More thoughts on Human Nature/ Family of Blood, and on race, sex and medical training

[tree_and_leaf]

I've been seeing a bit of Joan-bashing on various journals and comms, springing from two sources: one, a perception of Joan as a 'slut' (I've lost the link, but the term was definitely used) and, more frequently, that she's an unpleasant snob and racist (because she didn't believe that Martha was training to be a doctor).

The first charge is ridiculous, of course. 'Slut' is an appalling, and pretty much meaningless term, but even if you grant the premise that Joan should be censured for not conforming to the most conservative standards of her time (she does blatantly set her cap at John Smith), there's absolutely no grounds for calling her promiscuous. There's no sign that she's interetested in any of the other masters - she just likes John, and as a widow with some experience of life, she knows how to go about matters. Which is just as well, because although John clearly also likes her, he equally obviously hasn't the faintest idea how to go about it, is apparently completley sexually inexperienced, and a bit scared by the whole thing.

If the first charge rested on insisting on judging Joan by a perception of what was appropriate for a woman of her age (well, either that or it was a Martha/Doctor shipper looking for mud to fling), the second seems to me to rest on the opposite. Yes, Joan, for a variety of reasons, isn't motivated to believe Martha - for one thing, she's a tremendous threat, not as a sexual rival in the crude sense, but because she's suggesting that John Smith is just a phantasm, and she does voice her disbelief in terms of sex, race and class - but I'm not sure her scepticism about Martha's medical training is that unreasonable.

I know that the first medical school for women in Britain was founded in 1874, and it obviously wasn't impossible for women to become doctors by 1913, though that doesn't mean that they would have had an easy ride. The race and class issues are a big complicating factor, though. I can't thus far find any informtion on when the first black person, of either sex, registered as a doctor; the London Medical School page on Wikipedia informs me that the first Indian woman qualified in 1894, and that increasing numbers of female students from the subcontinent followed. However, they seem to have been (presumaby high-status) Indian nationals, who returned to India to practice. It seems, therefore, that the first 'woman of colour' succeeded in becoming a doctor nine years before the events of Human Nature - that's not long for a big social change to become widely accepted, especially as the Indian women doctors went home to practice. Martha's not in that position - she's obviously English.

However, I think, as Joan's speech suggested ("and certainly not a skivvy", or words to that effect), it's actually class that's the kicker. Medical training costs money; it also requires a decent education before you start. The likelihood of someone who spends long days scrubbing floors and doing physically hard cleaning jobs having the opportunity to save enough money to go to university/ college, and the resources and energy to learn what she would need to know, seems to me to be vanishingly small (Maisie Dobbs, I'm looking at you). And the likelihood that anyone would give a woman in that position a temporary job as a housemaid seems even smaller (yes, Maisie, that applies to you too). Why would anyone want to employ an obviously strong-minded and pushy young women when there were many more easily exploitable people out there? I suspect she might have believed Martha if she'd said she was a nurse: there were more ways to train as a nurse if you didn't have much money to start with, though it did mean doing a lot of cleanery jobs as well as looking after patients.


So - yes, Joan's very rude, mostly because she's understandably frightened. on a lot of different levels. But given that she's still thinking in the terms of her ages, I don't think we can convict her of overt racism. She has a lot of examined assumptions - but so do we all; they're just different assumptions. It certainly doesn't mean that she would have been unfit as a companion - 'Companion has ideas shaken up' is quite a common motif in Who. The Doctor's offer does illustrate once again for those who didn't realise it that he's really, really bad at relating to humans (although since it's not unrelated to the 'but I still want to be best friends' school of dumping, I suppose we can't entirely blame his Gallifreyan hearts for that piece of insensitivity).

Anyway: thoughts, people?

Comments

We can always blame Maisie Dobbs

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

it's actually class that's the kicker
I haven't looked for Joan bashing, partly because it would probably drive me up the wall. 25 years later than this, my higher-than-skivvy!Martha's social class great-uncle turned down a scholarship place at grammar school because his wages were needed by his widowed mother.

Or take another servant of the same age, one Mervyn Bunter, later seen as an intelligent man with considerable scientific knowledge. Could he, a young footman in 1911 aged c. 24, have had any prospect whatsoever of studying medicine? Not bloody likely, as Eliza puts it. Even if he had managed a year or two at grammar school, how on earth would the family have financed years of studying medicine? It’s not just the university costs, it’s the 14 – 19 education when a working class child would be earning her keep before she even gets there.

Joan is mistaken about Martha’s individual circumstances, but do the posters say to themselves “I mustn’t make judgements; she could be a time-traveller” before making likely assumptions about people in times of stress.

Re: We can always blame Maisie Dobbs

[parrot-knight.livejournal.com]

Just to support your point: forty years after the story is set, into the age of the welfare state, my father had to leave grammar school because my grandfather, who looked after horses in a dairy, had fractured his skull in an accident at work, and the household needed more wages than my grandmother, a housekeeper, could bring in.

Re: We can always blame Maisie Dobbs

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

Come to that, there are still children acting as carers who find their career options reduced because the family is dependent upon their help to function.

Re: We can always blame Maisie Dobbs

[tree_and_leaf]

Yes: my great-great-aunt was always very proud of the fact that her brains allowed her to pass the leaving exam a year early, and go and work in the mill - because she was the eldest child, her mother was dead, and they needed the money.

Bunter's a good comparison, and illustrates the problem nicely.

but do the posters say to themselves “I mustn’t make judgements; she could be a time-traveller” before making likely assumptions about people in times of stress.

That could lead to all sorts of interesting consequences (particularly 'interesting' in the apocryphal Chinese sense...)

[parrot-knight.livejournal.com]

The point that I was trying to make in my post was that there is a sort of utilitarian assumption in the British class structure. Martha's claims to medical training seem not just unlikely in Joan's eyes but presumptuous. She's not reacting against her for reasons based on race alone (though I was looking last night at King Albert's Book, the volume published by a consortium of newspapers for Christmas 1914 to remind those doubting the wisdom of the war of the plight of Belgium, and among the special compositions by Elgar and Debussy, the poems by the likes of Edith Wharton, and the essays and expressions of goodwill from politicians and men and women of letters, is an essay by a leading medical figure on the desirability, but impracticality, of the scientific extermination of 100 million Germans on eugenic grounds) but, as you say, because of her rank. Martha's demonstration of her ability is a threat to the social order established in the school. Joan's profession could be presented in 1913 as a modernisation of a traditional role; Martha challenges assumptions about British society by her presence.

There's a tradition in Doctor Who of exaggerating the conflict between the 'present day' and the recent past: I think of Sarah's statement that she's a journalist in Pyramids of Mars, and Laurence Scarman's shocked reaction; although by 1910 there had already been women national newspaper editors (though one, Rachel Beer, got the job by buying both her papers first, and the other, Mary Howarth, was editing a paper exclusively for women) the way the scene is played suggests that Sarah's career is dangerously modern - though it probably is for the sheltered Laurence.

[tree_and_leaf]

Also a good point, though I get the impression that Joan, who has her doubts about the army, might actually be the person in the school most likely to sympathize with a disruption of the social order. Up to a strictly limited point, and one that probably doesn't include the loss of servants!

[parrot-knight.livejournal.com]

I hadn't picked up on that, but of course she's clearly disturbed by Smith's dispatch of Tim to be beaten, among other examples.

[themolesmother.livejournal.com]

I haven't seen this double episode yet but I'm dying to as it sounds like an absolute all round winner.

As for the scepticism about Martha - it's completely in period. Casual racism was the order of the day as late as the 60s (I was the proud possessor of a copy of the dreaded "Little Black Sambo" and nobody thought it would scar me for life). And, as nineveh_uk remarks, someone working as a skivvy would not be likely to have access to the necessary funds to put themselves through higher education. The vast majority of the population left school at 14 and went straight to work.

It's frustrating, isn't it, how quickly we forget that the past is, indeed, a different country and they did things very differently there.

MM

[tree_and_leaf]

It's a excellent episode, you've a treat in store.

It sometimes seems that people either think the past was exactly like today, only with diferent props, or else totally alien and unknowable. My money's on it being somweher in between.

[emily-shore.livejournal.com]

I suspect she might have believed Martha if she'd said she was a nurse...

There were certainly black (or mixed-race) nurses in Britain long before the twentieth century:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Seacole

[parrot-knight.livejournal.com]

Mary Seacole was an entrepeneur, though, operating outside the formal nursing service, and earning her keep as a hotelier; I think Florence Nightingale and the establishment regarded her as a sort of profiteering mountebank.

[tree_and_leaf]

I knew about Mary Seacole, and also that she didn't get on with F.N.; of course, as far as I understand it, there were two routes into nursing, one for 'gentlewomen' and one for everyone else (mind you, I'm now relying on memories of Monica Dickens...)

[oursin.livejournal.com]

This is one of those 'all more complicated' questions - that people assume something couldn't be so because that was Past Times, except that when you go and look more closely at actual surviving sources the picture is often far more surprising. I wouldn't rule out the possibility of black/mixed race women studying medicine, but can't think of any offhand - it's surprisingly difficult to get very definite answers even for Indian women of who was the first and where she trained.

It was still quite difficult for women to get medical education pre-1914 - the number of medical schools which would accept them (http://www.lesleyahall.net/meded.htm) temporarily expanded during the war and then shut down during the 1920s. But not impossible. There numbers would probably still have been in the 100s or v low 1000s.

But on the possibility of black women - best source is prob still Peter Fryer's Staying Power: The History of Black People in Britain: Black People in Britain Since 1504, which we don't seem to have in the library here, or I'd check it.

[tree_and_leaf]

Thanks for the link; more data than I was able to find earlier, but confirms what I thought. I think you're right about not ruling out the possibility of black/ mixed race women students, but I am surprised by how difficult it is to find this out (unsurprisingly perhaps, it's very easy to find out equivalent data for the States; I note with amusement that the first black male doctor in the US appears to have been born in Glasgow). I'll try the book you recommended when I get chance.

[legionseagle.livejournal.com]

I'd go with the argument based on class first and foremost; I had class reasons ("whoever heard of a lawyer with a Northern accent?") cited to me as a reason for not applying for a particular profession in the 1970s - those dear dead days of full grants - and I was at a grammar school. Certainly the notion that Martha could get together the resources to fund medical school from any legitimate source of funding would have seemed preposterous on the face of it. I suspect if it had gone out in the Torchwood slot rather than the Doctor Who slot the sexual subtext "If you are a medical student what are you paying for your education with?" would have been clearer (though "John Smith"s" comment "what exactly do you do for him?" came pretty close to underlining the point.

[tree_and_leaf]

Joan seemed at one point to be wondering if Martha was the Doctor's mistress, though I can't point to a line that gave me the idea.

I agree with you about the class/ money aspect. Incidentally, I'm rather shocked by your experience. Perhaps it's being brought up in Scotland, where lawyers always did sound identifiably Scots (if not quite as much so as the abominably reactionary Judge Braxfield, who handed down savage punishments accompanied by insulting comments in broad Scots).

[legionseagle.livejournal.com]

I definitely remember saying to Helena Kennedy (who was giving a talk) how inspiring it was to hear a QC who was not only a woman but had a regional accent.

Oh, well, yes - it was rather appalling, but it was a long time ago and after all, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger (apart, of course, from nerve gas and progressive degenerative diseases).

[parrot-knight.livejournal.com]

Braxfield is one of my favourite historical grotesques, though he wouldn't have been if I'd had to face him in court. My favourite (quoted from the Oxford DNB article):

In March 1794 Joseph Gerrald, on trial for sedition, chose to make his own summing-up speech, in which he recalled that Jesus Christ had been a reformer: ‘Muckle he made o'that; he was hanget’, Braxfield muttered from the bench.

I think that Smith feared that Martha was the Doctor's lover; he didn't want to become someone who wasn't in love with Joan.

[snorkackcatcher]

Yes -- I tend to take the rather heretical view that a sensible default assumption is not invalidated by a minority of counterexamples, especially a tiny minority. The chances of someone black, female, and working-class having studied medicine in 1913 were very slim indeed. More the latter two factors than the first, in fact -- I'd say nonwhites of any kind were rare in 1913 Britain (as a HP aside, the 'Famous Wizard Card' picture of a black Celestina Warbeck with a birthdate of 1915 definitely made me blink), and although there would have been prejudice, the few present wouldn't face the kind of institutionalised, baked-in racism that developed from the 1950s (I believe there was a black mayor of Battersea in 1913, for example).

In fact, I thought they handled the whole racial topic quite sensibly in those episodes -- it was brought up enough to acknowledge it without distracting from the rest of the plot. Joan's attitudes were liberal for the time and personal situation without becoming unrealistically modern, and that's the right balance to strike, I think. And on that note, has 'John Smith' come in for any bashing on the same score? You know, like when Martha tries to jog his memory by showing him his sketchbook, and he says something along the lines of 'ah right, cultural differences -- Miss Jones, this is what we call a STORY'? That made me blink a bit too, but it certainly fit in the same way.

[tree_and_leaf]

Agreed - I thought it was well done.

I did see one person objecting to John Smith's 'cultural difference' comment; but you're right, it's far more offensive than Joan's comment. She suggested that Martha had unsurmountable barriers in front of her; he suggested she was an idiot and a savage. Possibly JS has got a bye on the grounds that it sounds a bit like the stupid excuses the Doctor comes up with of the top of his head, though...

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

a sensible default assumption is not invalidated by a minority of counterexamples

I have been trying and failing to come up with a comparable situation, and the best I can do is the position of ‘ordinary’ pupils in relating to the Taylorite Brethren girls at school. Joan’s assumption that Martha will not study medicine is along the same lines as never asking a Brethren classmate what she was going to study at university. One does not expect what never happens, even though there is the possibility that it might. A housemaid is a housemaid, and C_ C_ was going to be married with several babies by the time she was 22. We didn't need to ever actually discuss it to know that there was no other option for her than the people-carrier and the pram.

[helflaed.livejournal.com]

A later period maybe, but when my (working class, unskilled Lancashire mill worker's daughter) Granny went to teacher training college in North Wales in the 30's, none of the English girls there would have anything to do with her, because of her class. All her friends were Welsh- they were far more open minded.

As for the racism- you only have to look at some of the textbooks of the period to see the manner in which black people- especially africans were viewed as lesser beings- especially intellectually. My father has a set of encyclopedias from that period which contain an entry explaining why black people are intellectually inferior to whites (pretty much because they have just come out of the bush, aren't civilised etc)

I honestly thought that Joan's response was only to be expected from a woman of that period. Even from a lady as nice as Joan. Not only that, but the very fact that she is obviously a well educated lady would make her more racist, not less, given the scientific beliefs of the time.

I thought that it was about time that Dr Who addressed the subject of racism, and that it did so in a historically accurate and thoughtful way. Oh and I loved the look on Joan's face when Martha reeled off the names of the bones of the hand!

BTW, no I don't think that Joan's behaviour was immoral, even by the standards of the time.

[tree_and_leaf]

Even from a lady as nice as Joan. Not only that, but the very fact that she is obviously a well educated lady would make her more racist, not less, given the scientific beliefs of the time.


That's a very good point.

I don't think that Joan's behaviour was immoral, even by the standards of the time.

Oh, neither did I. I thought they made a rather sweet couple.

[cuiaalfheim.livejournal.com]

A year ago, I took a class in the History of Western Medicine. Good survey of the philosophical and technical aspects on early development of medicine, and throughout the class black (or women) doctors were always shown as a rarity until quite recently. There would be people who trained at schools only to return to a foreign country, but again, these are a rarity. And I think I need not remind everyone of the influence of the civil rights movement, which is still going on in the States. I'm less familiar with the business here in the U.K., but I think what I'm trying to say is that even though Joan and Martha are both human, they are meeting another woman whose opinions are practically alien to them. That could confound anyone.

I do not think that Joan is even aware of her racism (and a degree of sexism), but what I found so pleasing about her is that she wasn't there to argue the point. Sure, the Family of Blood is knocking down the door and the boys might die, but she still manages to show a measure of grace towards her own ignorance. She's not standing there telling Martha that she's a liar, only that she has trouble believing her since her own experiences are so far removed. And Martha, you classy dame, doesn't rant and rave about Joan's perspectives, she just does the bone demonstration. Very reasonable of her. If nothing else, she shook up Joan's view of women and blacks in medicine (not that Joan wasn't shook up enough in this episode...I mean, SHEESH!).

As for the subject of Joan's promiscuity, I ask, "WHAT promiscuity?" I thought she was a decent, caring and extremely feminine woman, who clearly has excellent taste in John Smith/The Doctor. She's not a selfish woman, either, as proved by letting John make his decision for himself. She doesn't bully, and certainly doesn't seduce, but she gives the signals and proper encouragement necessary for John to move forward with her. Nothing wrong with that; we all need a little help! If Joan has a serious flaw, it is only her exceptional strength. Don't think many of us would let the Doctor/John Smith walk away so easily. :)

[tree_and_leaf]

I really shook my head at the 'slut' comment, which was insane even coming from an embittered Martha fan (I suppose this means that the 'bat-chippers' finally have a Martha-centric counterpart, but I don't see this as progress).

Don't think many of us would let the Doctor/John Smith walk away so easily. :)

Well, yes - except in that situation, it was perfectly obvious that one has to find the strength to do so, or face complete moral annihilation. But the only comfort going - that if you didn't, you'd still never be truly happy again, because of what it had cost - is pretty cold. Poor Joan. But she did her duty, and went on doing it.

[snorkackcatcher]

I really shook my head at the 'slut' comment, which was insane even coming from an embittered Martha fan

Likewise -- I mean, the Slut!Ginny 'analysis' was ridiculous enough, but Joan isn't even dating anyone ... (Not to mention that Martha got the guy in the end, as least sort of. I quite like the development of her 'crush' storyline, although with the Doctor doing his 'do you trust me?' bit every week you have to feel that it's being set up for a crash where it all goes horribly wrong at some point.)

[tree_and_leaf]

I wonder if the crash isn't going to come in the Saxon storyline and be connected to the cousin the Doctor shot at Canary Wharf (admittedly because she had been turned into a cyberman, but still...)

[legionseagle.livejournal.com]

I wandered off and had a look at some of the comms in question, and actually got boggled off my mounts by some sanctimonious poster talking about the Eval of Austria "starting the first World War just because a single arch-duke was shot". It left me wondering; is there a defined minimum number of arch-dukes whose assassinations justify a global conflict? It also occurred to me, depressingly, that the poster clearly had no idea whatsoever who Franz Ferdinand was, or, indeed, that Austria was something rather more like the US in size and influence at the time, rather than "quaint little landlocked country in Central Europe; principal exports yodels and Von Trapps."

[tree_and_leaf]

Don't get me started. Though I quite like the idea of measuring the justness of a war in terms of the number of dead archbishops it equates to ... Might be tricky to calibrate, though.

[tree_and_leaf]

I suppose we should be greatful that they knew it wasn't Alex Kapranos who was shot....