Rating: Summary: ego unleashed Review: When admitting that her assumptions are in no way demonstrable as fact, Cornwell puts the word "proof" in quotation marks (p. 192) "Proof" therefore becomes questionable, as in 'so-called-proof.' As in 'let's not allow PROOF to get in the way of a good story.' She doesn't. I believe the well-intentioned author could have saved herself some embarrassment by reviewing some of the Ripper books published over the years. Anyone can marshall this mess of evidence to convict their favorite suspect. She's just the latest (and perhaps most arrogant).
Rating: Summary: Jack the Ripper still unknown, 400 jumbled pages later Review: I've been interested in "Ripperology" (a term Cornwell hates) for a few years and have read a few interesting works, namely, Alan Moore's very inventive graphic novel "From Hell." I was interested to see how a novelist with forensic experience would interpret the mysterious serial killer. I have to say, Ms. Cornwell has really done her research- reading all of the Ripper letters, genuine or no, tracing back histories on inspectors, victims, other suspects, and on occasion, witnesses. However, her research as presented in the book is completely disorganized and unreadable. She jumps from brief anecdotes on Sickert's life to murder scene mood settings, London commonalities, related murders, epistolary comparisons, and a too incomplete to be valid DNA analysis the way most of us change our socks. Cornwell may have something that Sickert is the killer, but if he is, the argument needs to be much more clearly made. The fact that it isn't creates speculation that perhaps the evidence she has is not that compelling.
Unless you are REALLY interested in the Ripper case, or perhaps Walter Sickert (who I'd never heard of, despite claims that he was England's most famous painter in the early 20th century) you will definitely want to stay away from this book as it about as coherent as the amass of Ripper letters the police had to work their way through in the late 1880s. I was incredibly disappointed with this book. Don't waste your time.
Rating: Summary: Too much Fluff Review: How did she zero in on this one person? She never gave definitive reasons why the other's were not guilty of being the ripper.
Rating: Summary: Cornwell buys art and tries to instantly increase it's value Review: Sheds virtually no new information on the Ripper killings. Cornwell provides very little in support of her claim that the artist William Sickert is the killer. Her evidence basically consists of suspect DNA tests, Cornwell's (and her handpicked cronies') own interpretations that some of Sickert's works depict violence against women, and may bear likenesses to Ripper murder scenes/victims. There is absolutely no application of the disciplines of the Scientific Method here to prove her hypothesis of the killer's identity. In fact, this book is tantamount to Cornwell stamping her feet stating that Sickert is the killer just because she says so.
Cornwell makes much hullabaloo over her spending $6 Million of her own money on this investigation...seemingly on travel and on buying up Sickert's drawings and paintings. It doesn't take too much imagination to figure that she's bought the paintings and "traveled for research purposes" to justify expenditures related to this "investigation." This in an attempt to beef up the value of the paintings of Sickert, which she now owns, by claiming they were the work of Jack the Ripper. It's a great ruse, hopefully one the IRS will look upon closely (how different is this than insider trading???), but it's an insult to those who have not had noteriety such as hers, and who have for decades performed valid scientific leg work to help solve this historically important crime spree.
Rating: Summary: Starts at the end and works backwards Review: I was very anxious to read this book, but the hype outdid the reality. I have loved all of Cornwell's fiction and believed this would be in the same style, even though it is non-fiction. Wrong! I have 2 major complaints about this book.
First, as other reviewers have said, she seems to have made her decision as to who the Ripper was and then pulls together evidence that supports her claim. She talks repeatedly about how little evidence there was and how hard it was to find much of it. Since it was so hard to find what she does have, how much evidence did she not find - evidence that could clear Stickart's name? When writing fiction, the author needs to first determine the solution and work backwards, building evidence for that ending. Real life doesn't work that way.
Second, the writing does not flow well. She bounces from subject to subject with little or no break. Many times I found myself flipping back through the pages, trying to find when she changed thoughts and to what.
All in all, this is an interesting study into the Jack the Ripper case. However, I feel Cornwell has gone too far in saying she has, hands down, solved the mystery
Rating: Summary: READER BRINGS DEPTH AND RESONANCE TO AN ABSORBING TALE Review: Arguably America's number one crime writer, Patricia Cornwell is the mastermind behind the blockbuster series featuring Dr. Kay Scarpetta. Her books instantly cap bestseller lists and intrigue readers throughout the world.
This time out Cornwell tackles one of the most puzzling cases in criminal history - Jack the Ripper. Utilizing her considerable forensic and investigative skills the author proposes the identity of this mad killer who terrified Victorian England.
No one is better suited to bring this story to life than the acclaimed Broadway and film actress Kate Burton who reads the abridged cassette and CD editions. Her stage trained voice brings depth and resonance to this absorbing tale.
Kate Reading, the gifted member of a prominent London theatrical family who has read novels from the Kay Scarpetta series, renders a flawless performance in the unabridged edition.
As crime and history buffs well know at least seven women were brutally murdered in London's Whitechapel area during the year 1888. The gruesome nature of these slayings brought forth a nickname for the feared killer - Jack The Ripper.
For well over 100 years Jack the Ripper has stood paramount among the world's most troubling unsolved crimes, and the unknown killer grew to be a demonic figure remembered in literature and lore.
Using all the state-of-the-art tools at her disposal as well as access to Jack the Ripper files, Cornwell reveals that Walter Richard Sickert, an illustrious Victorian Era painter, is, indeed, the dreaded murderer. According to the author Sickert was an evil serial killer who penned the letters that were written to the Metropolitan Police and the news media. She further shows in detailed analyses of his paintings that his art reflected the mutilation inflicted upon his victims. As Cornwell unearths the artist's birth defects and his upbringing she is able to present the history of a classic psychopath.
Cornwell is unique in presenting the netherworld of the depraved, while at the same time introducing the miraculous investigative methods now at our disposal. Combine those traits with the tongue of a born storyteller, and you have quintesSential Cornwell at the top of her game.
- Gail Cooke
Rating: Summary: Four Stars Review: I give a lot of books four stars instead of five. Most books I read are good (if a book is bad, I might finish it, but generally I don't waste my time reviewing it), but few are fantastic. This is one is good.
I like this book because it's non-fiction that reads like a story. Cornwell hasn't abandoned her trademark compelling tone for changing genres, in other words. I wasn't sure at first if Kay Scarpetta (heroine of most Cornwell novels) would be the one delving into the mystery of Jack the Ripper in Fiction-Land. That would have been interesting. But I wasn't disappointed to learn that it's a first person from Cornwell herself.
I don't know Cornwell but through her books, and I bet if I met her, I'd find she's meticulous and thoughtful (as in thinker, not as in considerate). Just from reading her novels, I feel comfortable with believing in the validity of her research. In other words, I would count on her having done her legwork well. I trust that she herself believes in the deduction of her research, that Walter Sickert is Jack the Ripper.
That doesn't make me believe it, though.
I've read other books that claim to solve the Jack the Ripper mystery. This one is at least as well done as those; many times, it's better. Yet, Cornwell's evidence is largely circumstancial. The piteous lack of real evidence over 100 years after the fact makes it impossible simply believe her, period. Also, her research is prone to her interpretation, though she tries valiantly to minimize those times.
Another thing that bothers me about this book is her categorical disinclination to explore the other "suspects." Based on her research, she is convinced that Walter Sickert is the Ripper, and even says at one time that it's her goal to follow the research, not to discredit other suspects. I guess, if we can't prove negatives, we can't prove that the other suspects DIDN'T do it, but the absence of addressing other popular candidates (except, I think she does discredit it being the Duke of Clarence) does disgruntle me.
Buy this book if you're an ardent Cornwell fan, Ripper "fan," or a true-crime fan. You'll enjoy it.
Rating: Summary: I love me, who do you love? Review: This book is an arrogant, self-indulgent, ego trip from title (Case Closed??? Not by a long shot) right through to the final page. Even the dedication comes off as insulting. "You would have caught him"...if what? He had been as good as you are? Oh, please!
I think that her theory would have held much more credibility had she arrived at Sickert as a suspect from the evidence, as opposed to presenting the evidence only as it related to Sickert. And even with her I'm-right-because-I-say-so investigation, she still couldn't make a case that a first year law student wouldn't blow out of the water.
Ms. Cornwell writes excellent fiction. That is a world that she can control right from the beginning. But it seems that Investigative Journalism isn't what she is cut out to do. Things don't always fall into place quite the way you may want them to.
Rating: Summary: Convincing Case Review: It is evident the Ms Cornwell really did her homework in researching this book, and the results are excellent. Not only does the author make a compelling and convincing case for her nomination for Jack the Ripper, her book goes into the details of the period; the characters who voluntarily or otherwise became involved in the case of the ripper, and without doubt one of the most graphic descriptions of what passed for living in the East End in the 19th century - so far removed from the mansions of Mayfair and Belgravia. Ms Cornwell's hard work has paid off royally.
Rating: Summary: You people don't know what you are talking about! Review: As far as I am concerned, she...nailed it. Walter Richard Sickert *WAS* Jack the Ripper. It seems like everyone else who read this book has never, EVER read anything else about the Ripper murders-they simply relied on stories told over and over and over again, and were, of course, disappointed that real life does not read like fiction.
