Rating: 
Summary: Abomination
Review: Writing in the New York Times, the distinguished novelist Caleb Carr reviewed this book as "an exercise in calumny." He is too kind, and bear in mind that writers almost never say anything negative about another writer's work. This book is worse than awful; it is an abomination for which the publisher should be ashamed. It is one thing for Ms. Cornwall to write dreadful novels (though her first ones were quite good), but it is another matter for her to tackle non-fiction and write [bad stuff]. If her "Ripper," Walter Sickert were still alive, he could sue her for libel and win every dollar she has earned. Pages 64-65 sum up her work. In these two pages, she makes her case against Sickert by stating: "may have," "it is possible," "one wonders," "could be," "it may be," "it may also be," "could have," "it can," "he may," "I imagine," I am inclined to suspect," "I doubt," "I can't say exactly," on and on--TWENTY ONE TIMES. In two pages! The rest of the book reads the same way. This is her "case closed" proof of Sickert's guilt. It is all supposition, amateur pyschology and twisted logic. Plus awful writing that no high school teacher would accept. This book is a disgrace. I will never read another thing she writes.
Rating:
Summary: Over-hyped garbage - an insult in every way: Case Closed
Review: It's almost funny, Patricia Cornwell has conned a lot of critics and her pubisher - but the reviewing public here at Amazon sees right through the garbage. Cormnwell's theory about poor old Walter Sickert is so full of holes that I frequently found myself chuckling as I read.Only allowed a thousand words here so I can't tear this book apart line by line. But here's a fun example: Cornwell points out that Jack the Ripper often used horse racing slang in his letters, even gave the cops tips on the ponies! The tie-in to Sickert is clear she says - the Ripper once referred to "Bangor Street" in a letter and there is no Bangor Street in London. But don't go away now, there is a city called Bangor in Wales which has a racecourse! Stay with old Patty now, here's the clincher, and I quote: "While I have no evidence that Sickert bet on race horses, I don't have any fact to say he didn't".
CASE CLOSED, as the cover says. Hey, while I have no evidence that Patricia Cornwell wears men's size 12 Bruno Magli shoes, I have no proof that she doesn't either - call Mark Furman. It only gets better. Cornwell finds a guest book at some obscure coastal England bed and breakfast. The guest register was defiled and doodled in by a guest Cornwell assumes to be the Ripper many years after the Ripper murders. She points out that poor old Sickert was never seen there (he was semi-famous), and never registered there. But she's happy to spend a chapter assuming that he registered there under an alias, and disguised, decades after the Ripper murders because it was the kind of place he would have liked. CASE CLOSED! You want evidence of a crime, folks, it's on page 184. Old Patricia found evidence that she thought might point to a London cop, not Sickert. Her reaction: "I was completely unnerved and thought my life might disintegrate right before my eyes." Looks like Ms. Cornwell had a lot at stake in nailing Sickert. Why Sickert? My guess is because he is the only one of five or six well known Ripper suspects who has no family left alive to sue Patricia Cornwell. Oh, there's a lot of 21st century psycho babble that he hated women in spite of the fact that he kept marrying the darned creatures (as a child he had an operation on his private parts - so MAYBE he couldn't perform sexually - Cornwell doesn't know this, but she guesses). Unfortunately she accuses the Ripper of murdering a young boy too, so much for the woman-hater theory. But logic doesn't deter Kay, I mean Patricia. And there's DNA evidence too, yeah - sure, and let us pray that they're not springing convicted murderers today on DNA evidence this weak. Listen, I'm an old Kay Scarpetta fan who has seen a huge drop-off in the quality of Cornwell's work in the past few years. I think Pat signed her Hollywoood contract and stopped working hard. The last Scarpetta novel was really bad. I'll bet a Kay Scarpetta movie is coming out soon, and I'll bet her Hollywood backers were screaming for some publicity. Well, they got it. CASE CLOSED.
Rating:
Summary: Very Dull Reading
Review: I received this book as a Christmas present, and was very eager to read it. That enthusiasm began to fade with each passing page of this book. I have enjoyed reading this author's other works, but this was like watching paint dry. There is no suspense, and nothing in this book really grabs your attention. The evidence offered is, at most, inconclusive, and I don't think people need to read this book to realize that forensics in 19th century England was not as developed as it is today. In light of the content of the book, I find the title misleading. If you feel you must read this, get it from the library.
Rating: 
Summary: I enjoyed it.
Review: Despite other reviewers' opinions, I liked the book. It is chock full of history and at times reads more like a textbook than a novel, but as long as you're prepared for that, I found it very thought provoking and truly fascinating.
Rating:
Summary: Badly Written - Needs Good Editor
Review: For someone who writes excellent mystery novels, this book is a mess. It badly needs a good editor to point out the writing faults. For some strange reason Ms. Cornwell can not stay on one subject making it extremely difficult to read and follow. She will make a statement about a certain happening and then go off on two or three semi-related tangents that may or not be pertinent to the statement and never come back to the main topic. It is like a stream of consciousness session that rambles all over the place.
There was a TV special featuring Ms. Cornwell giving her theories on the Ripper and it was BORING. It seemed possible from that program that the book would be the same - and it is. But at least the TV editor could keep the thoughts together as the book editor did not. Ms. Cornwell does not convince a reader that she has truly solved the Ripper murders. She has strong ideas, many already proven false. It is an interesting set of possibilities, but nothing that will actually close the case. Years ago there was a book ,"Prince Jack", that contained just as many facts and possibilities that a member of the royal family was the Ripper. It was better written than Ms. Cornwell's book, but left just as many unanswered questions and possible false statements. Jack the Ripper remains an unsolved enigma.
Rating:
Summary: Do Not Bother Reading This Book
Review: Do not waste your money buying this book. Do not waste your time reading this book. A friend let me read her copy, but I could not finish it. As a scientist myself, I was appalled at the terrible psuedo-science in this book. The author has obviously never heard of "the scientific method" and "the null hypothesis". Instead, she sets out with the idea of proving that the killer is someone nobody else has considered and then interprets scant pieces of evidence that support her thesis as "proof" and ignores or brushes off any evidence to the contrary. There is so much speculation and so little real evidence that an intelligent reader will conclude that this book comes no closer to solving the ripper riddle than any of the other numerous books on this subject. Indeed, there are many more convincing books on the market.
Rating: 
Summary: Another Suspect in a Long List
Review: I was very disappointed in this book, and had hoped to find more conclusive "evidence" as well as a smooth read. I found neither. I found that while some interesting correlations were drawn and Sickert was certainly introduced as a possible suspect with good reason, I found myself needing something more definitive... perhaps a chronology that showed a definite link. While Sickert's art is certainly suggestive, and mtDNA on some of the dismissed "Ripper" letters is somewhat supportive... I did not find the substantive information I was looking for. So, certain art experts believe that the writing in many Ripper letters is consistent with Sickert's writing --- show me how, graphically. I also found the organisation of the book a little haphazard, which perhaps added to my alienation from Cornwell's strongly held conviction. She presented a good case of suspicion, but fell far short of "convicting" Sickert in this reader's eyes. She did convince me though that he was a truly strange and mysterious individual.
Rating:
Summary: Case closed? I couldn't wait to close this book forever!
Review: Cornwell presents somewhat convincing evidence, although the presentation of the evidence was disorganized, repetitive, and too drawn out at times. It took me quite a long time to get through this book, it was way too much of a struggle. Also, I concede with another reviewer in that it would have been nice to have pictures of the art pieces discussed included in the book to refer to.
Rating: 
Summary: Well written, but ultimately unconvincing
Review: I really enjoy Patricia Cornwell's Scarpetta novels, and have always had, as any history buff/mystery reader probably does, an interest in who Jack the Ripper really was. Unfortunately, I have to say I'm no closer to an answer now than I was before reading this atmospheric and descriptive, but not definitive, book.
Clearly, Walter Sickert was a very odd man (to put it mildly.) The problem is, as we delve deeper into his habits and paintings it becomes clear that while it may be possible that he was The Ripper (although lines like "I have no proof he was in London at the time, but no proof that he wasn't" don't inspire a lot of confidence) it is more likely that he was just someone who was deeply fascinated by the Ripper, much as in our modern times there are "serial killer groupies".
I can even accept that perhaps his mDNA (see other reviews for explanation of this) was the same as that found on one of the Ripper letters. The problem is, Ripperologists have apparently long considered that letter to be a fraud. As Ms. Cornwell makes a strong case that Sickert was the type who thrived on attention, and has gone to great trouble to detail for us his obsessive need for publicity and the many letters he wrote to newspapers, it seems likely to me at least that he would have though it fun to fake some Ripper correspondence.
Certainly, Walter Sickert was creepy. I'm just not convinced he was a killer. I'm afraid I still have to agree with Alan Moore on this one. (If you have any interest in Saucy Jack you really should read his From Hell.)
Rating:
Summary: An A for Effort
Review: Since this is a review on Amazon.com, let me start by saying: this book is a great read. Forget the agendas you see here in these reviews, just know that whether or not you agree with Cornwell's findings, you won't be able to put this book down. It is an exhaustive, impressive work, and if nothing else, for the case she has so compellingly collected, she deserves to be commended. In my experience, "Ripperologists" are not interested in having these crimes actually solved. A survey of Ripper websites reveals appalling closed-mindedness and surety in their own opinions, with little respect for the opinions of others. (In fact, I've noted refutations of Cornwell's books that conveniently ignore any of her own caveats or disclaimers, to suit their argument better.) If you are a person with only casual interest in the Jack the Ripper subject, I advise you to take the reviews by Ripper fanatics with a very large grain of salt. As a person only mildly interested in the case before reading this book, I was hooked. The psychological analysis of Sickert is fascinating -- even if he wasn't the Ripper, he was a very sick man -- and the details of English life in that era are fascinating. Perhaps most importantly, Cornwell does not spare any of the gory details of these murders. She helps us to remember that Jack the Ripper was not a glamourous figure, but a sick, twisted, psychopathic killer, who is not deserving of the glitzy mythos that has sprung up around him. Many women died -- probably more than the 5 victims who get all the "P.R.", and there is nothing romantic about that. Whether you leave the book convinced of Sickert's guilt or not, "Portrait of a Killer" will provoke you to think, and remind you all too well that there is evil in this world. Kudos to Ms. Cornwell.
|
