What do you think?
Rate this book
Casualty Figures: How Five Men Survived the First World War
Casualty Figures is not about the millions who died in the First World War; it is about the countless thousands of men who lived as long-term casualties—not of shrapnel and gas, but of the bleak trauma of the slaughter they escaped. In this powerful new book, Michèle Barrett uncovers the lives of five ordinary soldiers who endured the “war to end all wars,” and how they dealt with its horrors, both at the front and after the war’s end. Through their stories, Barrett sheds new light on the nature of the psychological damage of war, which for the first time became both widely acknowledged and profoundly controversial through the term “shell shock.” Drawing on a wealth of previously unpublished material, Casualty Figures is a moving and original account of the psychological havoc caused by war.”
174 pages, Hardcover
First published April 7, 2008
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
September 30, 2017
Casualty Figures has an interesting premise. Barrett has chosen to examine the private history of the men who fought in the First World War by following five who survived the fighting in decent physical shape but hid their psychic wounds. The book is primarily about PTSD (or "shell shock," as it was called at the time), with occasional comments about how it affected families, the British military establishment and the pension schemes of the British government.
She has done her research thoroughly but unfortunately there isn't much content, even for a short book. The introduction more-or-less summarizes the entire text. Barrett frequently repeats herself--she discusses William Tyrrell's testimony at least four times--and a lot of the experiences the men report are similar. The book also suffers from the fact that all five of the subjects are British, giving it a narrower focus than it deserves.
The author is at her best in discussing the post-war politics of shell shock and the government's efforts to get out of paying for medical treatment. She usefully notes the differences between the men that may have affected how well they recovered from the strain (some had more liberty and solitude than others). She also stresses how horror, rather than fear, was the factor that most deeply disturbed the troops in the trenches.
All in all, an okay book with the potential to be much better.
She has done her research thoroughly but unfortunately there isn't much content, even for a short book. The introduction more-or-less summarizes the entire text. Barrett frequently repeats herself--she discusses William Tyrrell's testimony at least four times--and a lot of the experiences the men report are similar. The book also suffers from the fact that all five of the subjects are British, giving it a narrower focus than it deserves.
The author is at her best in discussing the post-war politics of shell shock and the government's efforts to get out of paying for medical treatment. She usefully notes the differences between the men that may have affected how well they recovered from the strain (some had more liberty and solitude than others). She also stresses how horror, rather than fear, was the factor that most deeply disturbed the troops in the trenches.
All in all, an okay book with the potential to be much better.
October 30, 2019
An awkward book with a lot of errors. Reads a bit like a first or second year university paper with weak research and analysis to match. It felt like a drawn regurgitation of the service record of 5 soldiers, which is at least interesting in of itself. Probably could have done with a new/better editor.
The premise focuses around how shell shock “might” have affected these soldiers. “Might” meaning a lot is attributed to it (and maybe rightfully so) but with little evidence to actually support it.
The premise focuses around how shell shock “might” have affected these soldiers. “Might” meaning a lot is attributed to it (and maybe rightfully so) but with little evidence to actually support it.
January 21, 2016
The book is not about the millions who died in the First World War; but rather it explores the experiences of countless numbers of men who lived as ‘long-term casualties’. That is, not those of profound physical trauma, but of the desolate trauma of the slaughter that they managed to escape alive.
To do this, Barrett explores the lives of five ordinary personnel who endured war, how they dealt with its horrors, both during and long after the war's end. Through this, she attempts to shed light on the nature of the psychological damage of war. I am not altogether convinced that she has been wholly successful, but it really does leave you with a profound sense of the impact of war on those ‘lucky’ to emerge physically unscathed. Even more profound is the context that each of these men returned during a time that psychological trauma was only grudgingly acknowledged, and assistance to respond to that was non-existent. Although the figures are impossible to pin down, suicide rates, alcoholism, homelessness, familial breakdown and so on were all significantly more prevalent in the experiences of veterans than those who did not serve.
Although the book perhaps asks more than it answers, it is well worth a look. I did want to include something that I personally found very moving though, arising out of the last ‘case study’ of the book, Captain Lawrence Gameson, a medical officer in the Field Artillery. A remarkable character, Gameson is notable in how he maintained a great sense of humanity despite his experiences. Driven to identify and appropriately bury the dead, he routinely took it upon himself to do what must have been a gruesome task.
One way of identifying victims was simply to rifle through their pockets for letters. The correspondence that moved me was found on a fellow killed in October 1916, in the village of Le Sars. Gameson came across the body of a British soldier, not of his division, unburied and decomposing. In the act of identifying the dead man, he was driven to copy down and keep the letters for many years after the war. The first was from the dead man’s mother:
Gameson wrote of this one, “even had I not copied the letter one would have remembered the iambic music of the remarkable ‘John many a cry when I lay down for thou’, read for the first time beside John’s pitiful body.’
In John’s breast pocket there was a torn photograph of his young daughter and a letter from his wife:
In Gameson’s diary underneath this passage he records: “what in God’s name must the grand total be of ours and the enemy’s – if this one man had three generations to mourn him.
Christ that depresses me. A fine book, well worth your time.
To do this, Barrett explores the lives of five ordinary personnel who endured war, how they dealt with its horrors, both during and long after the war's end. Through this, she attempts to shed light on the nature of the psychological damage of war. I am not altogether convinced that she has been wholly successful, but it really does leave you with a profound sense of the impact of war on those ‘lucky’ to emerge physically unscathed. Even more profound is the context that each of these men returned during a time that psychological trauma was only grudgingly acknowledged, and assistance to respond to that was non-existent. Although the figures are impossible to pin down, suicide rates, alcoholism, homelessness, familial breakdown and so on were all significantly more prevalent in the experiences of veterans than those who did not serve.
Although the book perhaps asks more than it answers, it is well worth a look. I did want to include something that I personally found very moving though, arising out of the last ‘case study’ of the book, Captain Lawrence Gameson, a medical officer in the Field Artillery. A remarkable character, Gameson is notable in how he maintained a great sense of humanity despite his experiences. Driven to identify and appropriately bury the dead, he routinely took it upon himself to do what must have been a gruesome task.
One way of identifying victims was simply to rifle through their pockets for letters. The correspondence that moved me was found on a fellow killed in October 1916, in the village of Le Sars. Gameson came across the body of a British soldier, not of his division, unburied and decomposing. In the act of identifying the dead man, he was driven to copy down and keep the letters for many years after the war. The first was from the dead man’s mother:
Dear Son John...
Just a few lines for your birthday. I have just been reading thy letter on to myself. I feel a bit dull today Sunday. I would like to post you a nice present but am getting a pair of stockings knit for though. John many a cry when I lay down for thou. I am such a bad letter writer. So no more. Short and sweet. God be with us until we meet again.
Love and many kisses,
Mother.
Gameson wrote of this one, “even had I not copied the letter one would have remembered the iambic music of the remarkable ‘John many a cry when I lay down for thou’, read for the first time beside John’s pitiful body.’
In John’s breast pocket there was a torn photograph of his young daughter and a letter from his wife:
God knows I have many a weary night and day for I never go to sleep but I see you somewhere or I am talking to you for my mind is so much upset for it is now we know how much we love each other but we will just have to hope for the best and trust you will come safely through it all. May God send you safely through this terrible war safe, from your own dear annie. XXXXXX. Goodnight. Love to Daddy from his Bubbles. (I hold her hand, but she wriggles too much)
In Gameson’s diary underneath this passage he records: “what in God’s name must the grand total be of ours and the enemy’s – if this one man had three generations to mourn him.
Christ that depresses me. A fine book, well worth your time.
September 29, 2014
Although it's interesting to read primary sources about World War I vets, I was a little bored by all the military jargon and military history included. Still, useful for high school students doing reports.
July 23, 2016
These profiles of five soldiers who suffered the long-term effects of what would controversially be called "shell shock" a fascinating, insightful look at the nature of the psychological damage of war.
May 27, 2015
This book could have been so much better than it was.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews