Category Archives: Personal

another day another poem by someone else

A Pot of Tea

by Richard Kenney

Loose leaves in a metal ball
Or men in a shark cage steeping,
Ideas stain the limpid mind
Even while it’s sleeping:

Ginseng or the scent of lymph
Or consequences queasing
Into wide awareness, whence,
Like an engine seizing

Society remits a shudder
Showing it has feeling,
And the divers all have shaving cuts
And the future’s in Darjeeling—

Blind, the brain stem bumps the bars
Of the shark cage, meanwhile, feeding,
And the tea ball’s cracked, its leaves cast
To catastrophic reading:

Ideas are too dangerous.
My love adjusts an earring.
I take her in my arms again
And think of Hermann Göring,

And all liquidities in which
A stain attracts an eating,
And of my country’s changing heart,
And hell, where the blood is sleeting.

A Princess and Her Pee

Princess dressed to attend the ball.
Trouble is brewing, pain is steeping.
She is troubled inside her mind—
Will she survive, or like her colleague, end up sleeping?

Wracking cough of mucus and lymph,
All around people are, at the sound, queasing.
From here they wonder whence
she commences her seizing.

Princess expectorates with a shudder
and onlookers get a sneaking feeling
that in her spare time she cuts.
Did she pick up consumption in Darjeeling?

After the ball she hits the bars,
picks up a few guys and proceeds in feeding
every stereotype of her caste.
And the reader persists her reading.

The behavior of the princess is dangerous.
Don’t share her necklaces or earrings.
She goes to the free clinic to get tested again—
her monthly voluntary goring.

The test is necessary. By which
disease is dying. Which is eating
her body, her mind, her heart?
Her hopes are dashed by diseased sleeting.

today, today, dah dah dah dah dah dah

Line Poem
by Caroline Knox

Long jetty, long shell-racked jetty, cracked warped planks.

Beautiful fish, beautiful sea-bass poached with an August tomato,
on an ironstone plate.

A snake’s slough, a snake’s spinal cord, a dry-rot stump.

A twill tape measure, an audiotape cassette unspooled and puckered,
shining.

Agate prayer beads, kazoos, whistles, rattles.

A bike chain and a bungee cord. A möbius strip and a broccoli elastic.

Split vanilla pod inset with paltry-looking flat oily brown seeds.

Egg-and-dart molding of vitreous fake sandstone. Contrails,
mares’ tails, mackerel sky.

List Poem

Old comic book, a Wonder Woman comic book, soiled pages.

Pink worm, a slippery earthworm cracked and dry, in a plastic sandwich bag.

A raccoon skin cap, a rabbit’s foot key chain, a piece of driftwood.

A crinkled dress pattern, several eight tracks labels faded, dusty.

Knotted prayer rope, song flute, marbles, music box.

An airplane gear and a silky cord. An infinity symbol and two pieces of velcro.

Soybean shell burst with beans missing and husk brown and dry.

Papier-mache volcano with soda-vinegar explosions. Sun dogs,
neighbor’s dogs, Red Dog Saloon.

poem of the day

Just
by Alan Shapiro

after the downpour, in the early evening,
late sunlight glinting off the raindrops sliding
down the broad backs of the redbud leaves
beside the porch, beyond the railing, each leaf
bending and springing back and bending again
beneath the dripping,
between existences,
ecstatic, the souls grow mischievous, they break ranks,
swerve from the rigid V’s of their migration,
their iron destinies, down to the leaves
they flutter in among, rising and settling,
bodiless, but pretending to have bodies,

their weightlessness more weightless for the ruse,
their freedom freer, their as-ifs nearly not,
until the night falls like an order and
they rise on one vast wing that darkens down
the endless flyways into other bodies.

Nothing will make you less afraid.

Just

before the snow, in the late morning
slow moons dangling above the horizon dipping
behind the red finishes of the antique barns
beside the woods, beyond the fields, each tree
bending and blowing forward and bending again
beneath the dipping,

I am not really fond of the original poem or mine, so I’ll just stop here. I usually like Shapiro’s work, too. I think if I want to write like him, I need to outline the parts of speech and analyze how they work together and go from there.

PCM Lent

This was a year of no bad passion plays; I couldn’t have stomached one.

I grip the cross at the base
Of the soft, yarn prayer rope
And pray a quick our father
Then move my fingers clumsily
To the first black knot
And breathe in, kyrie eleison imas,
And breathe out, christe eleison imas.
On the second black knot
I breathe in, Jesus Christ, Son of God
And breathe out, have mercy on me a sinner.
One phrase for each of ten knots
Alternating the corporate and the personal,
The Greek and the English, until
I feel the hard cold blue of the first plastic bead.
Another our father but more attentive this time.
I repeat this process nine more times
And I am back at the base of the cross
for the Apostle’s Creed.
By the third time around the knots and beads,
I put the rope down and crack the soft
Black, leather cover of the bible.

I pause, reflect, and pray:
Our Mother-Father-God, you are
In heaven. Your name is holy.
Your kingdom come, your will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day your daily bread.
Forgive us, as we forgive others. Do not lead us into
Temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. Yours is
The kingdom,
The power,
The glory,
Forever and ever, even unto the ages of ages.
Amen.

Since I was a sophomore in high school, I have frequently fancied myself as a nun, living in poverty, praying, working, and living alongside other people who are as consumed with spirituality as I am. I think about living a life of celibacy, cloistered away from the world. My family members used to say when they were asked what I was going to do with my life: other people dream about being movie stars, Corby dreams about being a nun. For now, it is a fantasy I will not realize. And I am settled with it, but I entertain these thoughts sometimes during the high holy days of the liturgical calendar, and frequently as I pray the prayer rope in my own small library.

I was thinking about becoming a nun today. It’s Lent, the highest holy season. Thanks to the Los Angeles Times and my insatiable desire to be correct in every argument I ever have with my partner, I know that the last time Lent came this early in the secular calendar was in 1913. I barely have the Christmas decorations down from celebrating Jesus’ birth, and it’s already time to start mourning his death! To mark this newsworthy occasion, I didn’t “give anything up for Lent” as goes the tradition. I am not consciously trying to look inwardly, or biblically, for some life changing insight. I am not disciplining my body in order to gain some great theological understanding. And I am not changing my habits in order to better glorify God for the next forty days, as every good Methodist should.

It feels strange, though, not wholeheartedly observing Lent, but I am one of those people who throws myself into things, allowing my whole body to be consumed by it, particularly if it is a spiritual discipline. For me, fasting by giving up coffee or chocolate, or something like that is like giving up something that I consider a privilege in the first place. Lent is traditionally about suffering, more specifically, Lent is reminding yourself daily of the suffering endured by Christ, and for me giving up chocolate, as many of my friends do, or giving up coffee, like I have done in the past, just reminds me that I am privileged enough to have it to begin with.

Recently I was processing the enduring effects of a time in my life that marks the ruination of my tolerance of my own lukewarm faith. I had an experience during seminary that changed me and affected my life in many ways. I am going to retell my experience here, but I want you to know that I am not telling it because I think I am enlightened or have reached the epitome of spiritual greatness, but I am telling it because as I look back, it seems to be a marker in the wrecking of my superficial faith; it also lingers in the back of my mind every day as I seek to live a somewhat normal life in a secular graduate program studying literature.

When I was in my second year of seminary, we were encouraged by our ethics professor to make a radical commitment for the observation of Lent. Mind you, I went to a Church of God seminary, so they take this time period in the liturgical calendar pretty seriously. In fact, they are one of a handful of denominations that practices the ritual of foot washing on Maundy Thursday. I combined their intensity of faith with my beliefs and decided to only drink liquids. I gave up solid food, eating only soup for lunch and dinner on Sundays. I told myself that I wasn’t going to tell anyone about my plans for two reasons: I didn’t want to answer all the questions, and I didn’t want to have a spiritual pissing contest with my peers. I wasn’t yearning to find out which one of us was more spiritually endowed. You see, it frequently happens that when you put several spiritual people in a group and challenge them to make commitments, they end up trying to out commit each other. I wasn’t up for the challenge; I just wanted to deepen my faith.

On Fat Tuesday, I ate as much as I could possibly stomach, which wasn’t much because I was nervous about this whole endeavor. I had read quite a bit about fasting and I learned that after a week without food, your body sort of shuts down and reintroducing food is a challenge. So I stuffed myself with all my favorite foods, and for once I understood why Mardi Gras was such a big deal. I was so full, I felt like I would never want to eat again anyway. On the next day, Ash Wednesday, we had a special chapel service in order to begin the forty-give or take a few-days of contemplation. We were marked with the ashes in the shape of a cross, and sent on our way to “seek Christ in a radical way” …for forty-days. I was ready to begin this discipline. I was eager to find out why so many Christians before me had found such healing and mystical fascination in the discipline of fasting. In my mind I supposed a quick, radical difference. I thought I was on the fast track to becoming like Mother Teresa, Thomas Merton, the desert fathers and mothers, or maybe even Saint John of the Cross.

The first days went of without a hitch.Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday. I was hungry. In fact, by Sunday I was ravenous, so I wolfed down the soup I had made from stratch. I was also disappointed because no great transformation had taken place in my faith. Apparently, there is no fast track when it comes to spiritual growth. My spiritual transformation would be slow, tedious, and incomplete, always changing and growing from this experience, although I didn’t know it then. I feel as if I seek every day in some way to get back to that place where I was ten years ago.

The next week was horrible. Each day it felt as though my stomach was digesting a little bit more of itself, as it cramped and groaned and refluxed. By the next Sunday, though I was hungry, every little bit of soup that I ate left my body in a hurry, so I just drank more water and more fruit juice. By this time, I had learned that once you wean your body from food, only clear juices are digestible with ease and that tomato juice was not my friend, so I looked forward to forty days of apple juice, white grape juice, and cranberry juice, which I quickly found to be too acidic for my empty gut. Forty days of water, some soup, and white grape juice. After two weeks I had discovered that not only was I not hungry anymore, but I was also quite repulsed by food. The smell, the taste, the sight of food became overbearing for me. The Sunday soups were eaten with much force, and over a period of about an hour for each bowl.

One of the most challenging aspects of the fast was that during the forty days, I was a social outcast: forty days of self-imposed ostracism. One of the only things the Church of God has on the Methodists is a love of food. Every social event at seminary was a feast of some kind: the Indian missionary feast, the after chapel pizza feasts, the daily excursions to the coffee shop on the corner, the Friday brown bags. Because I couldn’t eat, I had to choose: Don’t go or be a spectacle. I was in a place spiritually that I didn’t really want to talk about not eating, because I felt as if I was doing something intensely private and personal and I didn’t want them to glorify that decision. And as I said before, sometimes seminary is like a little sacred cult with each student trying to outdo the other, so I went to events, but I simply said that I wasn’t hungry. That worked for the first couple of weeks, but then they got suspicious. The dark circles that were forming under my eyes, the odd dryness of my skin, and my lack of energy gave me away. They jumped to the logical conclusions: I was either sick or anorexic, so I admitted what I was doing. I explained my attempt to follow the examples set down by years of Christian ancestors.

Their discovery brought on the barrage of questions as I was suspecting, and I didn’t want to answer them: Yes, I felt like I was supposed to do this. No, I’m not hungry, in fact, that greasy hamburger smell on your breath kind of repulses me. Yes, I am using some online sources from a monastery to guide me. No, I didn’t talk to my doctor; I don’t consult my doctor about spiritual matters. No, I haven’t told my professors. Yes, I am exhausted and I am not really sure why I feel compelled to continue this madness. No, I don’t want to testify about it in chapel.

I wanted to ask them to leave me alone, but I was also mildly attracted to the feelings I got when they were curious. I wanted them to look at me. I wanted to challenge any one of them to the “I am more spiritual than you are” game. I wanted them to ask me how it felt to be so spiritual, but then I remembered that one of the points of fasting is humility. When you have no food, you are humbled in a way like no other, and I was immediately, to use the words of my favorite gospel writer, Mark, I was immediately conflicted about my lust for the spiritual accolades of my peers and the spiritual correction of my attitude about this discipline. Humility: humble pie tastes even worse when you’ve nothing else to eat for a while. I began to learn how starving people feel, and I sort of felt like Oliver Twist: I was on the outside of this huge feast looking in, and my nose was leaving smudges on the window. I could watch everyone else having fun, eating, and socializing, but I couldn’t join. If you ever wonder about the role of food in socialization in our culture, try not eating for a week. If you want to move yourself further outside, replace your food with reading Biblical texts.

By the time the end of Lent came around, I was in an incredibly tender place, susceptible to the slightest force of spiritual movement. Not eating coupled with intensely reading spiritual texts moves your mind in ways that are hard to describe. There was this feeling of being at one with something, sort of like the great cloud of witnesses that is talked about in Hebrews: “Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles, and let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us. Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. Consider him who endured such opposition from sinful men, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart.” I could literally sense this cloud of witnesses and I did not grow weary or lose heart. I am sure this example would make my seminary professors cringe, but it was like being high and dancing to a really long Grateful Dead song. I was with friends that I could see, and friends I couldn’t, only I can remember everything that happened in an acute way. It seemed as if everything moved slowly and had a soft, rhythmic cadence to it. I could literally feel the spirit of the earth, the spirit of the cloud of witnesses.

By Maundy Thursday, I was ready for Holy Week. I was ready to experience the passion of Christ with this raw spiritual nerve. I had never been part of the ritual of feet washing before, so I was shocked to see the usually barren room packed from end to end, with people sitting on the floor in the aisles. My naiveté coupled with my weird spiritual state made the experience more than I could bear. Now, I cry at movies and books, as long as I am in my own home; however, I despise crying in public, but when my friend Kimberly, who sat next to me, got up out of her chair, bent down and started washing my feet, I teared up and sobbed uncontrollably, nose running, gasping for breath, sobbing. Picture me as Tammy Faye Bakker, only for real. Churches keep boxes of Kleenex under the altar rails for times such as these, but I don’t think a Kleenex could have helped what was happening in me. In that moment, I wasn’t focused on the events at hand, my mind was looking forward to the next days and anticipating what was to come: the eventual death of Jesus on the cross. My knowledge of what was to come, the emotion of one of my best friend friends washing my smelly feet, and the physical emptiness of my body was too much to bear. This was a year of no bad passion plays; I couldn’t have stomached one.

Maundy Thursday progressed into Good Friday. I was in a grief-induced daze as during the service, the sanctuary was stripped of its adornments, symbolizing Jesus being stripped before being crucified. The room was left barren with only the naked cross hanging in the front of the church. Our red-carpeted sanctuary was especially eerie with no decoration, no gold adornment, no eternal flame, and no light except the spotlight on the hard, wooden cross. I was mesmerized by that cross, and then the gong sounded and the spotlight went out. Jesus was dead.

Friday turned into Saturday. Because I hadn’t eaten for forty days, I was already slightly delusional, I knew I would get to eat on Sunday, and I realized for the first time, that for one day the followers of Christ were without their best friend, the man they considered their teacher and confidante. As far as they were concerned he was dead. The emotional drudgery of that one day is so pressing that I wasn’t sure if I would come out on the other side. I haven’t experienced a feeling like that Saturday before or since. There was a great weight on my chest, which I can say was not my stomach caved against my ribs; the pressure was external. It seemed as if my heart would stop beating, my lungs would stop inflating. My body was wracked with hurt, guilt, sadness, and pain. I was heavy in the world. I spent the day inside, in my room, writing and drawing, trying to capture the gravity of it all. I tried in vain to record that feeling. I tried to keep myself from being jealous of the Christians who lives two-thousand years ago, because at least they had the consolation of preparing his body for burial. Some would say, I spent that Holy Saturday in a religious fervor. Holy Saturday was the last day of my status as a self-inflicted social outcast. It was the final step in my journey of this spiritual discipline. On Easter Sunday, I would begin to return my body to its happy physical state of nourishment.

I didn’t sleep much that Saturday night before. I am sure I looked like hell. I know I felt like I had just been there. I stepped up into the Lectern to read the Scripture from John:

Then the disciples went back to their homes, but Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus’ body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot. They asked her, “Woman, why are you crying?”
“They have taken my Lord away,” she said, “and I don’t know where they have put him.” At this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus. “Woman,” he said, “why are you crying? Who is it you are looking for?” Thinking he was the gardener, she said, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him.” Jesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, “Rabboni!” (which means Teacher). Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’ ” Mary Magdalene went to the disciples with the news: “I have seen the Lord!” And she told them that he had said these things to her.

While I read this Scripture, my whole world opened and I knew. I knew the holy mystery. I could feel it. I knew that my fasting was not in vain, because I had experienced the trial, death, and resurrection of my Christ.

It wasn’t until several years later that I realized how this experiment had impacted me, had changed my life, had wrecked me spiritually. I had sensed what it must be like to live in a convent, in community, with other people who are entrenched in the daily exercise of spiritual discipline. I didn’t know then that the forty days I spent fasting would shape who I would become ten years later as a graduate student at Ball State who still wrestles with spirituality on a daily basis. I reflect on the way my life could have been had I chosen that cloistered life, had I chosen to follow a celibate path, had I chosen a vow of poverty, work, and prayer. I struggle to apply what I know about myself through my spiritual life to what I read in every text, every situation, and every experience I have. I sometimes fail to see how what I am doing will effect the greater good, but I pause, I reflect, and I pray. And if you asked me, on most days, I am settled with my decisions.

PCA, fat studies

Real Fat: The Disease Rhetoric of TLC’s Fat “Reality” Show

Please note that the medical language, disease language, and language of normalcy that is used throughout the paper is not mine, but the predominant language used by the medical community and the media to describe the relationship between fatness and thinness.

American culture views obesity as a curable disease, which is pathologized in both the physiological and psychological branches of medicine. Frequently, the medical community uses a rhetoric of disease to give credence to their stance that fatness equals ill health. The fear instilled by the psychological and medical communities has, in its most recent form, found its way into every American home through the programs shown on the Discovery network’s television channels, specifically on TLC: The Learning Channel. Because many Americans believe Discovery channels have expert authority and present information using an unbiased stance, it is especially troubling when they present information that is untrue and exploitive of large groups of people, as is the case with their many medical programs that deal with subject of obesity or fat.
Although the many Discovery networks have several different programs that highlight the “problem” of obesity, for me, the two most denigrating and propagandistic programs are Big Medicine and Inside Brookhaven Obesity Clinic. TLC has recently taken down the information for Inside Brookhaven, but I was able to find a description provided by TLC to another website called Associated Content. We learn: “This clinic is not for the average morbidly obese American but for what the television has dubbed the “super-sized obese.” The average weight, for those in this program, ranges from 400 to more than 800 pounds. Addicted to food, their struggle is an uphill battle. It is not the same as being addicted to drugs, alcohol, or cigarettes where some can stop entirely. With a food addiction you cannot stay away from eating.” In this paper, I will focus entirely on Inside Brookhaven Obesity Clinic, but the ideas and concepts can be used to analyze Big Medicine, as well as a variety of other shows on the Discovery channels in which fat people are exploited. By exploiting fat people through filmic manipulation and through the continual use of disease rhetoric, TLC’s Inside Brookhaven Obesity Clinic creates the fat equivalent of the horror film monster by fetishizing the body and instilling the fear that one day you, too, could be a fat kid. And that’s very bad. In fact, that may be the worst thing that could happen to you.
I started watching Inside Brookehaven because I read about the founder, Robert Kolman in an article in The New York Times, and I wanted to see if the program was, indeed, a venue that explored the real lives of fat people as the interview suggested. Kolman was motivated to found Brookhaven because he had a friend who died of “fat related complications,” and he wanted to prevent other “senseless deaths” of fat people. In the article, Dr. Butch Rosser said: ”Size discrimination is the last bastion of bigotry in this country, and the medical profession isn’t any more sensitive than anyone else. The people whose job it is to care for people, a lot of them have the attitude, ‘You deserve it.’ Right now, people with substance abuse issues get more respect and better health care treatment. Morbidly obese people get substandard medicine.” While Rosser borders on intelligently defining the nearsightedness of the medical community, he still compares fat people with addicts and uses the terminology “morbidly obese.” Though he attempts to deride his colleagues for their poor treatment of fat people, he simply rearranges the stigma and treats fatness in the same category as drug addicts.
Similarly, the doctors at Brookehaven convince their patients that their eating habits are addictions, which must stem from some mental instability or psychological need, and they are encouraged to visit the clinic’s psychological counseling facility. In his work “The Size Acceptance Movement and the Social Construction of Body Weight,” Jeffery Sobal writes: “The rise in emphasis on thinness was accompanied by a parallel rejection of fatness. Obesity became a stigmatized condition, a discredited characteristic that was perceived as a moral failure of fat people.” He continues later in the essay to write: “the medical community accelerated the medicalization of obesity and increased its attention and efforts to encouraging weight loss to enhance health and prevent illness…Other professions such as psychology began to intrude into medical turf, bringing different concerns and therapeutic perspectives about eating disorders and body image that conflicted with the physiological focus of the biomedical model.” As Sobal suggests: in the medical community, if being fat is not a physical problem, then surely it must be a mental one. Kolman thinks he is doing a service for fat people; however, the idea that fat people need a cure is problematic to begin with, but even more offensive is the way that Inside Brookhaven is filmed.
In his book New Developments in Film Theory, Patrick Fuery describes the gaze: “No longer is the gaze just a term for perception, but now includes issues such as subjectivity, culture, ideology, gender, race, and interpretation.” I add body size into the mix, as I follow Fuery’s argument that “the gaze is fundamentally about the formation of certain relationships between the spectator and the film.” If the gaze is fundamentally about forming relationships, what relationship is TLC suggesting between the viewer and the fat object of the viewers gaze? As Fuery continues to tease out his understanding of gaze, he quotes Freud: “the scopophilia instinct is auto-erotic; it has indeed an object, but that object is part of the subject’s own body.” To answer the above question: TLC is suggesting a relationship of fear of fat while constantly reminding the viewer that she, too, is one step away from obesity, immobility, or hospitalization; that fatness lurks forebodingly under the surface of the viewer’s otherwise “normal” façade. While the idea of Inside Brookhaven seems to be to treat the “whole patient,” the camera angles used frequently dissect the people into pieces of fat body parts and fatty tumors. Fat people are literally reduced to their fattest body parts and those parts are repeatedly filmed in isolation as they seek medical attention for their psychological and physiological “disease.”
Imagine the best horror films: Dracula, The Mummy, Silence of the Lambs, or any other well-known horror film. How are they filmed? Fetishistically. By separating the facet of the monster that scares the viewer or the facet that denotes that the monster is, in fact, a monster from the rest of the monster’s body, the cinematographer both highlights the monster’s freakishness and forces the audience to fear those abnormal parts of the monster’s existence. So, then, how does the cinematographer make the audience believe that the monster is real? By quickly focusing first on the fetishized body part and closing in on the abnormality, then panning back and forth between a far shot of the entire person and close-ups of the monstrous portion of the person, the desired effect of realism is achieved. The viewer learns that the monstrous portion of the body is but a small facet, so his empathy is increased. How does the film instill fear in its viewers? If the cinematographer can convince the viewer that the monster is scary and real, then the viewer begins to notice the parts of his own body (or persona) that resemble the monster. Once the viewer is convinced that her own body contains the abnormal facets of the monster’s body, the viewer becomes afraid that she, too, may become a monster, or may be absorbed in monstrousness.
For example, in virtually any version of Dracula, the monster’s canine teeth, usually dripping with blood, are filmed at close range. By seeing the teeth closely, the viewer recognizes that the teeth are the abnormal facet of the monster—the one which she should fear. The cinematographer then toggles between close-ups of the teeth to longer shots in which the viewer can sympathize with the humanity of the monster. Once that common bond is established, the viewer is implicated in Dracula’s crimes, but she also begins to question the presence and size of her own canines. She may even wonder if she is more like Dracula than she would like to admit.
Similarly, Inside Brookhaven captures the patients at the Rehabilitation Center in a horror-film-like presentation. In each episode, the portrayal of the main person is presented in such a way that the person becomes a monster at whom the viewer is invited to gaze and cautioned not to become. For example, in the first episode of the program, a man who the narrator repeatedly calls “Six hundred pound Bill Surrat” is first filmed from above as if being examined under a microscope. As he is being shown from every angle, we learn his story: he was a firefighter, wanted to be a police officer, was unable to control his weight, and was put in a desk job because he couldn’t pass the physical to be a field officer. Once we learn his story and are able to sympathize with him, the way he is filmed changes. He is no longer figured as a whole person, but he is broken into pieces: his oxygen tube, the fat on his arms, the computer resting on his belly which is exposed because the sheet is too small to cover him, and the skin on his sides hanging over the “specially made, extra-large bed.” Slowly, the way Surrat is filmed transforms him from more of a human to more of a monster, as we are encouraged to see him, see his fat, recognize our own bodies, and be afraid that our own bodies harbor the potential to become fat, too.
As if allowing his patients to be filmed and portrayed as monsters is not enough to make viewers question the intent of Dr. Robert Kolman, perhaps his insistence on the diseased status of fat people should be able to convince them. Throughout the second episode, along with being filmed and portrayed as I have described, a second man, George Cuadrado, is described as having a “deadly dependency” on food. As his medical diagnosis is being narrated, the viewer sees only small snippets of varying parts of George’s body: large fat deposits on the insides of his legs as he walks down a narrow hallway (a camera shot that in the time conscious world of television last over thrity seconds), the large amounts of food he ravenously shoves into his mouth, which subsequently spills back out and lands on his shirt, and a nurse lifting layers of his excess as she bathes him. Interestingly, Cuadrado is feminized in this manner, as well, and although it is not the focus of this paper, it is worth mentioning that the viewer is privy to a full frontal nude shot of a male, whose genitals are masked by his excess. Would TLC show a full frontal nude shot of a thinner man?
All of this happens as we listen to Kolman instructing us about the dangers of obesity, and if it we aren’t convinced by now that being fat is bad, the camera man focus in so close to Cuadrado that we can see his pores and we hear him say: “If I don’t stay, I’m not going to die; I’m going to kill myself.” He implies that he will literally eat himself to death: “Food is my crutch.” Food is presented as the solution to a psychological problem. Kolman and his patients consistently employ a language of death, morbidity, and disease when they talk about food, bodies, and consumption.
Similarly, Kolman extends the fear of fat beyond the parameters of the specific fat person’s body by delving into the eating habits of the patients’ families. By extrapolating the implications of the disease of obesity outside the patients’ body, Inside Brookhaven completes the cycle of the gaze and indicts the viewer in the monstrosity of fat. We come to believe that the patient is diseased, his family is diseased, and we could be, too. This again works like a vampire movie: first there is one vampire, then there is a group, and then they are knocking on the doors of every person trying to change them into vampires as well. If not only the patient is fat, but her children are also fat, then maybe hiding inside each of us watching, there is a fat person and one false move will cause us, too, to become TLC’s next monster.
But, perhaps I am taking it too far. Perhaps Inside Brookhaven is not received in the way I suggest. However unfortunate, it seems that the program is having the effect desired by Kolman and others. In an online forum called TWoP Forums, user lilith 1930 writes: “Shows like these are such a good incentive for my diet. I never want to eat again when I’m watching them. What happened to taking personal responsibility for your health? Of course, there are glandular and genetic factors you have no control over sometimes. But most of these people have eaten themselves into this state through buckets of fried chicken and entire pizzas. Who has been paying for Dennis to sit on his ass eating take-out food for 3 years? If it’s insurance, wouldn’t they want to see progress, and not reversal? I was glad that one doctor refused to do the gastric bypass on that woman. She clearly hasn’t addressed her food issues and learned to eat properly yet, she was going to rely on the surgery to do it for her. I’ll have to remember to catch this next week, too.” Lilith buys right into the idea that over-consumption is the reason for the patient’s obesity, and that if she eats too much, she will become undesirously fat.
Similarly, another user on the same forum, lambie, writes: “Oh Christ, I can’t believe this show exists. Does TLC do any shows besides ones on gastric bypass and the morbidly obese? I can’t decide if their philosophy is “let’s all watch the freak show” or if they think they’re really helping people. I haven’t seen it yet so I’ll try to remain optimistic that it’s a little more objective than other shows they’ve had on this subject. It’s encouraging to hear that someone was refused gastric bypass on the show. The surgery has become way too common and it’s being abused from the “tool” it was developed to be. I know 2 people who gained weight in order to qualify for it because they thought it was the easy way out. I know another who died a week after from complications, and several more who have all regained significant amounts of weight 1-2 years post-surgery. TLC never seems to show that side of the story though. If anything, knowing this show exists will hopefully incentivize me, like Lilith to stay on my diet and keep exercising. Ultimately I’m in charge of me and I refuse to hand the blame or the credit off to someone else for my weight.” On the first read, I was almost encouraged because it seemed like Lambie was resisting the urge to join in supporting the too frequent prescription of the gastric bypass, but as I reflected on the post, I recognized that Lambie, like Lilith was scared into dieting to attain a culturally constructed level of beauty. Seeminlgy, TLC and Kolman have succeeded in horrorizing the fat body and thereby instilling fear in the patrons of the television show.
While it is already problematic to equate fatness with ill health, as Jeanine C. Cogan suggests in her article “Re-Evaluating the Weight-Centered Approach toward Health,” “Obesity and eating disorders are not objective and value-free categories; their definitions and meanings are culturally produced…our shared understanding of obesity is that it is a public health threat in need of treatment and prevention.” She later writes that, “a central belief about obesity is that it is self-induced through overindulgence, gluttony, and laziness, which allows us to blame the obese individual.” Basically, throughout her essay she argues that obesity, and specifically the language of disease surrounding obesity, is culturally constructed without a substantial basis for the construction. Couple the fear instilled by Inside Brookhaven with a vague, culturally constructed belief that thin is beautiful and fat is not, and we end up with a general public that worries that fat, which equals ill-health and non-beauty, may one day happen to them.
By combining the filming techniques of horror films, and a language that the American public concedes to as medical, TLC has produced in Inside Brookhaven a program that instills a fear of fat and fat people in the American public. Again, what is worse in American culture than being fat? We know of course, that it is being forced to fear fat and fat people because of false assumptions made by the medical community, and being exposed to programs like those on TLC and the other discovery channels that pathologize fat; thereby, further instilling a horror-film-like fear of fat bodies into the psyche of America. I think it is time to drive a wooden stake through the heart of Inside Brookhaven Obesity Clinic and shows like it.