Author Topic: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...  (Read 90902 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Forum Admin

  • Administrator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 4665
  • www.alexanderpalace.org
    • View Profile
    • Alexander Palace Time Machine
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #60 on: April 09, 2008, 01:49:17 PM »
So sorry Alixz, it was so OT, and at the end you said you realized you had "put this in the wrong thread" so I thought you wanted me to delete it. Once a post is deleted, it can't be restored. My bad...

Offline Annie

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4756
    • View Profile
    • Anna Anderson Exposed!
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #61 on: April 09, 2008, 08:32:45 PM »
Now that I have direct quotes, here is an issue I want to address and question:

The back cover declares that 'newly discovered sources shatter long held beliefs'

among the claims:

Surprising evidence that Anastasia may have indeed survived

Revelations of how the Romanovs were betrayed by trusted servants


the flap claims that FOTR "explodes myths, confirms long dismissed theories, solves mysteries, and poses intriguing new questions..."

on page 470, it declares that 'intended victims left the murder room that night' The claim is made that forensic evidence from the exumed remains counteracts the Bolsheviks' story that the last two screaming girls (AN and MN) were finished off with head shots. Later: " Maria most certainly died that night...The evidence, as it stands, does not support any such conclusions about the possible deaths of GD Anastasia and Tsarevich Alexei. It is at least possible that one or more of the intended victims remained alive.....the deaths of Anastasia and Alexei are only a theory."

So much of this seems to directly tie into the AA story- AN 'surviving', Bux betraying the family, etc.  Some of the comments from the flap even seem to be leading into the AA story. My question is, do the authors confirm or deny that a main goal of this book was to set up a possible escape for AN ahead of and laying the groundwork for the (then) upcoming claimant book? Knowing what we know about the 'passing of the torch', (as the champions of AA's story from Kurth to Wilson and King) it's very hard to believe anything else. I would be interested to heara  truthful, sincere and friendly response.




« Last Edit: April 09, 2008, 08:41:51 PM by Annie »

Alixz

  • Guest
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #62 on: April 09, 2008, 11:07:55 PM »
That's OK FA. 

Everything was getting so tense and contentious, that I was trying to get people to say, "What?"

At least for a minute.

I know that it looked very OT and it was supposed to be.  All of that larger than life posting and all of the terse comments made me want to do something - well strange.

I should have warned you in advance. 

No "bad" on either side.  i confused my son, too.

Thanks,
Alixz

By the way - has anyone truly thought about "whirled peas"?  Certainly not the Chinese or some of the posters on this thread for that matter.   ;-)
« Last Edit: April 09, 2008, 11:10:38 PM by Alixz »

Offline LisaDavidson

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 2665
    • View Profile
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #63 on: April 09, 2008, 11:42:55 PM »
Now that I have direct quotes, here is an issue I want to address and question:

The back cover declares that 'newly discovered sources shatter long held beliefs'

among the claims:

Surprising evidence that Anastasia may have indeed survived

Revelations of how the Romanovs were betrayed by trusted servants


the flap claims that FOTR "explodes myths, confirms long dismissed theories, solves mysteries, and poses intriguing new questions..."

on page 470, it declares that 'intended victims left the murder room that night' The claim is made that forensic evidence from the exumed remains counteracts the Bolsheviks' story that the last two screaming girls (AN and MN) were finished off with head shots. Later: " Maria most certainly died that night...The evidence, as it stands, does not support any such conclusions about the possible deaths of GD Anastasia and Tsarevich Alexei. It is at least possible that one or more of the intended victims remained alive.....the deaths of Anastasia and Alexei are only a theory."

So much of this seems to directly tie into the AA story- AN 'surviving', Bux betraying the family, etc.  Some of the comments from the flap even seem to be leading into the AA story. My question is, do the authors confirm or deny that a main goal of this book was to set up a possible escape for AN ahead of and laying the groundwork for the (then) upcoming claimant book? Knowing what we know about the 'passing of the torch', (as the champions of AA's story from Kurth to Wilson and King) it's very hard to believe anything else. I would be interested to heara  truthful, sincere and friendly response.






First of all, what is on the back cover of the book is placed there by the publisher, not the authors. The publisher is generally interested in selling books, so they control what goes on the covers. It has nothing at all to do with the authors, so is not pertinent to any discussion of the contents of FOTR. Ditto the contents of "the flaps" - I believe these are called end papers - they are also the work of the publisher and not the authors.

Second, I have always interpreted Peter's remarks about "passing the torch" as a much more casual thing than those on this board seem to take it. When I discussed this with Peter years ago, he said he was glad that Greg and Penny had written their book, and that was about it. Although he has apparently said otherwise to others, he has always told me that the only thing he disputed about the 1990's testing was AA being identified as Fraziska Schanzkowska. Since he told me this directly and was consistent about it for many years, I tend to believe this more so than later statements attributed to him after he became so ill. This is, however, only my opinion.

Third, the purpose of this book was to reexamine the evidence around the murder of the family. I think this is fairly evident by what the authors said before during and after the publication. This is not to say that there was not consideration of a claimant book. Over the years, I have compiled a great deal of material on claimants and I have always found this to be an interesting subject. However, no one I know, including myself, has any intention of writing such a book. It has nothing to do with the new findings or AA's true identity - it has to do with the level of nastiness that seems to accompany the publication of any new book on the Romanovs. For me, my kids are old enough to read what is said about me (and they do) but still young enough to get very upset by some of what is said to me on the Forum and by PM - not to mention email. I really don't need this in my life - and I think that most of the writers I know feel the same way - who needs it?

This was certainly sincere, and definitely honest. I don't feel at all unfriendly by writing this, but I don't know if my reply will meet your expectations or not, Annie.

Offline Annie

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4756
    • View Profile
    • Anna Anderson Exposed!
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #64 on: April 10, 2008, 06:33:37 AM »


First of all, what is on the back cover of the book is placed there by the publisher, not the authors. The publisher is generally interested in selling books, so they control what goes on the covers. It has nothing at all to do with the authors, so is not pertinent to any discussion of the contents of FOTR. Ditto the contents of "the flaps" - I believe these are called end papers - they are also the work of the publisher and not the authors.

1. Well, if the publisher got that impression from the book, then I'm still not wrong.

2. The authors did or said nothing to prevent or change the wording.

3. I wonder if this was the same 'editor' who changed all those meanings inside the book, too? Wow, there must be a real conspiracy against them by somebody at that publishing company!

Quote
Second, I have always interpreted Peter's remarks about "passing the torch" as a much more casual thing than those on this board seem to take it.

It sure seemed pretty emotional to me. I was told by one person that he did it at a time when he was ill and thought he may not survive, so it was like his 'last wishes', trusting them to carry on for AA when he was gone, which makes it even more emotional. Add to that the fact that at the time he was not allowed to post on the forum and had to send it via a reliable friend. That proves it was no casual, off hand remark, it was something very important to him that he wanted publically seen.

Quote
When I discussed this with Peter years ago, he said he was glad that Greg and Penny had written their book, and that was about it. Although he has apparently said otherwise to others, he has always told me that the only thing he disputed about the 1990's testing was AA being identified as Fraziska Schanzkowska. Since he told me this directly and was consistent about it for many years, I tend to believe this more so than later statements attributed to him after he became so ill. This is, however, only my opinion.

Yet, to this day, he still openly admits he thinks she was AN.

Quote
Third, the purpose of this book was to reexamine the evidence around the murder of the family. I think this is fairly evident by what the authors said before during and after the publication. This is not to say that there was not consideration of a claimant book. Over the years, I have compiled a great deal of material on claimants and I have always found this to be an interesting subject. However, no one I know, including myself, has any intention of writing such a book. It has nothing to do with the new findings or AA's true identity - it has to do with the level of nastiness that seems to accompany the publication of any new book on the Romanovs.

I don't believe there would have been any 'nastiness' had there not been open invitation to controversy by claiming 'shocking new evidence that destroys long held beliefs', and the way one of the authors reacted when questioned. They had mentioned a claimant book , even here on this forum, so there's no question one was in the works. Another poster (nameless, not in this thread but has been active in others on this topic) even admitted that Greg had told her the book started out as an AA book and took on a larger purpose. But maybe it was still a lead-in, leaving little bits of info to back up parts of the AA story (like Bux, rape on the Rus) for an upcoming blockbuster AA book? Having been handed the 'torch', that would make sense.

One more thing I'd really like to know is that if this stuff was once true but is not anymore, have the authors changed their minds, are they  maybe a little 'embarrassed' (hence the silence) and if it is or was true, would they ever just admit it and move on? If they did, I don't think it would cause more trouble, but clear up a lot of questions and finally STOP it all!

Quote
I really don't need this in my life - and I think that most of the writers I know feel the same way - who needs it?

Really, who does?


« Last Edit: April 10, 2008, 03:56:50 PM by grandduchessella »

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #65 on: April 10, 2008, 08:53:55 AM »
One more thing I'd really like to know is that if this stuff was once true but is not anymore, have the authors changed their minds ... would they ever just admit it and move on? If they did, I don't think it would cause more trouble, but clear up a lot of questions and finally STOP it all!

I agree.

Offline Tsarfan

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1848
  • Miss the kings, but not the kingdoms
    • View Profile
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #66 on: April 10, 2008, 01:13:32 PM »
In Mein Kampf Adolf Hitler advanced a lot of sensational theories about Jews.  It would have been nice if people had put anywhere near the sustained energy into challenging his foray into book writing that has been put into trying to force a recantation of two authors' proposition that a few former princesses had a bad night on a boat.

When I read a book on a historical topic that takes what I view as an untenable position (whether the result of deliberate assertion or editorial error), I put it back on my shelf until I get around to the next cycle of sending books to Goodwill or the Salvation Army.  The notion that I would spend the next several years in unceasing demands that the authors explain themselves to me or recant their views seems rather extraordinary.

It is one thing to argue for one's own position . . . and even to do so with great and repetitive zeal.  (That  I get.)   But it is quite another to demand time and time and time and time again that an author either explain himself to my satisfaction or recant his views.

Everyone has the right to put their own views forward or to change their minds.  No one has a right to demand it of others (unless one counts Torquemada among one's ideological signposts).

Offline Annie

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4756
    • View Profile
    • Anna Anderson Exposed!
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #67 on: April 10, 2008, 01:31:53 PM »
The notion that I would spend the next several years in unceasing demands that the authors explain themselves to me or recant their views seems rather extraordinary.

The difference is they have been active participants in the internet board community, and other authors have not. Either they or someone close to them seems to be around at all times. For this reason, it's not unusual at all to ask things of them that haven't been challenged with others in the past, and expect answers.

Quote
Everyone has the right to put their own views forward or to change their minds.

Fine, but why not just tell us?
« Last Edit: April 10, 2008, 01:35:07 PM by Annie »

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #68 on: April 10, 2008, 01:32:27 PM »
Everyone has the right to put their own views forward or to change their minds.  No one has a right to demand it of others...  

Good point about "Mein Kampf", but with that one most [reasonable] people do realize that those ideas have been detonated long ago (except in some circles of course). As far as "demanding", you are right, no one can "demand" anything from anyone else, but from where I stand I am not demanding, I'm just saying that it would be "nice if" these things were explained and/or retracted/corrected, especially since according to the authors most of them were "editorial mistakes"... But believe me, I have no delusions that there will be any explanations or retractions/corrections forthcoming any time soon.

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #69 on: April 10, 2008, 01:52:55 PM »
The difference is they have been active participants in the internet board community, and other authors have not. 

Yes, that's another thing. Because the authors used to post here and interact with the posters, and things got somewhat ... heated... in the process - which continued for some time - it makes this book sort of "special" and different from other books with similar "issues". 

Offline Louis_Charles

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1498
    • View Profile
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #70 on: April 10, 2008, 02:31:44 PM »
No, it really doesn't. It makes it special and unusual for you, Helen. You have posted your questions, but you refuse to e-mail them to Wilson or King. Case closed, I think. Your objections have been noted by everyone who has read this thread, and several others like it that have existed over the years. In fact you are demanding, since you post relentlessly about Fate of the Romanovs all over the internet, both under your own name and a variety of aliases. Since by your own admission you do not expect a response, what point are you trying to make by continuing to ask? Other than that you are obsessed with this?

At any rate, after being chided by you that this thread is for questions directed to King and Wilson, I am not sure why you feel compelled to speculate about their motivations for refusing to answer your questions. Especially since you haven't e-mailed them. To paraphrase you, cut the nonsense and get back on topic. Otherwise it seems to me that it is fair game to speculate about your motivations in doing this.

Simon
"Simon --- Classy AND Compassionate!"
   
"The road to enlightenment is long and difficult, so take snacks and a magazine."

Offline Louis_Charles

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 1498
    • View Profile
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #71 on: April 10, 2008, 02:34:31 PM »
The notion that I would spend the next several years in unceasing demands that the authors explain themselves to me or recant their views seems rather extraordinary.

The difference is they have been active participants in the internet board community, and other authors have not. Either they or someone close to them seems to be around at all times. For this reason, it's not unusual at all to ask things of them that haven't been challenged with others in the past, and expect answers.

Quote
Everyone has the right to put their own views forward or to change their minds.

Fine, but why not just tell us?

I don't know. My guess --- and it is only a guess --- is that they don't like you. I realize that you dislike them as well, so surely you can understand why the reverse might be true?
"Simon --- Classy AND Compassionate!"
   
"The road to enlightenment is long and difficult, so take snacks and a magazine."

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #72 on: April 10, 2008, 02:42:57 PM »
No, it really doesn't. It makes it special and unusual for you, Helen. You have posted your questions, but you refuse to e-mail them to Wilson or King. Case closed, I think. Your objections have been noted by everyone who has read this thread, and several others like it that have existed over the years. In fact you are demanding, since you post relentlessly about Fate of the Romanovs all over the internet, both under your own name and a variety of aliases. Since by your own admission you do not expect a response, what point are you trying to make by continuing to ask? Other than that you are obsessed with this?

At any rate, after being chided by you that this thread is for questions directed to King and Wilson, I am not sure why you feel compelled to speculate about their motivations for refusing to answer your questions. Especially since you haven't e-mailed them. To paraphrase you, cut the nonsense and get back on topic. Otherwise it seems to me that it is fair game to speculate about your motivations in doing this.

Simon

Ok, here we go again. Don't you have to work or something? FYI: I do not post anything all over the internet, that's your overactive imagination. The only place I ever posted anything about FOTR was here and on Amazon*, which is quite reasonable. "A variety of aliases"? You are out of your mind, Simon. I have no reason to use aliases and will be more than happy to post anything I want to say under my real name, as I have been all along. And speaking of "obsessed", what do you call your patrolling the forum at all hours and posting all sorts of nonsensical accusations at people, whenever anything you don't like to hear about FOTR comes up? I think you are the one who is obsessed... And I'm sure you know very well why I won't email them, other than the fact that you already told us that they have no intention of answering me or anyone else...

As anyone can see, these are legitimate questions, whether you want to admit it or not (my guess is "not" ;-)), and they need to be brought out into the open, no matter whether they are answered or not. If they were allowed to stand two years ago, no one would be posting them again. As it stands, I realize that your goal is to start another brawl so that this thread is deleted and people don't get to see these questions, but guess what, I am as stubborn as you are, and they will be reposted again and again, until they do stand. You and I are very much alike in that way, Simon, whether you like it or not ;-).

FA feel free to delete this post and Simon's in the interest of the flow of this discussion.

*P.S. Oh yes, also on that dumb Legends of Anastasia forum, where I posted as a joke as the generic "romanovfan" (when everyone accused me of being Bob, lol), but I think I only mentioned FOTR once there after someone else posted about it. I can't even count that one. That was the only time I ever posted under an alias and it was a complete joke, as you very well know. Simon, you should really give up on accusing people of posting under aliases, weren't you embarassed enough when you accused poor Jim Wilhelm of being me on K&W (you were really sure of that one, weren't you, lol)? As if I would really go near there, let alone go through all that trouble. Get real...
« Last Edit: April 10, 2008, 02:55:15 PM by Helen_A »

Offline Helen_Azar

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7472
  • Coming up Fall 2015: Tatiana's diaries and letters
    • View Profile
    • War-time diaries of Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna Romanov
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #73 on: April 10, 2008, 02:43:48 PM »
Quote
Everyone has the right to put their own views forward or to change their minds.


Fine, but why not just tell us?

I don't know. My guess --- and it is only a guess --- is that they don't like you. I realize that you dislike them as well, so surely you can understand why the reverse might be true?

Trust me, even if they liked her (or me for that matter) we would still get no answers ;-).

Alixz

  • Guest
Re: Questions/comments for the authors of THE FATE OF THE ROMANOVS...
« Reply #74 on: April 10, 2008, 02:46:48 PM »
In Jennie - The Life of Lady Randolph Churchill - The Romantic Years 1854-1895 page 241:

"A woman with a graceful figure and a small head, the Czarina resembled her sister, Princess Alexandra, "though not so beautiful."  She asked Jennie "endless questions about England," and Jennie remembered the Czarina from Cowes as a wholesome, normal girl with a love of laughter.  The strictures of the rigidly formal Russian Court, however, had converted her into a nervous, submissive woman with mystical leanings.  Concern for her son's health had brought her under the influence of Rasputin, who represented hope for a possible cure for her son's illness."

Ok -  anyone see anything wrong in this?  I first read this in 1976 (it was published in 1969) and immediately wrote to the publisher to let them know that they had an error of gigantic proportions.  I never head a word from them, however, subsequent editions were changed and the comment -   "The strictures of the rigidly formal Russian Court, however, had converted her into a nervous, submissive woman with mystical leanings.  Concern for her son's health had brought her under the influence of Rasputin, who represented hope for a possible sure for her son's illness." have been removed.

I am sure it wasn't removed because of me as I read it 8 years after publication, but I am just as sure that someone brought it to their attention and they realized it was an error by - the writer? - the editors? - the typesetter? - the proof reader?

Who knows, but errors no matter what their origin can be and are changed upon research and clarification.

Did Ralph G Martin - who wrote this book approve the changes?  I would think that the publisher would go first to him to find out if anyone who was complaining had a case.

By the way this trip to Russia was made in 1888.  Nicholas was barely 20, Alix was just 16, Rasputin, though married to Praskovia, was most likely on yet another of his "pilgrimages" and, of course Alexei wasn't born until 1904.

Uh, whirled peas anyone?

Hi Mike.

« Last Edit: April 10, 2008, 02:54:16 PM by Alixz »