This is where the "big picture" of my findings is organized or "weaved" into some type of chart, outline, or models. For me, I have always processed my information from information recorded on 3x5 index cards. This is how I was taught in high school English courses, and one of my graduate history professors also reinforced this idea. But there are a few steps I take before grabbing these cards.
First, I do some pre-searching and skimming. Then I come up with some general concepts, dates, ideas, events, etc. for an outline. For this project, I would create an outline that looks like this:
I. Introduction to Jack the Ripper
II. White Chapel: Life in East End London
III. The Victims
IV. The Suspects
V. Theories on the identity of Jack the Ripper
VI. Conclusion
With these general headings, I would then write this on the upper left hand corner of each index card for easy and efficient filing and retrieving for a later time. After doing some more research and reading, I would then go back and put some "meat" to the bones of my above outline. For example:
IV. The Suspects
A. George Chapman
B. Prince Albert "Eddy"
C. M.J. Druitt
VI. Theories on Jack the Ripper
A. Royal cover-up
B. Masonic Conspiracy
C. The Misogyny Angle
D. Psychological killer
Again, I would then do further research from my books, articles, and online sources and skim for further names and concepts. Then return to my outline and add some more substance to it.
VI. Theories on Jack the Ripper
A. Royal Cover-up
1. Druitt
2. Prince Albert "Eddy" Victor, Duke of Clarence
3. Sir Dr. William Gull, royal physicican
B. Masonic Cover-up
1. Freemasons and the Royal British Government
2. Freemasons involved in investigation/cover-ups
Eventually, I would have a box full of index cards, broken down by general headings and then subheadings. I find index cards the most effective note taking or "weaving" style for me as it allows me great flexibility in moving my ideas and research around. Sometimes I might put a particular topic too early in my assignment, and then realize later it might fit in better with another heading or argument.
For this class, I will try some different and more visually stimulating organizing/note taking strategies. For example, I decided to used Dr. Lamb's "What If" chart to interpret my information, identify similarities and differences, and just for the chance to explore alternative solutions and outcomes. I remember sitting in one of my grad history courses and a student asked the professor if we were allowed to do "what ifs" in historical writing. This professor (same one I mentioned in a trailblazer assignment who said there was nothing to gain from watching historical movies) said "Absolutely not. This is a useless tool and only amateur writers who think they are historians adopt this process." Once again, I'm glad to learn and be able to do something I wanted to but was told not to now in my SLIS studies!
The last stage in "weaving" is synthesizing the results. I've look at my notes from my journal, viewed and reread websites such as casebook.org, and examined why some researchers believed a particular subject was responsible for the killings in London. I feel I have addressed my important questions, which seemed to be constantly a recursive issue for me. I would find something new out and then go back and revise my questions. For example, in my KWHL chart, I wanted to know how political, religious, social, and/or psychological factors contributed to the Ripper theories.
First off, I feel I have acquired enough background information for all the above angles to present in a basic introduction lecture/presentation. I learned that the Freemasons controlled the Royal British government, and many key players in this mystery including royal physician Dr. William Gull, and Commissioner of Metropolitan Police force, Inspector Abberline who collected and recorded the evidence, Sir Charles Warren, and artist Walter Sickert were Masons. I also found out from reading that some Ripperologists believe the way Jack the Ripper arranged the victims' bodies and left behind clues depicted Masonic symbolism. Further reading and quotes from sources also talked about Stephen Knight's research which contends that Dr. Gull created the "Jack the Ripper" suspect to kill prostitutes who knew about the royal family's indiscretions (Newton, 78)
I also learned from Patricia Cornwell's book about how forensic science today can be used to solve the mystery of the Ripper. With DNA analysis focusing on saliva and mitochondrial testing from several of Jack the Ripper's letters matched Sickert's DNA. Furthermore, some of Sickert's paintings and drawings contained clues about the Ripper murders, clues and scenes so similar that only the killer would know.
There are some other angles to view this information, as suggested by Dr. Lamb. I could have focused on the artistic and visual angle of the case. For example, I found an that.... Or, I might have spent more time and research on a social and political issues, such as the great divide between the wealthy and poor classes; anti-Jewish attitudes; and the moral issue of prostitution in the Victorian Age. All these angles sound exciting to pursue, but I would definitely need more time, research sources, and background information. Maybe I'll pursue this inquiries later....
***************************************************************************
Works Cited
Lamb, Annette. "Weaving." http://virtualinquiry.com/inquiry/weaving.htm
Newton, Katie Colby. Jack the Ripper: Opposing Viewpoints. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press, 1990.
1 comment:
I like that you did the 'What iffing' chart. It is a lot different from an outline. I think its always a good idea to try different methods, because our students will all learn differently.
Post a Comment