Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

5 Q With : Tom Wescott ( April 8, 2017 )

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Howard Brown
    replied
    Thread back open.

    Leave a comment:


  • Monty
    replied
    As Tom controls the distribution of his book, he should have a degree of knowledge on who has a copy, however a precise knowledge? I'm not so sure as Phil states. Nor should it matter really. A book is to be read.

    Some shall read the book for its content, others shall tackle it with the mind of picking its bones for errors as if collecting trophies. Both are beneficial for the author.

    There are errors in Stewart Evans work (which he graciously acknowledges), errors in Rumbelow, errors in Fido, Begg, Sugden, Brown, Bennett, Clack, Carter, Bell, Marriott, yes, even Ed Stow has made the odd balls up.

    I know, shocking ain't it?

    Monty

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Hello, Maria, it's great to see you been on the scene again. It's been far too long! I look forward to hearing your feedback on my book.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • Maria Birbili
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom Wescott View Post
    I'm not as big a believer in coincidences as some. The police force was a business like any other. If you do something at your job that the vast majority of people completely disagree with (in this case, the erasure of a potentially vital clue) and it's such a big deal that reports from all parties involved are requested by your superiors, and then three days later your resignation is asked for, I don't see how anyone could conclude anything other than that Warren's erasure of the writing was the primary reason for his resignation. It's just obvious.
    As for the police reports, there's so few surviving that we tend to put too much weight on what they have to offer and why. For instance, most of us rebel against the notion of a 'canonical five'. But why does this canon exist? Because of Macnaghten and Bond. And because during the information starved 20th century, these were considered groundbreaking new finds and the community at that time vested them with more relevance than perhaps they deserved.
    I really, REALLY like this kind of analysis.

    Originally posted by Paul View Post
    One of the undeniably great things about Ripperology is that there are so many really good people willing to sacrifice their time and energy to explain the flaws in one's work and character. It brings a tear to the eye.
    Rofl.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul View Post
    Their generosity makes one choke with emotion.

    The end result could conceivably include choking, yes.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
    It's overwhelming, actually.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott
    Their generosity makes one choke with emotion.

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Originally posted by Monty View Post
    Phil gave a review of my book a week before it hit the printers.

    If their fingers are on the pulse, they need to dial 999.

    Monty
    I suspect we would prefer not to know where their fingers have actually been.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • Monty
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
    He just received his copy and posted a pic on his FB page, where Ricky assured everyone no one actually likes my book. I'm just so damn popular and loved that they all feel they have to tell me they like it. So, I'm pleased whatever the case. Oh, and Phil says Bank Holiday Murders was a Le Grand suspect book. Good to know that crew has their finger on the pulse of Ripperology.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott
    Phil gave a review of my book a week before it hit the printers.

    If their fingers are on the pulse, they need to dial 999.

    Monty

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Originally posted by Steve Blomer View Post
    One thing which is very clear to any who spend time studing this subject is that some people will defend their own theories no matter what and in doing so may not even be prepared to acknowledge that others have a point.
    We see it all the time with people attacking work they have not read. Paul I am sure would happily agree on this considering the reception Cornell's new book on some sites by some who admitted they would not read the book.

    To me Tom's book offered much, the format I particularly liked with different essays, thus allowing a wide discussion.


    Steve
    Steve, I wish I could disagree with you, but alas, I cannot. Nevertheless, there is a lot more wheat than chaff amongst the Ripperologists. Thank you for taking the time to say that about my work.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul View Post
    One of the undeniably great things about Ripperology is that there are so many really good people willing to sacrifice their time and energy to explain the flaws in one's work and character. It brings a tear to the eye.
    It's overwhelming, actually.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
    Tom,

    Did you screw up royally with your Upper/Lower Berner Street distinction?


    Gary.
    Hi Gary. No.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • Steve Blomer
    replied
    One thing which is very clear to any who spend time studing this subject is that some people will defend their own theories no matter what and in doing so may not even be prepared to acknowledge that others have a point.
    We see it all the time with people attacking work they have not read. Paul I am sure would happily agree on this considering the reception Cornell's new book on some sites by some who admitted they would not read the book.

    To me Tom's book offered much, the format I particularly liked with different essays, thus allowing a wide discussion.


    Steve

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul
    replied
    Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
    He just received his copy and posted a pic on his FB page, where Ricky assured everyone no one actually likes my book. I'm just so damn popular and loved that they all feel they have to tell me they like it. So, I'm pleased whatever the case. Oh, and Phil says Bank Holiday Murders was a Le Grand suspect book. Good to know that crew has their finger on the pulse of Ripperology.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott
    One of the undeniably great things about Ripperology is that there are so many really good people willing to sacrifice their time and energy to explain the flaws in one's work and character. It brings a tear to the eye.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gary Barnett
    replied
    Tom,

    Did you screw up royally with your Upper/Lower Berner Street distinction?


    Gary.

    Leave a comment:


  • Howard Brown
    replied
    He just received his copy and posted a pic on his FB page, where Ricky assured everyone no one actually likes my book. I'm just so damn popular and loved that they all feel they have to tell me they like it. So, I'm pleased whatever the case. Oh, and Phil says Bank Holiday Murders was a Le Grand suspect book. Good to know that crew has their finger on the pulse of Ripperology.

    I struggled through the exchange, Tom.
    I'm still amazed that a couple of them who WON'T read the book cast aspersions on it ( Best book I've read on the subject for quite some time and one of the best ever)...

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X