The Rape of Bucharest

Roann Barris (Casper)

Roann Barris is an art historian who has published several articles on the reception of Russian
constructivism. Her more recent work has involved the Romanian architectural competition
("Bucharest 2000"). he currentl! teaches at Casper Colle"e# in $!omin". %he followin" essa! is
part of &R%'ar"ins( series of interventions re"ardin" the state of contemporasr! art in )ast*Central
)urope. +t is based on a panel recentl! convened b! usan nod"rass at the Colle"e &rt
&ssociation(s annual meetin". & lon"er version of Roann Barris(s presentation has been published in
the 'a! 200, issue of the Journal of Architectural Education.
+- &R%+% .) &R% %/ '&0) 1/2+%+C&2 %&%)')3%# is it le"itimate to understand the
blatantl! political actions of politicians as performances and art4
+f in some sense it is# does that allow us to see the performances of artists as models for the
performances of ordinar! citi5ens in their ever!da! lives# and can we then see both of these
performances as the completion of or response to the performances initiated b! a political ruler4
+ hope to provide a preliminar! and partial answer to these 6uestions throu"h m! e7e"esis and
interpretation of the Bucuresti 2000 architectural competition# a competition held in ,889 which
attempted to reframe the urban and architectural interventions imposed b! 3icolae Ceausescu
before his deposition.
)ast facade of the House of 1arliament. (&uthor(s photo"raph# ,888.)
/n : 'arch ,8;;# an earth6uake rava"ed a lar"e area of Bucharest# resultin" in the death of
more than ,#<00 people and a wide 5one of destruction. 'uch of the historic center of Bucharest
was spared# however# due to natural anti*seismic properties in that re"ion*spared b! the
earth6uake but not b! Ceausescu who sei5ed upon the stable soils as merel! one =ustification for
usin" this re"ion for the construction of a new civic center.
His other =ustifications included the historic nature of the re"ion# possibl! the location of the first
church to have been built in Bucharest# and its elevation# which made it visible from most points
of the cit!.
Ceausescu(s "remodelin"" imposed a lar"e boulevard cuttin" ,20 meters across the cit! in an
east*west direction but with no actual destination# and crossin" five prominent north*south
arteries# amon" them a street which had been a ma=or point of access into the center of the cit!
and was now completel! blocked.
Construction included a lar"e House of the Republic (used as the House of 1arliament since
,889). Coverin" 29<#000 s6uare meters in area# it looks onto the new boulevard from a vanta"e
point that evokes comparison with the view from t. 1eter(s onto the >atican pia55a.
Construction of new apartment buildin"s for prominent 1art! members and of new ministr! and
cultural buildin"s was also anticipated. ?espite the consumption of enormous amounts of
resources# most of the intended construction remained unfinished at the time of Ceausescu(s
deposition (and remains unfinished toda!).
2ookin" east from the House of 1arliament# onto a re"ion of the cit! sub=ected to Ceausescu(s reconstruction. %his view
seems desi"ned to evoke the view from the papal lo""ia in t. 1eter(s. (&uthor(s photo"raph# ,888.)
%o initiate construction# more than :0#000 people were dislocated@ in order to prevent planned
resistance to the relocation# notice of relocation came with the arrival of bulldo5ers.
%he 5one of demolition t!pified characteristics of the old BucharestA serpentine streets full of
"reener!# houses with spacious courts# and varied architectural st!les reflectin" the dual
influences of )ast and $est*/ttoman* or %urkish*inspired court!ard housin" and Berman*
influenced mercantile structures# both united with a -rench 3eoclassical influence in the
nineteenth centur! and assimilated into a form of national romanticism b! the end of that centur!.
$ithout e7pandin" on the nature of this mi7ed herita"e# we should note that a central issue in
debates about Romanian culture has lon" been the ori"in of Romanian identit!A east# west# or
some uni6uel! indi"enous ori"in.
$e should also note that the demolition 5one included fourteen churches and two historic
monasteries with a uni6uel! indi"enous e7pression.
uch an appropriation of reli"ious monuments for political purposes was neither new nor uni6ue
to Ceausescu. +ndeed# such strate"ies have been "enerall! characteristic of totalitarian re"imes
in the twentieth centur!# thou"h often the appropriation of sacred value has taken the form of a
s!mbolic appropriation# without the actual destruction of ph!sical buildin"s.
Ceausescu not onl! did both# he did it in the conte7t of appropriatin" elements of the Romanian
national culture to himself*an act which mi"ht be seen as the construction of a statement of
Romanian identit! as ori"inatin" with him and within him. &t the same time# he was evacuatin"
those elements of pree7istin" meanin".
Ceausescu(s "oal of establishin" a form of "national communist rule" which did not embrace the
oviet alliance can be seen as one manifestation of the previousl! mentioned cultural debate. +n
his case# it led to his creation of Romania as a "castle re"ime" and his use of the visual lan"ua"e
of art and architecture as a means of "lorif!in" and e7altin" his own persona and that of his wife.
,
Contamination is the ke! threat to the castle re"ime because it dilutes or spoils identit!@ the
visuali5ation and performance of unit! are primar! weapons a"ainst this contamination.
Ceausescu(s architectural intervention# the House of the Republic# a buildin" surrounded b! a
metaphorical moat of void space and to which the entrance cannot easil! be found# would appear
to be the concrete visuali5ation of this idea.
+t sou"ht to conflate the issues of nationalism versus internationalism in its st!le# it conflated
political architecture with spiritual architecture in its choice of a site associated with important
reli"ious monuments of Bucharest# it used eclectic references to Romanian landmarks# and it
attempted to establish continuit! with baro6ue and socialist realist traditions of architecture.
But it did somethin" elseA it conflated the ima"e and the word@ a dictator whose re"ime asserted
control of the human bod!# the female bod! in particular# used that control to assimilate the
female bod! into the bod! of the state and used urban and architectural space as a mirror of this
bod!. +ndeed# the buildin" became a mirror and weapon of this control and the controlled bod!
united in one.
Ceausescu(s pro*natalist policies# includin" the prohibition of abortion and the inaccessibilit! of
most forms of birth control# had the intention of producin" a Romanian "collective bod!"*a bod!
which en"a"ed in labor in all senses of the word#
2
a bod! whose onl! valuable feature was its
abilit! or capacit! for contributin" to the "rowth of the socialist utopia and the socialist bod!.
Biven that a substantial portion of the state(s propa"anda was related to the creation of the
socialist bod! and the woman(s role in creatin" it# it ma! be realistic to see the House of the
Republic as the reification of this propa"anda*the house of the famil! of Romania# the house of
the bod! politic# with the emptiness of the words of propa"anda matched here b! the lar"e# diml!
lit and empt! halls of the buildin"#halls which resonate with emptiness even when the buildin" is
occupied.
1erhaps even more consonant with the duplicit! of propa"anda was the fact that this was a
dismembered bod!.
%he state(s metaphoric destruction and reconstruction of the Romanian famil! was matched or
reenacted in the dismemberment of the e7istin" urban and historic fabric alon" with the
dismemberment of Romanian architecture.
%he former was reco"ni5able and impacted the lives of most Bucharest residents# while the latter
occurred throu"h the incorporation of allusions to local and national landmarks in an eclectic and
uns!stematic approach to interior desi"n in order to recreate and rec!cle e7istin" architectural
and urban fabrics into a new home for the new socialist famil!.
%he dominant desi"n strate"! was one of replicationsA the ceilin" patterns replicate the floor#
interiors of rooms replicate interiors of well*known Romanian landmarks# views within halls
replicate views from the buildin" onto the street.
&t this point + want to turn to a Romanian m!th that associates the act of creation with destruction.
&lthou"h there are several m!ths that do this# + have chosen to focus on a m!th that does this in
the conte7t of architecture. %he m!th of 'ester C'asterD 'anole is a stor! of workers assi"ned b!
a prince to build the most beautiful church in the world.
Central to this stor! is the tremendous sacrifice of human bodies# from the woman who is
deliberatel! trapped between the walls in order to nourish the soil of the unstable foundations# to
the workers and 'anole himself who are left stranded on the top of the completed church in order
to prevent the possibilit! of ever constructin" an even more beautiful church.
+n the case of the House of the Republic# the death of the workers who built the 1alace is but one
of the forms of human sacrifice embodied in the new buildin".
tavropoleos Church (detail of facade) erected in ,;2: and restored b! +on 'incu# ,E88*,80:# in the 3eo*Romanian
st!le. (&uthor(s photo"raph# ,888).
%he suppression of architectural ima"ination# of both the architects who worked on its desi"n and
those who were unable to find buildin" commissions in subse6uent !ears# the depletion of the
nation(s resources# and the restrictions on women(s ri"hts to control their bodies@ instead of a
prince who was creatin" the most beautiful church in the world# we have a dictator who was usin"
the bodies of Romanian people to create stable foundations for the s!mbolic and architectural
bod! of the new people of Romania.
%o the de"ree that a fusion of m!tholo"!# ritual# and architecture was successfull! embodied b!
the House# the House came to represent national and social identit!# the identit! of the re"ime#
the labor and sacrifices of individual men and women and the incipient en"enderin" of a new
Romanian population.
+ts destruction or deliberate obfuscation would therefore be a strike a"ainst all of these conditions#
a strike which would obliterate the re"ime# even as it obliterated national and social identit!# in the
same blow. +f Ceausescu(s ori"inal action was traumatic# the counter*action of the competition
was at risk of producin" its own trauma.
The Competition
'einhard von Berkan# Foachin Gais and team# first pri5e. %he =urors praised the dense urban fabric surroundin" and
incorporatin" the House of 1arliament into a more inte"rated and fle7ible cit!scape. 1hoto"raphs of models from the
Catalo"ue of the Competition (BucharestA imetria# ,88;)A pp. HE.
+n ,889# after appro7imatel! five !ears of plannin"# an international architectural competition# the
Bucuresti 2000# was held for the ideolo"ical and architectural purpose of "healin" the wound"
inflicted b! Ceausescu and reconfi"urin" the functional role of the House of the Republic. %he
framework for the competition and =ud"in" was initiall! set as the "oal of healin"# and althou"h
this "oal later became one of several# includin" the "oal of showcasin" Bucharest as a cit! of the
new millennium# it reflected the creation and performance of another m!tholo"!A the m!tholo"! of
the wound.
&n important m!tholo"! that united dama"e to the urban framework with dama"e to the urban
ps!che# it did underscore several of the pri5e*winnin" entries to the competition. &s a m!th# it also
represented the contemporar! thinkin" of man! residents of Bucharest# but it did not
acknowled"e the possibilit! of seein" a t!pe of continuit! with the past in Ceausescu(s actions.
1erhaps it is in this respect*m! search for continuit!*that + most marked m!self as an outsider.
But it must be noted that the m!th of woundin" and healin" did not represent ever!one(s
response to the site or the competition. 3evertheless# it provides a ps!cholo"ical and
performance*based framework for understandin" the success of the competition before an! new
construction has be"un.
/f particular interest is the fact that# accordin" to the competition "uidelines# Bucharest would
enter the ne7t centur! b! brin"in" international architects to Bucharest.
)ven more si"nificant was the fact that one or more of the pri5e*winnin" pro=ects was to be used
b! the or"ani5ers of the competition for the composition of a "eneral plan for the area and as the
stimulus for a call for further competitions for specific buildin"s in the new "eneral plan.
>iorel Hurduc# ?elia*imona Ferca# and team (from Bucharest)# mention. %his entr! was described b! the =ur! as
possessin" clarit! and order but critici5ed for its densit!# scale# and two*level traffic s!stem. %he =ur! also 6uestioned
some specific architectural decisions. 1hoto"raphs of models from the Catalo"ue of the Competition (BucharestA imetria#
,88;)A pp. 99.
&bove all else# this was a competition for ideas# not a final solution. Iet this too makes an
intri"uin" parallel to Ceausescu(s advisor! role to the architect*in*chief of the House. +n this case#
the winnin" team becomes the advisor to the cit!.
%he winnin" pro=ect# a desi"n which perhaps more than the others en"a"ed in the architectural
act of emulative repossession# or the attachment of new meanin" to a form which imitates the old#
was that submitted b! the team headed b! 'einhard von Berkhan.
H

$e can see how this becomes an act of emulative repossession in the model b! conceptuali5in"
the e7istin" House as a comple7 of cubic volumes of var!in" hei"hts# which are then encircled b!
other slabs indicatin" the proposed new buildin"s and creatin" a steppin" stone from the new to
the old. &s the new buildin"s assume the power of emulation# the old buildin" is subsumed b! the
new and the power of the old is diffused while the power of the new is ma"nified.
%he old meanin" and the old buildin" have not been obliterated@ the meanin" has been
reattached# reasserted# and reconfi"ured*it has# in short# been reified in the lan"ua"e of post*
socialist modernism.
%o describe this in the more metaphorical terms of the cultural m!tholo"!# the old buildin"
appears to have been simultaneousl! dismembered and left intact# a desi"n tactic which
uncannil! replicates Ceausescu(s strate"! of incorporatin" su""estive but incomplete allusions to
Romanian architecture.
+n its own wa!# this appeared to be a restatement of the issue of ori"ins# in this case
acknowled"in" the need for a s!nchronic (arisin" simultaneousl! in the )ast and $est) view of
ori"ins# as opposed to the protochronic (arisin" first in Romania) view of Ceausescu.
%he Richard Ro"ers 1artnershipA a pro=ect which was in the final sta"e of the competition but likened to a "forbidden cit!"
and not premiated. 1hoto"raphs of models from the Catalo"ue of the Competition (BucharestA imetria# ,88;)A pp. ;8.
/ther pro=ects focused more on either maskin" or "packa"in"" the 1alace so that it effectivel!
disappeared from view# becomin" a non*entit! or# as the =ur! described it in the case of the
Richard Ro"ers team pro=ect# a -orbidden Cit!.
But pro=ects that treated the e7istin" 1alace as one element of man! in an architectural colla"e
departed too dramaticall! from the competition theme of woundin" and healin" and the search for
a national essence.
/ne pro=ect that visuall! distin"uished itself from the others was submitted b! &m! &nderson# a
3ew Iork architect. ?escribed as an "ecolo"ical pro=ect#" lar"el! because of its focus on the
landscape# it ma! more accuratel! be seen as an e7ercise in the comple7 interweavin" of past#
present# and future# resultin" in the creation of a virtual palimpsest of memories# actualities# and
visions.
&m! Christie &nderson and team# mention. %he =ur! admired the landscapin" and the ima"e of an "open democrac!" but
6uestioned the possibilit! of transformin" the House in the manner shown. /ther sources su""ested some distrust of the
lar"e area of open space. 1hoto"raphs of models from the Catalo"ue of the Competition (BucharestA imetria# ,88;)A 92.
%he notion of a borderless flowin" space# which is continuall! formed and re*formed# is the
m!tholo"! and desi"n strate"! of the &nderson pro=ect. +t was not# however# a pro=ect that
brou"ht order or direction to the future development of the cit!.
+ts centrali5ation of "reen space was not consistent with the involuted space of a cit! of markets
and churches# and althou"h &nderson spoke of the need to respond to the infestation of the
wound# the comple7it! of her response# with its refusal to anne7 the power of the past to the
present# as well as its creation of transparent# open space# ma! have been the source of the
=ur!(s uneasiness with this entr!.
:
Healin" in this desi"n was too abstractl! conceived# thou"h its
evocative sensibilit! was not lost on the =ud"es.
Interpretation
But how can healin" be conceived in architecture4 %o answer this 6uestion# + turn to theories of
torture and the meanin" and e7perience of trauma. )laine carr!# in her writin" about torture# has
delineated a model of "unmakin" and makin"" in which war# torture# and trauma silence the victim
throu"h pain and throu"h the deliberate falsification# or fictionali5ation# of the pre*trauma truth.
<

-ocusin" on the e7perience of e7treme ph!sical pain# she writes that it destro!s lan"ua"e
because pain can onl! be e7pressed nonverball!.
he does not# for the most part# deal with the e7perience of ps!cholo"ical pain# either of the
individual or of a communit!. %his is a 6uestion which has# however# been raised b! studies of
holocaust survivors and second*"eneration holocaust victims# where the issue is complicated b!
the fact that the second "eneration did not e7perience the pain firsthand but has become the
"uardians of a space of absence*the memories of first*"eneration survivors.
9

Because man! Bucharest residents toda! are a "second "eneration#" responses to the House of
1arliament and the competition ma! be conflicted b! the same need to serve as ""uardians."
+f# accordin" to carr!# unmakin" the world involves an act of makin" the victim and his or her
world invisible# then creation# or the act of remakin" the world# is the act of makin" the invisible
visible so that it can be faced and deconstructed# so that woundin" can become healin".
carr! further observes that remakin" the world involves the substitution of a created ob=ect for
the bod!# thereb! enablin" the pro=ection of interior feelin" states or sentience onto the e7terior
world. carr!(s focus on the bod! and the wa! it chan"es place with the created ob=ect a"ain
derives from her focus on ph!sical torture# but as a ps!cholo"ical strate"! of pro=ection and
transference# the idea of the bod! ma! serve as a metaphor for the visibilit! of the wound# thus
makin" her model compatible with a ps!cholo"ical definition of trauma as the impossibilit! of
either knowin" or preventin" trauma# and the subse6uent loss of the abilit! to ima"ine life without
trauma. -urther# we can ima"ine Bucharest as the tortured bod! and the House of 1arliament as
the wound.
Because silence is the direct effect of trauma# the onl! possible counter*d!namic is a visual
lan"ua"e of reenactment and repetition as a form of refusal and a form of bearin" witness. %his
reenactment en"enders the transformation of woundin" to healin".
;

+n the post*trauma d!namic of the competition# the silent performance of the e7hibition then
becomes a strate"! for reconte7tuali5in" the meanin" of silence and makin" silence into a
lan"ua"e# while architecture s!mboli5es the concrete remakin" or re*creation of the world. But
also within the parameters of the competition# the silence of repetition and the lack of a
conclusive endin" can be understood as a refusal of ideolo"!.
%he refusal of ideolo"! is the refusal of solutions# and the refusal of solutions is the act of
restatin" trauma so that it can be seen and known. -inall!# in a culture in which survival of the self
meant the ps!chic splittin" of self into a public self# which demonstrated behaviors complicit with
the "oals of the re"ime# and a private self# which contained a repressed core of individualit!# the
avoidance of solutions ma! be the most precise lan"ua"e of takin" control.
E

&s such# the competition succeeds in not bein" completed but in "eneratin" subse6uent plans for
the development of the cit!.
B! wa! of analo"!A when the Romanian artist 2ia 1er=ovschi created a performance with a
fabricated second self# a shadow self which she throws# beats# and re=ects# we witness the
performance of a woman with a split persona who is re=ectin" her shadow self. $e don(t know if
the shadow is the true individual core or the imposed complicit self# but the violent re=ection of
one b! the other su""ests the emer"ence of the interior bod!.
$hen an architectural vision of the core of Bucuresti essentiall! surrounds the e7istin" House
with buildin"s that evoke the dismemberment and reformulation of the collective socialist bod!
into a capitalist and modernist bod! of parts# we mi"ht likewise ask if the buildin" known as the
bod! of the people has been turned inside out# remakin" the world into a sentient terrain.
3evertheless# + still believe that one pro=ect alone would not have succeeded in doin" this.
+n her discussion of makin" the world# carr! turns to the model of Christian scriptures where#
she observes# the scene of woundin" is conflated with the scene of healin"# resultin" in a union of
healer and wounded# the source of power and the recipient of power@ the created ob=ect# a "od
created b! man# becomes the creator of the world.
%his is an interestin" premise for the Bucuresti 2000 and its "oal of allowin" the 1alace to remain
standin" while restructurin" the environment# a "oal which was not uniforml! understood or
accepted b! all observers althou"h it is a "oal which can more readil! be seen as an
antitotalitarian "esture.
ome Bucharestians believe that onl! b! openin" up the House in such a wa! as to replenish the
lost resources of the cit! could some t!pe of healin" be achieved. /thers more adamantl! believe
that the buildin" should be destro!ed# that the onl! wa! to ri"ht the traumas inflicted b!
Ceausescu would be to inflict a similar trauma on the House.
-or others still# the use of the buildin" matters far less than the rupture inflicted on the terrain of
the cit!. -rom this perspective# nothin" can reconfi"ure the meanin" of the House# but at the
same time it should not be destro!ed because it stands as a ""uardian" of memories of the past.
%his response touches on another d!namic of healin" which is central to carr!(s discussion of
pain and central to traumatic healin"A the conflation of the woundin" instrument with the wound.
$hat the competition did# as a whole# was to conflate the actions of Ceausescu and the ob=ect of
woundin" with the wounded cit!. %he desi"n of the House of 1arliament communicated
centrali5ation and totalitarianism in all its parts.
%o the e7tent that its desi"n and construction involved a process of filterin" pieces of lar"er
conte7ts into a new whole for the purpose of a""randi5in" a leader and deni"ratin" the base from
which he ruled# the competition# as a process# and the winnin" desi"n# as a model or catal!st for
chan"e# subverted and reversed this filterin" process b! breakin" down the ensemble of parts
and "ivin" the smaller parts a value which mi"ht supercede the value of the whole or represent a
new meanin" of the collective whole as somethin" which cannot function without the parts.
+n carr!(s discussion# man created Bod and Bod created the world. +n Bucharest# Ceausescu
created the House of the Republic# the House of the Republic created what man! perceived as a
new Bucharest# and the new Bucharest created the post*traumatic lan"ua"e of the competition.
%he possibilit! and prevention of trauma as embodied b! the Bucuresti 2000 became the new
"enerator of memories. %hrou"h the variations in the competition pro=ects# the world became a
sentient place# evidencin" the ran"e of feelin"s and responses to the interventions and the
ori"inal state of the cit!.
+ want to end on a more personal note# with reference to an issue of +3+?)RJ/.%+?)R
lan"ua"e raised b! the C&& conference discussion. $hen + was in Bucharest and + first heard
about the competition# it was the lan"ua"e which cau"ht m! attentionA the notion of usin"
architecture to heal a wound struck me as creatin" a parallel to the lan"ua"e of the >ietnam
>eterans( 'emorial# but it also struck me as askin" architecture to do too much*to heal a wound
that had been political and social in ori"in. o + was intri"ued but skeptical. Iet m! reaction was
that of an outsiderA the Romanians + spoke to used the lan"ua"e of woundin" and healin" without
ambivalence.
%he! did not all identif! the wound in the same wa!*for some it was a more sociall! directed
wound# for others the wound was implicit in the destruction of the cit!. But this was the lan"ua"e
used b! the residents of Bucharest and it was the most challen"in" part of m! learnin".
+n li"ht of recent events + understand the lan"ua"e far more easil!# but in Bucharest# where +
could not hope to be an insider# + had to listen to the lan"ua"e of m! friends and collea"ues. %o
be sure# m! written narrative is a reframin" of some sort# and it isn(t accepted b! ever!one@ but +
think at a certain point we can(t make a clear delineation between insider and outsider lan"ua"e.
NOTES
1. %he "castle re"ime" is a re"ime that seeks to isolate itself from contaminatin"
environments b! metaphoricall! and ideolo"icall! buildin" a moat around itself. %he term
was proposed b! ?eborah Fowitt in ,8E;# cited in >erder!# National Ideology# ,2E.
2. + am buildin" here on the work of Bail 0li"man# The Politics of Duplicity (Berkele!A
.niversit! of California 1ress# ,88E).
3. /n emulative repossession as an architectural strate"!# see piro 0ostof# The City
Assemled! The Elements of "ran #orm through $istory (Boston# '&A 2ittle Brown#
,882)@ Richard &. )tlin# %ymolic %pace! #rench Enlightenment Architecture and Its
&egacy (Chica"oA .niversit! of Chica"o 1ress# ,88:) and 2awrence F. >ale#
Architecture' Po(er' and National Identity (3ew Haven# C%A Iale .niversit! 1ress# ,882).
4. /n paper# the! critici5ed it for not showin" increased comple7it! between the first and
second sta"es of the competition (The Catalogue# 9:).
5. )laine carr!# The Body in Pain (3ew IorkA /7ford .niversit! 1ress# ,8E<).
6. &lan 2. Ber"er# Children of Jo! American %econd )eneration *itnesses to the
$olocaust (&lban!A tate .niversit! of 3ew Iork 1ress # ,88;).
7. + am drawin" on a number of sources hereA 'ark el5er# "$ound CultureA %rauma in the
1atholo"ical 1ublic phere#" +ctoer ,0# prin" ,88;A H*29@ )ric 2. anter# "Histor!
be!ond the 1leasure 1rincipleA ome %hou"hts on the Representation of %rauma#" in
aul -riedlander# ed.# Proing the &imits of -epresentation! Na.ism and the /#inal
%olution/ (Cambrid"e# '&A Harvard .niversit! 1ress# ,882)A ,:H*,<:@ Robert F. 2ifton#
"%he %raumati5ed elf#" in F.1. $ilson# G. Harrel# and B. 0ahana# eds.# $uman
Adaptation to E0treme %tress (3ew IorkA 1lenum 1ress # ,8EE)A ;*H,@ and Cath! Caruth#
"nclaimed E0perience! Trauma' Narrati1e' and $istory (Baltimore# '?A Fohns Hopkins
.niversit! 1ress# ,889).
8. %he creation of a split self is a theme in 0li"man# The Politics of Duplicity.