In An Intimate History of Killing, Joanna Bourke asserts that when ordinary men and women are freed from conventional social constraints, they find intense pleasure in the act of killing and that the structure of war allows for primal joy and even erotic satisfaction in intimate combat. Although Bourke writes lucidly and engagingly and argues with evident conviction, she comes up short on the evidence that would be necessary to support her daring claims.

Many of Bourke's statements are extreme: "For men, combat was the male equivalent of childbirth ...the experience seemed to resemble spiritual enlightenment or sexual eroticism: indeed, slaughter could be likened to an orgasmic, charismatic experience." She supports her position with letters, memoirs, reports and diaries from Australian, American and British soldiers documenting their experiences in both World Wars and Vietnam.

"Killing itself could be seen as an act of carnival: combat gear, painted faces, and the endless refrain that men had turned into 'animals' were the martial equivalent of the carnival mask." Such radical interpretations might fit certain situations and the experiences of individual soldiers, but when Bourke tries to generalize, her argument collapses. The quotations she cites often seem to be taken out of context and deformed by her interpretations.

The essential weakness in this book is Bourke's limited research and biased bibliography. Her argument feels hollow and lopsided; her sources are undeniably selective and incomplete. Bourke ignores important studies that inconveniently contradict her assertions. Dave Grossman, in his Pulitzer Prize-nominated study, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society, argues that most soldiers try to avoid killing and, when forced to kill, experience stages of thrill, remorse and rationalization. Bourke focuses on only one of these stages of emotion, thrill, ignoring the others. Similarly, she completely neglects John Keegan's The Face of Battle and mentions Richard Holmes's Acts of War: The Behavior of Men in Battle only in passing. Bourke's failure to discuss such important works on warfare undermines her credibility.

On the other hand, Bourke's use of first-hand material is admirable; she deftly explores soldiers' letters and diaries. Perhaps this book would be better read as a collection of war narratives than as a general history of killing.