Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Jack the Ripper" by Jack the Ripper

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

  • "Jack the Ripper" by Jack the Ripper

    How would you value a signature 'Jack the Ripper' in the man's own handwriting?
    7
    The same as that of any other historical figure, relative to its rarity.
    71.43%
    5
    Tens of thousands of pounds.
    14.29%
    1
    Tens of millions of pounds.
    0.00%
    0
    Lower figure than quoted.
    0.00%
    0
    Higher figure than quoted.
    0.00%
    0
    Priceless - no monetary value could be set.
    14.29%
    1

  • #2
    Once set, I don't think the price wouldn't fluctuate much thereafter. I say this, because I keep getting told that his signature wouldn't vary

    Comment


    • #3
      Sick as it sounds, the Man Who Held Back The Cold Meat's signature would be priceless in my view.

      He,on the other hand, was a no-goodnik.

      Quick sperm of the moment thought here....

      What if the Whitechapel Murderer did write his name to one of the missives...not necessarily the legendary JTR....but another one...such as;

      Dear Boss;

      I hear you've blah blah blah...

      Yours Truly

      Corky, The Mean Person

      Ha ha !!!!!!!!!!!!

      What if the sumbitch did write a letter but no one knows that he used the name "Corky" ?
      To Join JTR Forums, Contact :
      Howard@jtrforums.com

      Comment


      • #4
        I think "worthless" should have been an option?

        It could never be validated......unless it was on some document that was verifiable and in that case...the document, not the signature, would be the item that decided value?

        Unless you divided the signature from the document. In which case neither are worth a toss.

        How much is the Dear Boss letter worth?

        p

        Comment


        • #5
          Let me clarify, Mr. Poster.

          This posit assumes that Jack's identity has finally been proven beyond doubt (fantasy, I know). Numerous specimens of Jack's handwriting may then exist, such as for numerous of the current suspects, but say there is only one such of 'Jack the Ripper' in his own handwriting. That's gotta be worth something.

          Note that the most likely genuine ripper letter, the Lusk letter, does not contain this signature, whereas the Dear Boss letter and some others did. I think we're talking big bucks here.

          Comment


          • #6
            Hi ho Admin

            Fair enough. I supposeone could do some kind of mind experiment on the matter.

            The price being determined by a combination of thingys.

            Such as how many are interested enough to buy it. The average and maximum buying power of those people. And so on.

            I mention these because there have been artifacts of undoubted veracity, of historical interest, of intrinsic value....that havent sold for that much at all.

            A Declaration of Independence 1776 copy goes for ... and I checked...about 8 million dollars. Thats a document of international importance, appeals to a huge group of collectors, some of which are loaded....and it goes for 8 million bucks.

            The most valuable signature in the world at th eminute is one of the six of Shakespeare with a guide price of 5 million dollars.

            A ripper signature is hardly earth shattering (especially as the veneer of his being unknown has, by his signature existing, vanished), didnt change the world, is probably low down on even the serial killer list (he was hardly prolific), is not of historical interest, appeals to a small group of people, most of whom are hardly Rockefellers and so on and on.

            If Shakespeare can only clear 5 million, why would a JtR signature (in reality: a signature of some London chappie of known name) be worth more than a couple of grand to a specialist?

            I'll plump for a few thousand and no more.

            p

            Comment


            • #7
              I voted the same as any other historical figure.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Mr. Poster View Post
                didnt change the world
                That's debatable. Some would argue that he served as a catalyst for accelerated social reform.
                he was hardly prolific
                True, but he arguably has the greatest mystique of them all.
                is not of historical interest
                Debatable, again.
                I'll plump for a few thousand and no more.
                I'd agree with you there.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hi SamF. This thing about him causing social change. Even if he did, it was hardly widespread or quick. Not exactly martin luther king. . . . P

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Mr. Poster View Post
                    Hi SamF. This thing about him causing social change. Even if he did, it was hardly widespread or quick. Not exactly martin luther king. . . . P
                    Not him, obviously, MrP - just others reacting to the attention his deeds inadvertently drew to the slums, not to mention the police, street-lighting etc.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                      Not him, obviously, MrP - just others reacting to the attention his deeds inadvertently drew to the slums, not to mention the police, street-lighting etc.
                      Hi SamF

                      Aware of what you mean but somehow I have always had the feeling that this assignation of indirect social change to our ripping friend was as much part of the myth as Gladstone bags and prosthetic legs by people desiring to fill a few pages in a book or agrandise the topic of choice a bit.

                      There were no Ripper Bill's passed in parliment, no mentions of him at the ceremonies tearing down slums.

                      Indeed the pace of renewal was so slow down there that even James Mason could pop by a murder site before it was all torn down. So one gets the feeling that maybe some token gestures were made but nothing was really achieved due to the actions of our ripper.

                      Even if it was....one would do well to be able to highlight it against the sporadic and slow nature of teh change and the fact that there were probably half a dozen confounding variables thrown in the mix...like changes in finances, changes in government etc etc.

                      Its a nice myth and gives a warm fuzzy feeling and allows people to say "Oh but the women didnt die in vain" but its no more reality than the London peasouper wafting out from under his toff cloak.

                      p

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I tend to agree, MrP, although there could be a case for Jack's intervention having had a subtle, slow-burn effect. For sure, the Ripper phenomenon drew the attention of the world's media to conditions in the East End, and on an unprecedented scale. Who knows how much slower progress would have been if this had not happened?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Hi SamF

                          This is perhaps true....but media attention had also been drawn to lets say the 1848 potato famine and a host of other problems and that did nothing at all.

                          I don't see why the media attention, Ripper induced or not, would have precipitated any action.

                          What is much more likely is that conditions down there were following the usual social models and the area developed due to pressures from within. Development of a middle class of sorts, the influence of the Jews, the general progress of the industrial revolution, immigrants becoming naturalised and integrated and so on.

                          Indeed in that context, Jack the Ripper is less the first modern serial killer and more the last pre-modern serial killer.

                          p

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X