Anastasia: The Riddle of Anna Anderson by Peter Kurth
|
List Price: Our Price: $3.62 You Save: $13.33 (79%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.01 (click here) Category: Book See more book details and other editions |
|---|
Book Reviews of Anastasia: The Riddle of Anna Anderson
Book Review: Baffled and Bothered
Summary: 4 Stars
I read this book in the knowledge that the case of Fraullein Unbekannt/Anna Anderson is now meant to represent the story of the Twentieth Century's most famous impostor. So I expected I would easily be able to spot the holes in Anna Anderson's "story" and see the author's belief in her identity as little more then mawkish sentimentality. And his prose ebbs and flows ~ it is, at times, grating. Yet, after reading the extraordinarily convincing case he gradually presents, I simply was, and am, baffled. I am expected to be dismissive of this apparently "obsolete" book in the light of some negative DNA results, but I refuse to be. Besides, for me, the results of the DNA make it all the more mezmerizing. Of course, I do not want to believe the DNA results, any way. I try to remember A) that DNA is NOT 100 percent foolproof, and B) that it is possible (if relatively unlikely) that somebody, somehow, perpetrated some kind of "switch" on the samples tested. Yet, if I accept that the DNA was not tampered with, and moreover constitutes the best form of scientific identification ("proof") that mankind has on offer, then a huge gaping question remains: How did she do it? How could so many people simply have been so WRONG? The scientists, the graphologists, the friends and (some) relatives of the authentic Grand Duchess, the author of this book even, all of whom believed Anna was Anastasia? Has anybody made any attempt to reconcile the array of convincing evidence on hand ASIDE from DNA, or explain away the knowledge Anna had of the Romanov family, evidence which suggests she was indeed who she said she was? Her opponents, cited in the book, were fond of saying she was coached in her knowledge by "Russian monarchists", but how? How could Russian monarchists ~ most of whom never knew the Imperial Family ~ have had the knowledge Anna Anderson had? Am I really expected to believe that somebody falsely claiming to be a Russian princess just happened to be lucky enough to have so much evidence to prove it ~ identical hand~writing, ears matching at "seventeen anatomical points", scars such as one would expect to find on the survivor of a massacre like Ekaterinburg? It was furthermore a stroke of genius luck that Anna should claim to be Anastasia seventy years before the Grand Duchess's body was proven to be missing from the Romanov burial site. I was, in short, deeply impressed by Kurth's biography, but far more deeply baffled.Book Review: DNA does not lie but people do
Summary: 4 Stars
It is pathetic and sad that so many people are so willing to dismiss DNA evidence simply because it doesn't conform to their feelings and wishes. This woman was not Anastasia it is as simple as that. DNA is 100% foolproof unlike what a previous reveiwer claimed, If someone is a Romanov no DNA researcher or anyone else can manipulate the results to make this person a Schanskowska(sic). DNA can't tell you who a person IS but it most certainly can tell you who a person is NOT and this woman was not a relative of Prince Phillip therefore she was not Anastasia. In order for the sample of Anderson's tissue to have in some way been tampered with there would have to have been a major conspiracy going on between the hospital and the Schanskowska family and the doctors who took their blood sample. Also a woman at a sale with items belonging to Mrs. Manahan's husband found an envelope with dyed hair in it and the words "Anastasia's hair" written on it in Mr. Manahan's handwriting. Since the hair still had the follicles on it they were able to use it for further DNA testing. Again it PROVED BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT that this woman was NOT a relative of Prince Phillip , therefore she was not Anastasia. Now go ahead and insist that you are convinced because of this book that the DNA is wrong but in order to intelligently be able to explain why you must also explain how the conspiracy between Martha JEfferson hospital, the Polish woman's family, the DNA researchers in both England and America{where the hair was tested}and the lady who discovered the hair came about because a vast conspiracy between all these people is required to explain how Grand Duchess Anastasia's DNA mysteriously transformed into someone else's.Book Review: DNA does not lie but people do
Summary: 4 Stars
It is pathetic and sad that so many people are so willing to dismiss DNA evidence simply because it doesn't conform to their feelings and wishes. This woman was not Anastasia it is as simple as that. DNA is 100% foolproof unlike what a previous reveiwer claimed, If someone is a Romanov no DNA researcher or anyone else can manipulate the results to make this person a Schanskowska(sic). DNA can't tell you who a person IS but it most certainly can tell you who a person is NOT and this woman was not a relative of Prince Phillip therefore she was not Anastasia. In order for the sample of Anderson's tissue to have in some way been tampered with there would have to have been a major conspiracy going on between the hospital and the Schanskowska family and the doctors who took their blood sample. Also a woman at a sale with items belonging to Mrs. Manahan's husband found an envelope with dyed hair in it and the words "Anastasia's hair" written on it in Mr. Manahan's handwriting. Since the hair still had the follicles on it they were able to use it for further DNA testing. Again it PROVED BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT that this woman was NOT a relative of Prince Phillip , therefore she was not Anastasia. Now go ahead and insist that you are convinced because of this book that the DNA is wrong but in order to intelligently be able to explain why you must also explain how the conspiracy between Martha JEfferson hospital, the Polish woman's family, the DNA researchers in both England and America{where the hair was tested}and the lady who discovered the hair came about because a vast conspiracy between all these people is required to explain how Grand Duchess Anastasia's DNA mysteriously transformed into someone else's.Book Review: "Anastasia:The Riddle of Anna Anderson"
Summary: 4 Stars
"Anastasia:The Riddle of Anna Anderson".....was a very interesting,captivating book....But I have questions: 1.If you had been at the receiving end of a firing squad,that murdered your entire family...and you lived.....would you be perfectly sane? 2.If you kept telling everyone that you were you....and they kept saying you weren't....would you be sane? 3.After your families' death...The banks of England pocketed all the money your family invested and said"there were no deposits"...and you show up to claim the money they stole....what would you do? 4.If the living heirs (from the other sides of the family) thought you were dead...and the "crown and possessions and title were up for grabs...and ever hoping that the possibility of "the Monarchy' would reign again.....what do you think"They" would do???? 5. If you were a ruler of one country and your family was the ruler of another...and those two countries were at war...and you went to try to get your relatives to give up control and get out....but knew that if anyone found out that you did this it would be your head!!!! What would you do? 6.If your country...that you loved..shot you...stabbed you...bayoneted you...disfigured you....and you LIVED...and escaped...and went to another country...what language would YOU speak??? Well...I'm not saying SHE WAS......but I think we'd all be a little bit crazy...sick...worn out from life and argueing that we were who we thought we were.....even if we weren't ...because we'd gone completely crazy!!!! .....the bottom line is:she kept the Romanov story alive for nearly a century!!! they might have been long forgotten if it hadn't been for Review: Riddle me this...Summary: 4 Stars When I was young, I remember hearing about Anna Anderson. And thinking "what if she is? What if she is?" It was like a fairy tale - a lost kingdom, an unrecognized princess (okay, grand duchess). This romanticized view was further enhanced by the Ingrid Bergman movie. Is she? Is she? She is...?
My interest in this book went beyond the "is she?" question. More profound for me were basic questions of identity.
How can one possibly prove that one is who one is? Think about it. What possible arguments could you make? How could you convince people that you were who you said you were? I realized that one could become lost, cast adrift without the anchor of identity in the world.
Kurth made a very convincing "she is" argument. And it was hauntingly sad to think that maybe, just maybe Anna Anderson had memories of being a cosseted little girl in the palaces of St. Petersburg and because she couldn't proved that she was who she was, she ended up living a large part of her life in squalor - her very self denied.
Science has erased some of these questions and Peter Kurth's book is now dated due to the science of DNA and the good grace of Prince Phillip. But prior to DNA... [prior to DNA results, I would have rated slightly higher - but he was wrong, after all