Nigel the ripper, Does it have the same shock value?
2007-05-24 01:48:05 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
They would if he'd had a knife to their throat
2007-05-24 01:55:43 · answer #1 · answered by Purple.Diamond 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
He wouldn't have been called nigel, since the name Jack the Ripper was invented precisely to instill fear.
Prior to the Ripper, Jack was known both as Leather Apron and The Whitechapel Fiend. The journalist who invented the Ripper catchphrase did a good marketing job, but the name reflected the fear that was already there.
2007-05-24 19:07:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Names have the power we give them.
Adolf was a joke name until Hitler made it popular.
Katrina was on of the 10 most popular names in the US before 2004. Now it's not even on the top 100 list.
There hasn't been a girl called Lizzy in the US for over 100 years after Lizzy Borden killed her family.
If the Ripper's name was known at the time, it would be scary today. Even if it were Nigel.
2007-05-24 01:59:12 · answer #3 · answered by taliswoman 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nigel the Ripper? Well, it's marginally scarier than Nige the Ripper. And definitely harsher than Beryl the Ripper.
Jack is a pretty good Ripper type name, I guess. Trying to think of some others.
Hmmm.
Jarrod the Ripper ... not bad!!!!
Jaydn the Ripper ... nah, not too scary.
Bill. Bill the Ripper. Nope, not working.
As far as Ripper names go, Jack or Jarrod for my money.
Cheers :-)
2007-05-24 01:57:17 · answer #4 · answered by Bluewaterwoman 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. He was never caught, but since the killings occurred in 1888 it's pretty certain that he's dead. London has also changed a lot since then. The street lighting is better, the police are better trained and equipped, and the slums of the East End have largely been cleared. Still probably not a good idea to wander around Spitalfields and Whitechapel in the early hours of the morning, but you should be reasonably safe in daylight. Most of central London (especially the touristy parts) are reasonably safe as well.
2016-04-01 05:40:19 · answer #5 · answered by Sylvia 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is widely believed by experts that the letter sent to the London metropolitain Police in September 1888, signed "Jack the Ripper" was a hoax sent by a newspaper to add an extra "fright factor" to the already appalling crimes.
Between August and November 1888 the whole of the East end of London lived in fear of the unknown uncaught murderer. The tabloid media at the time was having a field day with it all.
2007-05-24 02:00:15 · answer #6 · answered by Robin 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well you still have the 'ripper' part, but I agree, Nigel is not as frightening as Jack.
2007-05-24 01:52:13 · answer #7 · answered by Julia Sugarbaker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Instead of Ripper,he would be known as......
NASTY NIGEL , or
NAUGHTY NIGEL ,
I think the folk of old London Town would still be afraid ,whatever he was called.
2007-05-24 02:18:08 · answer #8 · answered by seaview 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I personally would be just as scared of a knife wielding lunatic named Nigel as of one named Jack. As Jack's victims all seemed to be "street-walkers", common prostitutes, they were the only ones who really needed to be afraid of him, tho all of London was up in arms over his crime spree. Even the queen, I recall hearing. But if I saw a nut named Nigel coming at me with a big knife and a gleam in his eye, i would be making tracks in the opposite direction as fast as my legs could carry me!
2007-05-24 01:58:22 · answer #9 · answered by harridan5 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He might have been Nigel the cudgel who bashed people's brains out perhaps in a parallel universe.
2007-05-24 01:53:40 · answer #10 · answered by CHEESUS GROYST 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
sure...of course jack is a tough guy name and nigel is a wussy name, but considering the crime is the same...there isn't that much power in a name when balanced against mass murder of hookers!
2007-05-24 01:51:47 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋