In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • Shell Shock: Traumatic Neurosis and the British Soldiers of the First World War
  • Jeffrey S. Reznick
Peter Leese . Shell Shock: Traumatic Neurosis and the British Soldiers of the First World War. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002. xi + 229 pp. $49.95 (0-333-96926-X).

Many histories of shell shock have appeared in recent years, and one might wonder, upon learning of this volume, whether the subject deserves another extended study. Drawing on an impressive range of evidence to shape a wide view of shell shock before, during, and after the Great War, Peter Leese shows that his subject is indeed worthy of further attention. Few scholars, Leese rightly argues, have moved beyond using shell shock as a cultural metaphor to explore how this [End Page 148] mental state defines for the first time "a modern condition that becomes all too familiar through the twentieth century: mass trauma" (p. 4). Shell shock is modern, he claims, because "surrounding it are scientific and bureaucratic procedures designed to manage human emotions and behavior and direct them towards mass, state-controlled activity, in this instance, making war" (p. 4). The emergence, understanding, and effects and memories of shell shock, therefore, parallel wider processes in civilian society before and after the Great War, making the study of shell shock a means to "further our understanding and interpretation of the human experience of industrial labor, of the Great War, and of cultural change in British society" (p. 10).

Leese's argument takes shape in three sections. Part 1, "Discoveries," tracks the worker's experience of traumatic neurosis through peace and war, especially in the context of related technology and bureaucracy. Part 2, "Wartime," examines the front-line and home-front experience of trauma among officers and other ranks. Part 3, "Legacies," explores the postcombat experience of war veterans and the place that shell shock has taken within wider twentieth-century British culture. The very core of this book—chapters 5, 6, and 7—deserves critical attention for its unprecedented examination of the shell-shock treatment network in World War One Britain. Within this narrative, Leese offers engaging analyses of the varied pressures that shaped the understanding of shell shock, including medical debates in journals and specialist medical practice, institutional regimes, nonspecialist practice, patient perception, military requirements, and political opinion. Noteworthy here and elsewhere is Leese's careful use of too-often-neglected source material (namely hospital magazines and medical case sheets), alongside notes, letters, and professional clinical literature, to reveal how officers, men, and clinicians wrote about shell shock. These carefully crafted passages should inspire among scholars of the Great War, and certainly among historians of medicine, a deeper mining of the archives and a wider interpretation of the literary and visual materials held therein.

The greatest achievement of Leese's work, beyond contributing to interpretations of the Great War and echoes of this event through the twentieth century, lies in provoking critical thought about individual and collective experiences and expressions of trauma—and the cultural shaping of these experiences and expressions—in the new century. Globalization, terrorism, and landmines shape the latest chapters of the story Leese presents here. Soldiers and civilians traumatized by ideology, warfare, and technology are the faces of this narrative. Set alongside projects in the history of disability and the fields of international studies and international development, Leese's work helps to frame new perspectives on a condition that individuals and populations continue to recall and, more important, to experience firsthand.

Jeffrey S. Reznick
Orthotic and Prosthetic Assistance Fund
Washington, D.C.
...

pdf

Share