A Stone in a Spaghetti Bowl: The Biological and Metaphorical Brain in Neuro-Oncology

Sky Gross

doi:10.1108/S1057-6290(2011)0000013009

Login

Welcome:
Guest

Search for:

Browse:

Product Information:

Resources:

Advances in Medical Sociology

ISSN: 1057-6290
Series editor(s): Professor Barbara Katz Rothman

Subject Area: Sociology and Public Policy

Content: Series Volumes | Current Volume RSS

Options: To add Favourites and Table of Contents Alerts please take a Emerald profile

Document request:
A Stone in a Spaghetti Bowl: The Biological and Metaphorical Brain in Neuro-Oncology

Document Information:
Title:	A Stone in a Spaghetti Bowl: The Biological and Metaphorical Brain in Neuro-Oncology
Author(s):	Sky Gross
Volume:	13 Editor(s): Martyn Pickersgill, Ira Van Keulen ISBN: 978-1-84855-880-9 eISBN: 978-1-84855-881-6
Citation:	Sky Gross (2011), A Stone in a Spaghetti Bowl: The Biological and Metaphorical Brain in Neuro-Oncology, in Martyn Pickersgill, Ira Van Keulen (ed.) Sociological Reflections on the Neurosciences (Advances in Medical Sociology, Volume 13), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.99-119
DOI:	10.1108/S1057-6290(2011)0000013009 (Permanent URL)
Publisher:	Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Article type:	Chapter Item
Abstract:	This chapter presents findings of ethnographic work in a neuro-oncology clinic in Israel. It is claimed that patients, close-ones and physicians engage in creating metaphorical visions of the brain and brain tumours that reaffirm Cartesian dualism. The ‘brain talk’ involved visible and spatial terms and results in a particular kind of objectification of the organ of the self. The overbearing presence of visual media (i.e., magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, angiographic studies) further gave rise to particular forms of interactions with patients and physicians where the ‘imageable’ (i.e., the image on the screen) became the ‘imaginable’ (i.e., the metaphor). The images mostly referred to a domain of mundane objects: a meatball in a dish of spaghetti, a topping of olives over a pizza, the surface of the moon, a stone, an egg, an animal, a dark cloud. Furthermore, conversations with family members showed that formal facts and informed compassion were substituted by concrete representations. For them, and especially for the patient, these representations redefined an ungraspable situation, where a tumour – an object – can so easily affect the organ of their subjectivity, into something comprehensible through the materialistic, often mechanistic actions of most mundane objects. This, however, also created alienated objects within the boundaries of their own embodied selves. Patients, on the one hand, did not reject their own sense of ‘own-ness’, of having a lifeworld (lebenswelt) as subjective agents, but on the other, did talk about their own interiors as being an ‘other’: an object visible, observable and imaginable from a third-person standpoint – a standpoint drawing its authority from biomedical epistemology and practice.