What do you think?
Rate this book
Null and Void: Poland: Case Study on Comparative Imperialism
Null and Case Study on Comparative Imperialism traces the history of Poland from the 1930s to the 1950s, dealing with the Nazi era and focusing especially on the Stalinist period.
260 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2008
7 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 of 1 review
February 23, 2011
M.B. Szonert calls her book a case study on comparative imperialism. Whether or not Szonert's book qualifies as an actually case study or whether she uses the word to mean a study of this particular woman's life in context, is a question that I asked myself when I started reading this book. Whether it is a study of comparative imperialism using Halina's story as a vehicle is another question. I suspect that it is Szonert's intention to do both. And she succeeds on both counts. Case study methodology is an empirical inquiry investigating a phenomenon using multiple sources of evidence. The researcher employing this method places the phenomenon of interest in context and attempts to answer questions about how and why things pertinent to that phenomenon happened. It is a method that is particularly pertinent when one wants to study something in-depth and when the researcher or writer has access to information rich sources.
Her case study has an information rich source -- Halina -- and many primary and secondary sources to which she refers and which she has read in order to describe the context of Halina's life between two imperial powers -- Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. The book is well annotated and referenced and it is very well written. Szonert has a very accessible and interesting writing style. She immediately engages the reader.
Moreover, she should be applauded for publishing a book that tells people what it was like for Polish patriots under Soviet control. To be tortured for fighting for one's country by one's country is almost unbelievable. BTW, there is description of torture in this book, but it is not nearly as graphic as some reviewers suggest. There are plenty of descriptions of atrocities during war that are far worse than what she describes in this book. However, as a piece of scholarship, the work is flawed in one important way and that is that Szonert lets her passion show repeatedly. Over and over she lets her own feelings seep through from the very first pages of the book. E.g. The Soviets finished off with the Polish patriots in grand style; referring to Stalin and Hitler as the two villains; ironic use of quotation marks as in "democratically elected," god must have answered her prayers, and others are sprinkled throughout the book. These kinds of value laden references actually detract from the narrative rather than add to it. They also tell us more about Szonert than they do about Halina. Had the author recounted Halina's conversation as containing these words, it would be one thing, but as the author's words, they call into question her objectivity in telling this story. And, more importantly, it also is insulting to the reader. I, as an informed reader, am perfectly capable of concluding that those bastards Hitler and Stalin were villains or worse on the basis of her telling me their actions, not her calling them names. This is the difference between an objective rendering of a topic that respects a readers intelligence and one that will send critics scurrying to shoot holes in a history. And they will, because Szonert deals with some controversial material, such as the use of Polish Jews by their Soviet masters as pawns in the suppression and oppression of Polish citizenry post WW II. This, although true, will send apologists from certain sectors up the wall, and they will use her less than detached narrative as one nail in making an argument against her.
Her empirical rendering may be based on historical data, but her emotionality does not help her argument, and that is really too bad.
There are also some strange hiccups in the writing of this book. One example, on page 50-51 refers to a friend of the author and his warm feelings about George W. Bush, which she then extends to all Poles. I read this several times and finally concluded that it was simply a gratuitous non sequitur. It had nothing to do whatever with the Halina story except tangentially to "show" that Poles love liberty. They do, but she might have used a better example than Bush, the invader of Iraq. I wonder if the author reflected on the silliness of this example? It seems to me that John Paul, the Polish Pope, would have been a much better exemplar of Polish love of liberty and freedom. Also, what was her foundation for the contention that Bush was almost universally loved by Poles? Were there polls conducted to support this contention? Or was this simply Szonert's impression? Again, I think that this statement tells us more about the author than about Halina or comparative imperialism -- although one might argue that the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld Iraqi adventure smacked of imperialism. AND, this may well have been her subtle point. How can Poles support a president who invades a country to liberate its people and have experienced the same sort of invasion with the same justification -- a very valid question. If this was the author's point, she was way too timid in making it.
In the final analysis, the value of this book is to add to the mounting literature on the topic of Poles during WW II and to open the door on the topic of what happened afterwards. For this, I am grateful to Szonert.
Her case study has an information rich source -- Halina -- and many primary and secondary sources to which she refers and which she has read in order to describe the context of Halina's life between two imperial powers -- Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. The book is well annotated and referenced and it is very well written. Szonert has a very accessible and interesting writing style. She immediately engages the reader.
Moreover, she should be applauded for publishing a book that tells people what it was like for Polish patriots under Soviet control. To be tortured for fighting for one's country by one's country is almost unbelievable. BTW, there is description of torture in this book, but it is not nearly as graphic as some reviewers suggest. There are plenty of descriptions of atrocities during war that are far worse than what she describes in this book. However, as a piece of scholarship, the work is flawed in one important way and that is that Szonert lets her passion show repeatedly. Over and over she lets her own feelings seep through from the very first pages of the book. E.g. The Soviets finished off with the Polish patriots in grand style; referring to Stalin and Hitler as the two villains; ironic use of quotation marks as in "democratically elected," god must have answered her prayers, and others are sprinkled throughout the book. These kinds of value laden references actually detract from the narrative rather than add to it. They also tell us more about Szonert than they do about Halina. Had the author recounted Halina's conversation as containing these words, it would be one thing, but as the author's words, they call into question her objectivity in telling this story. And, more importantly, it also is insulting to the reader. I, as an informed reader, am perfectly capable of concluding that those bastards Hitler and Stalin were villains or worse on the basis of her telling me their actions, not her calling them names. This is the difference between an objective rendering of a topic that respects a readers intelligence and one that will send critics scurrying to shoot holes in a history. And they will, because Szonert deals with some controversial material, such as the use of Polish Jews by their Soviet masters as pawns in the suppression and oppression of Polish citizenry post WW II. This, although true, will send apologists from certain sectors up the wall, and they will use her less than detached narrative as one nail in making an argument against her.
Her empirical rendering may be based on historical data, but her emotionality does not help her argument, and that is really too bad.
There are also some strange hiccups in the writing of this book. One example, on page 50-51 refers to a friend of the author and his warm feelings about George W. Bush, which she then extends to all Poles. I read this several times and finally concluded that it was simply a gratuitous non sequitur. It had nothing to do whatever with the Halina story except tangentially to "show" that Poles love liberty. They do, but she might have used a better example than Bush, the invader of Iraq. I wonder if the author reflected on the silliness of this example? It seems to me that John Paul, the Polish Pope, would have been a much better exemplar of Polish love of liberty and freedom. Also, what was her foundation for the contention that Bush was almost universally loved by Poles? Were there polls conducted to support this contention? Or was this simply Szonert's impression? Again, I think that this statement tells us more about the author than about Halina or comparative imperialism -- although one might argue that the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld Iraqi adventure smacked of imperialism. AND, this may well have been her subtle point. How can Poles support a president who invades a country to liberate its people and have experienced the same sort of invasion with the same justification -- a very valid question. If this was the author's point, she was way too timid in making it.
In the final analysis, the value of this book is to add to the mounting literature on the topic of Poles during WW II and to open the door on the topic of what happened afterwards. For this, I am grateful to Szonert.
Displaying 1 of 1 review