Customer Reviews

Man Who Killed Rasputin

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Felix Youssoupov is rememberd for only one thing--the murder of the mystic, Rasputin, in 1916. He accomplished little else during his long and self-indulgent life save a major lawsuit against MGM. (The next time I see "Any resemblance between the characters and persons living or dead is purely coincidental", I'll think of the Prince's fortuitious suit which left him in the financial pink for the rest of his life.) Greg King's book on THE LAST EMPRESS was a stunning, beautifully researched book on a controversial figure. King had access to all of Alexandra's correspondence and also that of her friends and relatives. The same situation did not apply when he wrote about Felix Youssoupov, and this hurts the book. We have hints of scandal and sexual misbehaviour. There are lengthy descriptions of palaces and their contents since there is so little to say about the subject of this book.His only character traits appear to be vanity and frivolousness. He may have murdered Rasputin simply to gratify a vain urge to 'be part of history.' Other 'reasons' are suggested, and never proven. Youssoupov's relatives apparently did not cooperate with King and the prince's papers were unavailable. We are left with 'suppositions' and a great deal of third-person narrative. The Prince rarely speaks in his own words A great deal of the information on Rasputin is simply repeated verbatim from LAST EMPRESS. I would refer readers to the latter book. It is immensely superior to this book in every particular.

An absolutely beautiful book with interesting photos. The book is so well-written, that the characters in pre-revolutionary Russia come to life and one gets a feeling of the "hardship" Felix and Irina endured when in exile. It is astounding that a "mad" monk could have such an influence over the tsarina and her imperial court. Personally, I admire Prince Felix Youssoupov for taking such a drastic action in those troubled times. After reading this book, I bought his book "Lost Splendour" which gives generally a very good impression of what life was like in pre-revolutionary Russia and there are some funny chapters in it as well. It ends with the tragic exile from Yalta sailing towards the unknown.

Greg King tells a great story, from the sordid affairs and intricacies of the European aristocracy to the history of that era. Rasputin's death and life reads like fiction. The details of Youssoupov's life pre and post Rasputin draw interesting parallels between the killer and his victim. On par with Massie's "Romanovs: The Final Chapter".

The author does a wonderful job of separating the myths and the truth concerning the lives of the "Mad Monk" Rasputin and his killer, Felix Youssoupov. Rich in detail, I felt like I was in Tsarist Russia, watching the dramatic events as they unfolded. Recommended reading for any history buff.

A wonderful book that give a just account of the Prince himself. Not your ordinary biography or history book, and it reads like a detective story, unfolding the final act of murder and sustaining reader curiosity even though the victim and the murderer are known.

King's scholarship is severely in question in this book. Many of his claims about both Rasputin and Yusupov are mixtures of conjecture, pop-psychology, and pseudo-mysticism. In some cases, they're downright libelous.

Too bad Felix Yusupov isn't alive to sue him, too. (As he did both MGM and CBS).

King makes claims that cannot in any way be substantiated, but he presents them as truth, as allegations, and as innuendoes. The book comes across as an apologists attempt to paint Rasputin in a good light and to brand Yusupov as some kind of insane sex-criminal.

King even maintains that Rasputin could actually heal!

In most of the rest, he just re-quotes other sources. I know that stealing from more than one source is research, not plagiarism, but the only new insights into the events are from King's imagination.

Read it as fiction, not as fact. Yusupov might not have told the complete truth in his memoirs, but you can't take this book as fact either.

And the book isn't too bad, either

The author purports to be a historian and scholar but this book shows he is neither. It is full of "Grigori Rasputin good," and "Prince Felix Felixovich Yusupov bad." Yusupov knew Rasputin's motives and knew Rasputin was intrumental in bringing down the Tzar and the murder of his family by the Bolshevichs. The author of this book doesn't bother to provide evidence for his claims. He literally makes things up as he goes along. It is astonishing this book obtained publication. However, when one considers the slop being published today, it should probably be no surprise it came into print. The author glosses over several obvious facts. For example, as the predominent number of extant Rasputin photos show, Rasputin was a freemason. Secondly, Rasputin is a well known charlatan who was arrested many times for defrauding the public. That is why he left Siberia. Moreover, Rasputin, as freemason, was a spy for the Bolshevichs. Much of the "healing" was a charade engineered by Rasputin himself in order to gain the confidence of the Tzar's circle and documented by several sources at the time. The author mentions none of these facts. In fact, the author is nothing more than a revisionist historian who wants to rewrite history the way he feels it should be rather than the way it is. In short, the author is a buffoon. He is as credible a scholar as Rasputin is a faithhealer. The author is an imbecile.

And the book isn't too bad, either