At the Museum of London, the City That Sherlock Holmes Knew
Showing posts with label Victorian England. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Victorian England. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 10, 2015
Monday, November 10, 2014
The whole Jack the Ripper thing has never been of interest to me, but othesr may enjoy it. . . .
'Real Sherlock Holmes' solved ripper murders, but aristocracy covered it up claims new book by Author Diane Madsen
(PRWEB UK) 10 November 2014
The recent claim that DNA on a shawl purported to be from one of the Ripper victims can identify immigrant Polish hairdresser Aaron Kosminski as Jack the Ripper has been further undermined by the revelation that the 'Real Sherlock Holmes,' Joseph Bell, and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle both identified the same suspect. Author Diane Madsen claims in her new book, 'The Conan Doyle Notes – The Secret of Jack The Ripper', that a cover-up by the aristocracy hid the real identity of the killer. The evidence against Kosminski being the Ripper is overwhelming and the credibility of the shawl is limited at best.
A recent article from the Smithsonian comments, "Others, however, are still skeptical. First, the shawl has been 'openly handled by loads of people and been touched, breathed on, spat upon.'"
Also, Catherine Eddowes was a prostitute. Should this shawl in fact be hers, and should the DNA not be the result of later cross contamination, there is no way to demonstrate that the DNA traces found did not result from an earlier paid encounter between Eddowes and Kosminski, who lived in the same area.
Aside from the DNA, Kosminski is a poor suspect. He spoke Polish not English according to the records where he was institutionalized. He didn't fit the eyewitness description of the Ripper. He certainly would not have warranted consideration of a Royal Pardon.
The real clues in the Jack the Ripper case point to a completely different suspect identified by Doyle and Bell. They were given the Ripper files, and they made a report on their suspect to Scotland Yard. The report has never been released. Why? Why did they both keep the identity of their suspect secret? This suspect was investigated by Scotland Yard.and is mentioned in a cryptic letter written by Inspector Frederick George Abberline, who did much of the actual work on the Ripper case. The Radio Times recently reported that, "As expanded upon in her novel, Madsen believes their investigations led them to one James K Stephen – tutor to Prince Albert Victor, son of the Prince of Wales – and that Stephen's royal connections could have been behind Doyle's decision to stay quiet, for fear of causing a scandal."
In a bizarre twist, the publishers of the Conan Doyle Notes, MX Publishing, are located in Princess Park Manor, an 1850s building in North London which used to be Europe's largest mental institution converted into apartments – and the very same institution that Kosminski was held. Steve Emecz, from MX comments, "It's a crazy coincidence that Kosminski was held in our very building. The records show that he spoke little English whereas it's generally understood that the Ripper spoke perfect English."
About MX Publishing
MX Publishing is the award winning world's largest Sherlock Holmes publishers. They are based in London, England, but their seventy plus authors are spread around the world. Most of their one hundred and fifty books are fiction, but they also have many biographical works on Conan Doyle. In 2013 MX made a big splash on the international stage with the performance biography 'Benedict Cumberbatch In Transition' which has sold in its tens of thousands in English, Japanese and Chinese.http://www.mxpublishing.co.uk
MX Publishing is the award winning world's largest Sherlock Holmes publishers. They are based in London, England, but their seventy plus authors are spread around the world. Most of their one hundred and fifty books are fiction, but they also have many biographical works on Conan Doyle. In 2013 MX made a big splash on the international stage with the performance biography 'Benedict Cumberbatch In Transition' which has sold in its tens of thousands in English, Japanese and Chinese.http://www.mxpublishing.co.uk
Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/11/prweb12296664.htm
Monday, April 14, 2014
Monday, March 3, 2014
Mrs. Brown you've got a lovely movie. . . .
.jpg)
Just thought you would like to know.
Also just called "Mrs. Brown", it is a very good movie.
Sunday, February 2, 2014
Tuesday, December 31, 2013
What would the modern Baker Street Irregulars look like?
The Canonical Baker Street Irregulars were described as Street Urchins by Dr. Watson, first appearing in STUD, and then again in SIGN. We assumed them to be perhaps homeless. And if not homeless, probably from a very poor household, lead my a single mother or unemployed or alcoholic father.
And although they to have become a little romanticized in the Canon of Sherlock Holmes, they actually represent one of the more grittier sides of Watson's story telling.
Poor, dirty, unkempt, probably seldom well fed and, again, probably for the most part homeless.
They probably did not have much of a future ahead of them, with petty crime and lowly employment the only path that lie in their future. Not without energy, they would do anything they could to increase their collection of pence; holding horses, running errands, helping with loads of goods or baggage. (source).
Some may have gone off to wars, to return better formed men. Some may have died in those same wars.
None are mentioned as women, although that could well have been the case. And if women, their lot in life was probably less pleasant to think about than that of the boys.
Most of them probably spent the biggest part of their lives within a few small blocks.
Again, probably most of us romanticised about Holmes' influence on them, even going so far as to hope Holmes was their way out of their sad lot. (Who does not hope Holmes or Watson sent Wiggins off to school somewhere?)
Must of us accept Wiggins as the leader of the Irregulars.
Many of us probably assume Billy the page ascended from those ranks and found cleaner employment and perhaps a life long career beyond the streets.
But truth be told, we don't really know much about the individuals or what ever became of them. London streets were dirty and harsh, with little future. And although we may fantasize about the London of Holmes era, it was for most a very hard time and a hard place to live in.
And although they to have become a little romanticized in the Canon of Sherlock Holmes, they actually represent one of the more grittier sides of Watson's story telling.
Poor, dirty, unkempt, probably seldom well fed and, again, probably for the most part homeless.
They probably did not have much of a future ahead of them, with petty crime and lowly employment the only path that lie in their future. Not without energy, they would do anything they could to increase their collection of pence; holding horses, running errands, helping with loads of goods or baggage. (source).
Some may have gone off to wars, to return better formed men. Some may have died in those same wars.
None are mentioned as women, although that could well have been the case. And if women, their lot in life was probably less pleasant to think about than that of the boys.
Most of them probably spent the biggest part of their lives within a few small blocks.
Again, probably most of us romanticised about Holmes' influence on them, even going so far as to hope Holmes was their way out of their sad lot. (Who does not hope Holmes or Watson sent Wiggins off to school somewhere?)
Must of us accept Wiggins as the leader of the Irregulars.
Many of us probably assume Billy the page ascended from those ranks and found cleaner employment and perhaps a life long career beyond the streets.
But truth be told, we don't really know much about the individuals or what ever became of them. London streets were dirty and harsh, with little future. And although we may fantasize about the London of Holmes era, it was for most a very hard time and a hard place to live in.
Visually, for me, one of the best representations of the above image is the Irregulars is as they appear in the film "Without a Clue". Although played in large part for laughs, I think the habits and dress come pretty close to accurate.
Jump forward some hundred plus years to the modern incarnations of Holmes, "Sherlock" and 'Elementary", and we find a different set of Irregulars, if we can even call them that at all.
In the Canonical Irregulars we see a gang or group of boys. Assuming for the most part that the individuals are the same in each story. And as with most gangs, new individuals would come and go for one reason or another with a central repeating core.
While we have a substantial image of the Canonical Irregulars, one has yet to form within the two television shows mentioned above.
When doing a google search for the Baker Street Irregulars you first get a description of the Canonical Irregulars, followed then by the incarnations that developed from the original.
When searching for minor characters within the Canon Wiggins shows up as an Irregular.
As of yet, no minor characters have been described as such, in my observations, within "Sherlock" or "Elementary". (James or Buddy2blogger, I am counting on you guys to correct me if I am wrong.)
Individuals have stood out in individual episodes as resources that Holmes uses at times to find needed information, but to my knowledge, none have been children, and if they have been none have been part of a group or gang.
Most have been more along the line of Langdale Pike or past clients with a skill set usable to Holmes, which is very Canonical in nature, but not the same as the Irregulars.
So, with all this above space wasted so far, can the Irregulars be relevant to a modern Holmes, and what would they be like.
In this day and age, in a modern society, I don't believe wayward children would have access to things the way they did in Canonical Holmes' era. The streets are not filled out the same way with a mass of people all suffering the same lot. Unkempt youths would not be accepted in most of the places the stories in the modern era take place. They could not move around unnoticed, nor is information gathered in the same way. (Unless all the stories took place in a Walmart or something.) Hygiene and attire that was acceptable in Victorian times would no longer go unnoticed.
If most of cases involving "Sherlock" or :"Elementary" took place in slum districts run by gangs, the scenario of child Irregulars mixing with the masses would seem possible.
But with most stories taking place in more high-tech or suburban areas, the likelihood of child Irregulars as repeating characters seems unlikely, especially if seen as a group.
Again, can a group of children in a modern take on the Canon be convincing as a group called "Irregulars" and if so, what would they be like?
Could they indeed be children?
They would have to be street smart.
They would have to be somewhat tech savvy.
They would have to be mobile.
They would have to be able to gain access to more upscale types of places.
Would the gang be led by someone more like 'Q' in the modern newer Bond movies?
Women would have to be part of the new "Irregulars".
They probably would require more funding.
Martial art skills may be required. (Teen-age-Ninja Irregulars?)
If we assume that even most high tech or high-society crimes have their germination in seedier parts of towns, we could see child Irregulars as a possibility. But I don't know if that is the case or not.
Or, in this day and age, are the new "Irregulars" more likely to be gadgets?
Is the IPHONE (or like device) the new "Irregulars", with "google' being the new Wiggins, and all the hackers out there being the rest gang.
Or would "Sherlock" or "Elementary" now use the term "Irregulars" not as a group or gang as such, but a mental collective of individuals, some tech savvy and some street smart, all unknown to each other, with the term "Irregulars" only a personal description of his network?
Are "Irregulars" irrelevant in the modern era of Holmes? What do you think?
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Comfort food images. . . .or. . . the currency of the mind.
No, this is not going to be a culinary review of lessor known recipes of Mrs. Hudson's.
Instead it is going to be an essay (short I hope) of an image I have formed about certain habits associated with my readings involving the UK and Irish themes. I think this association can also be suggested in UK and Irish themed television.
What brought this on you ask?
Well,. . . I am currently reading a modern Irish murder mystery and this 'comfort food' image keeps pooping up. Which is perfectly fine with me because it is one I enjoy.
Now it probably must be said that my 'comfort food' images and yours may not be the same, and probably aren't.
How does this relate to the Canon of Sherlock Holmes?
I know that my reading of the Canon as always been more about the images within the stories that Watson verbally illustrates, and not with the mysteries themselves. I care more about the location of Baskerville Hall and how it looks around it than I do with the dastardly deeds of Stapleton.
And I would suggest that it is the written ambiance that I find most appealing with most writers I follow.
This is probably the case with most readers following favorite authors, while some may choose subject matter or topic.
I would also suggest that the 'comfort food' images we find appealing at one time in our reading career may change or shift from time to time, often coming back to an earlier set of images as our tastes change. I find myself shifting settings depending on my mood at certain times in my life.
Most of the time these images are going to be fairly accurate, but sadly to say, they can sometimes be erroneous. I have admitted to that mistake once in my image of Watson's birthplace. But that's for another time.
This book I am reading now takes place in the tiny village of Leap, Ireland. If you are a movie buff, Leap is in the wonderful movie, no pun intended, 'Leap Year'.
Very small, it is said, with a population of just a few hundred people.
So far, one of the main settings is an old Irish pub (you had me at pub) that the lead character ends up working at and around which much of the narrative takes place. Sort of this stories 221b if you will.
Well, at this time the mystery and the story are unimportant because I haven't finished it yet.
But one image keeps popping up and seems to be a reoccurring image in many UK/Irish books and shows. And one I love.
And that image is of people walking up to pub counters (or store counters) and paying for things with coins and not paper money. Nice coins, coins with character. Heavy, substantial.
Occasionally you will see paper money, but not very often
You don't see or hear of wallets coming out very often when reading or watching. Most of the time the man reaches into his pocket and plops coins down. Women usually reach into the bottom of a handbag or coin purse.
Paper money seems to be reserved for exchanges planned well ahead of time requiring more funds than a pocket could support. (Now a days, that would be a tank of petrol)
Now, historically this would have to do with the fact that most coins were made of metal for durability and longevity. Many times made from a metal that could be traded across cultures.
Paper money was expensive to produce, easily damaged and could not be melted down and re-stamped. (and it doesn't sound as nice when you smack it down on the bar top).(and when did you ever see pirates raid a ship with paper money?)
Americans, at least in my life time, have never had a love of using coins in daily transactions.
The key word there is 'using'. We love to collect them, in a jar or something, planning on going through them looking for rare ones, but usually ending up redeeming them into our bank accounts or for larger bills. But actually having them in our pockets and counting out change, I think we find that cumbersome.
As a kid, coins were fine. We collect soda bottles to get coins. We could still buy things with coins; candy, soda, an ice cream. You could easily carry enough coins in your pocket to acquire just about any thing a kid could need on any given day.
But over here, once things started going up in price, coffee, papers, phone calls, we started caring less and less about using them. We would never, in America, consider carrying around twelve dollars worth of coins in our pockets. That would be about eight pounds UK at the time of this writing. Easily done with UK currencies.
Over here coins are usually thrown into a dish when we get home, retrieving the next day only enough to maybe buy a soda. We don't even use them in phone booths any more. Most of the time, especially pennies, they may not see the light of day again for several years.
Dimes are a nuisance. To small for their value, to close in size to the penny.
And most people don't want coin change much any more anyway. We are even talking about doing away with the penny over here. Most kids working at service counters can't even count out the right change for you without relying on the register. Advertiser will hate not being able to make something a certain dollar amount and an odd number of cents, but they will move on. (Why is it we will pay $15.98, but will shop around if it's $16.00?)
The dollar doesn't get you enough to want to carry many dollar coins around in your pocket, at least without the aid of suspenders. We even, over here, tried the make the dollar smaller to make it more appealing, but poor old Susan B. didn't fare very well.
Yea, you can find westerns and depression era books and movies that still show the use of coins (five cent beers, dinner for fifty cents, a glass of whiskey), but even those eventually found the use of paper money better suited. Remember in 'Butch Cassidy' the paper money flying all over the place after the train robbery.
Maybe I'm reading the wrong books or watching the wrong shows, but it doesn't seem that the use of coins in visuals has been around in America since the depression, except with the occasional newspaper buying scene.
You read a book, or watch a show set in the UK or Ireland and I believe you will still see coins coming out of pockets more often than wallets. Maybe I'm wrong, and maybe it's just what I want to see, but I love it.
And over there the coins always have better names; quids, coppers, half-penny or hap'ney, two pence or tuppence ("with tuppence for paper and string, you can have your own set of wings. . ."), three penny bit. You actually want to use these coins in story telling!
On our last visit to the UK I would feel guilty if I couldn't come up with the right coins fairly quickly.
Something I wanted to master.
We all have favorite images that we carry around in our heads. Images we almost require to make a setting appeal to us. (Holmes can not open a can of Bud at the Alpha Inn!)
And for me Watson will always pay the hansom driver with coins. Holmes will always use coins at the Alpha Inn. Foyle will buy his whiskey with coins. Herriot uses them at the Drovers. And Barnaby. . . well, Barnaby may be a paper man, I just haven't decided yet.
It's just what I find appealing. I still have a big collection of English coins and I love them. I keep them in a Lyle's Golden Syrup can.
What are some of your favorite image requirements?
Instead it is going to be an essay (short I hope) of an image I have formed about certain habits associated with my readings involving the UK and Irish themes. I think this association can also be suggested in UK and Irish themed television.
What brought this on you ask?
Well,. . . I am currently reading a modern Irish murder mystery and this 'comfort food' image keeps pooping up. Which is perfectly fine with me because it is one I enjoy.
Now it probably must be said that my 'comfort food' images and yours may not be the same, and probably aren't.
How does this relate to the Canon of Sherlock Holmes?
I know that my reading of the Canon as always been more about the images within the stories that Watson verbally illustrates, and not with the mysteries themselves. I care more about the location of Baskerville Hall and how it looks around it than I do with the dastardly deeds of Stapleton.
And I would suggest that it is the written ambiance that I find most appealing with most writers I follow.
This is probably the case with most readers following favorite authors, while some may choose subject matter or topic.
I would also suggest that the 'comfort food' images we find appealing at one time in our reading career may change or shift from time to time, often coming back to an earlier set of images as our tastes change. I find myself shifting settings depending on my mood at certain times in my life.
Most of the time these images are going to be fairly accurate, but sadly to say, they can sometimes be erroneous. I have admitted to that mistake once in my image of Watson's birthplace. But that's for another time.
This book I am reading now takes place in the tiny village of Leap, Ireland. If you are a movie buff, Leap is in the wonderful movie, no pun intended, 'Leap Year'.
Very small, it is said, with a population of just a few hundred people.
So far, one of the main settings is an old Irish pub (you had me at pub) that the lead character ends up working at and around which much of the narrative takes place. Sort of this stories 221b if you will.
Well, at this time the mystery and the story are unimportant because I haven't finished it yet.
But one image keeps popping up and seems to be a reoccurring image in many UK/Irish books and shows. And one I love.
And that image is of people walking up to pub counters (or store counters) and paying for things with coins and not paper money. Nice coins, coins with character. Heavy, substantial.
Occasionally you will see paper money, but not very often
You don't see or hear of wallets coming out very often when reading or watching. Most of the time the man reaches into his pocket and plops coins down. Women usually reach into the bottom of a handbag or coin purse.
Paper money seems to be reserved for exchanges planned well ahead of time requiring more funds than a pocket could support. (Now a days, that would be a tank of petrol)
Now, historically this would have to do with the fact that most coins were made of metal for durability and longevity. Many times made from a metal that could be traded across cultures.
Paper money was expensive to produce, easily damaged and could not be melted down and re-stamped. (and it doesn't sound as nice when you smack it down on the bar top).(and when did you ever see pirates raid a ship with paper money?)
Americans, at least in my life time, have never had a love of using coins in daily transactions.
The key word there is 'using'. We love to collect them, in a jar or something, planning on going through them looking for rare ones, but usually ending up redeeming them into our bank accounts or for larger bills. But actually having them in our pockets and counting out change, I think we find that cumbersome.
As a kid, coins were fine. We collect soda bottles to get coins. We could still buy things with coins; candy, soda, an ice cream. You could easily carry enough coins in your pocket to acquire just about any thing a kid could need on any given day.
But over here, once things started going up in price, coffee, papers, phone calls, we started caring less and less about using them. We would never, in America, consider carrying around twelve dollars worth of coins in our pockets. That would be about eight pounds UK at the time of this writing. Easily done with UK currencies.
Over here coins are usually thrown into a dish when we get home, retrieving the next day only enough to maybe buy a soda. We don't even use them in phone booths any more. Most of the time, especially pennies, they may not see the light of day again for several years.
Dimes are a nuisance. To small for their value, to close in size to the penny.
And most people don't want coin change much any more anyway. We are even talking about doing away with the penny over here. Most kids working at service counters can't even count out the right change for you without relying on the register. Advertiser will hate not being able to make something a certain dollar amount and an odd number of cents, but they will move on. (Why is it we will pay $15.98, but will shop around if it's $16.00?)
The dollar doesn't get you enough to want to carry many dollar coins around in your pocket, at least without the aid of suspenders. We even, over here, tried the make the dollar smaller to make it more appealing, but poor old Susan B. didn't fare very well.
Yea, you can find westerns and depression era books and movies that still show the use of coins (five cent beers, dinner for fifty cents, a glass of whiskey), but even those eventually found the use of paper money better suited. Remember in 'Butch Cassidy' the paper money flying all over the place after the train robbery.
Maybe I'm reading the wrong books or watching the wrong shows, but it doesn't seem that the use of coins in visuals has been around in America since the depression, except with the occasional newspaper buying scene.
You read a book, or watch a show set in the UK or Ireland and I believe you will still see coins coming out of pockets more often than wallets. Maybe I'm wrong, and maybe it's just what I want to see, but I love it.
And over there the coins always have better names; quids, coppers, half-penny or hap'ney, two pence or tuppence ("with tuppence for paper and string, you can have your own set of wings. . ."), three penny bit. You actually want to use these coins in story telling!
On our last visit to the UK I would feel guilty if I couldn't come up with the right coins fairly quickly.
Something I wanted to master.
We all have favorite images that we carry around in our heads. Images we almost require to make a setting appeal to us. (Holmes can not open a can of Bud at the Alpha Inn!)
And for me Watson will always pay the hansom driver with coins. Holmes will always use coins at the Alpha Inn. Foyle will buy his whiskey with coins. Herriot uses them at the Drovers. And Barnaby. . . well, Barnaby may be a paper man, I just haven't decided yet.
It's just what I find appealing. I still have a big collection of English coins and I love them. I keep them in a Lyle's Golden Syrup can.
What are some of your favorite image requirements?
Monday, March 18, 2013
A fun site for some insight. . .
The Victorian Era.
Found this site (actually a while ago, while working on another paper ) while doing research for an upcoming paper. Lots of fun stuff.
.jpg)
Found this site (actually a while ago, while working on another paper ) while doing research for an upcoming paper. Lots of fun stuff.
.jpg)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)