Customer Reviews

The Jack the Ripper A to Z

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Looking for the best book ever written on the elusive Whitechapel Fiend? This is it. This book is not really for the beginning "ripperologist" (the encyclopedia format makes it difficult to get a grounding in the facts), but if you have a little more experience, the _A to Z_ will tell you everything you ever wanted to know about Jack the Ripper

Anyone with more than a passing interest in the Whitechapel Horrors will want to make sure they have this book handy as they read any other work on the subject. Many Ripper books are written seemingly presupposing a certain degree of knowledge on the part of the reader. If you find you don't have that knowledge, this book will fix that in a hurry. It is simply a "must have" on the subject.

I have been reading about Jack the Ripper casually for the last 20 years. I recently decided to get serious and read as many books as possible. What a mess of suspects and stories and possible victims..... This book will help you to keep everything straight. The book is set up like an encyclopedia, so when you are reading another Ripper book this one will serve as a reference guide. The research is documented. All in all a wonderful book in my search for information on 'Jack'.

This book written in encyclopedia form, lists all the people associated with the Jack the Ripper murders such as witnesses, informants, suspects, residents, inspectors, etc. There is a summary for each person mentioned, which is very informative. This is an excellent source to have by your side when reading other books on the Ripper. It is invaluable!

I had to write a research paper on the Ripper murders, and I found this book invaluable. Grab it as soon as possible. I reccommend it 100%

I found this book extremely well researched, well done begg,fido and skinner. I have been interested in the jack the ripper mystery for some years now,and this book was the first to introduce me to such little known suspects as william h piggot.He was arrested in a public house not far from whitechapel after causing a disturbance, and was found to have a torn bloodstained shirt in his possession plus a severe bite mark on his hand(the day after a ripper murder).Then there was edward mckenna, arrested for suppossedly threatening people with a knife.When he was taken to the police station for questioning and told to empty his pockets, they contained amongst other things several metal and cardboard boxes!(the ripperologists out there will know) that a month after mckenna was arrested,Mr lusk recieved a human kidney delivered by post in a (cardboard box). These little gems of knowledge have been brought to life in this alphabettically arranged guide of who's who ,from the bobby on the street to the head of police investigations.A breath of fresh air, much better than the usual claptrap about the prince of wales etc.

This book is basically an alphabetized glossary of every person that conceivably had anything to do with the Jack the Ripper story. Even masochist-poet Algernon Charles Swinburne was proposed as a Ripper suspect! It's an intriguing and helpful catologue of names and brief biographies focusing on Ripper connections. This book will appeal especially to those readers who already have some knowledge of the case from books.

David Rehak
author of "A Young Girl's Crimes"

I should first of all begin by saying that my copy of this book is the 2nd revised edition printed in 1994, while the most recent edition available as of August 2010 is the third edition published in 1996. I am not aware of what might be different in the later version but I am not contemplating 'up-grading' my copy as the mere two year difference between editions and the 14 year gap since 1996 suggests that there would be little benefit for the money. I am curious to know, though, whether an upcoming newer edition will contain a good look at many significant new developments in the last 14 years, not the least being Patricia Cornwell's 'solution' to the mystery as set out in her laughable Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper Case Closed. I should very much enjoy seeing what Begg, Fido and Skinner might have to say about her 'investigation.'

All that being said, this book, somewhat outdated as it may be, is an important work, and one that no serious Ripperologist should be without. It is most definitely not a book for a newcomer to the subject as it is an encyclopedic reference work rather than a logically laid out explanation of the case. One *can* sit down and read it from first page to last (and I have actually done so) but the book is aimed at those who already have a fair knowledge of the case and will be using the work to check references in other works, or to quickly refresh their memory on little details. It also has the inestimable benefit of allowing one to be introduced to little bits of data that might otherwise be missed or not appreciated in reading other books.

At least one reviewer has suggested that the book contains too much detail on minor things. I, however, do not agree. I think the authors have attempted to index and examine every person or thing they could discover or think of in relation to the case, no matter how peripheral it may appear at first glance. What may not seem terribly important this year may be very important at some point in the future and it is crucial that books like this systematically preserve as much information as possible.

C. John Thompson

Great book, but full of too much detail on items of minor importance, and not enough detail on more important aspects of the Ripper crimes. The entry on Edward Buchan, who committed suicide late in 1888, is particularly pointless and gives no evidence that he was the Ripper.

In his Foreword to this reference book, Donald Rumbelow states that "contrary to popular belief, the pre-occupation with the Ripper is not anti-feminist".

Oh, thank you for the sour persimmons, Donald Rumbelow. Now all can revel in the mystery of Jack the Ripper with clear consciences and without having to worry about being affiliated with those horrible (chooey!) anti-feminists.

And your clarification was necessary because, as everyone knows, when we are not blowing up abortion clinics, anti-feminists are indeed in the habit of committing serial murders of women and ritualistically using their blood to brew our sacred malt liquor.
Sheesh!

And Rumbelow also states that he has no doubt that the mystery will eventually be solved. He wrote that in 1991 before the Maybrick Diary was publicized, but some of us think that the Maybrick Diary contains the solution to the mystery, and yet the debate rages on.

What would have to happen in order for the mystery to be solved to the satisfaction of MOST, let alone EVERYONE? In the wake of the Maybrick storm, Rumbelow's prediction seems naïve today.

But notwithstanding the Forward, this is a very good reference work, usable for both novice and expert, for which the editors, Paul Begg, Martin Fido, and Keith Skinner deserve much credit.

They appear to have overlooked no detail of information or speculation or tradition associated with Jack the Ripper. When one sees an entire entry devoted to "Smith, H - Undertaker of Hanbury Street, who supplied hearse for Annie Chapman", one must acknowledge that the editors truly appear to have left no stone unturned.

Maybe they went a little too far. Does it advance the study of the Ripper mystery to list every fanciful movie or TV show based on that theme, including the Star Trek episode "Wolf in the Fold"?

The authors are modest enough about what they have done and do not vouch for 100% accuracy, but as corrections are brought to their attention, they appear to be dutifully acknowledged and included in each new edition of this book.

Where there are disputes, the authors usually present all sides well and demonstrate impartiality in their analysis. Usually. I especially appreciate their presentation of the dispute over the "Lusk kidney" (genuine kidney removed from Ripper victim, Catherine Eddowes, or medical student hoax?)

But what's this - "(O)n the basis of handwriting analysis, there currently seems little doubt that Maybrick did not write the Journal"? Uh - no. Even the most stalwart Maybrickian might have to admit that the handwriting in the diary is a problem, but that remark from "A to Z" unacceptably crosses the boundary between impartial analysis and opinion.

And what of the famous "Dear Boss" letters written to the Central News Agency, which were signed "Jack the Ripper", from which the East End murderer acquired his legendary nickname? If the letters were contemporary hoaxes and weren't written by the murderer, it isn't really accurate to refer to the murderer as "Jack the Ripper".

When the editors solemnly intone (correctly) that "most researchers" have concluded that the letters were indeed hoaxes, I am inclined to believe that they are slyly using the weight of majority opinion to browbeat the reader into agreeing.

Begg and Fido are certainly part of the "growing consensus" on this issue - do they ever advertise a willingness to go AGAINST the consensus?

And yet, among other things, the "Dear Boss" letters were taken seriously at the time by the police and were written by someone who appears to display the extreme cocksureness of the serial killer. They were written by someone who seems to know that human blood thickens quickly and can't be saved for later use as ink. And they were written by someone who seems POSITIVE that more murders are yet to come. Moreover, they are written in the same hand as that which wrote a threatening letter to a police witness who might have seen the murderer - hardly the work of a hoaxing publicity hound.

So why the consensus AGAINST the authenticity of these letters? Could it be that most Ripperologists have their own favorite suspects, who were unable or unlikely to have written the "Dear Boss" letters, and that these Ripperologists merely alter their view of the letters to conform to their own pre-drawn conclusions?

Begg and Fido wrote about the Ripper before publishing this reference work. Each of them named a different poverty-stricken lunatic semi-literate Polish Jew as the most likely Ripper candidate. Neither of their candidates could have written in the good copperplate hand that wrote the "Dear Boss" letters. Are Begg and Fido expediently allowing their objectivity to be clouded by taking false reassurance from the opinion of "most researchers"?

Ripperologists are confident about issues such as this because of consensuses that they learn about by reading the works of Ripperologists. Did the police operate this way? No wonder Jack was never caught in his lifetime.

In their published commentary about Jack the Ripper, Begg, Fido, and Skinner have proven themselves to be of impartial disposition and advocates of fair treatment for all points of view. They have shown themselves to be friends of the truth, whatever that truth may prove to be. But I am reminded of a book on realpolitik that I once read, in which it was observed that a friend is someone that you can trust 80% of the time.

With that in mind, a rating of four stars out of a possible five seems quite appropriate.