Trauma and Recovery: The Aftermath of Violence - from Domestic Abuse to Political Terror

Herman traces the history of the study of psychological trauma, which has alternated between moments of progression, stagnation, and reclamation, or, as Herman describes it—”episodic amnesia.” She attributes this instability to the controversy within trauma research, arguing that neutrality in the face of human-caused traumas is “morally impossible,” even for bystanders who, by bearing witness, are put in a position to side with either the perpetrator or the victim. Perpetrators tend to avoid taking accountability, often first via silence and, if that fails, by dismantling their victims’ credibility, which further complicates the study of psychological trauma. Additionally, the credibility of trauma research is often questioned, and it is highly dependent on the sociopolitical climate, as acknowledging trauma often means questioning existing power structures. For example, Herman notes that “The study of trauma in sexual and domestic life became legitimate only in a context that challenged the subordination of women and children” (17). Herman identifies three of the most critical moments in trauma research—the emergence of “hysteria” and “shell shock” and the public discussions on sexual trauma that accompanied the women’s movement of the 1970s.

First, Herman discusses the late 19th-century emergence of hysteria as a subject of scientific inquiry, focusing on its association with women and the contributions of influential figures like Jean-Martin Charcot, Pierre Janet, and