DOC A Spy in the Archives: A Memoir of Cold War Russia by Sheila Fitzpatrick in History

Review

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful. Sheila Fitzpatrick A Spy in the Archives (London England; 2013). 345 pages.By Beau SamplesSheila Fitzpatrick’s memoir A Spy in the Archives is an account of her Soviet studies career and highlights her trips the Soviet Union; beginning in 19660s and ending with thru the collapse of the Soviet Union. The bulk of the memoir; however; concerns her first two research trips taken in X and Y. A look into her thoughts on daily life; as seen through her letters to her mother; as well as accounts told from her memory and notes she took during the time; provide an accurate sense of her daily life and thoughts during the 1960s and beyond as she established herself as a leading Soviet expert. Fitzpatrick argues that her gender as well as shaky translation from English to Russian allowed her work to continue in the Soviet Union for as long as it went. Her firsthand account of researching the Soviet Union through archives and libraries during the time of the Soviet Union provide a primary account given by a “Westerner” that is nearly unheard of in the field of Soviet-Russian studies. The beginning of A Spy in the Archives conveys the manner to which Fitzpatrick went about getting into the Soviet Union and subsequently being able to return and continue research. Fitzpatrick married multiple times throughout her career; which helped her fly under the KGB radar multiple times. Her multiple identities and nationalities make her a unique researcher during a time when everyone was under strict observation. An Australian by birth; Fitzpatrick married a British citizen to get a British passport to then take part in a British Exchange to the Soviet Union. Fitzpatrick’s first trip to the Soviet Union occurred in 1966 when she traveled by train for three weeks throughout present day Russia. While Fitzpatrick did not do archival research during this time; this trip set up her subsequent trips to the Soviet Union and was the springboard to her next fifty years of work and research. The evidence used for her memoir came from first- hand experience; but also through a reexamination of her letters and diaries from that time. This adds to the credibility arguments presented throughout her career and this memoir. A strong attribute of Fitzpatrick’s memoir is her employment of storytelling not only by documenting her bureaucratic hassles during her research in the Soviet Union; but also of the personal relationships she forged during her time in the USSR. A crucial part of her Soviet experience came from her decades- long friendships with Igor Alexandrovich Sats and Irina Anotolevna Lunacharskaya; Both were Soviet citizens who reciprocated Fitzpatrick’s dislike for Victor Ovcharenko’s care of Lunacharsky’s wWorks; which was the basis for their long lasting friendships. Specifically; Fitzpatrick became close to Irina because: “Irina was a fluent; persuasive conversationalist and a virtuoso of the telephone; with a well-honed instinct for the limits of the possible in any given situation” (129). Irina overwhelmed Fitzpatrick; something from which Fitzpatrick learned and thrived. Igor “adopted” Fitzpatrick and was one of her greatest allies and critics; orally reviewing her works to her in front of other Soviet scholars. He saw her as a waif that needed to be adopted (145). He had an aversion to privilege that drove those around him mad; but also garnered him tremendous respect. The greatest strength of this memoir is its delicate balance between discussing the professional work of Fitzpatrick with her personal life. Many historians divide their personal life from the research they publish because of their distinct differences. Fitzpatrick’s experiences in the Soviet Union directly influenced the work that she completed and the manner in which she did her research. This memoir gives the story behind the story. The title of the memoir; A Spy in the Archives is a reference to Fitzpatrick’s decades long self-questioning of whether in fact she was a spy working in the archives of the Soviet Union. The concluding paragraph of the book states that Fitzpatrick still struggles with the notion of whether or not she was indeed a spy. “Perhaps I was; perhaps I wasn’t; but I hoped grace would abound and I would escape being cast into the pit” (345). Fitzpatrick’s memoir leaves one yearning to learn more about other Sovietologists’ experiences during the same period. A supplemental memoir of her work since the collapse of the Soviet Union would be the crown jewel in her storied career. One lingering question that I am left with is how her work changed once the Soviet collapsed and also what fields of Post-Soviet studies can still be explored that have not been extensively researched already. The importance of this book will only grow as time passes and Sovietologists who lived and worked during the seventy-four years of the Soviet Union begin to retire and pass on their accounts as spies.Beau SamplesMiami University | Oxford; OH1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. Sheila Fitzpatrick's "A Spy in the Archives"By Kimberly FosterSheila Fitzpatrick’s memoir "A Spy in the Archives" is a compelling look at the mindset of those western students who had the opportunity; and the guts; to research in Soviet archives during the Cold War. Born and Australian citizen to decidedly communist parents; Fitzpatrick’s quest to be admitted to a study program in Moscow in 1966; and then to be admitted to the archives for research; is a backdrop to the deeper questions of what it meant to be a historian presumed both to be a spy and to be spied upon. Over and again; Fitzpatrick; labeled a spy by a Soviet newspaper; had to confront the question of her motives for studying in the Soviet Union. Originally traveling to Moscow out of academic interest; the occasionally paranoid atmosphere that resulted in anything from self-censorship (of letters; speech; and diary entries); to outright accusations of espionage (in favor of both the West and Moscow) led to the author questioning her own motivations. In the end; she attempts to keep herself as far from any accusation of espionage as possible; although in the climate of the 1960s Soviet Union; this was almost impossible.Yet; Fitzpatrick persists in bringing us at least one version of the truth; one based on hard evidence; which was woefully difficult for anyone writing on the Soviet Union to acquire. Sovietologists and Kremlinologists often had to make do with incomplete information; and Fitzpatrick was determined to back up her thesis on the early Soviet commissar; Anatoly Lunacharsky; with hard evidence. However; she does not rely only on the archives. During her stay in Moscow; Fitzpatrick meets Irina Anatolevna and Igor Alexandrovich Sats; both of whom were connected with her work on Lunacharsky. Through Irina and Igor; Fitzpatrick shows not only the scholarly life in the Soviet Union; but can connect the reader to how life was for (not necessarily the average) Soviet citizen. Through Irina; and especially Igor; Fitzpatrick is able to pull back the screen a little bit to show the behind-the-scenes politicking that dictated the lives of Soviet citizens that engaged in any kind of scholarship.Given the amount of time that has passed between the events of the memoir and when the author has written it; Fitzpatrick has written her memoir in an almost uniquely historian fashion; using old letters and diary entries to try to figure out her own mindset while a PhD student in Moscow. Fitzpatrick interrogates her own motivations as a “historian-spy;” (197) as she puts it; and attempts to run down the origins of her thought processes. However; as with all historical sources; no matter how complete; there are holes in her attempts to reconcile past; present; and primary source. Several times; Fitzpatrick must come to the conclusion that she does not know what her reasoning for certain actions were; or that in retrospect; she was less clever than she thought she was. Looking back with the added experience of decades; Fitzpatrick is able to place her own actions and experiences in the wider framework of the turmoil that occurred at the time and see how political happenings in the Soviet Union affected scholarly life. As a memoir of Cold War scholarship; Fitzpatrick conveys the difficulty of working caught between the First World and the Second World; and trying to delicately negotiate between these two powers; both of which want the privilege of any information she might bring back. Fitzpatrick’s constant attempts to keep from inadvertently becoming an “ideological saboteur” (1) comes through as the honest attempt of a student who may be slightly over her head to keep her work; and experiences; as free of the taint of Cold War espionage as possible.Fitzpatrick’s memoir of life as a researcher in the Soviet Union; and her attempts to remain true to herself and keep her work as free of political taint as possible is still a struggle that historians undergo today. The urge to identify too closely to the people and times you are studying; or of not detaching yourself enough from your own culture; can both have an effect on the validity and equitability of a work. While it is impossible to go into a study blind to what has come before; and is even dangerous to do so; acknowledging prejudice from the outset; as Fitzpatrick does; is paramount in maintaining historical integrity. Fitzpatrick eventually acknowledges her own “spy-like characteristics” (342) and how that muddies the water of her own allegiance; which she says was “neither to the Soviet Union nor Great Britain” (342). Her memoir of research under the aegis of the Cold War can be adapted to the present times; when our enemies are not so obvious and easy to find.1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. The Soviet Subject and Soviet HistoryBy Caroline JohnsonIn her latest autobiographic work; A Spy in the Archives; Sheila Fitzpatrick presents a vivid picture of life in the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Fitzpatrick presents herself as a young doctoral student from Australia studying at St. Anthony’s College in Oxford in the late 1960s. She perseveres through personal obstacles and red tape to perform dissertation research on Anatoy Lunacharsky in Moscow; USSR. Once in Moscow; Fitzpatrick provides a personal account of the difficulties; not only as a scholar performing research in the Soviet Union; but also as a young woman attempting to understand Soviet life. Throughout the work she references a fixation on spies within the Soviet Union; as she herself had several close encounters with the Russian Committee for State Security; known as the KGB. She informs the reader within the first few pages that she was deemed; unknowingly; as a spy in a Soviet newspaper. Fitzpatrick questions her motives as a Soviet historian and wrestles with the memories of her own past in order to understand the Cold War atmosphere from within the Soviet Union. Fitzpatrick’s arguments are subtly and cleverly intertwined throughout each page; and the memoir supports the revisionist goals of Fitzpatrick’s original work. Her attention to detail and mastery of connecting personal events to a larger picture highlights how; in her experience; Soviet history is best explained from an internal perspective. Fitzpatrick meets Igor Sats; Lunacharsky’s brother-in-law and the only person present at the time of his death. Through her interactions with close friends such as Igor; she reveals an emic understanding of Soviet history as compared to that of the west. She remarks; “Soviet history as Igor understood it was a kind of black comedy. That’s not wholly unlike seeing it as a tragedy; which is a standard western view; but there are significant differences” (159). As she travels outside of Moscow and major cities; Fitzpatrick reveals that the larger urban areas are not representative of all Soviet life. During her end-of-year trip; she recalls; “the further we got from Moscow; the warmer it got and the brighter and livelier it became” (256). All of these experiences create a portrait of life within the Soviet Union that could not have been properly understood from an outside perspective. To portray these larger themes to the reader; Fitzpatrick uses notes from her diaries and letters to/from her mother and those closest with her. As a scholar; she describes the experience of working in Soviet archives; and even wrestles with a controversial publication in the Soviet Union known as Novy Mir. Novy Mir represents the truth of the USSR to her good friend Igor; and Fitzpatrick relates how “He [Igor] and Novy Mir believed that truth was discoverable; non-relative; and communicable as long as its communication was not blocked” (246). Through Fitzpatrick’s detailed descriptions of the people she meets; the places she lives and travels; and her academic experience; she supports her view of social history by immersing the reader into the heart of life in the USSR through her eyes. Fitzpatrick’s account of the Soviet Union; being intensely personal; provides the reader with an abundance of details. Though her introspection is helpful in order to relate to her experiences; at times the amount of characters introduced or mundane details can overwhelm the reader. Additionally; the book reflects the nature of a memory; at times jumping from scene to scene or chronologically challenging the reader to recognize anachronisms as simple personal reflection. This could quite possibly be intentional; as A Spy in the Archives is a memoir in nature while also arguing her personal interpretation of Soviet history. It would certainly be of the reader’s advantage to have a basic background in Soviet history; but regardless of the level of knowledge one enters with; the memoir is both enjoyable and challenging to the reader. As one of the leading scholars on Soviet history; Fitzpatrick offers a look at what it was really like to study and live in the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Her work shows that it is possible to use personal reflection and relationships to understand Soviet life while also remaining objective as a historian. Though the Cold War is long over; A Spy in the Archives forces a reflection of the Soviet era and the best way to represent it. Sheila Fitzpatrick reminds us that there is something inherently revealing about using the Soviet subject to better understand the Soviet way of life.