What do you think?
Rate this book
A vodkakirály: Pjotr Szmirnov élete és egy birodalom születése
A Vodkakirály Pjotr Szmirnovnak és családjának lenyűgöző története, amelyből megtudhatjuk, hogyan lett a szegény jobbágyfiúból a világ egyik leghíresebb márkanevének megteremtője és egyben Oroszország egyik leggazdagabb embere. A regény középpontjában Szmirnov, a zseniális üzletember áll, aki korát megelőzve ismerte fel a reklám és az információ jelentőségét, és akinek ravasz húzásaival sikerült mindig egy lépéssel versenytársai előtt járnia. A több mint négyéves kutatómunka után írt regény ezt a hihetetlen életutat és a Smirnoff név további sorsát meséli el tárgyilagos és rendkívül élvezetes stílusban.
„Oroszországban a vodka legalább annyira hozzátartozott a mindennapi élethez, mint az étel vagy a téli fagy. Használták fizetség helyett, kenőpénzként és a tűzvonalban harcoló katonák bátorítására is. De az úgynevezett „élet vizét” adták a vajúdó asszonyoknak és az újszülött csecsemőknek is, ha semmilyen más gyógymóddal nem sikerült lecsillapítani őket. Bevett gyakorlat volt vodkát használni ösztönzőnek, ha mozgósítani kellett a közösséget, hogy felépítsenek egy templomot, betakarítsák a termést vagy építsenek egy hidat. A cári kormány, amely ellenőrzése alatt tartotta a vodkaipart, szentesítette és bátorította ezeket a gyakorlatokat. Minél több vodka fogyott, annál több pénz került az államkasszába.
Szmirnov születésekor a vodkaivás már nemzeti hagyománynak számított. Ráadásul óriási üzlet is volt, a belőle származó állami bevételek még a sóból szerzett összegeket is felülmúlták. A vodkára kivetett adókból befolyó pénz fedezte az állami kiadások egyharmadát és békeidőben Oroszország védelmének költségét. Szmirnov fiatalon felismerte a vodkában rejlő lehetőségeket, és elhatározta, hogy egy napon ebből fog meggazdagodni.
Halálakor Pjotr Szmirnov az ország legnagyobb vodkakészítője volt. Birodalmának értékét 20 millió rubelre (mai értéken körülbelül 265 millió dollárra) becsülték. Oroszország legnagyobb szeszforgalmazójának – a cári udvar beszállítójának – vodkásüvegei Svédországtól Spanyolországig minden király asztalán megtalálhatóak voltak. Személyes vagyona, amelyhez hozzátartozott két jókora ház, két nyaraló, egy gyár valamint számos üzlet, raktár és pince, meghaladta a 10 millió rubelt (nagyjából 132,7 millió dollárt), amivel ő volt Oroszország egyik leggazdagabb embere.”
Szmirnov 1831-ben született egy kis faluban több száz kilométerre Moszkvától. 1898-ban bekövetkezett halálakor uralkodóknak kijáró külsőségek között temették el.
366 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2009
56 people are currently reading
543 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 80 reviews
October 12, 2025
I'll give it a generous 3 Jigger rating for an interesting story of a serf who raises himself to the top of the heap against the odds. The author also gives a good background story of Russia as it moves out of serfdom and attempts to join the modern world. Pyotr built his empire himself, no government help and later plenty of government friction which eventually leads to confiscation. Vodka was a curse on the population but it was also responsible for over 40% of the government income from taxes and fees. The tsar wanted to ban it but the government needed the cash. Two conflicting goals. The history of vodka:
Surpluses of grain made production relatively easy—and cheap. Monks used primitive stills, producing liquor that often had a greenish blue tinge to it caused by traces of copper sulfate from the copper fermentation vessels—and a foul smell. In those days vodka wasn’t merely consumed for pleasure, it was a medicinal product. It could be a powerful disinfectant for wounds or a soothing, warm balm massaged into the back and chest. Its uses changed quickly, of course, becoming Russia’s beverage of choice when distilling methods were improved and medicinal additives were replaced with sweet aromas and tasty spices.
Almost overnight, vodka, whose name is derived from the Russian word voda, meaning water, became a focal point for a variety of rituals. A practice known as “wetting the bargain” used vodka as an inducement to bring communities together to build a church, bring in a harvest, or construct a bridge. A job well done meant that vodka would flow freely. Vodka drinking was also a favorite pastime of Peter the Great, who instituted the “penalty shot” during his reign from 1682 to 1725. It purportedly forced anyone late for a meeting or gathering to pay either a fine or drink a large cup of vodka.
Pyotr was a natural businessman and came up with a unique way to advertise his product. He looked for fellow freed serfs and men of the countryside coming into the big city of Moscow:
When that worked, he expanded his operations beyond the local area:
The story takes Smirnov to World Fairs in Europe and the USA. A sad story after he passes away as the children do not carry on the legacy. More sad stories when the commies take over. Eventually we get Smirnoff and the explanation of the new spelling.
Surpluses of grain made production relatively easy—and cheap. Monks used primitive stills, producing liquor that often had a greenish blue tinge to it caused by traces of copper sulfate from the copper fermentation vessels—and a foul smell. In those days vodka wasn’t merely consumed for pleasure, it was a medicinal product. It could be a powerful disinfectant for wounds or a soothing, warm balm massaged into the back and chest. Its uses changed quickly, of course, becoming Russia’s beverage of choice when distilling methods were improved and medicinal additives were replaced with sweet aromas and tasty spices.
Almost overnight, vodka, whose name is derived from the Russian word voda, meaning water, became a focal point for a variety of rituals. A practice known as “wetting the bargain” used vodka as an inducement to bring communities together to build a church, bring in a harvest, or construct a bridge. A job well done meant that vodka would flow freely. Vodka drinking was also a favorite pastime of Peter the Great, who instituted the “penalty shot” during his reign from 1682 to 1725. It purportedly forced anyone late for a meeting or gathering to pay either a fine or drink a large cup of vodka.
Pyotr was a natural businessman and came up with a unique way to advertise his product. He looked for fellow freed serfs and men of the countryside coming into the big city of Moscow:
When that worked, he expanded his operations beyond the local area:
The story takes Smirnov to World Fairs in Europe and the USA. A sad story after he passes away as the children do not carry on the legacy. More sad stories when the commies take over. Eventually we get Smirnoff and the explanation of the new spelling.
December 20, 2012
I enjoy both biographies and vodka martinis. A martini should be dry, a biography should not.
What I liked: It does include some really interesting background on Russian political history. It shines as a business bio, his strategies (excruciatingly) detailed and well researched, even inspirational. The guy was a marketing genius. 1st Russian to introduce branding, a self made millionaire caught between the shifting tides of the fall of the Tsars and the rise of Communism, no small feat. His marketing tactics were entertaining. For example; he’d round up impoverished serfs, stake them drinking money with instructions to hit as many taverns as possible, the deal being they’d demand Smirnov’s vodka and nothing else or they’d take their business elsewhere. Unheard of as taverns were used to serving the cheapest gut rotting swill, the only criteria it got you drunk, fast, and was made of potatoes. It worked, tavern owners beat down his door begging for his product - brilliant.
Where it failed: Fascinating story that reads like a textbook. I finished with no clear sense of Smirnov as a man. And back to the vodka, this is a book about vodka, right? I expected to pickup some interesting trivia to drop at cocktail parties. Nada.
2 1/2 stars
What I liked: It does include some really interesting background on Russian political history. It shines as a business bio, his strategies (excruciatingly) detailed and well researched, even inspirational. The guy was a marketing genius. 1st Russian to introduce branding, a self made millionaire caught between the shifting tides of the fall of the Tsars and the rise of Communism, no small feat. His marketing tactics were entertaining. For example; he’d round up impoverished serfs, stake them drinking money with instructions to hit as many taverns as possible, the deal being they’d demand Smirnov’s vodka and nothing else or they’d take their business elsewhere. Unheard of as taverns were used to serving the cheapest gut rotting swill, the only criteria it got you drunk, fast, and was made of potatoes. It worked, tavern owners beat down his door begging for his product - brilliant.
Where it failed: Fascinating story that reads like a textbook. I finished with no clear sense of Smirnov as a man. And back to the vodka, this is a book about vodka, right? I expected to pickup some interesting trivia to drop at cocktail parties. Nada.
2 1/2 stars
June 18, 2015
Wow, inspiring and sad story of Pyotr Smirnov, his legacy and Russian capitalism.
All I could think about while listening is that "He built that." without government help. The timing of my reading of this at this time was uncanning given what is going on in US politics today.
He built that...and that is the story. Smirnov vodka was the first branded product in Russia and many imitators followed continuously trying to dethrone the king through questionable activities. Then came the revolution. I wonder much more successful the family would have been had not the Bolsheviks taken over.
Moral: Government should have only minimal controls in business and let the risk takers earn their rewards...after all they built it.
All I could think about while listening is that "He built that." without government help. The timing of my reading of this at this time was uncanning given what is going on in US politics today.
He built that...and that is the story. Smirnov vodka was the first branded product in Russia and many imitators followed continuously trying to dethrone the king through questionable activities. Then came the revolution. I wonder much more successful the family would have been had not the Bolsheviks taken over.
Moral: Government should have only minimal controls in business and let the risk takers earn their rewards...after all they built it.
December 26, 2014
Though not particularly well-written, it's an easy read and a quick brush-up on Russian history for those who want to talk about dead people at parties.
July 14, 2009
Linda Himelstein's biographical account of Russia's top vodka producer Pyotr Smirnov is in itself exhilarating.
The premise of the book centers on the life of Smirnov and explores in the details his successful building of an empire. Smirnov in many ways reminds me of a typical follower of the American dream. Born a serf (peasant) Smirnov follows the footsteps of his uncle, first by redeeming his own freedom and next building an empire through diligent and hard work. Surprisingly Smironov was not a drinker of his product, which may have contributed to his success :)
Ms. Himelstein masterfully crafts the story by introducing and detailing the political, social and economic conditions of the 19th century Russia. One becomes familiar with the problems of the society, its weaknesses (love of vodka for one) and its progress from feudal peasantry to an industrial nation. The book encompasses a period of 60 years and draws on a number of rich resources both Russian and international.
The book is fulfilling and educational and I highly recommend it to all interested in Russian history, as well as those who'd like to learn what makes the nature of a Russian millionaire.
The premise of the book centers on the life of Smirnov and explores in the details his successful building of an empire. Smirnov in many ways reminds me of a typical follower of the American dream. Born a serf (peasant) Smirnov follows the footsteps of his uncle, first by redeeming his own freedom and next building an empire through diligent and hard work. Surprisingly Smironov was not a drinker of his product, which may have contributed to his success :)
Ms. Himelstein masterfully crafts the story by introducing and detailing the political, social and economic conditions of the 19th century Russia. One becomes familiar with the problems of the society, its weaknesses (love of vodka for one) and its progress from feudal peasantry to an industrial nation. The book encompasses a period of 60 years and draws on a number of rich resources both Russian and international.
The book is fulfilling and educational and I highly recommend it to all interested in Russian history, as well as those who'd like to learn what makes the nature of a Russian millionaire.
July 12, 2022
A fantastic book which at face value will sadly only have a niche appeal, the backdrop of Russian history from the emancipation to the revolution is brilliantly told and the available information about the Smirnov family gleaned from years of immense research is woven throughout it.
A great contextual springboard into classic Russian literature.
A great contextual springboard into classic Russian literature.
July 29, 2011
Pretty good, but at times dry. Kind if ironic for a book about alcohol.
August 6, 2012
Linda Himelstein’s The King of Vodka: The Story of Pyotr Smirnov is a superbly constructed biography and an entertaining read. It combines the compelling nature of a mystery thriller; the exquisitely researched conciseness of high-quality journalism, in which good work speaks for itself; the welcome authority of an historian without an agenda; and beautiful use of the English language. Indeed, primary source research extending from before the family even had a name through the settlement of present-day lawsuits has been made available to the Anglophone world, in many cases, apparently, for the first time. The success of this book on journalistic, academic, and literary planes is accomplished through the thoroughness of the background she creates without obscuring the scope of the work and the tone she sets throughout despite a surprising number of issues with grammar and editing. Of special value are the images included in the book.
The key to the effectiveness of Himelstein’s writing is her scope. I felt that I learned a lot about the history and culture of Russia on a broad scale. Everything that I learned was presented with just enough complexity to be intriguing, to be credible, but simply enough to be accessible to the reader without disrupting the narrative of Smirnov’s life. Not once did I have to re-read a passage because the ordering was confused or there were too many references in play. In fact, the creative cast list that appears before the title page ensures that the reader will not become lost in a world of interchangeable characters, even though the succinctness of the writing allows no danger of this, anyway. Time after time, having set the stage for a key decision made by the hero or a dramatic situation he would have to confront, Himelstein runs down Smirnov’s list of options, ruling them out one by one to arrive at what he actually did. A fine example of this style is in his reaction to the temperance movement and the enacting of the state vodka monopoly, a particularly thorny problem for Smirnov, who was as unflinchingly loyal to the tsar and his policies as he was driven by the spirit of individual entrepreneurism (pg. 142). Himelstein’s analysis of his thinking here is convincing, not forced, because she has woven in evidence of his worldview – in this case, his tsarist loyalty, continuing from his days as a serf – in detail throughout the book. It is not a characteristic she attributes to him with an eye to building her argument at this point but one of a great many themes running the length of his life. Together, they compose a revealing portrait, and a convincing one: they must be fair and true because they are apparent both in retrospect and from primary sources. She has even made it clear through her description of his character, family, and class why a serf would feel such patriotic loyalty, an attitude that might seem counter-intuitive to someone who had not read the book. Another fine example occurs in the final chapter before the epilogue, when Vladimir has finally made the connection with Rudolph Kunett that would finally save Smirnov vodka. Having painted a picture of the possibility, effectively communicating Vladimir’s emotion as he lay dying, Himelstein declares, “Vladimir could not have imagined how right he was” (p. 325). This gives the reader impetus to delve into the next chapter because the sense of big events in the history of the family and the vodka stems from the emotional state of the central figure, poignantly portrayed by the author. In outlining Russian alcoholism throughout history, common knowledge for today’s reader, Himelstein notes that, in fact, “Russians were not the most prodigious drinkers in Europe” (pg. 126), adding to our historical knowledge through the subsequent explanation and giving us really enjoyable writing. She offers the counter-argument to what she has just written – that Russians were not actually worse alcohol abusers than others – and turning it into an ingenious redirect, using the supports of this argument (the quality and regulation of vodka, how it was consumed, its unique role in society) to transform an understanding of Russia into an understanding of Smirnov. The reader now has an insightfully concise understanding of Russian problems with alcohol because they were central to Smirnov’s firm from its conception to its pinnacle. Even when it becomes necessary to provide a long passage of historical background, such as the one on Tsar Aleksander II (pgs. 113-115), it is always given in relation to Smirnov to preserve the directness of the writing and to allow the reader to hold focus. (This is not to imply that the history is not intriguing on its own account.) This is the genius of Himelstein’s scope and the literary quality of her writing – the reader is not following the subject’s life but experiencing the world just as Smirnov would have, avoiding the kind of omniscient or retrospective attitude that can cause biographies to become unmanageably boring, precisely by destroying their focus.
Having set the parameters of the narrative like a reporter limited for space or a seasoned researcher, Himelstein piles on the stuff that makes the book great: carefully chosen, fascinatingly explained facets of Russian history and culture that build on common knowledge without ever overwhelming the reader. Rather than dropping names like Tolstoy and Lenin simply because they happened to be alive at the same time as the subject, as happens all too often, the author uses an entire literary genre as evidence of broad social attitudes (pg. 61); recounts the growth of the Bolsheviks from the earliest, easily crushed labor organizers, distrusted by government, aristocracy, and laborers alike (pg. 106), themselves echoes of earlier cholera riots (pg. 3); follows Smirnov’s descendants to the extent possible, tracking his formerly irresponsible son Vladimir through repeated escapes from execution (pgs. 241, 297-298) and patterns of Russian emigrants (pgs. 301-321) as the means by which Vladimir, least likely of Pyotr Smirnov’s offspring to do so, barely managed to save Smirnov vodka; etc. Himelstein doesn’t only fashion complete arguments based on major cultural elements rather than forcing conclusions from carefully culled examples. She further ties these arguments to points of Russian culture with which the reader will already be familiar, relates it to the reader’s sense of his own history, and couches it in key aspects of the subject’s life. That is, every event in the book connects with the reader on three levels. For example, Tolstoy’s leadership of the temperance movement engages Tolstoy, a well-known Russian figure around the world, bizarrely resembles North American Prohibition in its philosophy, causes, and effects, and has a complex interaction with Smirnov himself as he builds his vodka empire. Himelstein explains this turning point in Russian history and for the Smirnov firm by implicitly drawing a comparison to current affairs, recognizable to readers in any country, especially as the book was first released in 2009:
From the outset, Vyshnegradskiy, a self-made millionaire, was preoccupied with erasing the state’s budget deficit and strengthening its overall economic health. His blueprint involved raising taxes, reorganizing the railroad system, increasing exports, and launching the vodka and tobacco monopolies. He hoped to prop up Russia’s international profile, attracting new foreign investors and capital. Vyshnegradskiy’s plan worked – to a point…Russians, namely peasants, did not share in the state’s largesse. Rather, they suffered greatly under the heavy weight of mounting tax obligations and a decline in world grain prices. Their living conditions plummeted (pg. 151).
Introducing these big ideas only as they become relevant to Smirnov’s life allows the author to maintain the scope of the work and keeps all material within the reader’s grasp. Himelstein’s style works on the small scale as well as the large. Her explanation of Smirnov changing trains in Warsaw to reach Vienna from Moscow because of the difference in Russian rails from European ones (pg. 83) is one of those small touches of expertise that makes the book sparkle. Himelstein’s account of Smirnov’s life, in short, is indisputable because it is crafted with exquisite knowledge in broad cultural terms from all available evidence in a logical and fascinating way.
Only a few small problems in Himelstein’s arguments present obstacles to her brilliant analysis of Smirnov’s life. In describing Smirnov’s “little sympathy” for the attempts at labor activism on the part of “rude, disrespectful, almost criminal” radicals (pg. 106), she has glossed over the fact that Smirnov’s upward mobility, freeing himself from serfdom before it was emancipated and elbowing his way into Moscow’s merchant class, were also actions significantly eased if not made possible by building pressure on the government on the part of the lower classes. She has separated Aleksander II’s reforms, “the very actions that spawned Smirnov’s enormous success” (pg. 106), with the lower-class activism that Smirnov despised, when the two are, in truth, inseparable. Still, she could be entirely correct in her determination of Smirnov’s attitude. That is, the flaw in her logic might only be reflecting a flaw in Smirnov’s thinking. More serious glitches in the logic of the narrative come when Himelstein, in explaining the Russian temperance movement, draws a conclusion by comparing an absolute statistic to a subjective one (Russia had five times the number of alcohol-related deaths that France did; “per capita consumption of liquor in France was higher” (pg. 140); but this means nothing without at least contrasting the populations of Russia and France). Later, crime, and especially violent crime, is tied to alcohol consumption in the same way Tolstoy and others might have made this argument (pg. 140), but Himelstein fails to account for the possibility that unruly people both commit crimes and drink alcohol; unhappier Russians could be hurting their compatriots and drinking alcohol rather than because of drinking alcohol. Himelstein could but neither acknowledges nor explains this major logical problem.
The effectiveness of the book’s structure and the accessible quality of the information it provides make it a good book, but what makes it enjoyable to read is its appropriate tone. The author is clearly very familiar with Russian and uses Russian terms to illuminate cultural points, but never in know-it-all fashion. The etymology of vodka, from voda, “water,” (xix) for instance, is a key to understanding the highly evolved, varied role vodka has played in Russian society from the 16th century on. The change from “Smirnov” to “Smirnoff” (unceremoniously changed where necessary in the book and the subject of Chapter 23), illustrates the attempts to save Smirnov vodka in various Western countries and the split which, once it took root in the U.S., would become a great East-West business dispute. Everyone is familiar with the form of names like Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (Peter, Son of Ilya); Himelstein uses this form of address in dialogue to demonstrate relationships of respect or formality without interrupting her train of thought (pg. 109). The average reader who has heard Tchaikovsky’s name but has no idea about Russian grammar comes to understand these things through their use, not through a burdensome explanation like the one I am giving here. Although the readiest examples of the effective tone have to do with points of language, Himelstein’s tone lends credence to all aspects of the book. The lives of Pyotr Smirnov’s children are known in greater detail than those of anyone in his own generation. Smirnov was distressed by his sons’ lack of drive, by various forms of indiscipline, by his daughter Mariya’s suitor. Yet, despite all the related documentation the author has painstakingly collected, no judgment of any family member on the father’s part is suggested to the reader if it does not come from a primary source. The narrator is trustworthy because she is a completely objective expert.
Himelstein’s authoritative, unbiased tone even waxes literary. The best example is the beginning of Chapter 15 (pg. 203):
Russia came into the twentieth century resembling a tree in early autumn. All of its leaves were still intact and bountiful, some even quite beautiful. But they had begun to lose their vibrancy. A gradual weakening was taking place, brought on by the country’s increasingly contentious political, economic, and social realities. Though few said so openly, there was a growing sense among certain sectors that it was only a matter of time before the nation, like the decaying leaves, fell to the ground exhausted.
In the subsequent pages (pgs. 203-205), Himelstein transforms the nation described above into a metaphor of the Smirnov family itself, a poetic turn of thought that has engaged the reader’s previous knowledge of Russian history, connected what is to follow with the circumstances described in preceding chapters, elegantly foreshadowed events to come, and done the whole thing not tangentially but with direct relevance to Smirnov’s life at this point in the story. Her writing is sprinkled throughout with such inspired passages. It is completely effective and enjoyable everywhere.
In addition to the strength and elegance of the writing, The King of Vodka benefits from the high quality of its images (beginning pg. 258), some of which are not easily accessible otherwise, if at all. Himelstein has chosen photographs, some of them apparently acquired with some difficulty, that not only illustrate but add to descriptions found within the pages of her book. They demonstrate not only personalities, but significant events and conditions of society, and their clarity is remarkable. In particular, the photo of Valentina Piontkovskaya proves the author’s description of her almost magical aura: “Valentina’s dark eyes were expressive and memorable because they shone in the same way diamonds do, changing their sparkle and brightness with the slightest shift in her gaze…Valentina carried herself like a queen” (pg. 255). The Smirnovs’ “3,000 Flashing Bottles” of the Nizhniy Novgorod fair (Chapter 12) are too fabulous for the reader to synthesize without the image presented here. These wonderful photos give a face to every character, illuminating the heights they reached and the depths to which they fell. Even the red-washed view of Smirnov’s section of Moscow on the front cover shows where the bulk of Smirnov’s life will take place even before the reading begins. The fact that such an exact group of photographs can be presented proves that Himelstein’s analysis has evolved organically from the evidence. If anything was deliberately or accidentally excluded from Smirnov’s life, these images would either contradict the narrative or be much less complete. The photographs are used as an effective narrative tool rather than a visual aid.
In such a great work of non-fiction, it is shocking that so many errors can be found. These have certainly not destroyed the quality of the writing, but they all detract from it. Some of them do, in fact, obscure or change the meaning.
Several times, atypical or unidiomatic usage can be found, the kind that might be expected of a non-native writer, which Himelstein, a career journalist with several major newspapers and magazines, would not seem to be. It would be possible that unusual usage is meant to contribute to the tone of the book by giving a sense of Russian syntax if this usage were found throughout the book. Instead, we see “Smirnov would later became famous,” with mixed tenses (pg. 57); “as much if not more than reality” (pg. 80); “ago” when she clearly meant “before” (pg. 82); “Despite urging from the tsar’s officials,” which causes a bit of confusion because we most commonly would expect “being urged by” or “Despite the officials’ urging,” where “despite urging” wants to be followed by an indirect object (pg. 154); “moved into offense” when we would expect “moved into attack mode,” “went on the offensive,” etc. (pg. 155); and “late into the night,” which serves a continuous action, when “late at night” should have been used for a one-time action (pg. 285).
Certain more serious errors don’t change the writing but do damage by distracting the reader. The bizarre use of a dash set off by a comma can be seen in “though the business carried Arseniy’s name – and he was the official owner, …” (pg. 49). We are still waiting for the second dash to conclude the interruption and return us to the main idea of the sentence, but, like a CD skipping, somehow end up back in the stream of the sentence without knowing how. Some distractions are errors in type-setting: “and to how profit from it” (pg. 49). Some are terms used illogically: “The dawn of 1873 began peacefully” (pg. 81), when, of course, the author meant that 1873 began peacefully or that the dawn of 1873 was peaceful.
Other more serious errors do not actually change the meaning of what Himelstein wrote but do change the emphasis, which takes away from the carefully polished quality of her writing. “In one letter he wrote” (pg. 181), should be followed by anecdotal evidence of what was in the letter, since “he wrote” is a phrase describing “letter;” to introduce a quotation from the letter, a comma should have been written after “letter.” The inappropriate combination of a superlative with a non-matching adjective (“very considerable”) (pg. 300), even if it was a quoted translation, renders the idea in question more vague. And the use of a “per year” statistic for an event happening in a non-specific time frame, weakened by the qualifiers “average,” “by some Muscovites,” and “up to” undercuts statistical evidence of alcohol purchases used as part of the argument (pg. 334). The lack of a comma following “it” obscures the pronoun by confusing its object, threatening one of Himelstein’s especially poetic turns of phrase: “Puffy bags drooped from Smirnov’s eyes, stretching it seemed for the floor where they could rest” (pg. 157).
The worst of the errors change the meaning of what is written on the page. Fortunately, it is always possible to figure out what was meant without any trouble because the context is always so clear, but that doesn’t have to be true. She has written “reining” when she clearly meant “reigning” (pg. 68); “unbeknown to his father” rather than “unbeknownst to his father,” meaning that his father does not know him rather than that his father does not know the information in question (pg. 161); “a hallow gesture” rather than a hollow one (pg. 231); “Mobs raised and burned the German embassy” instead of “razed” (pg. 276); and an “attack of part of our troop” rather than “by part of our troop” (pg. 300), meaning, of course, that the troop was attacked, not attacking. The misplaced modifier “Unaffected, his stunned murderers” (pg. 280) means that Rasputin’s murderers were both unaffected and stunned, a logical impossibility, when he failed to be killed by poison and gunshots. It is probably meant that the murderers were stunned when the victim was unaffected. A prison’s “dehumanizing treatment of its enemies” (pg. 298) certainly is referring to its inhabitants or its prisoners. It is also likely that the subject is “the Bolshevik army” and the location is the prison. “A series of attempts on the tsar’s life, the latest of which came in April 1879” (pg. 111) means that the last attempt on the tsar’s life happened then, when, of course, it is meant that the most recent attempt before the events being described at that point in the book was in April 1879, in which case the sentence should read, “the latest of which had come.” “Now, as he
The key to the effectiveness of Himelstein’s writing is her scope. I felt that I learned a lot about the history and culture of Russia on a broad scale. Everything that I learned was presented with just enough complexity to be intriguing, to be credible, but simply enough to be accessible to the reader without disrupting the narrative of Smirnov’s life. Not once did I have to re-read a passage because the ordering was confused or there were too many references in play. In fact, the creative cast list that appears before the title page ensures that the reader will not become lost in a world of interchangeable characters, even though the succinctness of the writing allows no danger of this, anyway. Time after time, having set the stage for a key decision made by the hero or a dramatic situation he would have to confront, Himelstein runs down Smirnov’s list of options, ruling them out one by one to arrive at what he actually did. A fine example of this style is in his reaction to the temperance movement and the enacting of the state vodka monopoly, a particularly thorny problem for Smirnov, who was as unflinchingly loyal to the tsar and his policies as he was driven by the spirit of individual entrepreneurism (pg. 142). Himelstein’s analysis of his thinking here is convincing, not forced, because she has woven in evidence of his worldview – in this case, his tsarist loyalty, continuing from his days as a serf – in detail throughout the book. It is not a characteristic she attributes to him with an eye to building her argument at this point but one of a great many themes running the length of his life. Together, they compose a revealing portrait, and a convincing one: they must be fair and true because they are apparent both in retrospect and from primary sources. She has even made it clear through her description of his character, family, and class why a serf would feel such patriotic loyalty, an attitude that might seem counter-intuitive to someone who had not read the book. Another fine example occurs in the final chapter before the epilogue, when Vladimir has finally made the connection with Rudolph Kunett that would finally save Smirnov vodka. Having painted a picture of the possibility, effectively communicating Vladimir’s emotion as he lay dying, Himelstein declares, “Vladimir could not have imagined how right he was” (p. 325). This gives the reader impetus to delve into the next chapter because the sense of big events in the history of the family and the vodka stems from the emotional state of the central figure, poignantly portrayed by the author. In outlining Russian alcoholism throughout history, common knowledge for today’s reader, Himelstein notes that, in fact, “Russians were not the most prodigious drinkers in Europe” (pg. 126), adding to our historical knowledge through the subsequent explanation and giving us really enjoyable writing. She offers the counter-argument to what she has just written – that Russians were not actually worse alcohol abusers than others – and turning it into an ingenious redirect, using the supports of this argument (the quality and regulation of vodka, how it was consumed, its unique role in society) to transform an understanding of Russia into an understanding of Smirnov. The reader now has an insightfully concise understanding of Russian problems with alcohol because they were central to Smirnov’s firm from its conception to its pinnacle. Even when it becomes necessary to provide a long passage of historical background, such as the one on Tsar Aleksander II (pgs. 113-115), it is always given in relation to Smirnov to preserve the directness of the writing and to allow the reader to hold focus. (This is not to imply that the history is not intriguing on its own account.) This is the genius of Himelstein’s scope and the literary quality of her writing – the reader is not following the subject’s life but experiencing the world just as Smirnov would have, avoiding the kind of omniscient or retrospective attitude that can cause biographies to become unmanageably boring, precisely by destroying their focus.
Having set the parameters of the narrative like a reporter limited for space or a seasoned researcher, Himelstein piles on the stuff that makes the book great: carefully chosen, fascinatingly explained facets of Russian history and culture that build on common knowledge without ever overwhelming the reader. Rather than dropping names like Tolstoy and Lenin simply because they happened to be alive at the same time as the subject, as happens all too often, the author uses an entire literary genre as evidence of broad social attitudes (pg. 61); recounts the growth of the Bolsheviks from the earliest, easily crushed labor organizers, distrusted by government, aristocracy, and laborers alike (pg. 106), themselves echoes of earlier cholera riots (pg. 3); follows Smirnov’s descendants to the extent possible, tracking his formerly irresponsible son Vladimir through repeated escapes from execution (pgs. 241, 297-298) and patterns of Russian emigrants (pgs. 301-321) as the means by which Vladimir, least likely of Pyotr Smirnov’s offspring to do so, barely managed to save Smirnov vodka; etc. Himelstein doesn’t only fashion complete arguments based on major cultural elements rather than forcing conclusions from carefully culled examples. She further ties these arguments to points of Russian culture with which the reader will already be familiar, relates it to the reader’s sense of his own history, and couches it in key aspects of the subject’s life. That is, every event in the book connects with the reader on three levels. For example, Tolstoy’s leadership of the temperance movement engages Tolstoy, a well-known Russian figure around the world, bizarrely resembles North American Prohibition in its philosophy, causes, and effects, and has a complex interaction with Smirnov himself as he builds his vodka empire. Himelstein explains this turning point in Russian history and for the Smirnov firm by implicitly drawing a comparison to current affairs, recognizable to readers in any country, especially as the book was first released in 2009:
From the outset, Vyshnegradskiy, a self-made millionaire, was preoccupied with erasing the state’s budget deficit and strengthening its overall economic health. His blueprint involved raising taxes, reorganizing the railroad system, increasing exports, and launching the vodka and tobacco monopolies. He hoped to prop up Russia’s international profile, attracting new foreign investors and capital. Vyshnegradskiy’s plan worked – to a point…Russians, namely peasants, did not share in the state’s largesse. Rather, they suffered greatly under the heavy weight of mounting tax obligations and a decline in world grain prices. Their living conditions plummeted (pg. 151).
Introducing these big ideas only as they become relevant to Smirnov’s life allows the author to maintain the scope of the work and keeps all material within the reader’s grasp. Himelstein’s style works on the small scale as well as the large. Her explanation of Smirnov changing trains in Warsaw to reach Vienna from Moscow because of the difference in Russian rails from European ones (pg. 83) is one of those small touches of expertise that makes the book sparkle. Himelstein’s account of Smirnov’s life, in short, is indisputable because it is crafted with exquisite knowledge in broad cultural terms from all available evidence in a logical and fascinating way.
Only a few small problems in Himelstein’s arguments present obstacles to her brilliant analysis of Smirnov’s life. In describing Smirnov’s “little sympathy” for the attempts at labor activism on the part of “rude, disrespectful, almost criminal” radicals (pg. 106), she has glossed over the fact that Smirnov’s upward mobility, freeing himself from serfdom before it was emancipated and elbowing his way into Moscow’s merchant class, were also actions significantly eased if not made possible by building pressure on the government on the part of the lower classes. She has separated Aleksander II’s reforms, “the very actions that spawned Smirnov’s enormous success” (pg. 106), with the lower-class activism that Smirnov despised, when the two are, in truth, inseparable. Still, she could be entirely correct in her determination of Smirnov’s attitude. That is, the flaw in her logic might only be reflecting a flaw in Smirnov’s thinking. More serious glitches in the logic of the narrative come when Himelstein, in explaining the Russian temperance movement, draws a conclusion by comparing an absolute statistic to a subjective one (Russia had five times the number of alcohol-related deaths that France did; “per capita consumption of liquor in France was higher” (pg. 140); but this means nothing without at least contrasting the populations of Russia and France). Later, crime, and especially violent crime, is tied to alcohol consumption in the same way Tolstoy and others might have made this argument (pg. 140), but Himelstein fails to account for the possibility that unruly people both commit crimes and drink alcohol; unhappier Russians could be hurting their compatriots and drinking alcohol rather than because of drinking alcohol. Himelstein could but neither acknowledges nor explains this major logical problem.
The effectiveness of the book’s structure and the accessible quality of the information it provides make it a good book, but what makes it enjoyable to read is its appropriate tone. The author is clearly very familiar with Russian and uses Russian terms to illuminate cultural points, but never in know-it-all fashion. The etymology of vodka, from voda, “water,” (xix) for instance, is a key to understanding the highly evolved, varied role vodka has played in Russian society from the 16th century on. The change from “Smirnov” to “Smirnoff” (unceremoniously changed where necessary in the book and the subject of Chapter 23), illustrates the attempts to save Smirnov vodka in various Western countries and the split which, once it took root in the U.S., would become a great East-West business dispute. Everyone is familiar with the form of names like Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky (Peter, Son of Ilya); Himelstein uses this form of address in dialogue to demonstrate relationships of respect or formality without interrupting her train of thought (pg. 109). The average reader who has heard Tchaikovsky’s name but has no idea about Russian grammar comes to understand these things through their use, not through a burdensome explanation like the one I am giving here. Although the readiest examples of the effective tone have to do with points of language, Himelstein’s tone lends credence to all aspects of the book. The lives of Pyotr Smirnov’s children are known in greater detail than those of anyone in his own generation. Smirnov was distressed by his sons’ lack of drive, by various forms of indiscipline, by his daughter Mariya’s suitor. Yet, despite all the related documentation the author has painstakingly collected, no judgment of any family member on the father’s part is suggested to the reader if it does not come from a primary source. The narrator is trustworthy because she is a completely objective expert.
Himelstein’s authoritative, unbiased tone even waxes literary. The best example is the beginning of Chapter 15 (pg. 203):
Russia came into the twentieth century resembling a tree in early autumn. All of its leaves were still intact and bountiful, some even quite beautiful. But they had begun to lose their vibrancy. A gradual weakening was taking place, brought on by the country’s increasingly contentious political, economic, and social realities. Though few said so openly, there was a growing sense among certain sectors that it was only a matter of time before the nation, like the decaying leaves, fell to the ground exhausted.
In the subsequent pages (pgs. 203-205), Himelstein transforms the nation described above into a metaphor of the Smirnov family itself, a poetic turn of thought that has engaged the reader’s previous knowledge of Russian history, connected what is to follow with the circumstances described in preceding chapters, elegantly foreshadowed events to come, and done the whole thing not tangentially but with direct relevance to Smirnov’s life at this point in the story. Her writing is sprinkled throughout with such inspired passages. It is completely effective and enjoyable everywhere.
In addition to the strength and elegance of the writing, The King of Vodka benefits from the high quality of its images (beginning pg. 258), some of which are not easily accessible otherwise, if at all. Himelstein has chosen photographs, some of them apparently acquired with some difficulty, that not only illustrate but add to descriptions found within the pages of her book. They demonstrate not only personalities, but significant events and conditions of society, and their clarity is remarkable. In particular, the photo of Valentina Piontkovskaya proves the author’s description of her almost magical aura: “Valentina’s dark eyes were expressive and memorable because they shone in the same way diamonds do, changing their sparkle and brightness with the slightest shift in her gaze…Valentina carried herself like a queen” (pg. 255). The Smirnovs’ “3,000 Flashing Bottles” of the Nizhniy Novgorod fair (Chapter 12) are too fabulous for the reader to synthesize without the image presented here. These wonderful photos give a face to every character, illuminating the heights they reached and the depths to which they fell. Even the red-washed view of Smirnov’s section of Moscow on the front cover shows where the bulk of Smirnov’s life will take place even before the reading begins. The fact that such an exact group of photographs can be presented proves that Himelstein’s analysis has evolved organically from the evidence. If anything was deliberately or accidentally excluded from Smirnov’s life, these images would either contradict the narrative or be much less complete. The photographs are used as an effective narrative tool rather than a visual aid.
In such a great work of non-fiction, it is shocking that so many errors can be found. These have certainly not destroyed the quality of the writing, but they all detract from it. Some of them do, in fact, obscure or change the meaning.
Several times, atypical or unidiomatic usage can be found, the kind that might be expected of a non-native writer, which Himelstein, a career journalist with several major newspapers and magazines, would not seem to be. It would be possible that unusual usage is meant to contribute to the tone of the book by giving a sense of Russian syntax if this usage were found throughout the book. Instead, we see “Smirnov would later became famous,” with mixed tenses (pg. 57); “as much if not more than reality” (pg. 80); “ago” when she clearly meant “before” (pg. 82); “Despite urging from the tsar’s officials,” which causes a bit of confusion because we most commonly would expect “being urged by” or “Despite the officials’ urging,” where “despite urging” wants to be followed by an indirect object (pg. 154); “moved into offense” when we would expect “moved into attack mode,” “went on the offensive,” etc. (pg. 155); and “late into the night,” which serves a continuous action, when “late at night” should have been used for a one-time action (pg. 285).
Certain more serious errors don’t change the writing but do damage by distracting the reader. The bizarre use of a dash set off by a comma can be seen in “though the business carried Arseniy’s name – and he was the official owner, …” (pg. 49). We are still waiting for the second dash to conclude the interruption and return us to the main idea of the sentence, but, like a CD skipping, somehow end up back in the stream of the sentence without knowing how. Some distractions are errors in type-setting: “and to how profit from it” (pg. 49). Some are terms used illogically: “The dawn of 1873 began peacefully” (pg. 81), when, of course, the author meant that 1873 began peacefully or that the dawn of 1873 was peaceful.
Other more serious errors do not actually change the meaning of what Himelstein wrote but do change the emphasis, which takes away from the carefully polished quality of her writing. “In one letter he wrote” (pg. 181), should be followed by anecdotal evidence of what was in the letter, since “he wrote” is a phrase describing “letter;” to introduce a quotation from the letter, a comma should have been written after “letter.” The inappropriate combination of a superlative with a non-matching adjective (“very considerable”) (pg. 300), even if it was a quoted translation, renders the idea in question more vague. And the use of a “per year” statistic for an event happening in a non-specific time frame, weakened by the qualifiers “average,” “by some Muscovites,” and “up to” undercuts statistical evidence of alcohol purchases used as part of the argument (pg. 334). The lack of a comma following “it” obscures the pronoun by confusing its object, threatening one of Himelstein’s especially poetic turns of phrase: “Puffy bags drooped from Smirnov’s eyes, stretching it seemed for the floor where they could rest” (pg. 157).
The worst of the errors change the meaning of what is written on the page. Fortunately, it is always possible to figure out what was meant without any trouble because the context is always so clear, but that doesn’t have to be true. She has written “reining” when she clearly meant “reigning” (pg. 68); “unbeknown to his father” rather than “unbeknownst to his father,” meaning that his father does not know him rather than that his father does not know the information in question (pg. 161); “a hallow gesture” rather than a hollow one (pg. 231); “Mobs raised and burned the German embassy” instead of “razed” (pg. 276); and an “attack of part of our troop” rather than “by part of our troop” (pg. 300), meaning, of course, that the troop was attacked, not attacking. The misplaced modifier “Unaffected, his stunned murderers” (pg. 280) means that Rasputin’s murderers were both unaffected and stunned, a logical impossibility, when he failed to be killed by poison and gunshots. It is probably meant that the murderers were stunned when the victim was unaffected. A prison’s “dehumanizing treatment of its enemies” (pg. 298) certainly is referring to its inhabitants or its prisoners. It is also likely that the subject is “the Bolshevik army” and the location is the prison. “A series of attempts on the tsar’s life, the latest of which came in April 1879” (pg. 111) means that the last attempt on the tsar’s life happened then, when, of course, it is meant that the most recent attempt before the events being described at that point in the book was in April 1879, in which case the sentence should read, “the latest of which had come.” “Now, as he
June 5, 2017
I thought the history of alcohol could be boring, but Pyotr Smirnov's story is surprisingly interesting. Equal parts intriguing and factual. From serf to the King of Vodka, Pyotr's story becomes increasingly more interesting with each turn of the page. If you want to know the origin of Smirnoff vodka, then this book is a great place to start. If you want to dip your toes into Russian history, you can't go wrong with this book. While it focuses on Smirnov's story and later his family's, it does provide information on Russian events as they happen. I'd definitely recommend reading this book to those who especially love history and Russian history/culture in particular, as well as those curious about Smirnoff's origins.
August 6, 2018
This is a well-researched and detailed account not just of Pyotr Smirnov but also of his family, both before and after his birth, that is surprisingly easy to read given the many and varied themes and events that are discussed, ranging from the life of a serf in 19th Century Russia to the changing political climates through the 19th and 20th Centuries and beyond. As vodka is my spirit of choice, I was fascinated by the drinks early days and the various monopolies applied by the Russian governments to the drink, not to mention how it appeared in modern times following the reinstatement of the vodka monopoly in Bolshevik Russia. An excellent and thorough account that really brings the vodka story to life.
December 23, 2023
Minu arvamuse raamatust leiab blogist https://triinuraamatud.wordpress.com/...
November 26, 2014
“The King of Vodka” by Linda Himelstein, published by Harper.
Category – Biography Publication Date – November 30, 2010
This is the story of Pyotr Smirnov (known more commonly as Smirnoff). It traces his life, his family’s lives, and a condensed history of Russia. All of this is based around the drink “VODKA”.
Pyotr was born into a family of serfs (a Russian name for slave) and his father was determined to better himself and his family. His father broke the bonds of serfdom but Pyotr took up the fight and through cunning, manipulation, and ingenuity, not only found respectability but wealth. He did all of this by becoming the major distiller and supplier if Vodka in Russia. He was so competent at putting forth his brand name that he was able to obtain the much coveted title of “Purveyor of His Imperial Majesty’s Court”. This entitled him to carry the State Emblem on his product. Once he received this title Pyotr’s business took off to the tune of 3.2 million rubles ($34.8 million in current dollars). The business kept growing and the Smirnov family began to live a palatial life. Their business and lifestyle came into hard times due to the State taking over the Vodka industry and a grass roots objection to alcohol consumption. Russia was quickly becoming a country of drunks and the State was being blamed because their revenues were largely obtained through the sale of vodka.
The Smirnov family also began to have problems that are often associated with wealth. The sons and daughters showed little interest in the business but had no problem throwing their money around carelessly.
The fall of the Tsars doomed the family as all their holdings were seized by the State. Many left the country almost penniless and an effort was made to rekindle the family business and name.
Category – Biography Publication Date – November 30, 2010
This is the story of Pyotr Smirnov (known more commonly as Smirnoff). It traces his life, his family’s lives, and a condensed history of Russia. All of this is based around the drink “VODKA”.
Pyotr was born into a family of serfs (a Russian name for slave) and his father was determined to better himself and his family. His father broke the bonds of serfdom but Pyotr took up the fight and through cunning, manipulation, and ingenuity, not only found respectability but wealth. He did all of this by becoming the major distiller and supplier if Vodka in Russia. He was so competent at putting forth his brand name that he was able to obtain the much coveted title of “Purveyor of His Imperial Majesty’s Court”. This entitled him to carry the State Emblem on his product. Once he received this title Pyotr’s business took off to the tune of 3.2 million rubles ($34.8 million in current dollars). The business kept growing and the Smirnov family began to live a palatial life. Their business and lifestyle came into hard times due to the State taking over the Vodka industry and a grass roots objection to alcohol consumption. Russia was quickly becoming a country of drunks and the State was being blamed because their revenues were largely obtained through the sale of vodka.
The Smirnov family also began to have problems that are often associated with wealth. The sons and daughters showed little interest in the business but had no problem throwing their money around carelessly.
The fall of the Tsars doomed the family as all their holdings were seized by the State. Many left the country almost penniless and an effort was made to rekindle the family business and name.
January 27, 2016
A fascinating & tragic look at the history of a family & company, running in tandem with the fascinating & tragic history that is the story of Russia. Knowing what is to come, there is a great sense of loss that permeates the story of the Smirnov's...one that makes the reader glad the family patriarch didn't live to see the madness & chaos that destroyed his family, and then his company. An addictive read.
July 20, 2016
How could a book about a fascinating man and fascinating times in Russia be so dry? and yet, it is. It's clear the author tries very hard and is very interested in her topic, but I learned almost nothing about what Smirnov was like as a person and everything about the % of alcohol that made up a nalivka in 1893. Lots of interesting history, but more of a textbook rehashing than a compelling narrative.
December 11, 2023
Sellele raamatule panin silma peale kohe ilmumishetkel, kuid kogu aeg trügis midagi muud lugemiseks vahele. Lõpuks aga ta ikkagi minuni jõudis ja osutus oodatult heaks lugemiseks. Kui tavaliselt kulub mitteilukirjanduslike teoste lugemiseks ja seedimiseks ikka rohkem aega, siis seekord sain teose läbi juba mõne õhtuga. Mulle väga meeldis autori kirjutamisstiil. Põhjaliku uurimistöö andmetele tuginedes on ta loonud köitva ülevaate vodkakuninga elust. Eriti meeldib mulle n-ö rekonstrueerimise kasutamine ehk ilukirjandusliku lihvi andmine ajalooliselt teada sündmustele või tegevustele. Et kes see ikka päris täpselt teab, mismoodi see noor Pjotr Moskvasee reisis, kuid eks ta ikka leiva ja juustu kotti pistis ja koos onuga teele jäävate sugulaste juures ööbis.
Kuigi minu suhtumine alkoholi ja eelkõige vodkasse on kõike muud kui soosiv, siis selle raamatu ja Smirnovi lugu lugedes minetas see hetkeks tähtsuse. Tegemist on siiski peamiselt ühe sisuliselt hariduseta ja pärisorjast talupoegade suguvõsast pärineva mehe teekonnaga suurettevõtte loojaks. Seda nukram oli lugeda, et kuigi äri saatis edu, siis eraelu polnud tal sugugi nii helge. Kui pärast vodkaimpeeriumi looja surma hoidis seda esialgu vee peal kaine pea ja kahe jalaga maas olev vanim poeg, siis pärast tema ootamatut surma hakkas loodu saatus liperdi-laperdi käima. Ning tundub, et see, mida me tänapäeval suurnimena tunneme, oleks võinud vabalt aegade unustusse kaduda, kui vaid juhused oleksid teisiti olnud... Paralleelina tuli kohe mõtteisse "Lehman Brothers". Teed ja orjad, lood midagi suurt ja siis kaob kõik igavikku, jääb vaid nimi...
Ei tohiks küll enam üllatada, aga juba 19. sajandi keskel moodustasid n-ö viinamaksud tsaariimpeeriumi sissetulekust peaaegu poole. Nii et isegi kui venelased ja vodka muudmoodi kokku laulatatud poleks, siis majanduslikelgi kaalutlustel oleks kõik karskustaotlused juba ette hukule määratud.
Seega, oli tõesti hea lugemine ja julgen teistelegi soovitada.
Kuigi minu suhtumine alkoholi ja eelkõige vodkasse on kõike muud kui soosiv, siis selle raamatu ja Smirnovi lugu lugedes minetas see hetkeks tähtsuse. Tegemist on siiski peamiselt ühe sisuliselt hariduseta ja pärisorjast talupoegade suguvõsast pärineva mehe teekonnaga suurettevõtte loojaks. Seda nukram oli lugeda, et kuigi äri saatis edu, siis eraelu polnud tal sugugi nii helge. Kui pärast vodkaimpeeriumi looja surma hoidis seda esialgu vee peal kaine pea ja kahe jalaga maas olev vanim poeg, siis pärast tema ootamatut surma hakkas loodu saatus liperdi-laperdi käima. Ning tundub, et see, mida me tänapäeval suurnimena tunneme, oleks võinud vabalt aegade unustusse kaduda, kui vaid juhused oleksid teisiti olnud... Paralleelina tuli kohe mõtteisse "Lehman Brothers". Teed ja orjad, lood midagi suurt ja siis kaob kõik igavikku, jääb vaid nimi...
Ei tohiks küll enam üllatada, aga juba 19. sajandi keskel moodustasid n-ö viinamaksud tsaariimpeeriumi sissetulekust peaaegu poole. Nii et isegi kui venelased ja vodka muudmoodi kokku laulatatud poleks, siis majanduslikelgi kaalutlustel oleks kõik karskustaotlused juba ette hukule määratud.
Seega, oli tõesti hea lugemine ja julgen teistelegi soovitada.
March 27, 2022
2.5 stars.
Not a terrible book, but what was the point? There were so many holes in the account of Smirnov's life--genuine facts that could not be located and were thus admittedly presumed and conjured up by the author--that the motivation and rationale for writing the account seem weak. For such a renown product, I suppose that an account of the life of the founder is not out of the question, but it just rang empty for me.
With so little information about him available, the character development isn't all that intriguing. And the same can be said for his relatives, on whom much of the book is focused, as Smirnov dies halfway through it. The rest of the book drags on talking about how the brand survived the Russian civil war, onset of communism, and the remainder of the 20th century.
It's an OK book overall. I'd say best suited to vodka or alcohol aficionados, and less so to Russophiles, which is the angle from which I picked it up.
Not a terrible book, but what was the point? There were so many holes in the account of Smirnov's life--genuine facts that could not be located and were thus admittedly presumed and conjured up by the author--that the motivation and rationale for writing the account seem weak. For such a renown product, I suppose that an account of the life of the founder is not out of the question, but it just rang empty for me.
With so little information about him available, the character development isn't all that intriguing. And the same can be said for his relatives, on whom much of the book is focused, as Smirnov dies halfway through it. The rest of the book drags on talking about how the brand survived the Russian civil war, onset of communism, and the remainder of the 20th century.
It's an OK book overall. I'd say best suited to vodka or alcohol aficionados, and less so to Russophiles, which is the angle from which I picked it up.
April 11, 2020
An excellent look at the Smirnov family and what led up to the events which led to their downfall of the Tsar's empire and the rise of the Soviet Union. There are some good marketing innovations and a view as to how the wheels of progress were greased with donations to Church & charities. It seems as if vodka runs deep in the veins of Russian history, culture and its people and the battles to establish, maintain and finally lose this brand to the state monopoly and later prohibition is as interesting as the personalities and their strengths and their many, many weaknesses. I can now understand the consumption and promotion of vodka as debilitating to the masses as opium was to the Chinese.
September 4, 2023
It was a fascinating book.
However, I don't think the author understood at all the politics of Russia - in terms of imprisonment. When a descendant of Smirnov was arrested and imprisoned in the 1930s, the author wrote "the authorities were hoping that he will change his capitalist convictions"... Really? How completely ignorant of Stalinist Russia can you be?
this type of writing basically made me question just about everything else that she wrote.
but - if you stick to just the facts - it was a fascinating story!
However, I don't think the author understood at all the politics of Russia - in terms of imprisonment. When a descendant of Smirnov was arrested and imprisoned in the 1930s, the author wrote "the authorities were hoping that he will change his capitalist convictions"... Really? How completely ignorant of Stalinist Russia can you be?
this type of writing basically made me question just about everything else that she wrote.
but - if you stick to just the facts - it was a fascinating story!
June 13, 2021
I enjoyed learning about how Smirnov vodka came to be. The book is fairly well written though the limitations of historic Russian records is obvious in many places. The author was also undoubtedly plagued by the fact that many people share the same names. The author makes it as clear as possible who she is talking about but it's rather difficult to keep track at times. It's an interesting though not fully great historical account.
October 13, 2022
The story of Pyotr Smirnovs rise from humble beginnings to being one of the most prominent businessmen in imperial Russia and his brand's struggle to survive the tumultuous period of the Bolshevik takeover of Russia was amazing. Although the focus is of course on the brand and its founder, the author also gives good insight into the twilight years of the Russian empire and the events leading up to the Russian Revolution.
November 4, 2023
Iseenesest huvitav lugu Smirnovi pere tõusust maata talupojast üheks tsaari-venemaa edukamaks ärimeheks ja osaks eliidist, muutustest Venemaal ja kõige kaotamisest. Viimane toob esile palju ka seda, mismoodi poliitilised muutused, progrommid ja natsionaliseerimine kõike muutsid - mingil hetkel suhteliselt edukast riigist… teadagi kuhu. Raamatu taga on suur hulk uurimistööd, mis on paraku mõjutanud ka selle kirjastiili.
January 24, 2025
While the story itself was a bit dry, this was an amazing story of a self-made man in Russia of all places. Pyotr Smirnov acquired business knowledge in order to sell his product, especially when the government does anything it can to sabotage your business. It is just too bad he did not live long enough to see his business through. The country, the times, and even his own family did not support him. This was a very insightful story.
December 14, 2018
An interesting presentation of the history of the Smirnov Family and its Smirnov brand of vodka and flavored wines...from the beginning to the approximately 2008. Russian geo-political and cultural influences had huge impacts on the manufacturer of these products. Himelstein does a good job of keeping the historical record enlightening and readable.
January 23, 2022
A well written and well sourced book.
The author, when venturing into areas that are based on "best evidence available" or drawn from what is known about the time period, makes sure to let the reader know.
However, I find the author to be a bit of an apologist for communism and the misery caused by that system, which mars an otherwise well done book.
The author, when venturing into areas that are based on "best evidence available" or drawn from what is known about the time period, makes sure to let the reader know.
However, I find the author to be a bit of an apologist for communism and the misery caused by that system, which mars an otherwise well done book.
November 28, 2022
What an interesting, well written, book. I have, or should I say, had no interest in Vodka, the Smirnov brand, or the family. I do have some interest in the historical period of the Tzar's. The book just grabbed me. Instead of the usual boring history, a well developed story, developed from facts and a tremendous amount of research was incredibly interesting and enjoyable.
July 27, 2023
Overall a really well researched and written book about the Smirnov family. I wished to learn more about vodka itself, but the book largely avoided talking too much about the distillation process of the time. This left me feeling a little frustrated that the way the man himself obtained the prestige to have the book written was left out. Nevertheless, a solid overview of the family.
June 13, 2018
A very interesting study of how vodka has influenced the history of Russia and how the Smirnoff family made vodka an international standard. Written with just the right amount of scholarship -- educational but not tedious.
August 4, 2017
The history of Russia through the prism of vodka.
March 22, 2018
So interesting-could not put it down!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 80 reviews