Bred Any Good Rooks Lately?

GNTLGNT

Kurben said:

That night worked according to plan but then i slept late because i was so tired so awoke late and have started to glide out of sync again. Somehow i doubt my body clock is set according to a 24 hour day. . ....

Grant87

Currently reading Four Past Midnight.

Kurben

Reading The Bloodied Ivy at the moment. Written by Robert Goldsborough and using Rex Stouts classic detectives Nero Wolfe and Archie Goodwin. It does a decent enough work of being true to the characters but, i think, falls a bit short when it comes to the mystery. But if you write about the character of a famous sleuth there must be comparisons. I've read people using Hercule Poirot and Lord Peter Wimsey as characters, approved of course but still, and they weren't close to the originals. The Lord Peter novels of Jill Paton walsh were awful. The Poirot ones were better even if it wasn't Christie class. This is also OK but you see the difference clearly. Most of the golden age crime classics played fair, they started early to give out well hidden clues and false leads. Often you, or at least i, failed to solve them at a first read which kind of were the point. The more you were led astray in your thoughtprocess the more you enjoyed the reveal in the last chapter. Here the author takes another road. So far, after approximately 100 pages, there is not really a single clue presented to us except a dead body supposedly dead from a fall. That would never happen in a true Rex Stout story. Or a Christie, or a Carr and so on. But as i said the characterization of Wolfe and Goodwin is good and true to the original and the author deserves points for that. I hope the mystery picks up steam soon.

Grant87

For any fellow collectors of King limited editions, The Folio Society is publishing a limited edition of Misery. Looks like they had some signed editions for sale, but they sold out quickly.

Here's the link to get a copy: https://www.foliosociety.com/usa/misery.html

GNTLGNT

Grant87 said:

For any fellow collectors of King limited editions, The Folio Society is publishing a limited edition of Misery. Looks like they had some signed editions for sale, but they sold out quickly.

Here's the link to get a copy: https://www.foliosociety.com/usa/misery.html

....oh Grant, why do you tempt me so?....

spideyman

Reading Find You First  Linwood Barclay.  Thriller with many twists and turns. 

Grant87

GNTLGNT said:

Grant87 said:

For any fellow collectors of King limited editions, The Folio Society is publishing a limited edition of Misery. Looks like they had some signed editions for sale, but they sold out quickly.

Here's the link to get a copy: https://www.foliosociety.com/usa/misery.html

....oh Grant, why do you tempt me so?....

PS Publishing has put their 40th Anniversary limited edition of Cujo up for pre-order today also.

Neesy

GNTLGNT said:

Hedda Gabler said:

My plan is to read finders keepers today.  Yes, the whole thing. 

The clock starts….now!

Reminds me of the clock from "Bag of Bones"

Neesy

I'm re-reading a book by Anne Tyler called "A Patchwork Planet"

It's about an "antihero" named Barnaby - I like Anne Tyler's writing

GNTLGNT

Grant87 said:

GNTLGNT said:

Grant87 said:

For any fellow collectors of King limited editions, The Folio Society is publishing a limited edition of Misery. Looks like they had some signed editions for sale, but they sold out quickly.

Here's the link to get a copy: https://www.foliosociety.com/usa/misery.html

....oh Grant, why do you tempt me so?....

PS Publishing has put their 40th Anniversary limited edition of Cujo up for pre-order today also.

Kurben

Reading The Romanovs by british Historian Simon Sebag Montefiore. He is a very good narrator and knows how to keep a factfilled narrative interesting. Very learned about Russian history and has written excellent books on Stalin and Catherine the Great. Here he takes on a bigger subject. The Romanovs ruled Russia for over 300 years and it is thanks to them that Russia is the gigantic country we know today. In 1613, when Michael I the first Romanov ascended the Throne, Russia was much smaller. It was chaos due to terror that Ivan IV (called The Terrible) brought to the people and the nobles. His cruelties are legendary. Michaels son was Peter the Great, one of two truly great rulers of russia together Catherine the great. It ended with the rather weak, indecisive and narrowminded Nicholas II. He and and the whole of his family were killed in the revolution of 1917-18. He might have been a great father and husband but as a ruler he was far from great. Another that that has been said of Charles I of England. He was also killed in a revolution, was a great father and husband and didn't have a clue how ro rule in england. The Tsars had it easier than the french and english kings that often had bow to either the nobles or the church or the parlament. But they still had to figure out a way to keep the nobles, the generals of the army and the administrators at the same time. The people wasn't as important. They might revolt but it was extremely unlikely that they could kill him. But the other three... if they were dissatisfied assassination was the next step therefore a tsar always had to keep a close eye on them. The only two totally succesful in this were Peter and Catherine for they were, for their time, political geniuses. And of course they were also ruthless if needed. No tsar stayed long if they forgave their enemies and let them live to revolt another day. Todays Russia and China have likenesses with tsarist Russia only they call themselfes democracies but there is no doubt who is the leader and that his power is much bigger than a prime minister or president have.

cat

I started The Whisper Man by Alex North. So far, so good, has had some genuine creepy moments and I'm not that far in yet. Think it's going to be great. 

Hedda Gabler

Kurben said:

Reading The Romanovs by british Historian Simon Sebag Montefiore. He is a very good narrator and knows how to keep a factfilled narrative interesting. Very learned about Russian history and has written excellent books on Stalin and Catherine the Great. Here he takes on a bigger subject. The Romanovs ruled Russia for over 300 years and it is thanks to them that Russia is the gigantic country we know today. In 1613, when Michael I the first Romanov ascended the Throne, Russia was much smaller. It was chaos due to terror that Ivan IV (called The Terrible) brought to the people and the nobles. His cruelties are legendary. Michaels son was Peter the Great, one of two truly great rulers of russia together Catherine the great. It ended with the rather weak, indecisive and narrowminded Nicholas II. He and and the whole of his family were killed in the revolution of 1917-18. He might have been a great father and husband but as a ruler he was far from great. Another that that has been said of Charles I of England. He was also killed in a revolution, was a great father and husband and didn't have a clue how ro rule in england. The Tsars had it easier than the french and english kings that often had bow to either the nobles or the church or the parlament. But they still had to figure out a way to keep the nobles, the generals of the army and the administrators at the same time. The people wasn't as important. They might revolt but it was extremely unlikely that they could kill him. But the other three... if they were dissatisfied assassination was the next step therefore a tsar always had to keep a close eye on them. The only two totally succesful in this were Peter and Catherine for they were, for their time, political geniuses. And of course they were also ruthless if needed. No tsar stayed long if they forgave their enemies and let them live to revolt another day. Todays Russia and China have likenesses with tsarist Russia only they call themselfes democracies but there is no doubt who is the leader and that his power is much bigger than a prime minister or president have.

What are your thoughts on the family? What do you think happened to them? Where do you think their remains are? Do you think anastasia survived?

Kurben

There is a lot of romantic legend surrounding them but actually it is no big mystery. The whole family,including all the children and their dogs was collected in one room (the romanovs thought they were going to be moved) but instead they were shot and stabbed repeatedly. It was a bloodbath where children and parents were brutally killed in front of their eyes. The tsar and his wife first, his son Alexei next and then the daughters. Anastasia was killed last but shot in the brain and later stabbed when they heard her groaning. The only survivor was a spaniel, the dog of the Tsars son Alexei that managed to run out of the room before they got to him. He was later adopted by a guard. Two other dogs were killed. They got orders from up above to destroy the bodies so they were first burned and then they dug a hole in a forest, poured acid on the remains and buried them there. There is not a chance in hell Anastasia survived. That the legend grew has to do with the very strict orders that Lenin and later Stalin had about not saying a word about what happened to them and threats to the guard and officers that carried it out about mentioning it ever again. As noone else knew of course diverse rumours grew. But there is no doubt they died, all of them.
They were killed 17,th July of 1918 and that first grave proved to be only temporary because it was revolution in Russia and they lost control of that area so they moved the remains to to a field called Porosyonkov outside of Yekaterinenburg. Here they were rediscovered in the late 70,s but nothing was told and not until the sovjetunion fell others got to know. In 1995 the remains were positively identified as the Romanovs thanks to DNA.
But the first grave place is where the big memorial was built. Ganina Yama, a mine shaft in a forest once, now they built 7 chapels there, one for each member of the family. Nicholas and his wife alexandra, Their son Alexei, Their Daughters, Olga, Maria, Tatiana and Anastasia. It is also close to Yekaterinenburg.

Hedda Gabler

Kurben said:

There is a lot of romantic legend surrounding them but actually it is no big mystery. The whole family,including all the children and their dogs was collected in one room (the romanovs thought they were going to be moved) but instead they were shot and stabbed repeatedly. It was a bloodbath where children and parents were brutally killed in front of their eyes. The tsar and his wife first, his son Alexei next and then the daughters. Anastasia was killed last but shot in the brain and later stabbed when they heard her groaning. The only survivor was a spaniel, the dog of the Tsars son Alexei that managed to run out of the room before they got to him. He was later adopted by a guard. Two other dogs were killed. They got orders from up above to destroy the bodies so they were first burned and then they dug a hole in a forest, poured acid on the remains and buried them there. There is not a chance in hell Anastasia survived. That the legend grew has to do with the very strict orders that Lenin and later Stalin had about not saying a word about what happened to them and threats to the guard and officers that carried it out about mentioning it ever again. As noone else knew of course diverse rumours grew. But there is no doubt they died, all of them.
They were killed 17,th July of 1918 and that first grave proved to be only temporary because it was revolution in Russia and they lost control of that area so they moved the remains to to a field called Porosyonkov outside of Yekaterinenburg. Here they were rediscovered in the late 70,s but nothing was told and not until the sovjetunion fell others got to know. In 1995 the remains were positively identified as the Romanovs thanks to DNA.
But the first grave place is where the big memorial was built. Ganina Yama, a mine shaft in a forest once, now they built 7 chapels there, one for each member of the family. Nicholas and his wife alexandra, Their son Alexei, Their Daughters, Olga, Maria, Tatiana and Anastasia. It is also close to Yekaterinenburg.

Thank you for such a thorough and thoughtful answer. 

It seems there were people coming forward claiming to be anastasia — one person, if my poor memory serves, got away with it for a good  while. 

Kurben

That is true. They had very good reason. At least 6 came forward claiming to be, usually Anastasia but sometimes another of the daughters. The most famous called herself Anna Anderson but 1922 claimed that she was Anastasia. The reason of course was the Romanov fortune that partly was placed in Western banks were the bolsjeviks couldn't get to it. If she and her backers could get a western court to say that she was indeed Anastasia she would inherit all that money. In all likelihood she was Franciska Schanskopska, a Polish-german factory worker that had disappeared in 1920 after getting injured in a factory accident in 1916. Both she and Anastasia had the same history of bouts of mental illness and scars from the accident. She lost several court cases and in 1968 married an american history professor. She died in Charlottesville, Virginia in 1984. In 1994 remains from her grave was dug up, DNA was taken and it was proved without doubt that Anna Anderson was not a Romanov.

Hedda Gabler

Thanks !   You are clearly a scholar. 🙂

Kurben

Hedda Gabler said:

Thanks !   You are clearly a scholar. 🙂

Thanks! That is a big compliment. I read a lot. And some of it stays in there.

Hedda Gabler

Kurben said:

Hedda Gabler said:

Thanks !   You are clearly a scholar. 🙂

Thanks! That is a big compliment. I read a lot. And some of it stays in there.

I’d say most of it stays there!

GNTLGNT

Hedda Gabler said:

Kurben said:

Hedda Gabler said:

Thanks !   You are clearly a scholar. 🙂

Thanks! That is a big compliment. I read a lot. And some of it stays in there.

I’d say most of it stays there!

......annnnnnnnnddddddd......

Grant87

I finished Four Past Midnight yesterday. While I enjoyed all the stories, I don't think it's on the same level as If It Bleeds. And it's not even close to Different Seasons. There were things I liked about all the novellas in Four Past Midnight, but none of them knocked it out of the park, at least for me anyway. What did you all think of it?

Started Dissonant Harmonies last night. Probably knocking out a big chunk of it today.

GNTLGNT

....The Library Policeman and The Sun Dog were the strongest two IMO....the other two kept my attention, but wouldn't be anything I would rush to re-read.....I have Harmonies on the TBR pile...non-fiction piece on Ed Gein is next up.....

Grant87

GNTLGNT said:

....The Library Policeman and The Sun Dog were the strongest two IMO....the other two kept my attention, but wouldn't be anything I would rush to re-read.....I have Harmonies on the TBR pile...non-fiction piece on Ed Gein is next up.....

I would agree with you on that one. I liked The Library Policeman and The Sun Dog much more than the other two stories. I'd pick The Library Policeman as my favorite of the lot. It will definitely stick around in my brain the longest, I'd say. Partly because of the heavy subject matter, but also because I thought it was the creepiest story in the collection.

GNTLGNT

...no doubt it was the "Kingiest" of the bunch.....not only do we have pedophilia, but a non-human "human".....good times, good times.....

GNTLGNT

.....this gentleman is quite the writer.....and this case is one of the strangest ever....maybe not the best choice for bedtime reading, but there it is....