Ripper Street BBC1 Sundays @9pm My posted Comment on Guardian online TV Review Blog by Sam Wollaston:posted 2nd January 2012

In reply to a poster:

@dontlikeit – Good point, had forgotten that bit whilst i wrote. Yes, somehow that scene, being that he was a Doctor ‘an all, was really shocking and depressing at the same time.

Myself i remember feeling the above yet at the same time finding it really dubious that we were meant to believe a Doctor was involved with a wife who had a whole travelling brothel attached?

Was the Doctor not, by his accent, meant to be a Southern gentleman? to train as a Doctor then would have meant having your own means:therefore being some kind of ‘Officer/Gentleman’ is it really likely that he would have had no problem with nefarious dealings and travelling brothels?

Or was the Doctor’s vague and unsubstantiated ‘money problems’ meant to explain it all? To me the whole thing was just another unnecessarily added extra touch of evil thrown into the already stewing smorgasbord..

Perhaps, as you mention, the point was that there are decent human beings across history that defy the hideous accepted standards of the time and we were supposed to believe that of Mathhew Mcfadden like you say of Gene Hunt?

Yet it was insufficient thinking to my mind , which simply transplanted modern day attitudes backwards. The Detective wouldn’t have phrased things, nor done things quite like that, would he?

Quite how the Victorian Detective would have thought, spoke and felt, we will never know for sure. But it would have been a lot more interesting if they had spent more time and effort on their historical research, not just on the clothes and sets but the language as well pointed out by another poster here:it just didn’t ‘fit’.

The language reflected the attitudes and all i really noticed was lots of gleefully pronounced words to describe ladies of the Night and “squirings” i half expected them to say “rogering”.
The language actually sounded more like it was emanating from a medieval Tavern than the language spoken by the Victorian middle to working class. The Press guy was wittily verbose i felt but even this, sadly, was overdone to the point of it sounding more Oscar Wilde-ish than day to day Victorian..

Ripper Street t’was really, i mean really a vile a thing to produce. i felt the worse for watching it and being involved..

Ripper Street BBC1 Sundays @9pm my posted comment on The Guardian TV Review by Sam Wollaston posted 31st December 2012

i was absolutely appalled: i felt like i was watching a deliberately sexed up snuff film. Plus the main ‘Detective guy in it was ludicrously anachronistic. Only the Drake character was believable in the era in the Police. It was today’s tropes ridiculously transplanted onto yesterdays.

I mean were we really meant to believe that they had a board full of stuck up photos? and that forensic science was that specific or advanced whilst the body lay on a stone floor? cue plenteous adoring close-ups of usual hideous dis-figuration of woman.

I mean had even sticky tape been invented? the rest of it was laden with symbolism laden tiresome pauses whilst they had to wait for the telegraph thingummy instead of phoning. Yes, we geddit, no gadgets.

Pouty faced Detective (who looked far too clean and had unlikely gleaming white teeth) looked askance at the departing horse and carriage of the eponymous Toff like he was missing the chance to chase it!

I only watched this out of historical interest yet it was just more torture porn/gore and excuses to view hideous sado-masochistic semi snuff scenes and salacious photos of the time plus some heavy duty ones thrown in for good luck..

I agree that the whole: ‘ You must drop this obsession with the Ripper thing’ to both the elderly Detective and the ‘Press’ was blatantly post revisionist and yet another future backwards transplanted trope.


in reply to a poster:

@Bangorstu – Agreed, my point was mainly that the whole:
‘Officially Obsessed with a Case’ Detective and or Journalist was not necessarily an assumed trope then if you like?   How on earth do we, or the programme makers know it was? I just think they were transplanting that well worn stereotype backwards in time, hence my post-revisionist description of what the programme makers have done.

eg. Do we really know that the Police then would have had the time, the equipment, the energy or even the care to be dwelling with all their cerebral efforts on solving a case?
Might they have not been much more matter of fact about it? considering the Police force itself can’t have been created that long (somebody here will know) and life was indeed cheap then.

I did find myself wondering during the programme whether they would have cared that much about the murders of Ladies of the Night anyway?
(for the Ripper cases that is and they assumed this victim was too at first)

I mean the Police in the 21st Century didn’t immediately care when this latter day Yorkshire ‘Ripper’ started his spree on the same women: i remember. They only changed their view when it was the ‘right’ sort of woman ie ‘a ‘real’ victim.
In Ripper Street their caring ‘right-on’ attitude just seemed a bit unlikely for that time period to me.

in reply to a poster:

@Froggies, good point, i agree. Myself i found this level of horrific violence towards women and lets face it a snuff film reproduced for our delectation and a second one lovingly dragged out before our eyes which seemed really the pivotal action around which the whole thing was designed was absolutely horrific.

Compared to a steady diet of Scandinavian dramas as you say i find this even more abhorrent in comparison. I watched the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo trilogy and was bemused they were all on so very late and hardly (bar the first one) reviewed in my paper. I pondered whether it was the title of the second one or that one scene, which after all was pretty much hidden from view.

Yet when you compare the heroine in that trilogy with the usual run of the mill woman as victim/dreadful disfigured dolls and this, Ripper Street, which was horrific hard core porn we were subjected, without warning, to watching:they are a million billion miles away from each other.

Lisbeth Salander is not a victim.

Personally i am wondering if these programmes are set in that time period purely to absolve themselves from any responsibility for continuing to portray this unacceptable level of misogynist violence and the sado-masochistic murder of women.

Not to mention plenty of auto-asphyxiation thrown in. We had the long overly drawn out scene of the husband too remember?=nice..

& any kids/teenagers or even youngsters with TV’s computers in their bedrooms could have watched Ripper Street..