- Roy Porter, professor of the history of medicinea
- a Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine, London NW1 2BE
Jokes, Freud taught us, are the acceptable face of aggression. Humour has, not surprisingly, provided a way for the people to fight back against the powerful; and, on account of their own highminded aspirations, the liberal and learned professions traditionally laid themselves particularly open to lampoon. Anti-priest and anti-doctor satire was not only a form of revenge, it was also designed to deflate, exposing pretension and humbug.
Medical satire was particularly near the bone since its humour was black. Laughter was a way of keeping the dread of death at bay—of handling the insidious suspicion that the medical profession might not after all be fighting death but could prove a double agent.
Such themes became specially prominent from the 18th century with the spread of fairly cheap prints and engravings alongside traditional verbal expressions like proverbs, riddles, and rhymes. Hogarth's commercial talents led the way from the 1730s. The decades around 1800 brought the golden age of the cartoon with Rowlandson, Gillray, and the Cruikshank family. The verbal and the visual joined forces to produce maximum impact in an age notably uninhibited in its depiction of sex and violence in political prints and professional satire alike.
The standing of early modern medics was precarious and it is not hard to see why. Disease and death still held sway. Faced with hordes of waterborne, airborne, and bugborne fevers, medicine had little power to cure the sick or save the dying. Doctors had to do their feeble best in a cut-throat trade, exposed to non-stop vilification. “If the world knew the villainy and knavery (beside ignorance) of the physicians and apothecaries,” the gossipy antiquarian John Aubrey was told by a doctor, “the people would throw stones at 'em as they walked in the streets.” Scepticism ran high: “God heals and the Doctors …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
The decline in the breast cancer incidence is 1.2% and it is not significant.
Published 10 February 2012
'twas ever thus
Published 10 February 2012
The value of historic human remains
Published 10 February 2012
In Praise of British Literature
Published 10 February 2012
Is real shared decision making possible?
Published 10 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (7 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (7 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
Search for evidence goes on (5 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012