Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Five: The Lives of Jack the Ripper's Women (Rubenhold, February 2019)

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

  • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post

    What would be a gracious response to this?
    To ignore it, Gary, and publish your book on Alice McKenzie.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
      Jon,

      What would be a gracious response to this?

      This is how it all kicked off because we had the temerity to question her claim that 3 of the victims were not prostitutes.
      Indeed, but my reply to Jon was in specific response to his queries about Rubehold's use of Neal Shelden's research.
      Kind regards, Sam Flynn

      "Suche Nullen"
      (F. Nietzsche)

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Jon Simons View Post
        To ignore it, Gary, and publish your book on Alice McKenzie.
        I’m not writing a book on Alice McKenzie.

        So just say nothing?

        Are we allowed to even mention the obvious flaws in her book? Or would that be ungracious?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
          I’m not writing a book on Alice McKenzie.

          So just say nothing?

          Are we allowed to even mention the obvious flaws in her book? Or would that be ungracious?
          Her acknowledgement of Neal Shelden is not one of the flaws in her book, and it was about that on which I specifically commented. My use of the the word "graciously" was in that specific context, so I'd appreciate it if you refrained from using the word sarcastically. Consciously or not, it sure looks like that sarcasm is directed at me, when I did nothing more than to stick to the topic under discussion. What Rubenhold said/wrote elsewhere is another matter entirely.
          Kind regards, Sam Flynn

          "Suche Nullen"
          (F. Nietzsche)

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
            Her acknowledgement of Neal Shelden is not one of the flaws in her book, and it was about that on which I specifically commented. My use of the the word "graciously" was in that specific context, so I'd appreciate it if you refrained from using the word sarcastically. Consciously or not, it sure looks like that sarcasm is directed at me, when I did nothing more than to stick to the topic under discussion. What Rubenhold said/wrote elsewhere is another matter entirely.
            Gareth,

            I was responding to Jon, not you. That’s why my post began: ‘Jon’.

            Hallie employed two little tricks re the Shelden’s. First she belittled their contribution by speaking of ‘basic information’, then she claimed that they had been ‘drummed out’ of Ripperology.


            Gary

            Comment


            • HR was interviewed on Sky a little while ago. She claimed that there was no evidence that three of the victims were prostitutes, but there was evidence that Eddowes sold ballads.

              She got very chippy when the interviewer asked about the ID of the killer, saying, ‘The identity of the killer is irrelevant today.’

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
                I’m not writing a book on Alice McKenzie.

                So just say nothing?

                Are we allowed to even mention the obvious flaws in her book? Or would that be ungracious?

                That`s a shame.
                Perhaps, you should send your Alice McKenzie findings to HR, for the updated version
                But this time a version with some original research, actually identifying one of the Whitechapel Murder victims for the first time, and tracing her life from Peterborough to that gutter in Castle Alley. She should snap your fingers off for this info.

                But you do what you want, Gary, it`s just that I don`t think it`s been very well dealt with. Simply, because she`s wrong with her assumptions, and if any of her readers are intrigued enough they will read further and discover this.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Jon Simons View Post
                  That`s a shame.
                  Perhaps, you should send your Alice McKenzie findings to HR, for the updated version
                  But this time a version with some original research, actually identifying one of the Whitechapel Murder victims for the first time, and tracing her life from Peterborough to that gutter in Castle Alley. She should snap your fingers off for this info.

                  But you do what you want, Gary, it`s just that I don`t think it`s been very well dealt with. Simply, because she`s wrong with her assumptions, and if any of her readers are intrigued enough they will read further and discover this.
                  Some of them have - us. And we have tried to discuss our reservations with Hallie and her acolytes.

                  Here’s an exchange between one of them and Paul Begg.

                  Matthew Sweet:

                  I’ve long doubted the moral culture of that sub-branch of Victorian studies called Ripperology. In unkind moments I think of it as a sort of wankers’ holodeck.


                  Paul Begg:

                  I was wondering how you respond to the criticism of the book, such as the omission (and, obviously, no discussion) of the evidence that the victims were in fact prostitutes?’


                  Matthew Sweet:

                  I’d say that Hallie’s research is scrupulous.

                  Comment


                  • Quick question:

                    Does anyone know whether Rube used material from the last book Neal & Jen put together on Kelly ? That book is pretty hard to locate to find ( I have it on Kindle).
                    To Join JTR Forums :
                    Contact [email protected]

                    Comment


                    • Straying slightly off-topic, I have it on Kindle too How...wasn't aware it was available any other way...

                      Comment


                      • Dave

                        I have it on Kindle, too.....thats what I meant.
                        Its hard to find, if I remember correctly....
                        To Join JTR Forums :
                        Contact [email protected]

                        Comment


                        • I believe she told me she had met with the Sheldens in person. Presumably that is how she obtained their research and blessing.



                          JM

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Jon Simons View Post
                            But you do what you want, Gary, it`s just that I don`t think it`s been very well dealt with. Simply, because she`s wrong with her assumptions, and if any of her readers are intrigued enough they will read further and discover this.

                            Have you read The Five, Jon. Did you listen to Jonathan's podcast review of the book, or read my review in Ripperologist, or Drew Gray's review in History Today? It wasn't just the nonsense that none of the victims were prostitutes, when we have statements in the MEPO files and by witnesses in the press that they were exactly that, and it isn't the uterly daft idea that they'd gone to where they were murdered for forty winks. It isn't even thw facts that she omitted possible sightings and non-sightings and thereby gave her narrative the wrong impression. It was the edited sources so that they looked to be saying something they weren't and claiming that sources said something they didn't. And, as Gary has pointed out, it's inciting ill-feeling among Ripperologists by Tweeting a post by Howard several months after it had been posted and making insulting comments.And on top of all that, sticking on Twitter among her acolytes and blocking anyone with the whiff of 'Ripperologist' about them. Whilst she has bad-mouthed Ripperologists in the newspapers, Ripperologists have pretty much restricted their comments to wabsites and Facebook pages. It's not just about 'assumptions', wrong or right.

                            Comment


                            • No doubt controversy sells and where one doesn't already exist...create one to get the ball rolling. And that's what Ms Hallie did with an otherwise niche subject. Our reaction was probably beyond her wildest dreams.

                              It reminds me of the old Cheech and Chong skit in the album with the great big rolling paper in it. You know, where they're walking along, minding their own business and come across a pile of dog shit. They stop and discuss it. "What does that look like, man?"
                              "Looks like dog shit to me."
                              "Yeah, looks like dog shit"
                              "Smell"
                              "Huh?"
                              "Smell!"
                              (Gag reflex) "Yeah, smells like dog shit, man."
                              "Taste."
                              "Huh?"
                              "Taste!"
                              (Starts spittin' and sputterin') "Yeah, taste like dog shit."
                              " Okay man, good thing we didn't step in it."
                              Best Wishes,
                              Cris Malone
                              ______________________________________________
                              "Objectivity comes from how the evidence is treated, not the nature of the evidence itself. Historians can be just as objective as any scientist."

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Gary Barnett View Post
                                I was responding to Jon, not you.
                                I know that, but you twice used my choice of adjective - in italics the first time, so it was clearly a conscious decision - which looked like you were having a dig at what I'd said. If you wanted to respond to Jon, it might have been better to have quoted his words instead... italics optional, naturally.
                                Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                                "Suche Nullen"
                                (F. Nietzsche)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X