ailurophile_bibliophile89's review against another edition
4.0
3.5 Stars
My only complaint is the amount of detail. Smith keeps you interested and he certainly did his research - and he definitely portrays Rasputin in a much more sympathetic light - but there is such a thing as being too meticulous. All in all, worth the read but it's not an easy read, so keep that in mind if you're interested.
My only complaint is the amount of detail. Smith keeps you interested and he certainly did his research - and he definitely portrays Rasputin in a much more sympathetic light - but there is such a thing as being too meticulous. All in all, worth the read but it's not an easy read, so keep that in mind if you're interested.
notbucket24's review against another edition
5.0
Very well researched and balanced. The (admittedly few) other books I've read about him seem to perpetuate the most popular myths and not truths about him. At 700+ pages it can get a bit bogged down in information at times, but well worth pressing on.
sarapalooza's review against another edition
4.0
The author does a great job of mixing the facts known about Rasputin (which are well-researched) and the gossip that was extremely prevalent during his life. He is neither painted as a saint or demon, but as someone much more nuanced. It is an interesting portrait of the man and the times he lived in. Absolutely fascinating how he became so enmeshed in court life.
keej2525's review against another edition
5.0
Very informative book about an incredibly elusive figure. This bio sheds much needed light on Rasputin, who otherwise seems entirely shrouded in mystery and propaganda.
chantelbrenna's review against another edition
4.0
This book is super detailed, which I mostly appreciated, but sometimes I felt a little bogged down in details. However, overall I enjoyed it and thought the author did a great job detailing Rasputin’s life and everything going on in Russia at the time.
atarbett's review against another edition
informative
slow-paced
2.5
Can’t say it’s not well researched, but he’s kind of a buzzkill when he explains (in exhaustive detail) why every interesting story about Rasputin is false.
penderzz's review against another edition
3.0
I really wish this book had lived up to what I expected it to be. For the length of it, I feel like I don’t know any more about Rasputin than when I started.
It was way too long for what it was for starters, it felt like when you were at school padding out an essay to reach the word limit with pointless anecdotes with little relevance to the subject matter. The amount of individuals mentioned by name once and never mentioned again was astonishing. It took me so long to read, mainly because I read approximately 6 other books in the middle of it because I couldn’t face picking it back up, but also as I was consulting google every other page to who on Earth we were reading a quotation from now. Even a list of persons mentioned somewhere in the book would’ve been useful to flick between.
There are about 60 pages covering 1869-1904 and a mere 700 ish covering the next 13 years. Whilst we know little about Grigory prior to becoming the royal favourite, the 60 pages were mainly setting the scene of the state of the Romanov dynasty, little Alexei’s illness and Monsieur Philippe.
Smith highlights almost every other line that Rasputin was not a khlyst (actually embedded in my brain to the extent that I had a dream that I too am not a khlyst). I also don’t know how much more I could take reading about Rasputin’s legendary penis - it may as well have had a whole section of the book devoted to it. The evidence provided for Rasputin not being a khlyst, was more the absence of evidence for his being a khlyst. I still don’t actually know what it was Rasputin believed in other than perhaps equal status in god’s eyes as he was outspoken when his company made anti-semitic comments? Who knows though.
I noted several spelling mistakes and the most annoying grammatical feature of “Nicholas wrote Alexandra” which infuriated me to no end as Smith also used “Nicholas wrote to Alexandra” - less frequently but still made use of it. I don’t know if using wrote without a preposition is normal in American English but as a Brit with an English language degree with several grammar modules under my belt, I was irritated immensely over the million pages that this book felt like.
If anyone could recommend a better/actual biography of Rasputin I would be much obliged.
It was way too long for what it was for starters, it felt like when you were at school padding out an essay to reach the word limit with pointless anecdotes with little relevance to the subject matter. The amount of individuals mentioned by name once and never mentioned again was astonishing. It took me so long to read, mainly because I read approximately 6 other books in the middle of it because I couldn’t face picking it back up, but also as I was consulting google every other page to who on Earth we were reading a quotation from now. Even a list of persons mentioned somewhere in the book would’ve been useful to flick between.
There are about 60 pages covering 1869-1904 and a mere 700 ish covering the next 13 years. Whilst we know little about Grigory prior to becoming the royal favourite, the 60 pages were mainly setting the scene of the state of the Romanov dynasty, little Alexei’s illness and Monsieur Philippe.
Smith highlights almost every other line that Rasputin was not a khlyst (actually embedded in my brain to the extent that I had a dream that I too am not a khlyst). I also don’t know how much more I could take reading about Rasputin’s legendary penis - it may as well have had a whole section of the book devoted to it. The evidence provided for Rasputin not being a khlyst, was more the absence of evidence for his being a khlyst. I still don’t actually know what it was Rasputin believed in other than perhaps equal status in god’s eyes as he was outspoken when his company made anti-semitic comments? Who knows though.
I noted several spelling mistakes and the most annoying grammatical feature of “Nicholas wrote Alexandra” which infuriated me to no end as Smith also used “Nicholas wrote to Alexandra” - less frequently but still made use of it. I don’t know if using wrote without a preposition is normal in American English but as a Brit with an English language degree with several grammar modules under my belt, I was irritated immensely over the million pages that this book felt like.
If anyone could recommend a better/actual biography of Rasputin I would be much obliged.
booksmacked's review against another edition
informative
sad
slow-paced
3.0
I appreciate learning so much about a topic that is generally a false narrative, but the story is quite repetitive and there are a lot of characters to keep track of.
mastle's review against another edition
3.0
More legend than reality. I'm a little disappointed that so much of what I had heard and known about Rasputin is not true. Most of what anyone ever said about him is not true. He wasn't a great person, but he wasn't supernatural evil incarnate. Probably a couple hundred pages longer than it needed to be, and difficult to follow with all of the names, but this was a detailed, thorough, and believable analysis of the man and the legends surrounding him.