Saturday, 11 August 2012

A cup of tea

As ever, while this is still on the blog, you will need to click on some pictures ( most) to see them in full. One of my favorite etchings by Walter Sickert, below, dated 1884. Exquisite character produced from a simple etching. Have you ever seen anyone similar, do you recall?


I've suggested that the painting below is representative of a number of scenarios and that Walter is suggesting that one and the same people, Special Branch police, were responsible for all of them. Firstly the painting evokes tortured Annie; the lady with her hair in a bun in the sketch of the tobacconists at no 21 Cleveland Street where the secret letter delivery service was situated; the man seems at once to be sitting down beside the subject in a pragmatic and detached manner, and from another perspective, to be standing up washing his hands: then it evokes Emily Dimmock, the young woman victim of the 'Camden Town murders', who seems, by Walter's account, to have been murdered by those responsible for Annie's torture; then again it invokes the figure of what was purportedly 'Mary Kelly', as she lay on the bed facing the room ( the painting, from the 'Mary Kelly' perspective, shows the inverse, with the girl facing away, perhaps demonstrating that the bed was at the centre of Miller's Court when all the desecration of the Stuart girl ( or staged arrangement of the same) took place. )




Below, Catharine Eddowes found lain at Mitre square, according to a contemporary police drawing in a newspaper which Walter will have seen.


Likewise, below, in close up.




Below, another painting by Walter Sickert called 'Une Thasse de The' ( Currently at the Aukland Art Galleries) in which he clearly references Catharine 'Kitty' Eddowes. Note that the way Catharine is seated at table is entirely suggestive of the way her corpse was sprawled out over the cobblestones in Mitre Square, having been lain there after being desecrated in a coach driven- according to Walter Sickert's secret and personal sketches- by 'John Charles Netley'.


In the above, Catharine's coat seems to have been done up again  from its torn condition, as it was after her death. This doing up of the coat apparently may have happened inside a coach, before her body was deposited at Mitre Square, or it could have happened on the way to the mortuary. Importantly, notice that in Catharine's left hand there is clearly a letter. She was ( as previously described) delivering a letter on behalf of Jacobite/Stuart/Irish confederates on the night she died. Specifically a letter from Prince 'Albert Edward' to Mary Jeanette Kelly. She was intercepted by Special Branch police, who murdered her. In the painting the letter seems, from one perspective, to be being read by some grotesque, almost monkey like figure, and this would seem to be suggestive of Walter's revulsion at such private correspondence being in the hands of murderers intent on espionage ( spying) on the lovers who'd employed Catharine as courier. In Catharine's right hand, there is depicted a cup of tea. (A sardonic gesture if ever there was one, aimed at Special Branch police. How would you like to go to tea with Commissioner Anderson and Chief John Littlechild?)


Here are the original research posts on the secret letter delivery service, and on Walter Sickert and Catharine Eddowes. The post on Cleveland Street in the 1880' here. There was clearly nothing accidental about Catharine's death; she was intercepted by Special Branch police, having betrayed them. The letter she was carrying was destined for Mary Jeanette Kelly, it was from the Prince. It was snatched out of Catharine Eddowes' hands, and her throat was cut. This painting literally places a letter in her hands at the time of her death, on top of all the other evidence for the women being couriers working for the secret letter delivery service.

In each of the Inquest papers pertaining to the 'Whitechapel murders', for each woman, there is reference to her throat being cut 'all the way across' the neck, some comments state from 'ear to ear'. ( I'm not going to go into it all now, that is for the website which is being constructed.)  The forensic evidence of the assassinations, including that which relates to Freemasonry revenge, does to an extent vary ( very significantly where Freemasonry is concerned) from one woman to another, but this neck feature is found in all five women. It specifically denotes a carefully planned assassination that involved two or three trained/educated people specifically. Why?

- Anatomical knowledge of the neck
- Restraint of the victim

Have a look here at the film reel from the film 'Witness', in which an assassination committed by by police is shown. See how conveniently the process of slitting the throat 'all the way across' serves to instantly stop the blood flow to the heart and therefore massively reduce inconvenient bleeding. See how it requires an ambush from behind and two, or possibly three, men.

 

..have a look at the anatomy of the neck, which I know you don't like to do, but it's essential here.


See how the external and internal jugular veins situate at the far sides of the neck, and that they carry the supply of blood that is pumped by the heart's strong pump that pushes it all round the body. Severing these jugular veins at the same time as the internal and external carotid arteries is very important if you want the thing to be efficiently done without bleeding from blood pumped by the heart going all over the place. Specifically it cuts of blood supply to the brain. It is more complex, slightly slower than a straightforward stab wound, and the victim is not going to stand there and let you try, so you would need to restrain the victim. And for such restraint you would need one man or two other men. As seen in the helpful film clip.

The facts of the corporeal forensic do rule out one lone murderer and imply a duo or threesome ( no more need be present on the spot I would say.) It is surprising that Patricia Cornwell, for all her endless talk about how she has seen forensic evidence, missed this obvious point. The dunderclunk 'ripperologists' miss it daily.

Walter has put forward paintings of the 'Ripper' trio, whom he paints with cloths over their faces- one detail from one of those paintings here, showing the woman Annie Chapman's throat being seized from behind her, as letters or letter fragments are scattered all over the stairwell. Is Annie being depicted with her face seized by a cloth here? It seems this can just about be inferred  though it's open to interpretation. The assassin or 'Whitechapel murderer' is behind Annie, an artistically huge knife in his left hand , and a letter which he has taken from her in his right, which he holds up. There are letters depicted strewn about the floor. This is Walter's depiction of one of the 'Whitechapel murders'. He clearly is stating that he saw a 'professional job' carried out by Special Branch police.


  Notice there are in fact what seems to be two men behind Annie Chapman. You can make out the second man to the left of the Whitechapel murder victim. ( On her right) .He has a bowler style hat and a cloth over his face too. Suggestive of the two police officers Anderson and Littlechild. The second man does seem to be pulling a cloth over Annie Chapman's face.

Isn't that little etching beautiful. Below, the little Amish kid from the film 'Witness' goes to tea with the police.



Below, an Amish looking man from Walters secret and personal sketch collection.


Another one such, below, from the same collection, but carrying straw bales or bricks perhaps?



Below, a drawing that could be an Amish on the town.... possibly a Danish/German  gent out for stroll, seen perhaps during Walter's childhood.  ( Is this a tentative drawing by a child or adolescent, or a slightly shaky drawing by an old man, drawn for Walter- Oswald drawing for Walter here?) I think it's a drawing from Walter, that he drew as a child.


Below, an Amish looking style of barn, or perhaps house, a sketch Walter seems to have modeled on his grandfather's paintings. ( There's an 1870/80s top hat in the picture, this is Walter's picture.)


A woman Walter enclosed with this collection, possibly his mother, seen through the eyes of a young boy or early teenager.


Very lovely.

Below, Walter Sickert's father Oswald Adalbert Sickert's painting of a family evacuating, having been made homeless apparently, with their household possessions,  possibly on a raft on a river it seems. From another perspective they could be on a street. The men on the bridge could be fishermen, but are they soldiers? Persecuting soldiers disguised in the painting as fishermen. And look at the shape of their persecuting swords. Is this a painting of Oswald Adalbert Sickert's  family ( Johann Jurgen Sickert's family) escaping persecution in Europe? Was this family originally a Mennonite/Amish family?


Here, a documentary on the Amish ( originally Mennonites) by a young girl, which goes into the European persecution: 



It seems that the Mennonite/Amish evacuation on the ship 'The Charming Nancy' ( you can instantly see why that ship's name would have appealed to Walter) was slightly too early for Walter Sickert's grandfather Johann Sickert, being in 1737. Nonetheless you can expect Johann Sickert to have recalled instruction about the persecution in that era from his own father, can't you. In this age where ( since the mid 1950s) artists are intimidated into accepting that discarding one's parents like an old shoe is a norm from which socially unacceptable deviance must be punished, it's hard for people to conceive of historical priorities as well as form and technique being repeatedly passed from artistic father to son but they were apparently in the Sickert family.
The painting by Oswald Sickert of the escaping family would probably be of his own family escaping Germany during the 1866 Austro Prussian war. ( Outlined here.) They do look like Prussian soldiers / Bismark's soldiers on the bridge there, don't they. This painting would suggest that Walter's family's exit from Germany was more dramatic than previously considered- (and why not, there was a serious war on).
 


   He married Nelly, a first generation love child, daughter of Richard Sheepshanks and an Irish dancer, and Walter was their son.

Walter as often called a 'contradiction in terms' where his love life was concerned; a philanderer who was very strict about the sanctity of marriage. Here the mystery seems to be solved. Sickert transcriblit.

There are few paintings by Johann Jurgen Sickert, Walter's grandfather, in the public domain. The following is called 'The interior of a barn'.


The following by Johann Jurgen Sickert is titled 'Hay stooks in a meadow.' Interesting how the 'stooks' are menacing and personalized: soldier like, they stand sentinel outside a harmless farmer's field, they loom and spy like the persecutors of the persecuted Mennonite/Amish people. 



The following Johann Jurgen Sickert painting is titled 'The Road to the North':


There is no formal record as to Johann Jurgen's appearance, though some of Walter's secret sketches do suggest him. I will check them out.



The association with the Mennonite/Amish might be the reason for the title of the painting of the persecuted/tortured woman, ( Annie Crook) 'La Hollandaise' (here). The Tate makes another interesting suggestion as the the title ( see link) but on the whole it's been a mystery for a while.  (In the mirror behind the female subject of 'La Hollandaise', you can see a woman sitting at a table in a chair with her back to us who appears to be facing a corrupt interrogator across a table.)

No comments:



The outline of the current situation in respect of the libel campaign against me and the legal stuff (click).