In a story in yesterday's New York Times, reporter Dana Jennings, who has prostate cancer, expressed his frustration that language is inadequate to describe what having cancer is like, but then does a terrific job of doing that very thing at the end of his story.
His frustration stems from what he views as the overuse of phrases like "long battle with cancer'' and "fighting'' cancer.
He points out that people with the disease have little choice about how to react to it.
"We are caught in the middle, between our doctors and their potential tools of healing and the cell-devouring horde,'' he writes.
"It pays to have a positive outlook, I think, but that in no way translates into 'fighting' cancer,'' he continyes. "Cancer simply is. You can deny its presence in your body, cower at the thought or boldly state that you're going to whup it. But the cancer does not care. You're here, the cancer has arrived and the disease is going to feed until your doctors destroy it, or, at least, discourage it.''
That strikes me as about right, although certainly learning to live with it (keeping up with politics yes, going on 20-mile bike rides no) is a key to a successful life while the disease and the drugs contend over which will prevail.
Jennings also suggests a way in which cancer has changed his life that I can identify with:
"Strangely enough, although cancer threatened my life it also exalted it, brought with it a bright and terrible clarity,'' he writes. "So, no, cancer isn't a battle, a fight. It's simply life - life raised to a higher power.''
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Jay - Just want you to know that I am really enjoying your blog so much. I'm sure there are a number of us lurkers out there who could say the same.
ReplyDeleteI think about word and meaning all the time - how we use language to communicate, however imperfectly, what's going on inside. Thanks for an especially great entry.
And keep at that advocate thing. Try it!
Warm regards,
Jo