ia_2011_c_mendez

=Evaluation of Sources (250-400 words) Tips]=

 **__Source 1 –__** __Uli Edel, “Rasputin”, 1996, HBO Pictures__ **__– Appendix 8__**

The director Uli Edel makes use of the dramatic and spiritual elements inherent in the life of the “mad monk”. In term of purpose, those are the values. This film tries to narrate the history as it happened and showing very small examples of the overall issues and situation of the time and the principal characters. The short duration of the movie is not a difficulty for the director who manages to successfully introduce the audience to the events leading up to the Russian Revolution and therefore the fall of the Romanov family, as well as the life of the most controversial man in Russia’s history. It shows the humanity of the Romanov family from the perspective of the narrator, the heir to the throne, Alexei. His point of view of the whole situation makes the Romanov family more likable to the audience. The film also tries to show the concern that they have for their son’s health. The Tsar Nicholas II and Empress Alexandra sacrificed their credibility and their throne because of the unique solution to save or improve the health of his son, Rasputin. The source has limitations. Some of the real facts that happen are telling completely different in the film. For example, the Prime Minister Stolypin was assassinated in 1912. Two years before the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, and in the film shows that he had been assassinated in 1914 after telling the Tsar that the heir to the Austrian Monarchy has been killed [1]. Other example is the fact that the Tsar decided himself to took the control of the Russian army, whereas in the film is Rasputin who persuaded the Tsar to take the control of the army. All those errors made by the film makes that the film is not a good source because many of those facts are very relevant to the historians studying the fall of the Tsarism. Also it has limitations in terms of purpose because the film tries to put the blame of the whole situation on Rasputin who wasn’t the major reason to the fell of the Tsarism. __**Source 2 –**__ __Brian Moynahan (1999). Rasputin. [New York]: Da Capo Press (ISBN: 0306809303) - **Appendix 9**__ The value of this book in terms of its origin is that Brian Moynahan is an English journalist and historical writer Moynahan who had travelled a lot through Russia and wrote other books about the history of Russia, so his interest and knowledge for the topic are present [2]. Another value of this book in terms of its purpose is that the book is a very detailed biography of Rasputin, as well as it tries to describe the situation on Russia at that time. The limitations of this source are basically that it tries to gain audience by narrating the facts in a melodramatic way which would attract more readers. Also another limitation is that many of the documents and data which were written at the time for people who really live that situation maybe are destroyed or hidden by the predecessor government.

[1] Uli Edel, “Rasputin”, 1996, HBO Pictures, 01:00:08 – 01:00:29 - Appendix 8 [2] [|http://en.Wikipedia.org/wiki/brian_moynahan]