Christine (luvmygem) -
Helpful Score: 11
I've read a majority or Patricia Cornwell's novels - loved some, liked some, not so crazy about some - so I was interested to see how she would address this case with her background. I was not disappointed. This book is well-written, and she uses her forensic and criminal justice knowledge, storytelling skills and talent for research very well. It is written in a methodical and suspenseful way and I was hard-pressed to put it down.
Another reviewer mentioned something similar to this: By the end of this book, the author has me 100% totally convinced that she has indeed solved this infamous mystery. But I later realized that perhaps it was her ability to tell a tale, and perhaps her ability to have the clues point in the direction she wanted them to that made this story so convincable. You WANT to believe she's right, she did such a great job with this book. But a year after it came out I happened across a documentary that convinced me this suspect was NOT Jack The Ripper...
So who knows who's right and who's wrong...I don't think we will ever truly know, but if you're intrigued by this mystery as I always have been, I highly recommend this book. It's a different take, contains a lot of information and was just plain interesting to read.
Another reviewer mentioned something similar to this: By the end of this book, the author has me 100% totally convinced that she has indeed solved this infamous mystery. But I later realized that perhaps it was her ability to tell a tale, and perhaps her ability to have the clues point in the direction she wanted them to that made this story so convincable. You WANT to believe she's right, she did such a great job with this book. But a year after it came out I happened across a documentary that convinced me this suspect was NOT Jack The Ripper...
So who knows who's right and who's wrong...I don't think we will ever truly know, but if you're intrigued by this mystery as I always have been, I highly recommend this book. It's a different take, contains a lot of information and was just plain interesting to read.
Helpful Score: 4
I found the book to be interesting at first, but I lost interest about half-way through. I think it makes an excellent case for Sickert possibly writing some of the Ripper letters, but that is all. I didn't find any of the other evidence to be strong enough for me to conclude that he was definitely the killer.
sevenspiders -
Helpful Score: 3
I have never read any of Patricia Cornwell's mystery books, but if they are as narratively compelling as Portrait of a Killer, they must surely be page-turners. She knows how to characterize a psychopath; how to illustrate a depraved and violent mind. But I'm not convinced that Walter Sickert, 19th century artists and minor celebrity, was such a mind, or that if he was, he was the infamous Jack the Ripper.
Cornwell is clearly meticulous in her research, but here she seems to have been meticulous with a purpose. She concluded that Sickert was the Ripper, and gathered the evidence that supported her theory, giving minimal attention to the evidence that opposes it. Her argument would have been more convincing had she elaborated on how she determined Sickert was the Ripper; what were the steps that lead her to that conclusion? As presented, her epiphany seems like a bolt from the blue.
Cornwell's main pieces of evidence raise many interesting questions about Sickert. He had a deformity due to botched surgery that made him impotent, his artwork is largely misogynistic, many of the Ripper letters were written with artists' tools. All of these things indicate that he may have been a repressed and violent man, but not that he was Jack the Ripper. But Cornwell's case with these points makes fascinating reading. Her more tangible, physical proof is less fascinating. The only point in the book where my eyes began to cross was her description of different watermarks in different 19th century stationary that Sickert and others used. More interestingly, several investigators are trying to get DNA evidence from the envelopes and stamps on the Ripper letters, but again, the most this could prove would be that Sickert (and many other pranksters) liked to bait the police.
Still, Cornwell presents a richly detailed portrayal of a unique and disturbing individual. I had never heard of Sickert before reading Portrait, and I can see how he and his artwork would capture the imagination. Sickert, from Cornwell's research, seems to have been a dark and complicated man. And the London of his time was undeniably a dark and complicated place. It was an intriguing read, and I enjoyed hearing Cornwell's argument although I remain unconvinced.
Cornwell is clearly meticulous in her research, but here she seems to have been meticulous with a purpose. She concluded that Sickert was the Ripper, and gathered the evidence that supported her theory, giving minimal attention to the evidence that opposes it. Her argument would have been more convincing had she elaborated on how she determined Sickert was the Ripper; what were the steps that lead her to that conclusion? As presented, her epiphany seems like a bolt from the blue.
Cornwell's main pieces of evidence raise many interesting questions about Sickert. He had a deformity due to botched surgery that made him impotent, his artwork is largely misogynistic, many of the Ripper letters were written with artists' tools. All of these things indicate that he may have been a repressed and violent man, but not that he was Jack the Ripper. But Cornwell's case with these points makes fascinating reading. Her more tangible, physical proof is less fascinating. The only point in the book where my eyes began to cross was her description of different watermarks in different 19th century stationary that Sickert and others used. More interestingly, several investigators are trying to get DNA evidence from the envelopes and stamps on the Ripper letters, but again, the most this could prove would be that Sickert (and many other pranksters) liked to bait the police.
Still, Cornwell presents a richly detailed portrayal of a unique and disturbing individual. I had never heard of Sickert before reading Portrait, and I can see how he and his artwork would capture the imagination. Sickert, from Cornwell's research, seems to have been a dark and complicated man. And the London of his time was undeniably a dark and complicated place. It was an intriguing read, and I enjoyed hearing Cornwell's argument although I remain unconvinced.
Debbie H. (bookmama101) reviewed Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper-- Case Closed on + 4 more book reviews
Helpful Score: 2
This is an excellent book. I love the history surrounding Jack the Ripper and if you do you will love this book too. Ms. Cornwell did an excellent job with her investigative work. I finished with the feeling that she had found out the true identity of Jack the Ripper.
Julie A. (jjmachshev) reviewed Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper-- Case Closed on + 21 more book reviews
Helpful Score: 1
Very interesting explanation for Ms. Cornwall's theory on the identity of Jack the Ripper. Well researched, well deducted, and well written.
