An author of Oswald: Russian Episode was one of the closest contacts, which Lee Harvey Oswald had in time of living of the last in commie Muscovy. Such book was interesting to me, whose third edition was published in 2020 and which I temporarily got. However, I always suspicion to account made by Russian. I never trusted them and that always was right. These people prone to imagine of events and, moreover, believe in that. Not at first time I mention Marquis Astolphe de Custine who in his famous “Russia in 1839” gave precisely remark that only non-Russian can objectively write about Russians. I add that it relates to everything what Russian tells.
Undoubtedly, this book is testimony about man who became a main relation to Kennedy’s assassination. However, Ernst Titovets writes not only about personal relationship, he made a painstaking research by learning vast quantity of sources and interviewed many people who had contact with Lee Harvey Oswald. His book also honestly recreates reeking reality and peculiarity of these times in that occurring place. The author usually makes a good portrait of every person. Titovets is talented for writing. Only few times he repeated facts told before. And his using of dramatizing isn’t for place. He intrigues as reasoning on what military secrets Oswald could have and later he concludes on their futility while he could initially write the last. Nevertheless, this book contains fascinating facts of relationship between Ernst Titovets and Lee Harvey Oswald even despite I was familiar with many of them as well as I read a lot interviews with book’s author and I listened audio records of these two people.
However, Lee Harvey Oswald became a figure tied with significant event while his life was plain and relevant for person of his age. I ended reading on meeting of Oswald with his future wife Marina Prusakova. I don’t know how honest Titovets in this place. I couldn’t bear that included interviews with different witnesses are contradict to each other and everybody like to put their ostensibly meaningful in that what can as significant moment while that meeting is another unusual episode for me.
Sometimes Ernst Titovets fantasizes and believes in it as that wary I had. He dares to put as facts that it was way of Oswald’s thinking without giving a basis as that much was in describing before of their meeting. He does it after as quoting diary in which Oswald writes that dances were “boring” until the last hour when he met Prusakova. Titovets defined Lee’s behavior in that part as arrogance – he makes a typical Russian negative perception. He demonstrates other Muscovian peculiarity of their mentality, which in that any person supposed to have same experience as his own. I have no point to believe that Ernst Titovets was familiar with “good cop, bad cop” in that time as this can understand in his book. I can’t confirm as a precisely fact, but I never heard and never experienced that this technique used in Russian-speaking world even despite it considered as the best around the globe. I usually had deal with “one or two absolutely rude cops”. However, writer of this book is misleading about “good cop, bad cop”, because meeting with one official and later with four government representers were separate and between them passed seven days as that can know from Oswald’s diary. Maybe, Titovets is understating in describing about application for US visa while obvious author’s high ego by needles quoting positive reviews in preface of the third edition. A horrible thing he makes about Stanislau Shushkevich whom mentions once. Titovets writes that Shushkevich considered Oswald as a “remote person” and doesn’t give links and explanation of this statement whereas a future head of Supreme Council, who was an intelligent person, spoke positive about Lee Harvey Oswald in multiple interviews.
Titovets didn’t learn past diligently. He uses common facts, which aren’t precisely. The doctor describes about successes of the Soviets as launching of Sputnik 1 while doesn’t mention about story with Explorer 1. Doctor, as he actually is, puts as a fact that Hruschyov did banging of boot by trust to words of a professor who was part of delegation. Nobody of Muscovians, who were in that delegation, told similar story, each of them had a contradicting version of event. There were photographers on that UN Assembly, what usually occurs, and one of them John Loengard said that nobody would miss such significant moment. Reading of that professor telling of meetings with Oswald gave feeling of fairytale, because they were different personalities at least. It also caused to close the book.
The author limits to mentioning a hunting episode with Lee Harvey Oswald, which is very famous in Russian media and I can’t understand why Ernst Titovets didn’t give it’s details. His book leaves with assuming that Lee Harvey Oswald was a lousy shooter by that case on hunting and other one happened in shooting range. I would like to know a brand of pistol, which Oswald hold in factory. Nevertheless, his results don’t conclude on his skills, because he hold these weapons at first time. It probable that you must adapt to unknown arm and especially if it’s Russian, which had (and carry on to have.) own peculiarities. There can require time for understand weapon and who knows in what conditions were these pistol and hunting rifle. It also possible that a gun can be not your type. Anyway, Oswald wasn’t a hopeless shooter by his scores when he was a Marine. He hit on “sharpshooter” at first time and “marksman” at second.
I got additional corroboration after less fifty pages of what I always thought about Lee Harvey Oswald. After meeting with his future wife, I was jumping to other pages carried on describing of simple life while I have learning for long time about JFK assassination and Oswald’s personality is very great familiar for me. Then was author’s opinion on famous event to which I hadn’t care.
