REVIEWS 747 Sirotkina's book evokes well the complexity and ambiguity of Russian psychiatry's engagement with literature at this crucial historical juncture. However, although the book is very readable, one sometimes struggles to connect all its differentstrandsinto a single, focused argument. The problem lies in the ambitiousnessof Sirotkina'sproject,which spansno less than half a centuryand definesitselfasboth a 'culturalhistoryofpsychiatry'and a history of Russian 'pathographies'. By trying to alleviate the lack of comprehensive histories of Russian psychiatry in English, Sirotkinamakes her study do too much. Consequently, subsections that refer to the history of Russian psychiatric institutions or to the careers of key Russian psychiatrists on occasion fail to 'gel' with the specific discussion of psychiatry'sengagement with and professionalinterest in literature.The study also lacks a conclusion that would tie all its themes into a coherent whole. The volume's brief and overly general introduction hardly does the job. Despite these weaknesses Sirotkina's history includes an abundance of valuable material and enlightening argument of use and interestto anyone studyingthe intellectual historyof late Imperial and early Soviet Russia. The most interestingchapter is arguablythe one connecting the emergence of psychotherapyin Russiawith Tolstoi and 'tolstoism'via the careerof the psychiatristN. E. Osipov. One should note that Sirotkina does not seriously tackle the issue of the incorporation of psychiatric discourse into literature or its relation to (lay) 'psychological' literary criticism. Although this is hardly a failing for a book that defines itself as a 'cultural history of psychiatry', the question of what exactly happens to meta-literarydiscourse on the boundary between literary studies and other human sciences, from which literary studies regularly borrowkey concepts and methods of analysis,remainsas yet to be explored. Woifson College, Oxford ANDY BYFORD Pleshakov, Constantine. TheTsar'sLastArmada.TheEpicJourney totheBattleof Tsushima. PerseusPress,Oxford, 2002. xx + 396 pp. Maps. Illustrations. Notes. Bibliography.Index. fi8.99. THIs Armada', the Russian Baltic Fleet sent out as the 'Second Pacific Squadron' to fight in the Russo-JapaneseWar, lost its point when both the existing Pacificfleet and its PortArthurbase fell to theJapanese. But, despite the misgivings of its commander, Admiral Rozhestvenskii, it continued its arduous voyage on the instructions of Tsar Nicholas II and met its end at Tsushima in I905. This reviewer's I3-year-oldson had greatfun with the book, likeningit to a novel and thereby neatly underlining its excellence as a popularization. But suchpopularizationhas itsdownside. The said I3-year-oldopened his innings by enquiringaboutwhy the authorhad speculated(p. I3)about the possibility of Nicholas II using the same oriental prostitutes as Chekhov, and then continued his quest for parental guidance by askingwhat the Kaiser's sexual preferences (p. I8) had to do with the Russian navy. The titillatingpower of subjects like prostitutes and spies does seem over-exploited in this book (althoughgore, creditably,does not). The mythicallyomniscient Britishsecret service,which seems to fascinateadolescentsof all ages, gets a good run. 748 SEER, 8 i, 4, 2003 The book is well designed and printed, but the editorial side could have given more support to the author, who is not thoroughly familiar with the English language, nor with naval practice. To write 'dove mail' instead of 'carrier pigeons' (p. I25) is harmless and endearing, and so perhaps is the description of Nicholas's face as 'impervious' (p. 4), but things can become unclear when 'gun-sight'is rendered as 'target-finder'(p. Io) and 'gunboats' by 'canon boats' (p. 43), and so on. Popular histories of Tsushima appear at quite frequent intervals, each successivepublisherclaiming that it is a book about a long-neglected subject. ConstantinePleshakov'sbest-knownpredecessoris GrahamHough's TheFleet thathadtoDie (London, 1958),which is clearlyinferiorto hisvolume. Butboth rely rather heavily on tainted sources. For example, A. S. Novikov Priboi's Tsusima (Moscow, I958) providesboth authorswith a good deal of luriddetail; Hough does not seem to have realized that this book was a novel, while Pleshakov might have been more cautious in using material from a book whose main object was the condemnation of the tsaristnavy and the tsarist regime. Pleshakovhas reinforcedhis account with archivalbrowsing, notably in St Petersburgand London. Forthis reviewer, the resultingtreatment of how the Britishgovernment reacted to events seems freshand well done, and archival access may alsobe responsibleforthe sympatheticaccount of...
Read full abstract