![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
niori_1709I’m kind of a twisted person, and I can easily admit that. I tend to watch all those crime shows (Criminal Minds is my favourite, which is telling enough) and tend to focus on the more bloody side of history. Of said bloody aspects, serial killers hold a (morbid) fascination for me. The one who interests me most? Hands down, Jack the Ripper.
Given those facts, it’s no surprise that, when I saw Patricia Cornwell’s Portrait of a Killer, I picked it up. Cornwell, famous for her fiction mystery novels, seemed to be the perfect person to delve into the case of one of England’s (if not the world’s) most famous serial killers. It’s a non-fiction book, chalk full of historical information and research (as a former history major, that warms my heart).
The book is Cornwell presenting her case about the true identity of Jack the Ripper, which to this day is a mystery. Cornwell presents well researched evidence that the Ripper was, in fact, an intellectual and artist named Walker Sickert. Her research is well done and meticulous, but is it really enough to conclude that Sickert was the killer? Well, let’s just say that, if it was a court case and I was on the jury, I’d convict. That doesn’t mean she’s right, only that her arguments are solid enough to make me agree she could be.
Obviously, this book isn’t for everyone. The content is graphic (it is about a serial killer after all). Crime scene photos of the six murdered women are in the book, and that is a disturbing thing to see (though the pictures themselves are truly not that graphic, given the photography at the time wasn’t that great). To say that you shouldn’t wander idly into this book falls into the range of understatement. Part of what drew me to this book (and the Ripper in general) is the fact that it’s unsolved, and no matter how convincing Cornwell’s argument, it will always remain that way. There are so many theories and conspiracies out there, that the mystery of Jack the Ripper will always remain just that- a mystery. Here, Cornwell gives us a possible answer to this mystery, and a well written one at that.
Given those facts, it’s no surprise that, when I saw Patricia Cornwell’s Portrait of a Killer, I picked it up. Cornwell, famous for her fiction mystery novels, seemed to be the perfect person to delve into the case of one of England’s (if not the world’s) most famous serial killers. It’s a non-fiction book, chalk full of historical information and research (as a former history major, that warms my heart).
The book is Cornwell presenting her case about the true identity of Jack the Ripper, which to this day is a mystery. Cornwell presents well researched evidence that the Ripper was, in fact, an intellectual and artist named Walker Sickert. Her research is well done and meticulous, but is it really enough to conclude that Sickert was the killer? Well, let’s just say that, if it was a court case and I was on the jury, I’d convict. That doesn’t mean she’s right, only that her arguments are solid enough to make me agree she could be.
Obviously, this book isn’t for everyone. The content is graphic (it is about a serial killer after all). Crime scene photos of the six murdered women are in the book, and that is a disturbing thing to see (though the pictures themselves are truly not that graphic, given the photography at the time wasn’t that great). To say that you shouldn’t wander idly into this book falls into the range of understatement. Part of what drew me to this book (and the Ripper in general) is the fact that it’s unsolved, and no matter how convincing Cornwell’s argument, it will always remain that way. There are so many theories and conspiracies out there, that the mystery of Jack the Ripper will always remain just that- a mystery. Here, Cornwell gives us a possible answer to this mystery, and a well written one at that.
