reviews 777 thatHenlein'sSudetendeutsche Parteiforsometimehouseddifferent strategies forSudetenGermanfuture, amongwhichof coursewere pro-Berlin policies, but also federalist Czechoslovak solutions.CatherineAlbrecht displays howbothCzechsand GermansintheCzech landsdeployed protectionist economicpolicies,beforeand after191 8. A finalcontribution in this thematic field onceagaintakeson thepost-war SudetenGermantransfer and brings together recentaccountsofthiscontroversial page in Czech-German history. Interestingly, ZdenëkRadvanovsky closeshischapterwithissuesof resettlement, whichgivesgood indications about theimpactofthetransfer and chaosofmassmigration itwas partof. Two chapters devotedtoBritish-Czechoslovak relations underline theroots of the volume.Vit Smetana and Keith Robbins addressBritishpolicies towards theCzechoslovak Republic, withthelatter solely focusing onMunich. Smetana parallels two key momentsin Britishpolicy-making towards Czechoslovakia(1938-39and 1947-48).In thisextremely well documented chapter theauthorclaimsthatCzechoslovakia wastwiceinone decadeatthe very heartofcrucialchangesinBritish foreign policy, eventhough bothcountries werenotparticularly wellconnected. In a morepersonalaccountKeith Robbinsrevisits British attitudes about1938and inparticular hisownMunich igj8 (London,1968). One oftheimplicit and tastefully notoverly programmatic preconceptions oftheseanalysesis thatinterwar Czechoslovakia was verymuchconnected withthemaincurrents ofEuropeanhistory and was notsolelyan islandof democracy or simply an anomalyin CentralEurope.This is greatly appreciated . The choice ofpapersand thedesignof thevolumesuggest thatthe editorswere trying to findmiddlegroundbetweena history of interwar Czechoslovakia and thematically arranged results ofcurrent research. Melissa Feinberg'sin itselfveryconvincing chapteron opposingopinionsabout women'srights and theirimpacton thenationalquestionin Czechoslovakia illustrates this.Moreover, giventhetitle and thescopeofthevolumeaccounts ofdomestic fascist and particularly communist partiesbeforeand during the warwouldhavebeenwelcomeadditions. However, theacademicstandard andinnovation oftheindividual contributionsare almostwithout exceptionof rare quality.The readerwithsome knowledge ofthisera in Czechoslovakia, CentralEuropeor,in fact,Europe at largewillfindthiscollection an excellent enrichment thatputsnotonly interwar Czechoslovakia, but first of all the development of nationaland fascist strands in interwar Europein context. Department ofEuropean Studies Carlos W. C. Reijnen Universität vanAmsterdam Plach, Eva. The Clash of Moral Nations:CulturalPoliticsin PilsudskïsPoland, ig26-igjj. Ohio University PressPolishand Polish-American Studies Series.Ohio University Press,Athens, OH, 2006. xvi + 262 pp. Notes. Bibliography. Index.$42.95. We areallfamiliar withthesituation wherewe,theaut] aboutthetitle ofa recently completed book.Our dream hors, havea clearidea lsareusually shattered 778 SEER, 87, 4, OCTOBER 2OOg bythepublishers intruding witha heavydoseofrealism and imposing a title whichis marketable, evenifnotnecessarily an appropriate reflection ofthe book'scontent. In thiscase the title, whichis long and complex,does littleto indicate whatthereadercan expect.WhatEva Plachhas offered is an intelligent and well-researched debate on Polishsociety s responseto the rilsudskicoup. Althoughthe titlewould suggestthatcultureratherthanpoliticswas the author'smain preoccupation, in realitythisis an outstanding analysisof thetraumaexperienced byPolesin thewakeoftherealization thatindependence ,on itsown account,would not be a guaranteeof politicalstability and nationalunity. Thus theauthorquestions whatitwasthatsections ofthe Polishcommunity expectedafterindependence.By analysingthe general senseofdisappointment and disillusionment withPoland'spolitical life, Plach hasoffered an interesting explanation as towhythecoupandPilsudski himself wereseenbymanyas a force forstability. The bookisnotmerely an attempt to understand thewayinwhicheconomicproblems and political turbulence leftmanycitizensbewildered, it is in effect a debate on the gap between dreamsofindependence fostered during thepartition periodand therealities ofself-governance. Plachfocuses on thepublicassumption thatthePilsudski coupwouldlead to a processofmoralrenewaland rebirth. She putsforward thesuggestion thatthestudyof thecoup as a reactionto thepoliticalbankruptcy which characterized theperiodis too narrowand insteadproposesto debatethe conceptofsanacja as a processofpoliticaland cultural healing.This is done by analysingletterssent to Pilsudski, and examiningthe mobilization of women'sorganizations. Plachpoints outthatduring theinterwar periodPoles notonlyfacedtherealities ofindependence, butpossibly moreimportantly a crisis ofmodernization. Thussocialexpectations werenotonlyfocused onthe hope thatthecoup wouldlead to economicstability and political unity, but thatitwouldresolve thedilemma whichfacedPolesina worldinwhichthey couldnolonger putthequestforindependence as theonlypriority. As Poland becamean independent stateso Poleshad tofinda consensus on a variety of issues,ofwhichPlach identifies women'srolein society as one ofthemost difficult toresolve. Thisledtodiscussions onwomen'sparticipation inpolitics, on childcare, education, birthcontrol and abortion. The authorsuccessfully arguesthathavingelevatedPolishwomento therole of thecustodians of national morality during thepartition period, itwasdifficult toarguethatthey shouldnotbe activeinpolitics oncePolandhad becomeindependent. Hence a highdegreeofwomen'ssupport forthesanacja government. If Piisudski's aim was to lead to a nationalmoralrenewal, womencouldand indeeddid, claimtheright to fully participate in thatprocess. Plachtakesthedebatefurther byshowing howthemobilization ofwomen's organizations in supportof the regimeand its statedobjectivesbrought themintoconflict withthereactionary forces, theCatholicChurchand the NationalDemocratswhosaw thisas a signofdeviancy and an attack on the socialorderwhichrequiredwomento focusselflessly on family matters. In attacking thosewho supported thepost 1926regimetheopposition did not focuson theissueofdemocracy and thesanacja!?, abuseofpower,buton the reviews 779 supposedbetrayal ofnationalinterests, whichtheyclaimedwereunderattack from theMasons,Jewsand Bolsheviks. In the finalchapterPlach states'the May coup both triggered and reflected strident debate about the moralhealthof the newlyindependent nation- debate about modernity and the pace of social change,about publicandprivate mores, nationalidentities, and cultural boundaries' (p. 158). This is what the authorhas succeededin analysingin a lucid and wellresearched book. The interwar periodin Polishhistory wouldbenefit from further research. Eva Plach has certainly...
Read full abstract