Jurecic’s astutely researched, nuanced answers to those questions propose a corrective to the extreme skepticism of “disembodied criticism.” Such criticism, she claims, dismisses testimonial writing from “a position of distance and privilege.”  At the same time, her answers affirm that intellectually “rigorous” responses to texts are central to the critical humanities (15). To support her position, she offers attentive readings of illness narratives by Virginia Woolf, Reynolds Price, and Jean-Dominique Bauby, as well as the theoretical writing of literary and other scholars.  For instance, Jurecic speculates that the condition of a reader’s body aligns with their responses to texts. In a chapter called “Theory’s Aging Body,” she observes that as skeptical scholarly readers aged—think of Stephen Greenblatt, Michel Foucault, Judith Butler—they turned their attention to “illness, vulnerability, and mortality” (93).  Jurecic also suggests that criticism’s function to expose cultural conditions turns illness stories into critiques of the effects of contemporary medicine on our experiences of vulnerability and mortality. The relatively new concept of living “at risk” is a case in point. Stories about living with the risk of experiencing a particular illness in the future leave potential patients with uncertainty,” prompting narratives that seek the “personal meaning of the impersonal statistics” that medical encounters now regularly deliver (18).   

Jurecic also reflects on the ways theorists have understood the possibilities of representing and responding to pain in the varied approaches of philosophical thinkers Elaine Scarry, Martha Nussbaum, and Richard Rorty, along with anthropologists Jean E. Jackson, Byron Good, and Veena Das. In an exceptionally comprehensive and nuanced reading of Susan Sontag’s theoretical, fictional, and journal writing about suffering, Jurecic uncovers Sontag’s inconsistent, yet revelatory positions on the human capacity for responding to representations of pain. The chapter on Sontag is enriched by Jurecic’s reading of Annie Lebovitz’s controversial photographs of Sontag’s final days (included in A Photographer’s Life: 1990-2005) and David Reiff’s responses to Sontag’s suffering in his memoir about his mother’s illnesses (Swimming in a Sea of Death).   

Illness as Narrative closes with examples of what Jurecic calls reparative writing and reading practices. Reparative writers, such as Jean-Dominique Bauby (The Diving Bell and the Butterfly), Jurecic claims, both create “a more coherent sense of themselves” and dislodge culturally “fixed ideas and narratives” about illness or disability (109). Her discussion of reparative reading considers the limits of two competing readings of Anne Fadiman’s The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down. One assumes that readers will empathically and unreflectively imagine those who are culturally different from themselves. The other looks skeptically at the assumption that what medical educators call cultural competence can be acquired by reading a book. Jurecic suggests that strategies for reading and teaching informed by Janelle S. Taylor, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, and Rita Felski encourage more complex habits of response, such as Taylor’s concept of “’empathic curiosity’” (122).    

Illness as Narrative poses questions so central to discussions in the medical humanities that it should be read by those who teach in the health professions and disciplines. Jurecic’s book advances the groundbreaking case made by Arthur Frank that illness narratives contribute not only to medicine, but also to contemporary culture and individual lives. Since Illness as Narrative rigorously addresses questions of how to respond to and teach the literature of suffering, it has consequential implications for literary studies and the critical humanities more generally. It exemplifies how a marginalized sub-field can offer a perspective that the dominant theories in the larger discipline fail to notice. Perhaps the most urgent professional question Jurecic asks is what we lose if writers and readers attuned to the ill or suffering body are not heard in critical discussions. Fortunately, Jurecic’s clear, jargon-free prose and the texts she writes about also welcome readers in disciplines beyond literary studies and health humanities into the conversation.  

Illness as Narrative: 
https://upittpress.org/books/9780822961901/

Arlene Croce: 
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1994/12/26/discussing-the-undiscussable

Arthur Frank:  
The Wounded Storyteller: Body, Illness, and Ethics, 2^nd ed. Univ of Chicago Press, 2013. (Orig. 1995) 

Illness as Narrative 
By Ann Jurecic 
University of Pittsbugh Press: 2012, 192 Pages 
Web Photo by Mostafa Saeed 

Alive: Our Bodies and the Richness and Brevity of Existence by Gabriel Weston 

Boston: David R. Godine, 2025, 304 pages 
ISBN 9781567928235 

The physician experience, medical history, motherhood, anatomy, and worries about her diseased mitral valve are tenderly sutured together by ENT surgeon Weston in her exploration of “the poetry of the body.” In thirteen chapters, she eloquently contemplates “the strange, unbridgeable gap that exists between the body science describes and the one each of us is living inside right this moment” (p194). In describing the anatomy of bones, brain, breasts, genitals, gut, heart, kidneys, liver, lungs, skin, and womb, Weston writes with a wit and intense curiosity reminiscent of popular science writer Mary Roach. But the book’s splendor arises from its attention to the art of doctoring. Weston notes how good physicians require a kind of “bifocal vision” that allows them to see the generalities of the human body but also the unique details of an individual patient. She extols empathy and elevates vulnerability: “We are not separable from those we care for, just as our strength is not separable from our vulnerability” (p263). Melding science and sentiment, mixing professional life with personal life, Weston enlivens anatomy and pays homage to the physician-patient relationship.  

The Land in Winter by Andrew Miller 

London: Sceptre, 2024, 384 pages 
ISBN 9781529354270 

Andrew Miller’s remarkable 1997 debut novel Ingenious Pain chronicles the complex life of an 18^th century highly skilled English doctor incapable of feeling pain. Twenty-seven years and many novels (Oxygen, Pure, The Optimists) later, Miller’s latest book spotlights a main character who also happens to be an English physician – but this flawed human being hurts (especially emotionally). Eric Parry is a 36-year-old country doctor having an extramarital affair with a married woman while his wife Irene is pregnant. Next door to their cottage is a farm owned by Bill Simmons and his pregnant wife Rita who suffers from mental illness and enjoys reading science fiction. It is winter (December, 1962 – January, 1963) and for a time the rural community is paralyzed by a brutal blizzard. Happy endings are in short supply here. One of the pregnant women has a miscarriage while sitting on the toilet. Characters get injured. Some patients die. Eric’s infidelity is exposed. Still, compassion and empathy occasionally sprout amidst the bleakness and the cold. Irene is cognizant that her husband’s work is hard as he “had to deal with people’s suffering all day” (p55). Eric excels at examining patients with a manner that “calmed” them. Secrets, loneliness, belonging, complicated personal relationships, and poor decision-making are essential elements of the plot. The story asks readers to contemplate whether virtuousness is a necessary requirement to be a “good doctor.” 

Doc or Quack: Science and Anti-Science in Modern Medicine by Sander L. Gilman 

London: Reaktion Books, 2025, 320 pages 
ISBN 9781836390152 

Bloodletting and purging (“heroic medicine”) employed for a wide array of diseases. Laetrile (a chemical present in apricot seeds) used for treating cancer. Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin prescribed for COVID-19. Spanning centuries, the list of wacky, ineffective, and sometimes dangerous remedies for illness is quite lengthy. In this standout history of scientific medicine from the mid-19^th century to the present, Gilman navigates “the ever-shifting boundary between good medicine and quackery” (p15). He reviews the rise of allopathic medicine that resulted from “following the science” as discovery and knowledge migrated from the laboratory to the bedside. He writes about the model of the physician-healer, the placebo effect (along with the morality of deception), superstitions (of both doctors and patients), and the faddish nature of medical practice. Gilman is rightly concerned about physicians experiencing burnout and patients feeling disconnected from their doctors in truncated office visits. He wonders if empathy and efficacy can coexist in contemporary healthcare. Three “case studies” are presented: peptic ulcer disease, the development of ophthalmic surgery, and acupuncture for back pain. A thoughtful study of historically “good” and “bad” medicine and the occasional blurring between the two. 

Additional recommended books published in 2025: 

The Mind Electric: A Neurologist on the Strangeness and Wonder of Our Brains
by Pria Anand 

The Age of Diagnosis: How Our Obsession with Medical Labels Is Making Us Sicker
by Suzanne O’Sullivan 

Web photo by Bermix Studio 

Mrs. Lin is a fifty-five-year-old woman who has lived alone in Canada for many years while her husband lives back in China. Her two sons are both working and out of the house. Last week, she discovered a new breast lump while showering. A few days later, she’s in my clinic to get the lump checked. As her family doctor, I order a mammogram and an ultrasound. When the results of these tests come back a few days later, the report indicates that the findings are suspicious for malignancy and a biopsy is necessary. 

Mrs. Lin returns to the clinic and I relay the information to her. I try not to mention the word “cancer” to her, but it hangs between us, powerful even if it remains unsaid. I urge her not to jump to worst case scenarios, but we both know that one way or the other, this is life altering news. I promise to order a referral to the breast diagnostic clinic at the community hospital nearby and that the breast centre will reach out to her in the next week or two. 

Later in the week, I receive a fax from the breast clinic. They’ve been trying to reach my patient by phone but with no success. Do we have another way of contacting her? 

I instruct my office staff to try to reach the patient. They call repeatedly for a few days. The breast clinic appointment is scuttled but I’m not actually worried. I’ve seen this pattern many times before. I am certain the patient has already flown the coop. 

A few days later, my hunch is proven right. My nurse manages to reach one of Mrs. Lin’s sons. His mother is safely back in China, seeking medical attention there. They’ll call us when she returns sometime next year. 

When my father boarded a plane in Taiwan in 1967 to come to Canada on a one-way ticket for graduate school, my grandmother saw him off at the airport. She gave him $1000 and said, “I’ll see you in about ten years.” 

She wasn’t far off. In fact, he didn’t return to Taiwan until 1974, for his wedding. 

That was what being a Chinese-Canadian immigrant was like back in those days. A journey to the other side of the world was truly a journey into an unknown abyss. Letters marked “airmail” with the blue and red checkered envelope edges took weeks to circumnavigate the globe. If my father wanted to call his parents, he’d reserve the call for special occasions like Chinese New Year because long distance rates were exorbitant. And even then, he’d be careful to limit the call to one minute and fifty seconds because exceeding the two-minute mark meant paying unnecessary fees. 

Immigrating was essentially a one-way trip. Immigrants like my father rarely considered the prospect of flying back home because it was something most of them simply couldn’t afford. There were only two acceptable occasions to fly home: your own wedding or a death in the family. 

The journey for today’s Chinese-Canadian immigrants is different. Not only can they communicate easily with those back home using apps like WhatsApp, WeChat and Line on an hourly basis, but based on my observation of my Chinese Canadian immigrant patients, even those who struggle financially, seem to have a reserve fund that they can dip into and use to return to China on a moment’s notice. Home is never more than a one-day airplane flight away. 

And people fly back for all manner of reasons now: family illnesses, Chinese New Year, summer vacations, and most definitely, for expediting medical investigations. 

The fluidity with which patients move back and forth speaks to a difference in what motivates immigrants to come to Canada. When my parents’ generation left China or Taiwan or Hong Kong, often it was to trade a future bleak of possibilities for a possibly prosperous future. But for many of today’s Chinese immigrants, it’s a trade of one hopeful future, for possibly, a slightly better one, but with the option to go back if this future in the West doesn’t work out. 

Health care has become part of this back-and-forth fluidity. It used to be that the health care trade off would have been clear–Canadian health care was more advanced than that in China in the sixties and seventies. But that’s not entirely true anymore, and today’s immigrants arrive with a great deal more reticence about our health care system. 

Health care always presents unique challenges to an immigrant population. Illnesses imply a degree of immediacy and urgency. They play out on their own timetables – they don’t wait for people to become comfortable with the language or culture of a place before occurring. 

So the new immigrant is forced to face the health challenges of regular life—acute illnesses, chronic diseases, bodily injuries, babies being born, and even the occasional life-threatening-situation without the social support structure that they would have had back home. All this is part of the bargain that the new immigrant strikes with their adopted country. And so they pray that nothing major will befall them, but when something invariably does, what do they do? 

In the previous generations, immigrants here had little recourse but to seek out solutions in the Canadian health care system. Whether their English was up to snuff or not, they were forced to navigate the system here. Many Chinese immigrants like my parents flocked to Chinese-speaking doctors like me in the hope that at least less would be lost in translation if they found a Chinese person holding the stethoscope. 

The modern immigrant though, has the luxury of straddling the line between the Canadian and Chinese health care systems, keeping one foot in China’s health care system and another foot in Canada’s. 

Unhappy with the wait times for elective knee surgery in Ontario? No problem. A doctor in Taiwan or Hong Kong will have you on the table in the OR in a few weeks, not months. 

New discovery of lymphoma? No need to wait for your family doctor to refer you to an oncology clinic and for that clinic to send you for imaging before finally making a decision on treatment—a process that can easily span into months. If you fly back to China, you can walk into a specialty clinic the next day, see a doctor by lunch time and have imaging and an oncology plan done by the end of the week. 

When it comes to China, the western world has a tendency to see things in stark black and white terms: e.g., freedom is good and communism is bad. As a Chinese Canadian physician, I find that this type of thinking carries over to our view of the health care system. Medical students in Canada, are taught that the Canadian health care system is a virtuous, humane social experiment, one of the country’s proudest achievements. It’s drummed into us that it delivers world-class care to the majority of its people. And we’re proud to be trained in it. Sure, it has its problems, but nothing’s perfect. 

There is a hidden side to this curriculum though. If we’re world class here, what about health care systems in other places? What about Africa? What about South America? What about China? 

Perhaps unintentionally, we’re taught to look down on the systems of other countries. We use words like ”developing“ and “evolving” to describe health care systems in these places. But in private, we often shake our heads in exasperation and use far worse language than that. 

These stereotypes were only reinforced when I started practicing medicine about fifteen years ago. The requests of my Chinese patients, often rooted in their own experiences with the health care systems they had left behind, drove me batty on a daily basis. 

I’d try to explain to my patients that, “Yes, that might be the case there. But you don’t really need any of those things.” But it’s hard to convince someone that everything they’ve accepted as truth may not be correct. 

The worse complaint was always about the wait times. This was one that I could not refute. It’s well-known that wait times for medical procedures in Canada are criminally lengthy. But whereas my Canadian patients had nowhere else to go and would just vent to me about the breaking down of our country’s beloved health care system, or try to drive a few hours to Buffalo to get an MRI, my Chinese patients had the luxury of options. They could hop on a plane, land in China or Hong Kong or Taiwan by the end of the week and get whatever they wanted within days, not weeks or months. 

I should point out that the feedback from patients about the Canadian health care system wasn’t always negative when compared to back home. I learned that the fifteen to twenty minutes I allocated to speak to each patient was approximately twelve to eighteen minutes more than they got in the typical Chinese hospital. 

Still, there were many frustrations that I was unprepared for. Patients would return to my clinic armed with reams of paperwork (all in Chinese), documenting checkups and physical exams that they had done overseas: lab tests and CT scans that had no indication for being ordered, medications that they had been prescribed that were not really indicated. 

If modern medicine in the West suffers from an over-reliance on medical imaging and pharmaceuticals at the expense of a more prudent and holistic approach to care, then modern Chinese medicine has become Western medicine’s adopted twin, with all the same problems we have, except with even less sense of restraint and caution. 

Mr. Zhang is a middle aged, Chinese man with diabetes. In China, people routinely retire in their early fifties and one of the perks of retirement is long term health insurance, so even though Mr. Zhang has lived in Canada for almost fifteen years, he still can access Chinese health care whenever he is back home. 

Mr. Zhang isn’t alone in returning home to seek health care. Even those without health insurance often choose to pay out of pocket to access health care in China on a regular basis because the costs aren’t prohibitive 

Because Mr. Zhang travels back and forth between China and Canada on a regular basis (after all winters in Canada are cold), he needs doctors on both sides of the world to help him manage his long-term diabetes. What he’s discovered is that the quality of care in both countries is, for him at least, comparable. The general procedures for diabetes, routine blood testing, and medication adjustments, are similar in both places. But there are some noticeable differences. 

He informs me that in China, the health care system is heavily incentivized by the profit motive. Hospitals make more money if they achieve certain revenue quotas, and this is passed on to the doctors, who in turn pass this mindset down to the patients. 

At the same time, it’s well known to him and all his friends, that in Canada, with a public health care system, cost-cutting is much more of an issue. 

The doctor as gatekeepers of the health care system is sometimes a difficult concept for patients to understand. Doctors in China are not really gatekeepers of the system the way they are in Canada, where doctors spend a great deal of time being instructed on not over-ordering tests. Not all medical investigations are necessary. Extra tests beget extra costs and may engender unnecessary anxiety and have deleterious consequences for the patient-just think about the patient who worries about a lung nodule that will never cause them problems once it’s been spotted on an unnecessary chest X-ray. These are hard lessons that even medical practitioners in the West struggle with at times. For my patients from China, this concept is irrelevant. In a privatized system where patients can pay for what they want, getting an unnecessary MRI is no different than spending money on a fancier car or an extra helping of dessert: nobody really needs it, but if they can afford it, then why not? 

So if I try to explain to my patients why I don’t think they need that MRI they really want, they think I am just trying to save the government of Canada money. If I am really hard-nosed about it, they just might turn around, get on a plane and have the test done in Shanghai or Taipei by the end of the week. 

In China, if I want an MRI and can afford to pay for one, then who is anyone to stop me from getting what I want? If a cardiologist makes more money for pushing a certain type of stent at a patient, who is going to stop them from recommending it to patients who might do just as well with a less aggressive intervention? 

To be sure, these are problems that exist in many parts of the world, even here. But reviewing the stacks of lab results and CT scans that my patients lug back to Canada from overseas, I can’t help but feel that my patients have stumbled upon the Wild, Wild, West of health care-except it’s in the Far East. 

There is of course a downside when patients straddle two countries for their healthcare. Countless times, I’ve had patients return from overseas after having had a major health calamity. Maybe they had breast cancer diagnosed in China, or a screw placed in their hip after a fall, but now that they’ve returned to Canada, no specialist office will see them.  

Dutifully, the patient brings copies of their hospital notes from China, copies of their CT scans and MRIs, but nobody here is willing to read them because nobody here trusts what the report says. If the documents are written in Chinese, Canadian doctors usually can’t read it. Even if they could and wanted to trust it, can they really do so medico-legally? And so it’s the patient that gets left in the lurch.  

In the end, armed with a Chinese-Canadian dictionary in my early years in practise, or more recently Google translate, I’ve learned to muddle through. With my admin staff translating the documents for me, I can usually piece together what procedure a patient has had done overseas. Then we try to match them with the appropriate follow up here, often repeating the testing and imaging so that patients can access care here. 

But it’s getting better. In my early years, I couldn’t find any oncology clinics willing to follow my patients who had started their chemotherapy overseas. Many of these patients flew all the way here to use their hard-won Ontario health care card, only to have to fly back home shortly thereafter when they realized they weren’t going to receive timely care in Canada. These days, I’ve seen more care handoffs take place here smoothly. Truly, the health care world is becoming a little friendlier to immigrants. 

It used to drive me crazy when my patients sought out health care overseas. In medical school, we’re taught a very idealized version of medical care, something akin to the traditional country doctor’s life straight out of the 19th century. A patient feels unwell. They seek out a local physician. The physician solves the problem or directs them to someone else who can. The problem is solved, and life goes on. 

But in real life, I saw that patients didn’t always stay in one place. Sometimes they asked me for help first. Then they’d go overseas. At other times, they came back from Asia and needed my help deciphering what had happened to them there. And back and forth they went. 

Sometimes I’d get exasperated that they were receiving substandard care overseas. At other times, I’d gain an appreciation that they really could get better, faster treatment for certain things in China that in Canada would have taken ages. In time, I developed a grudging respect for health care in China. 

As I worked with patients who were navigating these two systems simultaneously, I felt myself drawn into a curious, political dilemma. Which health care system is better? 

Sometimes patients would pull me aside and ask me what they should do, fly back to China and seek urgent care or wait a bit longer to see their specialist here in Canada? 

The issues were always some variation of the same theme, a weighing of trade-offs: comfort with the language, wait times, medical expertise, as well as the family support system, all bundled into one massive equation that boiled down to a simple binary question: China or Canada? 

I’ve found my own stance on the issue change over time. When I first graduated from medical school, armed with all my pro-Western biases, the answer was almost certainly Canada. 

But in recent years, I’ve watched medicine advance in China from afar, through what my patients tell me, and through the medical records and histories that they bring back to me. Perhaps there’s still a lot of overkill in investigations on the other side of the ocean, but often the quality of medicine isn’t that different from what it is here. And it’s almost certainly faster. And if you can pay for quicker care, why not? Moreover, many of these Chinese immigrants have family support networks back home that simply don’t exist here. For them to return home for their care simply makes rational sense. Nothing reminds someone of how foreign they are as being in a cold, sterile hospital environment where nobody speaks your language. 

More than a year after she departed, Mrs. Lin returns to my clinic. Following a lumpectomy and ten rounds of chemotherapy, the doctors in China have instructed her to remain on estrogen receptor therapy for the next five years. 

Why did she return to China for medical care? Despite living in Canada for more than a decade and having a passable command of the English language, she still felt that for something as serious as this, she wanted to be someplace she could speak her native tongue. Plus, she would have family members there to support her. Left unsaid is that the entire medical procedure in China took days to arrange not weeks as it would have here. 

I refer her to a medical oncologist, who reports back to me that she is overall, in agreement with the patient’s treatment plan. She replaces the patient’s estrogen treatment with an alternative agent that is available in Canada. 

Web photo by Zac Ong 

Additional Chapters from A Chinese City Doctor’s Notebook

When Your Body Isn’t Yours 

01.12.26 566

From Tigers to Otaku

09.16.25 1384

The Happiest Couple

07.28.25 1159

The Things We Don’t Talk About When We Talk About Dying 

05.13.25 1742

One Patient, Two Systems 

02.24.25 2377

It is one thing to read about bipolar disorder in a textbook, and another thing to observe it firsthand. Some of us have friends or family members whom we have seen in the throes of a manic episode. As a psychiatrist, I have witnessed mania at close range literally hundreds of times. But to be an audience member and to experience it in a way that manages to be both educational and entertaining is a rare privilege. And to do so as a multimedia event, fusing theater with visual arts, is surely unique.  

Sam Kissajukian’s one-man show 300 Paintings is a must-see that is currently enjoying a return engagement at the Vineyard Theatre in New York. (It is purely a coincidence that the theater, just off Union Square, is a block away from my former psychiatric office of eighteen years.)  

Kissajukian is an Australian stand-up comic. In 2021, during the pandemic, he experienced a five-month bipolar manic episode. During that time, despite having no previous background in visual arts, he decided to become a painter. Moving into a warehouse, he began to paint. He barely slept, frequently turning out multiple works a day. By the end of the episode he had created three hundred paintings, documenting his mental state.  

Kinssajukian has created the show he calls 300 Paintings as the culmination of his personal and artistic journey. The show has won numerous awards, including Best Comedy at Sydney Fringe 2022 and 2023, and the Mental Health Awareness Award at Adelaide Fringe 2024. It has played at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival, and it first came to the Vineyard last fall. He has also had several exhibitions of his paintings, and has come out as a strong advocate for mental health awareness. 

While 300 Paintings calls on the author’s experience as a comic, it is no mere stand-up routine. At 80 minutes it has the dimension and scope of a play. There are serious undertones, yet there are many undoubtedly funny parts: We hear how at his most grandiose Kinssajukian thinks of himself as a “Pisscasso” who goes through a blue period in days, rather than years. At another point he describes how he affected a beret. Funny or serious, he is always charming and engaging, and he breaks it up by showing projections of his work.  

There are times when the dialogue takes on the rapid, pressured speech of a person who is manic, and his thought process shows the jumping from topic to topic that a psychiatrist refers to as “flight of ideas,” But this feels intentional. At no time do you worry that the performer does not have it under control. And he readily attributes this to his rapid diagnosis and treatment by a psychiatrist.  

At the end of the performance, Kissajukian announces that a curated exhibition of his paintings is on view in the lobby, and that he will be available to meet the audience.  

Two Paintings by Kissajukian

Podcast

Web image provided by Sam Kissajukian

The phenomenon sometimes referred to as “baby blues,” a mild transient state affecting as many as 80% of new mothers, had been recognized early on. In his influential 1946 book on baby care Dr. Benjamin Spock advised that one could snap out of it by just going “to a movie, or to the beauty parlor, or [getting] yourself a new hat or dress” (p. 29). If a new dress did not do the trick, the implication in that era was that you were a defective woman. In the 1962 edition, Spock still repeated the same advice verbatim. The notion there could be a persistent mood disorder requiring treatment required far longer to catch on. In her book, Moran elucidates some of the factors that rendered it difficult to accept the existence of postpartum depression and explain why persistent advocacy was necessary.  

One such factor involved organized psychiatry. While early editions of the DSM (the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) had proposed psychodynamic causes for mental illnesses, in an attempt to be neutral about their origins the DSM-III did not include postpartum disorders as discrete entities. One implication of this was that there was no code to use to get health insurance to reimburse for medical care. The result, according to James Alexander Hamilton, a psychiatrist who had written the first modern monograph on postpartum mental illness, was that “many thousands of very sick women [were] very badly treated” (p. 67). It took several editions of the DSM until this was addressed. And even in DSM-V, postpartum depression would still be coded as Major Depressive Disorder with peripartum onset.  

Eventually the idea there was something more serious than” baby blues” yet still relatively common took root in the public consciousness. One began to hear about it on television talk shows. Yet these appearances often featured extreme cases such as that of Andrea Yates who had drowned her five children: “Tragedy and insanity got ratings. This still allowed advocates a chance to raise awareness on a massive national platform. But it also made postpartum depression frightening and unclear” (p. 166). It took celebrities such as Brooke Shields to come out about their experiences to change the national conversation. After publishing a memoir about her postpartum depression, in 2005 the actress went on the Today Show where she was criticized by Tom Cruise for using antidepressants. When the public rallied behind Shields, this proved to be a turning point for the movement. 

When national bipartisan legislation was proposed to increase awareness and to fund research for postpartum depression, the issue became a political football. Anti-abortion activists coined a brand new “disorder” they called “post-abortion syndrome” and would not consider supporting one without the other. It was not until the passage of the Affordable Care Act that the MOTHERS act went through, and not even then without the concession to abortion politics.  

If Moran’s book breezes through the science behind postpartum depression somewhat rapidly, its chronicle of an important advocacy movement for women’s health makes it worthwhile, and its extensive use of oral histories within the context of the author’s own history ensures it is an interesting read.  

Blue
Rachel Louise Moran
University of Chicago Press, 2024, 304 pages

Web image by Alexander Grey 

See https://www.postpartum.net/ for information about Postpartum Support International, one of the advocacy groups profiled in Blue.  

“Prof. William Osler, of the University of Pennsylvania, was summoned by telegraph this afternoon to go to Walt Whitman’s bedside. The aged poet had a relapse, and it was feared that he was dying. When the doctor came away from the little frame house at 328 Mickle Street, Camden, at 8 o’clock tonight, he said the poet was resting easily and about holding his own.” 

Osler first visited Whitman in 1884, shortly after moving to Philadelphia to take up his position as Professor of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Maurice Bucke, a Canadian psychiatrist and mutual friend, had asked Osler to look in on Whitman, who was complaining of dizzy spells and fatigue. The professor obligingly ferried across the Delaware River to Camden and made a house call. Osler reported that the poet had no residual neurological deficits from his earlier stroke. He was unimpressed with Whitman’s current symptoms and, in fact, later described him as “a fine figure of a man who had aged beautifully, or more properly speaking, majestically with a large frame and a well-shaped, well-poised head…“ ^{1, p. 21} 

However, four years later the situation was more serious. On June 14, 1888, Whitman developed slurred speech, prostration, and confusion “such as we know are not uncommon with sclerosis of the arteries of the brain.”^{1, p. 178} When Osler was called in, he recommended general supportive care and issued a cautiously optimistic prognosis (as the Times reported), but evidently did not present his patient with a specific diagnosis or discuss pathophysiology. Whitman recovered over the following weeks, but his health gradually deteriorated over the next several years until his death in 1892. 

During the years Osler served as the poet’s primary care physician, their relationship was respectful, but not ideal. Whitman frequently complained about the great clinician’s rosy bedside manner. “Osler made light of my condition,” the poet wrote. “I don’t like his pooh-poohs. The professional air of the doctor grates on me.” ^{1, p. 50} On another occasion he told his friend Horace Traubel, “I confess I do not wholly like or credit what he (Osler) says. I do not fancy the jaunty way in which he seems inclined to dismiss my troubles.” ^{2, July 3, 1888} Evidently, Osler continued to speak in generalities, rather than addressing specific concerns that Whitman raised as he became progressively feebler.  

This situation contrasts with some of the poet’s earlier medical experience. For example, shortly after his stroke in 1873, Whitman consulted Dr. Mathew Grier who must have explained the etiology of the problem. Whitman later wrote to his friend Peter Doyle, “Did I tell you that Dr. Grier here says that my real disease is the brain not being properly furnished and nourished with blood…” ³ The poet’s other physicians included Drs. Silas Weir Mitchell and his son John Kearsley Mitchell. The famous neurologist and champion of neurasthenia made house calls on Whitman twice in 1878 when the poet reported symptoms of rheumatism and prostration, which he had self-diagnosed as a recurrence of his previous stroke. Mitchell assured him that the stroke, which had resulted from a ruptured blood vessel in the brain, was not responsible for the current symptoms. These, Mitchell claimed, were caused by chronic stress, perhaps exacerbated by anxiety over a public lecture that the poet was just then preparing to give.³ In other words Mitchell considered the illness a manifestation of neurasthenia. He prescribed travel, mountain air, and vigorous outdoor activity, which was Mitchell’s generic regimen for neurasthenia in males, quite the opposite of his more famous regimen of complete bed rest for female neurasthenics. ³ The poet took Mitchell’s advice seriously and embarked on a trip to Colorado, after which he professed himself cured.  

While Osler’s optimistic persona must have pleased many patients, it irritated Whitman. He judged his doctor’s cheerfulness to be insincere, or at least questionable. The elderly poet was an eccentric who fiercely valued his independence. While at times he showed a sweet and gentle side, he could also be touchy, irascible, and assertive. As the poet grew progressively frailer during 1888 and 1889, Traubel recorded a series of house calls during which Osler assured him that he would soon recover. “Do not take a gloomy view of Whitman’s case,” Osler told Traubel, “he will come around.” ^{2, July 3, 1888} In this short poem, I try to resurrect the poet’s attitude toward his famous doctor: 

Walt Whitman Reflects on His Doctor’s Bedside Manner 

As an old rat that must be allowed to die 
in his own way, I start with a prejudice 
against doctors. Never mind worrying 

about your sickness, he scolds me,  
I’m seeing to all that. The man tinkers  
with platitudes and conceals his thoughts.  

In his gospel of encouragement 
I’m supposed to be agreeable and dumb 
while he puts the best construction  

on what’s happening. What does he know 
about Whitman, the old rat? A shoemaker  
tells his customer the shoe fits just right 
but the shoe pinches the fellow wearing it.  

Whitman was a master of self-promotion. He appeared to encourage members of his inner circle who viewed him as a prophet, as well as a poet. Dr. Maurice Bucke even wrote a book claiming that his friend was one of the few humans who had achieved “cosmic consciousness.” The others included Jesus, Mohamed, and the Buddha. Did Osler fail to understand that his one- size- fits- all approach to physician-patient communication might not be appropriate for a patient with Whitman’s complex and eccentric personality?  

Although dissatisfied with Osler’s bedside manner, the poet respected his doctor’s clinical abilities. Several months after the medical crisis in 1888, Whitman wrote, “As for Osler: he is a great man—one of the rare men. I should be much surprised if he didn’t soar way, way up—get very famous at his trade—someday. He has the air of something about him—of achievement.”^{2, December 26, 1888} Indeed, by that time, Osler had already accepted the position of Professor of Medicine at the new Johns Hopkins medical school in Baltimore.  

Osler was a sensitive, cultivated man, but also a rationalist, who initially looked askance both at Whitman’s exuberant poetry and the cult that had grown up around its author. Although he admired the man, he had no wish to become a disciple. He loved poetry and enjoyed quoting passages from Shakespeare and the Romantic and Victorian poets. Regarding his first impressions of Leaves of Grass, Osler later wrote, “Whether the meat was too strong, or whether it was the style of cooking—‘twas not for my pampered palate.” ^{1, p. 22} He found his new patient’s long, unruly poems and earthy subject matter self-indulgent and lacking in discipline. The boisterous persona reflected in Whitman’s poems jarred Osler’s methodical mind. In the following poem, I imagine the clinician’s response to his early encounters with the Good Grey Poet: 

Dr. William Osler Remembers His Call on Walt Whitman 

I took the ferry that day and found him 
in the front room of a small house 
on Mickle Street, buried to his chest 
in papers, magazines, and musty  
brown bundles. Push yourself a path, 
he said. I reckon you’re a friend of Bucke’s. 

His famous head had aged majestically— 
unkempt white beard; smooth, clear cheeks; 
a fissured, geographic forehead. 
His voice was pitched a shade too high,  
but strong like the rest of him. Of symptoms 
he said but little–remarkable 

for a man of 65. For a moment 
I felt that sweet aromatic presence 
his disciples spoke of–for me, though, 
the edge of chaos. I sometimes wish 
the man had made a difference in my life, 
opened me up, but how could I forego 

my restraint? Or professional kindness? 
For a man like me, a man of substance, 
what could be worse than falling in love 
with Whitman? I listened to the music 
of his tongue, but could never cross the line 
that reads, Who enters here, abandons discipline. 

Yet, in his later years, Osler grew to respect his one-time patient’s poetry, as well as his charismatic personality. In fact, at the time of his death from pneumonia in 1919, he was in the process of writing an appreciative reminiscence of his encounters with Whitman. 

The uneasy, but respectful, relationship between these giants in their respective fields provides interesting material for reflection. If the poet was so dissatisfied with Osler, why didn’t he go back to Weir Mitchell or his son, who were more easy-going and communicative? Mitchell’s reputation as a clinician easily equaled Osler’s, and he was a poet as well. Could it be that Whitman benefited in some way from Osler’s staunch optimism, or had developed deep trust in Osler’s judgment, despite the constant complaints he issued to Traubel and others? Alternatively, why didn’t Osler modify his paternalistic approach, since it seemed clear that Whitman preferred to play a more active role in the relationship? And those time-consuming house calls that required taking a ferry across the river! Why not recommend a more pliable colleague?  

References 

1. Philip Leon, Walt Whitman & Sir William Osler, ECW Press, Toronto, 1995. 

2. Horace Traubel, With Walt Whitman in Camden, vol. 2, at http://whitmanarchive.org/criticism/disciples/traubel (accessed December 30, 2024) 

3. Feinberg CE. Walt Whitman and his doctors. Arch Intern Med 1964; 114: 834-842. 

Photo of Sir William Osler and Walt Whitman from WikiCommons.

The narrator has enjoyed a mostly healthy life. He has traveled to Europe and once was treated for syphilis while there. He has been together with L for seven years. Both men are writers who teach at the university. Now, the pain that grips him defies exact description (even for a professional writer). The closest comparison that he can conjure is having someone’s hand plunge into his body and twist his guts along with the sensation of being kneed in the groin. He’s reluctant to seek medical attention since medical facilities are especially risky during the pandemic. So he waits and hurts. The pain is soon accompanied by fever, chills, and aching of the limbs. 

He decides to go to urgent care. After a brief evaluation, he’s referred to the university medical center ER. Covid testing is negative. A CT scan reveals an aortic dissection (tear in the aorta) associated with aortitis (an inflammation of this large blood vessel). He is told that such a tear is frequently fatal. He’s lucky to be alive. The narrator is placed in the ICU and treated with IV antibiotics, fluids, and antihypertensive medications. The vascular surgeon recommends holding off on any operation (either a stent or a graft), hoping the tear and inflammation will stabilize and heal. 

Hospitalized for a week and a half, the narrator confesses his feelings of helplessness, shame, bewilderment, and fear. He is intrigued by the bustle of the hospital – almost electric with human energy – but despondent over the seemingly omnipresent suffering there – his own, that of fellow patients, and even the distress of healthcare workers. He is most impressed by and appreciative of his ICU nurse, Alivia. As for the physicians involved in his care, the narrator notes the stark clinical detachment of many doctors. Reflecting on a visit from a rheumatologist, he concludes, “I was nothing to her, really, I was her job, she would clock out and enter her real life” (p124). He craves to sense some vulnerability and genuine concern emanating from his physicians. As for empathy, the narrator reveals some of his own when he decides, “it must be hell to be a resident” (p129) in training. 

The search for possible rare etiologies of his condition comes up empty. As his condition slowly improves, the narrator still worries about his current predicament and the future: “I was an enigma, they said, a conundrum, they were running out of ideas” (p121). The waiting for and indecision about any kind of surgical intervention wears on him. He wonders if it might be best to have an operation. 

But the narrator never has surgery. A repeat CT scan confirms stability of the aorta and resolution of all inflammation. He is discharged home on oral medicines and continued IV antibiotics. Frequent follow-up appointments with his doctors and imaging studies of his aorta are scheduled. His partner L lovingly tends to his needs. His sister G arrives to help too. The narrator’s prognosis is murky. Did he dodge a bullet? Or are further problems with his aorta inevitable? How does a person cope with such chronic uncertainty. Although the narrator is weak and emotionally rattled, he is happy to be alive, pain-free, ambulatory, and home with his lover. Shouldn’t that be enough? 

The novel reads more like a memoir than a work of fiction. It is impressively authentic and accurate about medical matters – the lingo and professional behavior of physicians, nursing care, clinical procedures, what it feels like to be a patient. Readers will rightfully consider whether the book’s author is perhaps recounting his own experience with a serious health problem.  

In this novel, the human body is depicted in many ways: sensuous, serviceable, surrendered to others, surreal when sick. The narrator’s experience of illness includes a warping of time, the pull of memory, the weight of regret, the need for truth, and the magic of love.  

The poet-protagonist is occasionally irritated by the language and metaphors spewed by doctors and nurses. The use of broad-spectrum antibiotics is explained to him as a “carpet bomb approach.” He is warned about the caustic effect of IV drugs and that his veins might “burn out.” This medical lexicon prompts the narrator to ponder “who taught these people, who gave them their vocabulary, their stock of images” (p86).  

We don’t need a novel (even an exceptional one like Small Rain) to remind us about the randomness and chaos of ordinary life, the uncertainty of health in the future. But we can look to great literature for inspiration, to help us understand and cope with those looming, difficult experiences. The word rain is both a noun (drops of moisture or a spiritual blessing) and a verb (something sent down in abundance). Whether it is tears (of pain and emotion), love, or gratitude, the rain in this story is hardly small.  

Small Rain: A Novel 
by Garth Greenwell 
New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2024, 320 pages 
ISBN 9780374279547 
Web photo by Pawel Nolbert 

German physicist Wilhelm Roentgen discovered X-rays in 1895 and received the inaugural Nobel Prize in Physics in 1901. One of the earliest X-rays he took was of his wife’s left hand. Her initial reaction to viewing the image was fright, accompanied by the proclamation: “I have seen my death!” Roentgen did not want the mysterious rays named for him. Instead, the letter X was chosen. Lobdell intriguingly contemplates the power, allure, value, and mystery conjured by that letter. X is employed as a warning symbol, a sign for measurement (2” x 4”) and multiplication, an indication of deletion. There is an X chromosome, X-rating, X-Files, the X-Men, and of course the platform X (formerly known as Twitter).

After their discovery, the use of X-rays spread rapidly even though pioneers of the technology tragically suffered from (often) fatal radiation poisoning and cancer. During World War I, Marie Curie designed mobile X-ray units placed in vans (dubbed “Little Curies”) that delivered the technology and its ability to rapidly diagnose injuries to the battlefield. 

Beyond the significance of establishing an accurate medical diagnosis, Lobdell explores the impact that X-rays have on so many aspects of human culture – literature, cinema, art, language, and even political cartoons. Society now had a different way to view life. Looking inward took on a new meaning. Notions of transparency and exposure merited rethinking. Getting an X-ray was paradoxically an impersonal and intimate act that raised concerns about voyeurism and privacy. Yet a desire to “see inside oneself” became quite popular.

For a time, a kind of X-ray “mania” swept America. The comic book hero Superman made his appearance, and X-ray vision was one of his many super powers. The shoe fluoroscope was a popular device to visualize how a customer’s feet fit properly into shoes during the 1920’s -1960’s. Chest X-rays were widely utilized to screen for tuberculosis from the 1930’s thru the 1960’s. Cabinet X-ray machines to view the contents of luggage and backscatter passenger scanning became fixtures at airports (examples of how X-rays suggest “security”).    James Bond sported X-ray glasses in the film, The World is Not Enough. In 2021, an emoji of a chest X-ray became available. 

X-ray, a small book that punches above its size and weight, is part of the Bloomsbury Academic publisher’s series titled “Object Lessons” that explores “the hidden lives of ordinary things.” Other medically-relevant texts in this series include Doctor, Pill, Pregnancy Test, and Tumor. 

These days, most people are accustomed to being X-rayed – radiographs taken in the ER following an accident or fall, routine dental X-rays, getting X-rayed at the airport, a chest X-ray done for a persistent cough. Some folks are reasonably concerned about the risks of radiation and the overutilization of this technology. Yet ultimately, subjecting yourself to X-rays is a risk-reward calculation that promises diagnosis, maintenance of health, or security in exchange for limited exposure to radiation and permission to intrude on privacy. Lobdell pens a clear, big picture of a surprisingly many-sided subject. The result is a glowing and penetrating examination of the importance, meaning, and influence of X-rays on not just health but all facets of life.  

X-ray by Nicole Lobdell
New York and London: Bloomsbury Academic
2024
121 pages
ISBN 9781501386701

This is my third trip to Naggalama.

In the summer of 2016, I flew to Entebbe with the doctors to direct a documentary about the US-Ugandan palliative care team. I wanted to explore how the Americans fared in a place lacking the diagnostic tools and tests they depend on in the US, and whether people in the villages, many of whom rely on traditional healers, were receptive to their care. 

Access to healthcare remains a major problem in these areas. The people visited by the team are often in the advanced stages of their disease and need the liquid morphine provided by the government to ease their pain and suffering. Many of the villagers we visited had no idea of their diagnosis and what they could expect as their condition progressed.  

With the footage from earlier trips, we created a video about cancer and what to expect when diagnosed. The video will be shown on mobile phones by Village Health workers to the people they visit in their districts. The purpose of this trip was to produce translated versions of the program.    

There are more than 40 languages spoken in Uganda. English, an official language of the country, and Luganda are the most widely spoken, but to reach a broader audience, including the rural population, we to produce other versions. On this trip, we spent a week in Kampala at Stone Age Pictures filming in Kiswahili, French, sign language and Luo, a language mostly spoken in northern Uganda. The plan is to record more versions once these are successfully piloted.

Ali Musoke is the head of Stone Age Pictures in Kampala and was the Director of Photography on my documentary film, Oli Otya? Life & Lost in Rural Uganda, in 2017. Travel to and from Stone Age from our guest house averaged 20 minutes door to door. We drove alongside women and men carrying all sorts of items balanced on their heads even an open suitcase displaying pieces of jewelry.   We passed roadside markets and goats nibbling grass on the side of the road. Traffic was heavier than I remember with government and army vehicles speeding down the middle of the road. Public transportation is either by boda boda motorcycles or buses, really no bigger than vans, that stop along the roads to pick up and drop off passengers. There were so many boda bodas to dodge,  at times I felt I was an avatar in a video game, dodging incoming traffic.   

Ali, his crew and I worked in the studio for six days. Together we directed and edited the new versions. To avoid having to re-edit the video for each language, on-camera actors- two nurses and three professional actors- had to read to time while watching the finely cut scenes in the video. For example, in the section about how cancer is diagnosed, we show techs examining scans then processing a blood sample, The translations of the scripts were handled by a professional translation service in Kampala. Because the translated versions were uniformly longer than the English one, we had the translators on the set to make any last-minute adjustments to the text and to ensure that the reading was accurate. Cultural differences quickly surfaced. For example, biopsy is not a commonly used word, and it was necessary to use a description of the procedure. Similarly, the phrase “palliative care” is not widely known, and not simple to translate. We used the English phrase but showed the team in the field talking to a patient and delivering medicine. Images played a key role throughout the video. For the sign language version, we split the screen evenly between the program and the accompanying signing so that people viewing the video on their mobile phones would be able to see the woman signing. 

Once we finished the studio work, we set out for Naggalama to meet up with the team at St. Francis hospital and head out to the villages to visit women who have breast cancer. The next project is a video to help destigmatize a breast cancer diagnosis.

As I drove with my crew along the red dirt, rough, and deeply rutted roads to the women’s homes, I couldn’t imagine how women in this area could cope with breast cancer, that is if they were able to be evaluated once they suspected they had an abnormality. Village Health Workers play a key role in connecting women to health centers. But evaluation and treatment is costly and require many trips to the Uganda Cancer Center in Kampala, a trip that can take two hours or more.   

In this area, many people rely on traditional healers. Szozzi, our soundperson, grew up in one of the villages we drove through, and we stopped to say a quick hello to his family. He told me that the healers have a placebo effect, using talk to soothe their patients even when the herbs they offer have little effect on their physical illness. Sometimes, Szozzi said, people lack the language to express how they feel at vulnerable points in their lives. How a question is asked can make all the difference. And sometimes, they believe that by giving voice to what they feel can make the illness worse.

On this morning in Naggalama, we pack our bags and prepare for the trip in the hospital van to the Entebbe airport. The doctors and I take a final walk around the hospital grounds. Much is unchanged since my last visit. The hospital now offers CAT scans, and there is a new building with private rooms.  We drop in on the maternity ward to say goodbye to Immy, a nurse and the spiritual leader of the palliative care team, who is caring for her new granddaughter born at the hospital the day we arrived.  

I leave with mixed feelings, overwhelmed by the needs of the population and grateful for the dedication of the health care workers. I will miss you, Naggalama.

For readers interested in the art of translation, I recommend Is That a Fish in Your Ear, Translation and the Meaning of Everything by David Bellos