The Five - A story as old as time

When I sat down to read the Hallie Rubenhold, The Five - the Untold Lives of the Women Killed by Jack the Ripper I didn’t expect to get a masterclass in the effects of inequality but that’s exactly what this book delivers - a “…. timely reminder of what happens when society ceases to care for its most vulnerable residents[1]”.

I'm confident there are very few people who haven't have heard of Jack the Ripper, the infamous murderer of the 1800s, the person responsible for the deaths of 5 women, a man never identified, but still infamous despite his anonymity. A character of myth and legend created and propagated by the press, perhaps revered by some in a society that even today has a morbid “fixation on the minds of the murderer and shallow, glancing sympathy for the dead[2]”. But have you heard of Polly, Annie, Elizabeth, Catherine and Mary-Jane? I'm less sure about that.

But this isn’t a story about Jack the Ripper. It’s a story about five women; daughters, wives, mothers, sisters and lovers, infamous for the same thing although they'd never met, the year of their murders: 1888. Its also a story about Dickensian London, about what happens when we allow the gap between the rich and the poor to grow, a compelling narrative ably demonstrating an unequal society is no good for any of us.

In more equal countries, human beings are generally happier and healthier; there is less crime, more creativity, more productivity, and – overall – higher real educational attainment. Economic equality benefits all people in all societies, whether you are rich, poor or in-between. Equality means being afforded the same rights, dignity and freedoms as other people, something these victims were never afforded; Rubenhold seeks to make right this wrongdoing.

For more than a century newspapers and writers have told us that the “Ripper” preyed on prostitutes, when in reality Rubenhold demonstrates with “a work of historical detection …. that is powerful and shaming[3]” there is very little evidence to support this narrative. 

There’s no doubt some of the women did make their living this way, but not all of them, they were educated, wrote ballads, ran coffee houses, lived on country estates, they breathed ink-dust from printing presses and escaped people-traffickers. For those that were prostitutes their journey to the profession was not straightforward with significant societal and political influences forcing them along this road. 

What is alarmingly clear from Rubenholds research is the Ripper was not preying on prostitutes, he was preying on the poor, the homeless, the destitute, the mentally ill, the despairing and addicted. When you combine this victim profile with a society that was deeply misogynistic, religiously radical, demonising of the poor, with confused moral codes applied to some and overlooked for others, what really killed these women and prevented their murderer from being caught was their poverty and the societal constructs of inequality that silenced them both during their lives and long after their death.  

So, I have to ask the question, what have we learnt since the 1800s? Still the UK has differences in income and poverty levels, health and opportunity which is among the worst in the developed world, limiting life chances, health and educational attainment, increasing the likelihood of low paid work, long term and life limited health conditions, to mention premature death - if you're poor you can expect to live 10 years less than your richer neighbours.

Why does society allow this to continue? Kaushik Basu gives it to us straight "… poverty has been so intractable … it remains largely out of sight for those who are not living it, safely somebody else’s problem” – Out of sight out of mind - remind you of Dickensian Britain perhaps? It seems not much has changed after all ….