9 replies to this topic

[Nichola Boughey]

For all those teachers out there like myself teaching 'Jack the Ripper' you may find it interesting that Patricia Cornwell has created a documentary where she claims that she will discover and reveal the true identity of Jack the Ripper.

The BBC are showing this documentary on Wednesday's Omnibus at 10:35.

This is what they have to say.

2235 Omnibus: Patricia Cornwell - Stalking the Ripper, BBC One
Bestselling crime writer Patricia Cornwell has set herself her toughest assignment yet – discovering the true identity of Jack the Ripper, widely seen as the world’s first serial killer. Cornwell applies 21st-century scientific methods to these century-old crimes and is now convinced she knows the Ripper’s identity. But how will her evidence be received? Omnibus finds out. Contains scenes of a graphic nature.  

Could be worth a look and maybe videotaping!

[Richard Drew]

perhaps this idea of a novelist delving into the world they write about might catch on: -

maybe jeffrey archer could become a serious politician?

[Nichola Boughey]

Aaaahhhh but...

Patricia Cornwell was a forensic pathologist before she was a novelist!

Can Jeffrey Archer really say he was a politician before he was a novelist?

Give it a go - it might be useful!

[Richard Drew]

perhaps i should read the blurb inside peoples books from time to time then i wouldn't look like a prat!

not sure if he can say he was ever a 'novelist', that would be like posh spice calling herself a 'talented singer'

[Russel Tarr]

I watched it for about five minutes; at that point she was busy talking about her relationship with her father...my immediate response was 'self-absorbed American pyschobabble' and I switched over to watch Interview with the Vampire instead. That was rubbish, too.

[Malarvilie]

I watched it and wondered why she talked about herself a lot...... yes I agree very self absorbed.

But that aside I felt she had made up her mind before even looking at the evidence and seemed to fit the evidence she did find into what she believed to be true. it wasnt a very balanced argument at all.

What did any body else think?

Mal

[Dafydd Humphreys]

I'm with Russel - I switched (myself) off after five minutes. It was more about her than the actual issues. Saved myself another blank tape though which I used for the Guy Fawkes programme today.

[Nichola Boughey]

I agree - she fit the evidence in with the conclusion that she wanted.

I felt that she needed to remeber that a Historian uses the evidence to reach a conclusion - as a novelist she has a conclusion and writes the story around it.

Saved myself a video as well Dafydd - but missed Guy Fawkes - mind you we do not teach it.

I was too busy sorting out a controversial lesson for Yr. 9 tommorow on Advertising techniques - usuing Benetton as an example with PPT and colour pictures to hand out - just sit back and wait for parent's complaints...

[Malarvilie]

I taped over Cornwell with the Guy Fawkes prog today....

[neil mcdonald]

I saw the programme too (to my shame I taped it). It was horid - lack of rela evidence - dismissed any other suspects (actually did n't mention any others) Lovely piece about it in the Sunday Telegraph - something about the man at the Tate looking increasingly disturbed by her comments of a bottle of red wine being blood.....

If you ever showed that to a class of students my opening line would be this is how not to investigate the past! I think I taped over it with Foyle's war