(Post a new comment)

	alpheratz 2005-08-28 04:27 pm UTC (link)
	Her book is kinda like, "Well, this dude lived close to the victims and drew disturbing pictures, so it must be him!"* Disclaimer: I don't know anything about Jack the Ripper investigations either. (Reply to this)(Thread)

kijikun
2005-08-28 05:18 pm UTC (link)

The book is a little more than that, and from a investigaive standpoint pretty good. While I would say she solved the case, its a hell of a lot more plasuable, than some of the theories tossed out over the years. Everything from the 'Prince did it' to those 'evil masons'. So it was refersing to see someone look a a new angle.

It read like it was writen by someone that writes you kow mystery novels (in other words don't expect a clear conicse A=B=C format).

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

oulangi
2005-08-28 08:44 pm UTC (link)

Yeay, I agree - the Sickert book was well investigated / documented.

I used to *love* Cornwall - I thought her first two Kay Scarpetta books were fabulous airport reads. But then her batshit-ness started creeping into her work - and about the time she killed of Benton I realized not only was the story not keeping my attention, but that I was only reading them to have a backround in her crazy real life antics. Kind of like reading Cassie Clair's Draco Veryendless. Such a shame because as mystery novels go Post Mortem and Body of Evidence are such promising first novels.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

altoidsaddict
2005-08-28 09:05 pm UTC (link)

What parts did you find believable? I found the investigation sloppy and made to fit her own conclusions, which is the start of all poor Ripper theories. I felt she twisted the DNA evidence in a rather quixotic way, that she made conclusions about the fistula in a way absolutely nobody with a working brain could (the hospital never had a case of a fistula on the penis; Sickert had many illegitimate children, which Cornwell dismisses as mere reputation-building along with the adultery charge); Sickert was a notoriously successful ladies' man. There goes the motive.

And he wasn't even in the country for one of them.

My own conclusion was that Jack the Ripper doesn't exist. There were two abberant pockets of murder, the media went nuts, and copycats took care of the rest. Four of the five victims were involved in violent relationships at the times of their deaths, and had recently ended said relationships. The crimes themselves, except Stride, were personal and intimate in nature, and done by someone who knew the habits of the area and the women themselves a lot better than someone in the upper class would have. Statistically, it makes more sense that four of the five were killed by someone they knew intimately - why would we be surprised, since that's what happens today?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

kijikun
2005-08-29 12:44 am UTC (link)

Like I said, compared to other recent Ripper books. It didn't bore me to tears, and hell it was intersting even if it was cracked out. (This is also a sign I shouldn't post while drinking and no proof reading. Since I meant, I don't believe she solved it.)

Had it been a actaully police invesgation I'd be a hell of a lot more critical.
Don't get me wrong, people can critize her and the book all they want. But if your looking for a read that kills a good amount of time (Say for a plane ride) it's a good book for that. Personally I found the devling in Sickert life pretty interesting, and while no way in hell the man did it, it made me aware of him and his work.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

altoidsaddict
2005-08-29 12:52 am UTC (link)

I agree with you that it's still better than most of the Ripper books. That's kinda sad, but crackpot Ripper theories sell books; if I published a book definitively proving that there was no Ripper, I think my mother would buy one. Ripper isn't about solving the case, which I don't think a lot of authors get (including Cornwell); it's just a whodunnit way to advance your pet theories about Victorian mores. Without the "whodunnit" part, it's just sociology.

And it interested me in Sickert as well. I've come to think of him fondly as the anti-Thomas Kinkade.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	kijikun 2005-08-29 01:23 am UTC (link)
	And it interested me in Sickert as well. I've come to think of him fondly as the anti-Thomas Kinkade. Best line ever. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	altoidsaddict 2005-08-29 12:53 am UTC (link)
	I wanted to add - I am more critical of Cornwell than others, perhaps, because she insisted throughout the book that she used criminal court and police investigative standards to reach her conclusions. So I judged the book on the exact standards she asked for, and it all added up to Patricia Cornwell needs to go to the Happy Room. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	dwib 2005-08-29 01:30 am UTC (link)
	Yeah, that's the impression I got from reviews and such - that she's kind of in love with her theory and so her investigation was coloured by that from the start. And from her advert it seems she feels she's proved her case satisfactorily and that the burden is on all the naysayers to conclusively prove that the Ripper was someone else. (Reply to this)(Parent)

drworm
2005-08-28 05:18 pm UTC (link)

Yes. Her book is awful. And I'm not much into Jack the Ripper either, but her logic sucks and she doesn't know a damn thing about art. Gotta love when they take a photo of one of his paintings, try to enhance it like a regular photograph and are surprised to get--gasp!--brushstrokes. She also quickly distances herself from criticism, saying that even if other people don't believe her, she knows that Sickert was Jack the Ripper. Uh-huh, yeah.

*sighs and rolls her eyes* My father used to read all her books and he says she's gotten really irritating in the past few years.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	kijikun 2005-08-28 06:03 pm UTC (link)
	Eh, I found it an enjoyable read. and her logic is as sucky as say some of the other Ripper books that have come out in recent years. If she wants to think Sickert is the Ripper who the fuck care. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	eljuno 2005-08-28 08:49 pm UTC (link)
	I don't think her logic or documentation were that good at all (though better than the ones that claim that, say, Lewis Carroll was the Ripper, or it was a monarchial conspiracy, or what-have-you...) but I have to admit that I am very bothered that she destroyed a painting of Sickert's during her investigation... (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	singe 2005-08-29 02:29 am UTC (link)
	she destroyed a painting of Sickert's during her investigation She did WHAT?! What the hell for?! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	eljuno 2005-08-29 11:19 pm UTC (link)
	I believe it was either in search of generalised 'clues' or possible DNA evidence... (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	Blasphemy. singe 2005-08-29 11:59 pm UTC (link)
	Unless he painted with his own spit and blood, just how much DNA could there BE?! Feh. (Reply to this)(Parent)

drworm
2005-08-28 11:41 pm UTC (link)

If she wants to think Sickert is the Ripper who the fuck care.

I wouldn't, except that she feels compelled to share this theory with the rest of us in such a way that makes it abundantly clear she's not open to any criticism even from her peers or from other people who have spent time studying Jack the Ripper. She began with a suspect and toyed with her evidence, trying to make it fit her theories. Bad form if you want people to take your theory seriously.

The general level of suck of many Ripper theories doesn't excuse her from criticism either.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	kijikun 2005-08-29 12:48 am UTC (link)
	No, but when comparing it to several Ripper books that are either down right boring or more cracked out than this one...G But by all means critize the book away. I enjoyed reading it. (On a amussing note the book is in the fiction section of Half price books) (Reply to this)(Parent)

altoidsaddict
2005-08-28 08:56 pm UTC (link)

I've been interested in Ripper theories my whole life, and I spent an entire semester on a huge project sparked by the Cornwell book. I actually lost respect for the woman for committing such character assassination, and was angry that so many trees died to publish that crap.

The book is poorly-researched, poorly-written, poorly-structured, and can be best summarized by "LOGIC GO BOOM." I mean, alleging that Sickert didn't have a penis and that's why he committed the murders and her only proof is an offhand remark by a relative who never knew him? And then she goes on to say that if she was in a court of law, she could convict him! That she has standards of evidence! Bullshit. Bull fucking shit. Her publisher should be ashamed. Even the relative that first alleged that Sickert did it (because she was certainly not as original as she likes to think) recanted his theory on television. Then recanted his recanting. Hardly reliable.

Hell, the Maybrick case was more believable, and there were less logical leaps than in the Prince Albert Victor theories.

Sickert was probably an asshole. But I hardly understand how that makes him a murderer, particularly when he wasn't even in the country for one of the murders. I guess Sickert's magical detached penis must have stayed behind for a little slice-and-dice.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	singe 2005-08-29 02:26 am UTC (link)
	Maybrick...was he the American? Myself, I'm ashamed to admit that I believed her but, in my defense, it was because of the televised documentary. It didn't focus on her batshitness and was edited well so it got me. The shame. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	moonjaguar 2005-08-29 03:25 am UTC (link)
	I forgot how much she spent buying that guy's paintings in order to shred them for DNA evidence (which she also paid for). It was in the millions I think. Wonder if being raised by Billy Graham did something to her brain as far as money and priorities? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	moonjaguar 2005-08-29 03:27 am UTC (link)
	Whooshit, damn my seizure brain. I missed the part in the Bibsee article about the paintings and research. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	memii 2005-08-29 05:27 am UTC (link)
	...Magical detached penis? Oh God, it's VB! (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	altoidsaddict 2005-08-29 05:52 am UTC (link)
	If he's VB, is the Camden Town Group the Tinhats? (Reply to this)(Parent)