TraumaZone is in my humble opinion a masterpiece. But to me it doesn't show that his previous work is any less incredible. In his previous work he explicitly se

TraumaZone is in my humble opinion a masterpiece. But to me it doesn't show that his previous work is any less incredible. In his previous work he explicitly sets out a (usually unconventional) thesis and then attempts to explain it in detail. In TraumaZone the subtitle explains what he wants to do this time, "Russia 1985–1999: TraumaZone What It Felt Like to Live Through The Collapse of Communism and Democracy". He wants only that you get a feeling of what it was like to experience what these people experienced and he does that incredibly well as far as I can judge. From TFA: > And yet this is hardly a sufficient explanation. I find it incredible that this isn't sufficient for the author. It fits with everything!