[.ca] Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper Case Closed (ISBN 1587244101)

Rambling and Premature, and That's Being Generous:
I am a fan of Cornwell. I find her to be an intelligent woman, an interesting interview, and a talented author...and she's a fellow Davidson alumnus, a definite plus for this fellow Wildcat. I purchased the unabridged audio of this book eager to listen to what surely must be a well-reasoned, well-grounded theory backed up by at least some evidence. I was horribly disappointed. Even if Cornwell is correct, this is the farthest thing from a closed case I have ever encountered. Some of the logical leaps and contortions in this book are downright laughable and should justifiably draw outrage from Sickert's admirers or surviving relatives. As other reviewers have noted, it is POSSIBLE (as far as anyone knows) that Sickert might have been a creep, that he might have written a ripper letter, even that he may have been the famous killer, but anyone wanting to bring a case against Sickert would find almost nothing useful in this tome. The conviction with which Cornwell delivers many of her conclusions (the narrator is suitably melodramatic and judgmental in tone), no matter how tortuous, absurd, strained, or self-serving they may be, makes this book one whopper of a bitter horse pill to swallow for any reader/listener who has somehow managed not to either: a) toss the book into the wall in frustration, or b) fall asleep while attempting to follow the last convoluted line of argument to it's "inescapable" conclusion. I WANTED Cornwell to come up with an exciting new theory I could buy in to, but at best this book is premature in it's title and conclusion (unless evidence is no longer a prerequisite for closing a case), and at worst this book may be both intellectually dishonest and shockingly irresponsible. Sadly, this is a must-miss that will leave the reader with more lingering doubts about Cornwell than Sickert.

Absolute tosh: says more about Cornwell than Sickert:
I can't think of another character assassination that is as unfounded as this, based as it is on pure conjecture and highly selective and inconclusive 'evidence'. And just think of the irony of a writer who has based her entire written output on lingering over the sordid details of murder and mutilation claiming that Sickert was a violent psychopath because of the subject-matter of his paintings. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! This book reveals more about the neuroses and obsessions of Cornwell's own sick mind than it does about Sickert. Rather than 'case closed' on Sickert, it is 'case closed' on Cornwell. Cornwell's reputation as a writer of FICTION remains intact.

Still open:
One of the most insidious phrases in the English language is: "It's obvious that..." Nasty little phrase. It's usually used to cover weak logic, but it convinces people because of the implication that whoever says it is more knowledgeable than the listener. So imagine an entire book based on that phrase. Unfortunately, "Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper -- Case Closed" is one such book. Bestselling mystery writer Patricia Cornwell tried her hand at unravelling the century-old mystery of who Jack the Ripper REALLY was. Too bad her book is a steaming pile of... well, you get the idea. In her investigations, Cornwell primarily focused on Walter Richard Sickert, a British impressionist, actor, and pal of Oscar Wilde. While Sickert was open about his interest in the serial killings, Cornwell delves into the bizarre to reveal what she clearly sees as irrefutable proof of his double identity. Makes you wonder what the poor guy did to tick her off. Perhaps the problem is Cornwell's fiction -- her imagination is way too active. She seems to be treating the Jack the Ripper case not as a true event with hard facts, but as something that can be spun into a semi-fictional narrative, with clues that no jury would vote for. It would make for a good detective novel, but not a serious cold case investigation. Watermarks, coincidental poses, perceived signs in his paintings, hoax letters and mitochondrial DNA are all touched on, but Cornwell never actually produces any hard evidence -- in other words, evidence that would make a jury sit up and listen. At best, the evidence is circumstantial. For example, Ms. Cornwell has no actual proof that any of the letters that were tested were even from Jack the Ripper, or that the mitochondrial DNA was from Sickert. However, this doesn't stop her from asserting that both are the case. And her leaps of logic are almost impossible to swallow, unless you have a festering hatred for Sickert. For example, his apparent fascination with the crime makes him clearly guilty in Cornwell's book, despite the fact that many others -- also presumably innocent -- were similarly fascinated by the crime. The big difference is that we know of Sickert, whereas we do not know of Robbie the night porter. Cornwell also tends to damn without reason, exhibiting an almost shocking smugness. Sickert is proclaimed a cunning "psychopath," and her disdain for certain parts of London is obvious. Worst of all is Cornwell portraying the cops of the time as inept losers who could not find their own backsides with a map. The "dumb cops, smart li'l me" tactic works in fiction, but it is absurd in the real world. And finally, what did Sickert do to earn Cornwell's wrath? In her eyes, he is a cunning psycho, a woman-hater, a eunuch, a "slob," a master of disguise, a predator, and a guy who was obviously insane because he liked to take nighttime walks. Every small facet of his personality is twisted into a sign of predatory madness. If liking nighttime walks shows that you're a deranged killer, then chain me up. While Patricia Cornwell -- who destroyed at least one Sickert painting in her quest -- is a passable fiction writer, her real-life investigations are nothing short of demented. "Case Closed"? I think not.

Histories Mysteries:
Apparently congrats are in order! Yes, while British authorities and serial killer devotees have struggled for many years with the mystery of the true identity of Jack the Ripper one of America's favorite mystery writers takes time from her, no doubt, busy scheldule to solve this pesky little 'whodunnit.' Yes, while many of the worlds greatest minds have been baffled by who the true culprit was our author simply 'crosses the pond' takes a few notes, picks a worthy ( if not terribly convenient ) subject and voila!! Mystery solved. Splendid indeed...perhaps next Ms. Cornwell will help by solving that troublesome Middle East problem that keeps cropping up. Excuse me? But surely the 'Jack the Ripper' case is truly solved. I mean, Patricia Cornwell and her publishing house have subtitled her work " Portrait of a Killer: Jack the Ripper - Case Closed " All done up nice and tidy, no? Well, perhaps not. Actually for this author to be so presumptuous as to subtitle this novel with the smug "Case Closed " I find almost offensive in its arrogance and finality. As the Brits are fond of saying I believe Ms. Cornwell has indeed gotten hold of the " wrong end of the stick. " Not only is this misinformed book completely negligable of other factors involving the true identity of this madman but so heavy-handed and coarse that at several points during my read I almost had to sit back and wonder at the almost mind-numbing wrong-headedness of Ms. Cornwells beliefs. Yet, like the proverbial 'bull in the china shop' she prattles on ceaselessly, confident in her findings and, no doubt, sure that her loyal readers too will find her mystery-solving skills truly supreme. Patricia Cornwell, who I assume, specializes in 'fictional' mysteries is most definitely out of her element here. Her lack of analytic thinking, lack of logic and her being far too focused on her one and only suspect belies a sense of being out of her depth. Her talents may lie in creating subjects that conveniently do as she writes them but sadly for our author true life is seldome that convenient. Yet, page after page, she attempts to pigeon-hole her characters into doing what she needs them to so they can fit her singular belief of who 'Jack the Ripper' truly was. One can assume that she almost viewed this offering as one of her fictional endeavors as well...happily coming to the conclusion that she had decided upon long before she ever sat down to put pen to paper. Presumptuous indeed! And,sadly, to make matters far worse, playing the role of the 'tortured artist' she includes a chapter where she has a talk with her literary agent describing how fraught she is with this latest work. Even going so far as to state, " I am suddenly in a position of judgement. " Then adding true insult to injury our grieving author states that she has some misgivngs about being wrong as to her identity of the culpprit but after being asked by her agent concerning any misgivings she she boldly states that indeed " No. Because I'm not wrong. " Sadly, this smacks of a writer who simply has an almost religious zeal toward her own talents married with a pathological belief in her abilities to be the only human being worthy of solving this international mystery. At this point any reader should be in awe of this womans supreme arrogance and lack of sublty. And many Americans wonder why we're so dislike by the international community! Well, in the end justice may previal. Ms. Cornwell's " Portrait of a Killer.... " was not exactly a rousing success for this author and today can be purchased as a 'remainder' for the paltry sum of $5.00. Fortunately Patricia will return to the genre that she does best, creating characters who dabble in fictional mysteries and quaint 'whodunnits.' As for real life atrocities I supect Ms. Cornwell should leave that to those much better equipped to deal with things here in the 'real world.'

Case closed? Not quite but....:
She's presented us with a very strong theory of who Jack the Ripper was. The only things she has conclusively proved are: 1: that Walter Richard Sickert wrote some of the Ripper letters (including one that came with a kidney). 2: That more of the ripper letters were written by the same person than previously thought (the use of paint rather than ink, watermarks and language point to one writer). 3: That Walter Richard Sickert was not a very nice guy and had a facination with the violent deaths of women. 4: That Walter Richard Sickert prefered the kind of women in the original five Ripper murders. I doubt the evidence that Ms. Cornwell provides would pass the reasonable doubt requirement with a jury. Then again, I doubt that enough evidence even still exists to convict anyone of these crimes. Sickert is definately someone ripperologists should give a closer look. Her evidence (or lack of) aside, Portrait of a Killer offers a rare view into the underbelly of Victorian England and a fairly entertaining read.