The Mammoth Book of Jack the Ripper

Rating:
Summary: Great for New Ripperologists!
Review: Althought this book is replete with details about the ripper victims and their post-mortems the presentation is so dry and clinical you may want to use this book as replacement for counting sheep. There isn't much here to whet the appetite but if you're interested in "just the facts" by all means pick this one up. If on the other hand you're more interested in something imaginative or entertaining pass on this one.

Rating:
Summary: The usual saucy suspects
Review: Because the perpetrator of the 1888 London slayings known as the Whitechapel Murders was never convicted as such the case has become the most popular whodunit in history. Every armchair detective in the world has his pet theory as to who the killer was and why he was compelled to slash to death women in the dead of night. Fortunately "The Mammoth Book of Jack the Ripper", published in 1999, is both informative and fun to read. I say fortunately, because it presents a kaleidoscope of conjectures and contradictions from Ripperologists who here present the theories they have published in different books. (Colin Wilson, whose own essay is the last of 16, takes credit for the term "Ripperologist".) This brotherhood is evidently a very chancy clique, characterized by tense camaraderie and frequent animosity. Shirley Harrison, in discussing an alleged Ripper diary (she's supported by Colin Wilson), says an informed debate sank to "a low level of vitriolic abuse". No wonder, with all these different ideas: Paul Harrison and Bruce Paley agree on their working-class suspect, while Martin Fido concentrates on the Jewish aspect, and Sue and Andy Parlour favor the Freemason angle. (Philip Sugden was either not invited to this party or declined the invitation.) M.J.Trow plays a little prank on the reader to indicate how easy it is to categorize anyone -- you, me, Lewis Carroll -- as a serial killer. Then there is the legend of the Duke of Clarence, who married a "model" of the Catholic faith, siring her child. The potential scandal so spooked the Court it sanctioned a series of homicides. All this has been fodder for some extravagant fiction, but as Simon Whitechapel observes: "If the murders were carried out to silence blackmailers, why were they so brutal? Why, in other words, were they so public?" (His own arcane conspiracy theory combines Roman Empire decadence with Victorian kitsch.) A more stable, if less romantic, explanation is the connection between the Irish Nationalist cause and the Conservative government's awareness of similarities in the Whitechapel murders and Fenian terrorist tactics. "The Mammoth Book of Jack the Ripper", well-edited by Maxim Jakubowski and Nathan Braund, offers many bonuses, including a chronology and autopsy reports. At the end is a bibliography, listing dozens of Ripper-related books, about 40 since 1988 alone. There is also a filmography, beginning with something called "Farmer Spudd and his Missus Take a Trip to Town" (1915) and including 1953's "Here Come the Girls", in which Bob Hope is threatened by a character named Jack the Slasher. So who was Saucy Jacky? An insane surgeon? An over-zealous reformer? An angry boyfriend? Peter Turnbull states bluntly: "Jack the Ripper was not a man: he was a myth." On the other hand, A.P Wolf has an article titled "Jack the Myth" in which a favorite candidate is promoted. It is A.P. Wolf who invites us to the party: "Go on, check it out," this Ripperologist writes. "The 'Final Solution' could be yours."

Rating:
Summary: Filled with Half-Baked theories and Poor Arguments
Review: Embodies a series of essays on ripper suspects that prove generally poor in analysis with a lack of any substantial or indepth counter-arguments. Anyone who has studied the Ripper case can easily pick up on how the author of each essay leaves out the evidence that doesn't fit his/her suspect.

Just about all of these suspects have been much more intelligently discussed and the evidence for their being the Ripper all but dismissed in Sudgen's excellent "The complete History of Jack the Ripper" and Begg's et al "Jack the Ripper A-Z

Rating:
Summary: A mountain of information
Review: I entered the Ripper world with little specific information about the case. However, after reading this book so much about the Jack the Ripper came into clear focus. The authors clearly outline the murders, suspects, police and newspaper accounts, witness statements and finally present a series of well written essays by Ripperologist, criminal historian and police detective alike. The book's greatest strength is how a variety of theories are offered in an attempt to finally unmask 'Saucy Jack'. The theories range from the plausible to the ridiculous. Yet each one leaves the reader with tremendous insight, intrigue and curiosity. In the end, The Mammoth Book of Jack the Ripper is a perfect read for either the Ripperologist or anyone who has had an interest in the Whitechapel murders of 1888 which continue, to this day, to be unsolved.

Rating:
Summary: One-volume intro to Ripper literature
Review: If you have an interest in Jack the Ripper/Victorian London, but are somewhat overwhelmed by the flood of theories, counter-theories and media sensationalism (like myself), this book is essential. The authors have laid out the Chronology of the five murders (the "accepted" Ripper killings), along with bios of the victims, and their autopsies. The most interesting part though is the chapter relating theories of Jack's identity, by the Ripperologists themselves. The authors don't critique these theories, simply provide them for the reader's edification. A small criticism might be that the theories aren't cross-referenced. Some of the Ripperologists destroy other theories published in the book, and it becomes confusing to determine what the "current" theory is regarding Jack's identity.
Overall though, for those with that general interest noted above, or simply want a single-volume compendium of Ripper literature, this book is highly recommended. I would suspect that those with a deep knowledge of Ripper theories, and the details of the murders might find this a rehash...

Rating:
Summary: A good beginner's compendium
Review: Sugden's COMPLETE HISTORY OF JACK THE RIPPER should be the first book anyone interested in the Ripper murders should read ... and this excellent collection should be the second. Introduces all the major suspects, not through a single author, but through the mouths of those who front the theories. In short: the way it should be done!

Rating:
Summary: A Good Start...
Review: This book features about 16(if I remember correctly)different essays on the identity of JTR. Most are well-written;and while some of the suspects are either ridiculous or proven to be innocent, it is a good starting point for amateur ripperologists. This book shows that there's many different opinions and varied viewpoints on the identity of JTR. We'll probably never know who he was, so I guess this is as good a place to start as any.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent Introduction to Ripperology
Review: This is an excellent introduction to Ripperology for the uninitiated; likewise, it is very useful for someone, like myself, who has read about Jack the Ripper fairly extensively in the past and just needed a good brush-up before taking up the mantle of amateur detective again. Don't worry--I'm not going to name a suspect here in this review (partly because I certainly do not know the true identity of Jack the Ripper). I leave the theorizing to the writers who contributed to this book. These contributors come from different walks of life, and their proffered theories range from the ludicrous to the seemingly substantive. Thankfully, no chapters are given to Stephen Knight's wild "royal conspiracy," although it is mentioned on occasion for the purpose of repeating how ridiculous such ideas are. The subject of the Maybrick diary is broached, with a good balance of positive and negative reactions to it (personally, I think it is a fake). There is one chapter that did annoy me somewhat, even though I can understand the point of it. Basically, and I won't identify him here, the contributor argues that X was the Ripper, presents evidence (circumstantial, of course, which is really the best that any theorist can offer in this case) of why this person was the Ripper, then ends the section with a Gotcha!. See how easy it is to build a case around any "suspect," he says--while that is a valid point, anyone who has read anything about this case knows the fragility and circumstantial nature of virtually every piece of evidence extant in the field, and I for one would not have chosen to waste my time reading a chapter that, in the end, was essentially nonsense.

The first section of the book , I should point out, consists of a very useful timeline and summation of the events and evidence, what the editors call the "undisputed facts." While no single piece of evidence is truly "undisputed" among Ripperologists, this section does provide an objective look at the subject matter. It is followed by sections specifically addressing the witness statements (many of which are of course contradictory and/or unreliable, which the editors point out), autopsy reports, the controversial "Ripper letters," police views, and disputed texts. Anyone who reads through that introductory session will have a useful foundation of knowledge to draw upon when interpreting the competing theories that make up the bulk of the book. That being said, any reader would really benefit from having another source of an encyclopedic nature handy (and there are such books out there) because it can be confusing to keep all of the names straight when there are so many suspects that the contributors ask us to consider.

All in all, this is an excellent source of information on Jack the Ripper. The background information provided by the editors is quite objective and fact-oriented, which is a rare find in books on this subject. In most cases, someone decides who the Ripper surely was and then goes about finding "facts" to fit his/her theory. That is certainly what some of the contributors to this book have done. The editors, commendably, have not done that; they do not even offer any "views" on the individual theories presented here. Their "just the facts, ma'am" approach is much appreciated and welcome. While this is not the "best" book on the subject, it may well be the best introduction available to the history and myth of the Whitechapel murderer.