized and may not have even been aware of that article....another aspect which hasn't been mentioned.

[Howard Brown]

Chris George provided an interesting article on George William Foote, who wrote an essay which appeared in a volume of his in 1894 ( Flowers of Free Thought)entitled, "Jehovah The Ripper".

Foote spent time in prison ( one year...late 1882 ) for publishing some cartoons which were deemed blasphemous.



Foote's book with this interesting essay can be found at this link:

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/30203/30203-h/30203-h.htm

[Howard Brown]

I notice the mention of an increase in anti-Jewish attacks in Britain in this month's Ripperologist...

I for one wonder what relevance that had to Ripperology or why its a surprise....considering that the escalation is easy to explain ( The typical strongarming by Zionists with U.S. $upport in Gaza in 2009).

Same old same old...

[Howard Brown]

There seems to be some issue as to the provenance of the Dr. Brown photo. To me, regardless of the contention that it is or it isn't...and which in time will be shown one way or the other to be Brown or not to be Dr. Brown.....Neil Bell and Rob Clack put together a nice article covering the life of Dr. Brown.
Anyone have any comments on this month's Rip ?

Where's Tom Wescott ?

[Howard Brown]

By the way...just to be clear on a previous post.
I wasn't attempting to insinuate that anti-Jewish activity in London was justifiable even with the aggressive manuevers in Israel.
Its just the same old story over and over again. These cats will never get their act together.

[Monty]

Provenence How?

There is a dispute on if the man in the photo is indeed Brown, something which is covered in the article.

To state the provenence is in dispute leads one to believe the photo is doctured. It is not. The photo has been seen prior to Rob and I by preceding Ripperologists, is not in our possession and is freely available for anyone who wishes to view it. As far as Im aware no one is disputing it as a group Police photo of Moor Lane Station.

Just to clarify, thats all Mate.

Cheers

Monty
:)

[Tom_Wescott]

There seems to be some issue as to the provenance of the Dr. Brown photo. A drunk from the pub handed it to Monty and said, "Here, do something with this." This seemed like a bad provenance until it turned out the drunk was AP Wolf and the pub was Paul Begg's.

[Howard Brown]

Neil:

I didn't mean to suggest that the photo was doctored,buddy !
I meant that its been questioned whether or not that the photo is of Brown ! I know that you and Rob have mentioned in the article that the photo may not be of Dr. Brown.

I apologize for any misunderstanding. Provenance is the wrong term. My mistake Neil.

[Howard Brown]

Let me try that again...and I apologize once more to both Rob and Neil for using an inappropriate word.:smash:

Despite the fact that the photo on the cover if this month's Rip might not be of Dr.Brown...as suggested in the article by the two authors....the article was a damned fine one and brought out facts about Dr. Brown's career and life which some may not have known before.

[Monty]

How,

Its all cool mate. I know it was unintentional but had to clarify as we both know how people interpret things.

Dont worry about it.

Cheers
Monty
:)

[Howard Brown]

Thank you for that Neil.

Knowing you accept my apology and that I meant nothing injurious makes me feel a lot better.

How....the dummy.

[SPE]

Provenence How?
There is a dispute on if the man in the photo is indeed Brown, something which is covered in the article.
...
Monty
:)

Yes, I endorse the statement that there is no dispute regarding the provenance of this photograph which is obviously genuine. However, I wouldn't describe what we have as a dispute (which is obviously how some view it), I would describe it as a difference of opinion as to whether or not the man in question is F. Gordon Brown.

[Howard Brown]

Dear SPE:

"Difference of opinion" is an even better phrase. Thanks for that.
I'm battin' 1.000 lately....

[Monty]

Yes, I endorse the statement that there is no dispute regarding the provenance of this photograph which is obviously genuine. However, I wouldn't describe what we have as a dispute (which is obviously how some view it), I would describe it as a difference of opinion as to whether or not the man in question is F. Gordon Brown.

Absolutely

Monty
:)

[Tom_Wescott]

Congrats to Jon Rees on a good Holmes write-up. Because of you, I think I've made up my mind to order a DVD of the Rupert Everett film. I have all the Rathbone and Brett stuff, can't stand the only grainy Wontner, but would be curious as to your opinions on Cushing, Lee, and some of the American Holmes films (not Downey Jr., I've seen that).

[Big Jon]

Thank you Tom. Cushing is something I'll look into over the next few weeks. Thanks to the Rip for asking me to do these - gave me an excellent excuse to watch some Holmes films!

As for Lee, I started to watch Incident at Victoria Falls a few months back when I saw it was on telly. Had to give up after about 45 minutes because I just found it long and dull!

[Howard Brown]

Tom:

Jon's doing well as a regular critic at the Rip.

By the way....check out the Ronald Howard "Sherlock Holmes" television series free on Hulu.com. There's around 30 episodes available.

Go to www.hulu.com (http://www.hulu.com)....
Punch in "Sherlock Holmes" in search...and you'll get a few Rathboners....and the Ronald Howard ( Son of Leslie Howard, of Petrified Forest, 49th Parallel, Scarlet Pimpernel, and Gone With The Wind fame) series will appear.

Periodically check You Tube out.

[Chris G.]

Tom:

Jon's doing well as a regular critic at the Rip.

By the way....check out the Ronald Howard "Sherlock Holmes" television series free on Hulu.com. There's around 30 episodes available.

Go to www.hulu.com (http://www.hulu.com)....
Punch in "Sherlock Holmes" in search...and you'll get a few Rathboners....and the Ronald Howard ( Son of Leslie Howard, of Petrified Forest, 49th Parallel, Scarlet Pimpernel, and Gone With The Wind fame) series will appear.

Periodically check You Tube out.


Ron Howard.... as in "Happy Days"? http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3644/3480298192_6f765722b4_o.gif

Tom Hanks was on the David Letterman Show the other night and he told a great story about being in Rome with Ron Howard to film one of the "Da Vinci Code" flicks. The filmcrew heard the ethereal voices of a male choir singing some medieval cantacle or other. But when the singers realised it was Ron Howard they broke into "Sunday, Monday, Happy Days. . . ."

Cheers. Have a great weekend, everyone.

Chris http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2467/3592488146_458e76994f_o.gif

[Robert Linford]

The theme music for the Douglas Wilmer series was very good - nice violin going there.

Ronald Howerd was an engaging, light-hearted Holmes.

Funnily enough I thought Charlton Heston had a good stab at it too.

I like just about all the Holmes portrayals I've seen. I think the crown has to go to Brett.

[Chris G.]

Now I am learning things. Ronald Howard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Howard_(British_actor)) was the son of actor Leslie Howard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslie_Howard_(actor)), star of "The Scarlet Pimpernel" and "Gone With the Wind" ("Oh, Ashlah!").

Six degrees of separation. . . When I first came to the United States in 1955 I attended the Mordecai Gist School in the Forest Park area of Baltimore. Mama Cass, Frank Zappa, and director Barry Levinson all grew up that neighborhood, though I admit I didn't know any of them at the time.

I also didn't know that Mordecai Gist was an American general in the Revolutionary War. Since many of my classmates were Jewish, I assumed that name was Jewish!!! It was funny on Jewish holidays, I was often the only kid in class. :violin:

Anyway, I told you this was "Six degrees of separation. . ." I now know that Mordecai Gist looked remarkably like Leslie Howard. :clap:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4005/4445717868_6749308c4b_o.jpg

[Tom_Wescott]

By the way....check out the Ronald Howard "Sherlock Holmes" television series free on Hulu.com. There's around 30 episodes available.Thanks Howard, but I already own all 39 episodes on dvd. You can get the set for like 10 bucks. I've watched it through at least twice, maybe three times and love it to death. Lot of fun.

[Howard Brown]

Tom:

Don't...mention....that number....39.

C.G.

This guy probably knew Gist....its my G-g-g-g-g-grandpappy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah_Harmar-g

[Chris G.]

Tom:

Don't...mention....that number....39.

C.G.

This guy probably knew Gist....its my G-g-g-g-g-grandpappy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah_Harmar-g

Hi Howie

The URL needs to lose that "-g" that you added in your eagerness, ha ha. :loco:

Yes Josiah Harmar and Mordecai Gist probably did know each other. It was a surprisingly small world back then, and many of the upper echelons of American society were related to each other in some manner or other... intermarried, were cousins, etc, etc.

All the best

Chris