Race and Class in an Immortal Life

Four of my colleagues at Carlow University recently participated in a panel discussion on the subject of race and class in our common reader book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks: Joel Woller, assistant professor of history, Dr. Linda Schifino, associate professor of communication, Dr. Judith Touré, professor of education, and Jessica Ruffin, Director of the Social Justice Institutes at Carlow University. Each approached the topic of race and class from a perspective informed by their discipline with the result that this was a wide-ranging look at these timely issues.

As a historian, Professor Woller, focused on three things. First, the author’s research and writing process and the excitement and pain of doing historical research. Second, the historical context of the book and, in particular, its settings in both the era of Jim Crow (with whites-only hospitals) and in the post-Jim Crow era—an era in which issues of race and class continue to have economic impact with disproportionate effects on African American families.

A professor of communication, Dr. Linda Schifino focused on issues of culture and how her culture affected Henrietta’s mindset toward her healthcare and this disease, particularly a culturally ingrained distrust of doctors. Linda also raised the notion of Intersectionality: Henrietta was not just black, also a woman, poor, and uneducated. All these identities “walked into the hospital with her,” with the net result that walking into the hospital was like walking into a foreign country. Trust and distrust was a central issue for Henrietta and for women like her.

Dr. Judith Touré approached this issue from a theoretical framework which has been part of her own research on what is called the white racial frame, drawing on critical race theory. One of the most pressing points she raised is the notion that Americans today are not living in a post-racial period; rather, racism (understood as prejudice plus power) is deeply rooted in the United States. One tool for countering racism is the idea of “counter-storytelling” a method that allows for counternarratives, giving voice to those whose voices are otherwise marginalized, such as women like Henrietta. One thing that those of us in higher education can do, suggested Dr. Touré, is to find ways to help students, faculty, staff, and ourselves develop racial literacy.

Finally, Jessica Ruffin, director of the Social Justice Institutes, did an excellent job of pointing out examples from the book showing that racism is not limited to individual actions or attitudes, but is systemic in nature. Differentials access to goods, services, and opportunities of society by race is the norm, and structure, and sometimes even protected by law. She provided ample statistics suggesting that this continues to be an ongoing systemic issue in our society.

During a time of open discussions some suggestions for further action were offered. These included expanding and deepening this conversation at Carlow; educating ourselves and our families; helping to educate our own communities; learning how people of other cultures want to be engaged, as a way of fostering trust; confronting the systems that propagate injustice; speaking up if you encounter something on campus- send an email, talk to someone, confront it. Jessica Ruffin gave a great summary exhortation to both students and Carlow faculty and staff:

“Remember your role in this; this is not someone else’s problem to deal with.”

A few days after the panel, I read the account in the Gospel of John where Jesus encounters the Samaritan woman at the well. In this account in John 4 many have seen an illustration of crossing social boundaries and engaging with “the other” as a person who deserves respect and dignity. What that looks like today in our culture may be very different from the time and culture of Jesus, but in any event it is clear that the writers of the gospels went out of their way to emphasize the inclusive nature of the good news and the love of Jesus as extending to all people regardless of race and class. In fact, the biblical and prophetic tradition suggests a concern and even a preference for those on the margins, whether that be racially, economically, or culturally. At the same time, it needs to be noted that the Bible has been used, at times, to propagate injustice and inequality. One need only look at the history of slavery in the United States for Christians who used scripture with great confidence to support the practice of slavery. On the other hand, it was also Christians who read the same Bible who worked tirelessly to abolish slavery as they sought to embody the teaching and love of Jesus toward their fellow human beings. Such an observation is a reminder that we need to be careful in what we “read into” scripture and make efforts to ensure that what we find in the Bible is not just a reflection of our own prejudices.

Taking a step back, my sense is that these panel members’ engagement with race and class in The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks embodies this same gospel openness to “the other.” The panel approach also demonstrates in action the value of the liberal arts: looking at complex issues from a variety of perspectives using knowledge from across the disciplines; questioning assumptions; and finding ways to imagine a better world and to help bring it about for the good of all. This summary only partially captures the breadth and depth of the discussion and the panelist’s comments. Ultimately what is important that we continue this conversation and each engage with issues of race and class in our own way recognizing that this is not someone else's problem.