By: Emily,
on 4/18/2012
By: Emily,
on 3/26/2012
By: Emily,
on 3/19/2012
By: Emily,
on 3/7/2012
By: Emily,
on 2/29/2012
By: Emily,
on 2/6/2012
Hazel, I will buy
you a "F**k Cancer" kit from
Subversive Cross Stitch.
By: Emily,
on 11/25/2011
By: Emily,
on 11/7/2011
Yes, I AM a sucker
for medical-school memoirs --
By: Emily,
on 9/14/2011
Rogue researcher sends
Marina into uncharted
territory.
By: Emily,
on 8/29/2011
Debunks "lizard brain"
idea, but not as clever
as he thinks he is.
By: Emily,
on 3/16/2011
By: Emily,
on 3/14/2011
By: Emily,
on 11/5/2010
By: Emily,
on 10/27/2010
By: dthaase,
on 10/15/2010
one-line pen and ink
It's been a while since I have posted but I thought this fit the last prompt.
More here: The Quotidian Journal
By: Sevensheaven.nl,
on 10/14/2010
Illustration in a 3D pixel style, for an article named The Makeable Human, about the rise of electronic implants in medical science.
Sevensheaven images and prints are for sale at sevensheaven.nl
By: Emily,
on 10/13/2010
Unique topic makes
run-of-the-mill coming-of-age
worth checking out.
As Simple As It Seems by Sarah Weeks. Harper, 2010, 192 pages.
P.S. What does this jacket have to do with anything? She skips rocks like, once. The nightgown is good, but otherwise . . . ?
By: Jenny Kadis,
on 9/27/2010
By: Rachaya Yodsuwan,
on 9/19/2010
By: josh pincus is crying,
on 9/18/2010
Mildred Ratched, the sadistic tyrant who maintained strict order as head administrative nurse at the Oregon State Mental Hospital, in Ken Kesey’s 1962 novel One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,was the bane of Randle McMuphy’s existence.
By: Emily,
on 6/7/2010
By: Darcy Pattison,
on 6/3/2010
Are there untouchable topics in literature? No, of course, not. But there are topics that are difficult to do well, or it feels like you are preaching.
You know the ones: alcoholism, abortion, medical ethics, underage drinking, etc. These are hard to put into a story or novel and have it work.
I’ve been listening to Mary E. Pearson’s novel, The Adoration of Jenna Fox and she does a stunning job of addressing medical ethics. It’s reminiscent of Peter Dickinson’s 1989 novel, Eva, but takes the discussion in new directions. Here are some of the things she does right as an author treading lightly.
Character. The novel works because the character is front and center. This is above all a character novel, with all the ethical dilemma from the medical “miracle” taking place within the character. She IS the ethical problem and has to resolve how she feels about herself. So, it’s not a theoretical issue; it’s an issue of identity.
Voice. Written in first person, the character’s voice is stunning. First person was a good choice, because it allows the reader to experience the dilemma along with the character. The voice never falters, it’s flawless.
Backstory. The bane of any sort of difficult topic is the mountain of data, the historical arguments, the cultural context. It is a trap, though, for the unwary author who tries to insert all this back story into the novel. Pearson walks that fine line between planting necessary information, but putting it in naturally.
All sides are presented fairly. Pearson populates the story with a variety of characters who represent the various points of view about this question of medical ethics. This is perhaps the hardest thing to do in a novel dealing with issues that set off fireworks in our culture. It’s easy to include stereotypes, believe cliches. Instead, Pearson creates fully developed characters who are passionate about issues, but are conflicted by the dilemma that confronts them. The grandmother, the friend at school, the mysterious next-door neighbor — each has a life perspective to bring to the story that enriches the conflict, without cheapening it.
Are you passionate about some topic facing our culture? I’d recommend you read this book just for pure enjoyment of Pearson’s language and storytelling. Then, re-read it, study it, as an example of how to do it right.
It’s sold movie rights: we can only hope they do the novel justice.
Also see the website for the book, Who is Jenna Fox?
By: Emily,
on 3/24/2010
By: Emily,
on 1/15/2010
By: SarahN,
on 11/9/2009
Mark Jackson is Professor of the History of Medicine and Director of the Centre for Medical History at the University of Exeter. His newest work, Asthma: The Biography, is a volume in our series Biographies of Disease which we will be looking at for the next few week (read previous posts in this series here). Each volume in the series tells the story of a disease in its historical and cultural context – the varying attitudes of society to its sufferers, the growing understanding of its causes, and the changing approaches to its treatment. In the excerpt below Jackson relays the story of Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company.
On 7 December 1889, an American inventor, Frederick Augustus Roe, obtained a patent for a device that was designed both to cure and to prevent not only the deadly strain of influenza that was sweeping across Europe 
from Russia, but also a wide range of other respiratory complaints, including catarrh, bronchitis, coughs and colds, croup, whooping cough, hay fever and asthma. Sold from offices in Hanover Square in London for ten shillings, the Carbolic Smoke Ball comprised a hollow ball of India rubber containing carbolic acid powder. When the ball was compressed, a cloud of particles was forced through a fine muslin or silk diaphragm to be inhaled by the consumer. Boosted by testimonials from satisfied customers and endorsements from prominent doctors, Roe was sufficiently confident that the contraption would prevent influenza that, in several advertisements placed in the Illustrated London News and the Paul Mall Gazette during the winter of 1891, he offered to pay £100 to any person who contracted influenza ‘after having used the ball 3 times daily for two weeks according to the printed descriptions supplied with each ball’. As if to demonstrate the sincerity of his offer, Roe claimed to have deposited £1,000 with the Alliance Bank in Regent Street.
In November 1891, Louisa Elizabeth Carlill, the wife of a lawyer, purchased a Carbolic Smoke Ball in London and carefully followed the instructions for use. When Mrs Carlill contracted influenza the following January, her husband wrote to Roe claiming the ‘reward’ offered in the advertisements. Suggesting that the claim was fraudulent, Roe refused to pay and provided Mr Carlill with the names of his solicitors. In the resulting legal case, initially heard in the court of Queen’s Bench and subsequently reviewed by Appeal Court, the dispute did not revolve primarily around whether the plaintiff had used the device correctly or indeed whether or not she had contacted influenza; these issues were accepted largely as fact. Rather, legal arguments focused on whether the advertisement constituted a valid offer, rather than ‘a mere puff’, as Lord Justice Bowen neatly put it, and whether Mrs Carlill’s use of the smoke ball constituted acceptance of that offer. By deciding unanimously in Mrs Carlill’s favour, the English courts set a precedent regarding unilateral contracts that continued to inform the legal doctrines of offer and acceptance, consideration, misrepresentation, and wagering throughout the twentieth century.
While Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company became a celebrated moment in legal history, it al
LOVED this book on so many levels!!