This is another “cancer language sucks” post. And yes, it is about the celebrity stories and wacky headlines bombarding the entertainment news sections: Rita Wilson and her 100% healthy and cancer free—which it seems she actually did say; Former President Carter’s cancer free status, though I think that was said about him, not sure what he actually said; and the completely baffling story of Lorna Luft and her seven ribs. I admit, I gave up reading pieces about her, could not figure out the details and her clichéd quotes, her need to adhere to the culturally approved cancer script, just sickened me and I gave up.
I’ve written about my rejection of the terms like survivor and warrior (here and here, that’s two in my mind, too lazy to look for more), and no doubt will again. I’ve especially written about my confusion about remission. I cannot recall exactly what phrases any of my oncologists have ever said to me. While never grim, they were always cautious. I do not remember anyone using NED with me; I picked that up via social media. I’m sure no one ever said “cured” or “cancer free”. The vibe was always: “we don’t see any cancer, and your chances are good, but let’s keep an eye on it all”. I was told from the very first meeting with the oncologist the odds of my kind of cancer (HER2+) and stage coming back. I was always aware it could go other places, and was told how lucky I was the cancer had not reached the chest wall—tho’ it almost had reached it.
But the general population just cannot understand all of that. I’m learning some cancer patients don’t understand it fully either, and nor do they try. I am still in slight shock, all these years later, when I think of that little “live healthy post cancer” workshop I attended—in a room with about 10 other women, none of them understanding what I meant when I announced my stage and type at the meet and greet part. “HER2? What does that mean?” Guess they were all estrogen receptor positive? Good thing a triple negative patient wasn’t there that day.
People like a beginning and an end—a cure, and end to treatment, and the absence of ever needing to think about cancer again. They like slogans and soundbites. And everyone especially likes a happy ending. A story about a former president’s cancer, the idea it might come back, but given his age, something else will cause his death earlier—that is too confusing! Better to simply think he “won”. An aging actress on the road with her play needs to reassure potential ticket buyers all is well; she’s going to be in the show coming to your town next year. Sell the joy! And so what if, 15 years from now, a small news item in the back pages appears announcing her recurrence and quick death—“I thought she beat that”, people will think before quickly forgetting the story and moving on to the latest young pop stars’ exploits.
But here’s the thing.
When celebrities and headlines go on and on about “cured!” and “beat cancer!” it confuses the people we—regular average cancer patients—have to interact with every day. What do I mean I have an oncologist appointment? Didn’t I finish up with cancer years ago? Old old old Jimmy Carter beat cancer, why can’t I? Look how peppy Joan Lunden is, why isn’t my breast cancer over and done with? Do I really need to point out that celebrities stick to a cancer culture approved script? Am I being too hard on actors and TV talks show hosts for needing a script rather than thinking and speaking for themselves? Whoopsie, did I just write that out loud?
Words matter, as so many inspirational posters like to remind us. A little celebratory slip of the tongue: “I’m cancer free” confuses the cultural conversation around cancer. And that is why so many of us in CancerLand got so bent out of shape about these stories. People without up close and personal cancer experience will happily go back to their fairy tale (My Reality and Your Fairy Tale), and assume the celebrity is “all done”, and cancer is curable.
It seems once I got my cancer diagnosis, I learned a second language. NED, estrogen receptors, chemobrain, pinkwashing, argh, do I need to go on? I do find myself translating at times. And it seems that the area of language in which we CancerLand residents must be MOST careful is when discussing the after-treatment (if there is even a post-treatment status, because generally for Stage 4, there is not) time. So when Rita Wilson says something like cancer-free, we find ourselves having to explain so much. And it is tiring.
This brings me to another little tidbit of translation, or more like re-defining words.
Reading FB comments is always a hazard, I know, but of course I did and the typical stuff happened in threads about Wilson’s news. A few advocates attempted to explain and correct the “cancer-free” issue. Naturally, those who believe that any kind of truth-telling automatically equals negativity, began to scream about it, calling the comments “toxic”. I’m not as active or strident as breast cancer advocates; unwilling to “get into it” very much. But I could not help but chime in with my annoyance at this. I mean, come on, why call a different opinion toxic? Isn’t that a bit overdramatic? In my mind’s eye, I saw a person clamping hands over ears to shut out the opinions they disagree with. And yes, I over-dramatized myself, picturing Gollum saying “not listening, not listening!” LOTR nerds will know what scene I’m referencing.
It irritates me that thoughtful dialogue cannot occur without the situation devolving to this. I found myself wanting to engage in a little careless re-defining or mis-translation myself. I get sick of reading about false positives (because I was a false negative). I know what it really means here in CancerLand, town of breast, but I have this fantasy. I want to call all these people who redefine words like toxic, who think cancer is curable by eating right and keeping a kick cancer’s ass attitude, I want to call these people “false positive”. Because to me that is what is going on: thinking something is one thing, and maybe it isn’t. So part of me is like, OK fine, embrace the positive-negative dichotomy and let’s hope you don’t end up bitterly disappointed in your mistaken idea cancer is really, really gone.
But of course, it is not in me to do that. I don’t like the misinterpretation of words and concepts. And I am tired of the strict black and white boxes being forced around the cancer conversation. Spouting facts does not equal being negative—looking at stats and numbers can actually be quite apart from such silly notions as “don’t be a negative nelly, be positive”. That kind of black/white, half-full/half-empty thinking must come to an end. Embrace the complexity of life, people!!!!
But then, who am I kidding? Everyone wants pat slogans that translate to their liking: “cancer can be cured!” Conversation over, and what have we lost in translation?
anotheronewiththecancer 