I've learned to always be extremely disappointed with Ken Follet. He establishes promising situations, but then he always lets you down. This book is no exception.

The eponymous character is pretty sufficiently complicated - he's been driven insane, first from a terrible love with a pretty lady who's pretty much unavailable, and then from being in a gulag. Then there's the pretty lady, who can't resist torrid animal sex with The Man (from St. Petersburg). And then she goes ahead and marries a boring and uncomplicated Englishman (who's the hero of our story. Yay!).

After this setup, as I remember, the book goes nowhere. The plot spins forward, as Follett's book's plots do, but it's super boring - Anarchist wants to blow up London, or something. Winston Churchill has a feel-good cameo. Oh Follet, I keep reading more, but there's no satisfaction...

I'll tell you the ending: The Man creeps onto the Englishman's estate, has sex with his wife, sets fire to the manor, and then saves his daughter (the one he had long ago with the pretty lady). I was so pissed at the ending. So pissed.

So my solemn advice is to not ever ever read Ken Follet. It's not worth the money, and it's not worth the time, and time is money, so there you go. Don't ever ever read Hornet Flight or The Man from St. Petersburg....Pillars of the Earth, OK, maybe the first 500 pages. Any more and you'll have a hangover.

Enjoyable fast reading book that basically revolves around an anarchist who is trying to kill a Russian Prince who is in England to work on a Treaty with the British in 1914. Of course there are a lot of unbelievable plot twists and while I enjoy Follett this book just is a little too unbelievable for me. Follett does a good job with his characters and his plotting of the book and effortlessly transports us back to 1914, but the plot gets convoluted when all of the family issues become involved and I truly do not believe that the characters in the book would have acted and behaved as he writes it.

Better than I thought. Decently constructed, kind of fun chase throughout. Likeable assassin character.

2.75

Downton Abbey with an assassin, eh yes please.


In all honesty though this book is ok. It starts off great with a great tempo and does a good job a juggling between the British high society and the Russian underground.
The main thing that brought it down for me are the characters. All of them seem to be very stubborn and are unable to anyone else’s point of view. The daughter is completely insufferable and I pretty much did not like any scene with her in it (she did have one good one at the end though).
The thesis of this book is not good at all either. The whole book it is telling you to listen to your heart and you will be happy, even though the things that these characters want/did are terrible acts of sin. The whole time the author says that if everyone did what they wanted and lived how they wanted they would be much happier and would have a better life. Again this is not true because the wants and desires of the characters in this book are of the flesh and lead to sin and demise.
Overall the premise is great and the writing and prose are delightful and easy to read. The theology and worldview however are truly lacking.

How can I root for an assassin?

Ken Follett has always been a personal favorite of mine. I love the way he mixes fiction with reality in all of his books, whether he’s chosen to write about the Cold War or the lead-up to World War 1 or 2. The writing style is never something I complain about with Follett and here is no exception. The sentences bring me to a whole other plane of historical existence, where history has altered to bring me there as an observer. Perfection!!!
Ken Follett spares not an ounce of genius in bringing his characters to life and weaving them together in electrifying narrative. His artistry is one that burdens the reader with sorting the protagonists from the antagonists, enriching each character’s complexion and back story with such talent that you may just end up pulling for the whole lot as the novel winds to a close.

Situated in the lead-up to the First World War in 1914 London, we find Britain pushing to secure an alliance with the Russian Empire. War seems all but inevitable, and intel indicates a low chance of Allied success unless the whole of the Triple Entente is prepared to throw their martial weight against Germany.
This thriller has a lot to offer, from the international intrigue of anarchist subversion-ism hurled against the British secret police, an endearing and dynamic cast, chase scenes, to the masterful pacing and pitch-perfect dialogue, all encased in a historical backdrop that will lend the reader in a sense of familiarity with prewar London. Sure, a few of the plot turns are a bit too sharp and escape sequences faintly implausible, but the gripping prose and fluorescent cast are more than adequate to keep you anchored firmly to your seat.

It may not be as polished around the edges as Eye of the Needle, or as seductive as his massively medieval opus, Pillars of the Earth, but Follett’s The Man From St. Petersburg is surely just as absorbing, insisting you delay that next meal just a little while longer so you can see how the current scene plays out.

This is the second book I read from Follett and it changed my view on the world. It also changed my view on reading, authors, and my expectations of a book.

Ken can do in few words what few authors can do with many.

This story is set in the time of women suffragettes. He creates a passion for polarized people struggling to fulfill their destinies while constrained by the limits of their social and political environment.

Exciting thriller--GREAT BOOK!!

肯大湿喜欢露骨性描写的癖好在这部作品里更加暴露了，他直接用不伦恋，完全沉溺于肉欲的狂野性爱和私生子来推动整个故事的发展，完全是地摊小说的手法。

当然，肯大湿还是比地摊小说作者厉害，这部作品仍然可以得到三星。原因是，书中对俄国布尔什维克革命之前的无政府主义分子描写得非常到位，这类人的流放，流浪和思想观点，都写得非常生动。另外这本书显然是“世纪三部曲”素材之一，对英国在二十世纪之初妇女参政运动的描写细致入微，这部分被挪移到《巨人的陨落》里成为女主的人生经历。

我对这部小说最觉得有趣的部分，还是两个贵族少女私下里对人体生理的探讨，让人忍俊不禁。二十世纪之初的英国贵族家庭，居然还是保持这样的观念，即不让女儿接受良好教育，只是一味地想着找个同阶层的男人嫁了，然后生儿育女过一辈子。肯大湿再次表现了自己痛恨贵族阶层，保持平民左派观点，对贵族虚伪两面性大加嘲讽的写作特点：这些贵族年轻时自己极其淫荡，有了孩子后却一本正经，生怕子女们了解“不洁”思想，以致于18岁的大姑娘连婴儿是怎么来的都不知道。

在嘲讽英国贵族虚伪做作这方面，就不能不联想到石黑一雄。他的《长日将尽》里虽然根本没有肯大湿这些赤裸裸的性交场面，只是一个英国管家的人生自白。但那种对虚假，两面和伪装的深刻描绘，却永远留在读者心里。都是描写相同主题，诺贝尔文学奖作家和畅销书作家，终究功力还是不同的。

这部作品算是肯大师最好长篇小说——“世纪三部曲”的一个片段，或者写作练习。

This is one of those books where I couldn’t work out who I was rooting for. All these characters had a unique history and particular personality traits that interested me, and I came to appreciate them all.

Although I could see the ‘twist’, if you can call it that, from a mile away, I still grew to love the story as it unfolded. It started a little slow, but all the build-up was important, and it ended up being quite thrilling.

Follett is brilliant at intertwining history with fiction, real historical figures and fictional characters, and he’s done it again very well.

Prima opera che leggo di Ken Follett. Siamo agli albori della Prima guerra mondiale a Londra e Churchill chiede aiuto a Lord Stephen Walden, visto che conosce il principe Orlov, nipote dello zar russo Nicola, per trattare un'alleanza (l'impero britannico è alla disperata ricerca di alleati per contrastare l'assalto della Germania). Ma un anarchico russo, Feliks, tenterà di assassinarlo e altri segreti verranno fuori dal passato.

Devo dire che mi è piaciuta questa opera giovanile di Follett, e sicuramente leggerò altre sue opere più celebri. Non ho altro da aggiungere, perché la storia si srotola pian piano lasciando sempre più a bocca aperta. Un buon esempio di romanzo thriller con storia d'amore che non guasta.

Ken Follett spares not an ounce of genius in bringing his characters to life and weaving them together in electrifying narrative. His artistry is one that burdens the reader with sorting the protagonists from the antagonists, enriching each character's complexion and back story with such brio that you may just end up pulling for the whole lot to triumph as the novel winds to a close.

The Man From St. Petersburg is of course no exception, with Follett's tried and true, World War era-themed cat and mouse thriller once again taking center stage. Ever the epicure of historical fiction, Follett treats his settings with care, honoring the historical minutia and injecting them with multiple shots of hair-raising drama. The global tensions and dis-ease surrounding the two largest global engagements to date provide blueprints aplenty for building an engrossing alternate timeline.

Situated in the lead-up to the First World War in 1914 London, we find Britain pushing to secure an alliance with the Russian Empire. War seems all but inevitable, and intel indicates a low chance of Allied success unless the whole of the Triple Entente is prepared to throw their martial weight against Germany.

The man chosen to represent Russia in the negotiations is the courtly admiral Prince Orlov, nephew to British aristocrat Lord Walden. Importuned by no less a figure than Winston Churchill, Walden is tasked with brokering the secret bond and saving his nation from impending defeat. A delicate assignment, no doubt, but one made all the more perilous by a shrewdly intelligent and combat-adept anarchist, whose life is interwoven with the Walden household's in variously surprising ways.

Enter Feliks Kschessinsky, who might just be the most unforgettable covert agent this side of Jason Bourne. The Russian idealist is fed up with his mother country's penchant for embroiling its citizens in wars in which they have no choice in participating and vows to sever the alliance talks with Great Britain by assassinating the admiral.

Fearless yet stringently cautious, unflinchingly determined, almost too capable of evading his pesky pursuers, and ornamented with the occasional flash of charisma and sensuality, Feliks is the cloak-and-dagger character you just can't help but cheer for. (If you're a pacifist at heart, you may have all the more reason to get behind him.) His frequent bouts with Walden and the full armada of the British police force ratchet up the intensity as the walls close in around the Muscovite assassin. But Feliks finds help in the most unsuspecting of places...

Beyond the instant allure of Feliks and his skirmishes with Walden and company, Follett has also arranged equally enticing female leads who are not subordinately tossed in but who command central roles in the narrative. Walden's wife, Lydia, whose Russian past is dredged up in plot-twisting fashion, and their daughter, Charlotte, with her closeted upbringing and later affinity with the suffragette movement underway in Britain at the time, round out the exquisite cast. There isn't too much that can be shared about these two characters without giving major plot shifts away, but their presence is integral to the whole and compete with Feliks on every page for rights to the most memorable character.

Closing Thoughts

Follett's 1982 thriller has a lot to offer, from the international intrigue of anarchist subversionism hurled against the British secret police, an endearing and dynamic cast, Ludlum-esque chase scenes, sensual but not at all gratuitous sex, to the masterful pacing and pitch-perfect dialogue, all encased in a historical backdrop that will lend the reader an osmotic familiarity with prewar London. Sure, a few of the plot turns are a bit too sharp and escape sequences faintly implausible, but the gripping prose and fluorescent cast are more than adequate to keep you anchored firmly to your seat.

It may not be as polished around the edges as Eye of the Needle, or as seductive as his massively medieval opus, Pillars of the Earth, but Follett's The Man From St. Petersburg is surely just as absorbing, insisting you delay that next meal just a little while longer so you can see how the current scene plays out. This is smooth escapism, enclothed in classic Follett garb.

The only question that remains: which character will you root for?

Note: This review is republished from my official website.

Mais um livro muito bom do Ken Follett. Apesar de o enredo ser bastante simples e um pouco previsível, as personagens e as descrições daquela época são simplesmente fantásticas.
Um coisa que achei curiosa foi por três vezes aparecer a palavra ónibus. Pensei que fosse um erro de uma má tradução, no entanto fui ao dicionário para ver se a palavra existia no português de portugal e realmente existe! Depois questionei-me do porquê de terem usado ónibus e não autocarro / camioneta. Então consultei a versão inglesa do livro e verifiquei que o Ken Follett utilizou o termo "omnibus" que não é mais do que é um termo antigo para uma carruagem fechada puxada por cavalos. Daí terem mantido em português a palavra ónibus. No entanto como soa um bocado a português do Brasil, penso que o tradutor do livro podia ter posto uma pequena nota de rodapé.

From one of the masters of historical fiction comes a new entry in the pantheon of lip-smacking World War I political adventures. Still not sold? How about if I told you that it also features a prominent supporting role from a young and slim Winston Churchill—and some steamy 1890s sex scenes, complete with restrictive corsets and the refined etiquette of British nobility?

Surprisingly not as dry and banal as that makes it sound, there is a distinct charm to the story—as is the case with much of historical fiction that winks at an audience that knows what the future holds. As is also the case with almost all historical fiction that I read, I curse myself for not knowing more about history. A lot of political thrillers are told with an emphasis on the technology of our time (or the contemporary time within which they are written), but this took place in a time devoid of any of our impressive tools of surveillance and communication. Therein lies the aforementioned charm.

Abrupt transition: this is a book about contrast. Follett highlights the stark difference between the wealthy British aristocracy and the poor Russian peasantry by establishing such disparate pictures of decadence and waste versus poverty and squalor–especially with regards to their respective experiences with food and living quarters. And this contrast is personified in the opposing factions of the two male leads: Feliks and Walden. Here are two great men on different sides of the same coin. One borne out of desperation and hate, and one born into wealth and privilege—both good men in their own misguided ways. One is passionate, frank, and violent; the other is restrained, cultured, and posh. These two characters are like looking at a Venn diagram—and their unexpected similarities are what make them so intriguing.

The shifting focus of these contrasts was Follett’s best effort in the novel, and it’s something that he also highlights very well on an individual level. There’s a constant battle being fought by many of the characters—especially the women, who are in the midst of their own burgeoning suffragette revolution—between maintaining the proper prescript of English high society and upsetting this rigid status quo. The characters are constantly questioning why they act in such a reserved and reticent manner if it makes them so miserable and unsatisfied. They long to say what is really in their minds and hearts, but they are restrained by an overwhelmingly pervasive sense of propriety.

For an author whose expertise is something as dry as history, he’s a fantastic hand at romance—which is something I’ve seen across some of his other books. He uses this as a purposeful mechanism for connecting us with his characters; it gives them more colour. They are realistically flawed and sympathetic.

The book is not without a couple of animadversions, however. Follett tends to develop his characters through straight up exposition, which I find inherently clunky and inorganic—as opposed to the slow character build of other, more patient, authors. Also, the twists are pretty projected, so you aren’t completely surprised by any major developments—although I’m not sure that would have been the intention here anyway.

To me, this book is about breaking free from your naiveté, in whatever form it might exist. People need to realize the inevitable fallibility of their position, their opinion, their parents, their country, their politics—whatever your ignorance or hubris. There is always an opposing camp of thinking. We see this in politics every damn day. The eponymous character sums up this overreliance of ideology quite nicely: “A transfer of power from one faction to another faction within the same class is called a coup, and this changes nothing. A transfer of power from one class to another is called a revolution and this does change things…although the changes are not necessarily the ones the revolutionaries sought.” Essentially, “stay woke folks.”