The architect of a project originally pitched as a “world-class” women’s history museum but now being marketed as a museum dedicated to Jack the Ripper, has said his firm was completely unaware of the plans to change the museum’s purpose.
Andrew Waugh, director of architecture firm Waugh Thistleton, said he had worked with former Google executive and museum founder Mark Palmer-Edgecumbe on the plans, which were submitted in 2014. According to the
Building Design Waugh said Palmer-Edgecumbe had not responded to any contact from the firm since the plans were approved by the council last year.
“It’s salacious, misogynist rubbish”, said Waugh. “We’re not interested in it.”
According to Palmer-Edgecumbe, the perception was a “misconception” of what the planned museum is trying to do, adding that the attraction will be “a serious examination of the events of London’s East End in the 1880s not a glorification of Jack the Ripper or his crimes.”
Palmer-Edgecumbe said that the project “changed architects in September 2014” and that Waugh had not tried to contact him since then. The developer added that he had not deliberately misled Tower Hamlets Council, rather that “ideas developed as we curated the exhibition and the museum is still focused on women examining the social history of the East End.”
According to its website, the Jack the Ripper Museum “takes a look at the history of women in the East End in the Victorian era and discusses why so many women had little choice in their lives other than to turn to prostitution.” However, social media commenters have suggested the focus will be on the murderer rather than his victims, with multiple Tweets referring to “Ripperology” – the study of the infamous serial killer.
Public opposition to the change has been strong, with a
petition to revoke planning permission for the East End museum at nearly 5,000 signatures.
In a statement, Tower Hamlets Council has said it is “aware of the Jack the Ripper imagery” on the museum’s facade and is “investigating the extent to which unauthorised works may have been carried out at the premises.” The council did add however that it has “no control in planning terms of the nature of the museum.”
The museum was originally due to open on 4 August, but is yet to open its doors with no set date confirmed.
