Tag Archives: Cutting for Stone

Interview with Dr. Abraham Verghese

Tadias Magazine

By Shahnaz Habib

Published: Wednesday, September 09, 2009

New York (TADIAS) – Earlier this year, Tadias reviewed Abraham Verghese’s Cutting for Stone, an epic novel about a young man’s coming of age in Ethiopia and America. From fascinating social and political portraits of Ethiopia in upheaval, Cutting for Stone zooms into a territory where few have gone before: the drama of the operating theater and the mysteries inside the human body. There can be no doubt that this novel is the work of a seasoned writer who has led many lives in many places.

Time and again, Dr. Verghese has dipped heavily into his own life for furnishing the material for his writing. His experience as a physician in the rural south, caring for terminally ill AIDS patients has been heartrendingly documented in his memoir My Own Country: A Doctor’s Story. Later, in The Tennis Partner: A Story of Friendship and Loss, he described a beloved friend’s struggle with drug addiction, rendering a poetic, raw tribute to male friendships. In his latest book and first novel, Cutting for Stone, the protagonist is a young doctor, raised in Ethiopia, who seeks his fortune in America.

Verghese’s own career as a physician in the United States has taken him from his grueling days as a foreign medical graduate (recounted in The New Yorker article, The Cowpath to America) to becoming the voice of empathetic medicine. As founding director of Center for Medical Humanities & Ethics at the University of Texas and in his current role as a senior professor at Stanford University, Dr. Verghese is a champion in the field of Medical Humanities. He is passionate about bedside medicine and physical examination and values the human element that these rituals bring to the facelessness of modern medicine.

In an exclusive interview, Tadias Magazine spoke with Abraham Verghese about writing, medicine, the healthcare crisis, and how to lead double lives.


Abraham Verghese (photo by Joanne Chan)

Can you begin by telling us a bit about all the different places that are a part of you?

My identification with place is complicated. Ethnically, I feel very much Indian. My parents are Indian and I feel very conscious of their legacy, But countrywise, I strongly identify with Ethiopia, having grown up there. And then of course, America is the place that welcomes everybody. So this is home unequivocally, and I am very proud to be American. So there are all these different threads that run through my life.

I remember the passage in the book where Hema speaks of Addis as an evolving city whereas Madras seems to have finished evolving. Was that something that struck you as a primary difference between both places?

Yes, when I went to India and lived in Madras, that was one of the things that struck me about the city. Traditions and ways of life were very established in Madras whereas so much was in transition in Addis. And then when I came to America, it was very different again. There’s a scene later in the book where Marion arrives in America and feels completely unprepared for the scale and scope of America.

You also show how, even through its upheavals, Addis was a cosmopolitan city of the twentieth century. You help the reader picture the different peoples who had congregated in Addis. Can you give us a sense of your relationship with Addis?

I don’t have any family in Addis but I do have friends there and I have strong connections to the medical world in Ethiopia. Also, the present Prime Minister of Ethiopia was a medical student one year behind me. When civil war broke out and the military took over the medical school, he became a guerilla fighter and I left. So I have been back twice – once to do an interview with him for a magazine and the other time for a medical symposium.

Could you tell us something about your writing process? You must have drawn a lot on your memories of growing up in Ethiopia but it is also clear you did a lot of research on Ethiopian history and politics.

I think the research happens in parallel with the writing. I was consciously trying to learn more about the Italian time in Ethiopia because it was a very colorful legacy. Every colonial power leaves their stamp on their country and we are very familiar with the English stamp on India or the French stamp on Cameroon but the Italian stamp on Ethiopia is not very well-known. So I spent a lot of time on that. But the research was in parallel with the writing because as I wrote I would stumble on something that I needed to know more about and so that would set me off in another direction. One of the great joys of research is that you find unexpected things in unexpected places. You are looking for one article but you find another right next to it that leads you to include something you might never have otherwise written about. There’s a lot of serendipity.

Elsewhere you talked about the incremental method of writing in which you write a little bit everyday.

I think I was talking about the incremental method of doing anything. If you do a little of something every day, you gradually get better at it. Instead of finding great blocks of time, you just have to find a little time every day.

So do you have a daily writing practice?

Not really. I write whenever I can and sometimes it winds up being everyday for several days at a stretch of time but sometimes I cannot get to it every day.

I also heard that you have a room on the campus, something like a secret bunker, where you can go and write. Tell me it is true and not a legend.

No, it is true. When I took this position I negotiated for a second office, separate from the student-related, that I could disappear into.

And you also negotiated two days a week to write.

Well, everybody here has protected time to do their research and so during my protected time, instead of going to a lab and doing experiments, I go to my lab and conduct my kind of experiments. In fiction, nonfiction. In any kind of writing, really.

How important is it as a writer to have a place for writing?

I actually don’t think it is very important. I think people make much too much of having a place and how it has to be just right. I can actually write anywhere and often do. The most important thing when you are trying to write is to simply sit down and try to write, it doesn’t matter where. If you are waiting for the right environment before you can write, then you are probably not prepared to write.

What would you say is the unlikeliest place that you have written in?

(Laughs) Probably airports. Everyone’s waiting to take off and frustrated that we are late or whatever and I am barely aware that anything is going on.

Pico Iyer talks about airports as the ultimate postmodern metropolis. He probably gets a lot of writing done in airports as well.

I am not surprised. He travels a whole lot more than I do.

In fact, in his book Global Soul, he talks about a new generation of transnationals who belong to so many cultures that they belong to nowhere. He calls them Nowherians, or fulltime citizens of nowhere. Do you think you are a global soul?

I feel I am not completely a global soul. I have sequential interactions with different countries and even within the US, I have steadily migrated from Tennessee to Iowa to Texas to California now. I hope this is the last stop. I hope I am not destined to go to Guam and Hawaii!

But even when our migrations are sequential, our memories are not, right?

Yes, very true. They are seamless and overlapping and the only constant is you. You are the only one linking the different places.

There is that beautiful passage in the book where you talk about how listening to Tizita takes the narrator right back to Ethiopia, whether he is in Adams Morgan or in Khartoum.

Yes, music is so mysterious that way in its connection to the brain and its ability to transform us. We all probably have a song that can transport us back to a different part of our life. And it is very difficult to make that song come alive for someone else us. I could not bring the song to the reader but I could try to bring that sense of identification, the nostalgia that it evoked. And of course, that song [tizita] itself is about nostalgia. I worried a great deal about whether I could pull it off. But we all have our tizitas, our songs of some kind.

To get back to the subject of medicine and writing. You speak in this book as well as in interviews about the ritual of examining the patient. Examining the patient is a lot like reading, isn’t it, with the patient as the text?

Yes, but it’s also much more than that. At one level the patient is a text to decode, a mystery to unravel, and that is certainly important, it’s the most attractive part of being a diagnostician. But this is not a natural relationship, between the doctor and the patient. In fact, it is terribly unnatural. They are coming to you because they are in some sort of distress and you are meeting them because you have made this career choice to help people and so it’s a very strange relationship and even though it seems routine, there is nothing routine about it. Its’ really quite loaded. So after you meet them and decode the text, you are, by your presence, by your engagement, providing the kind of comfort no one else can provide. The analogy I use is “when you are drowning, the only person who can save you is someone who knows how to swim”.

I find it terribly important to be conscious of that dynamic, even if the patient is not. Somebody else once described this by saying “one of our roles is to save the patient from their nihilistic tendencies.” A sick individual’s instinct is taking him or her towards nihilism, to imagine that the world is cruel, that there is nothing worth living for, and the doctor’s job is to counter that.

Have there been other writers who write about medicine whom you count among your influences?

There are a lot of writers who write well about the business of medicine. Atul Gawande for instance. And I have always admired that kind of writing. But I feel that by writing fiction about medicine, you are conveying a higher form of truth. I guess that’s my bias. (Laughs) If you pull it off well, like in “The Citadel” for instance, then you have captured the reader’s imagination. If I manage to get you to enter the world of the novel and completely forget your everyday life, you don’t just find out about medicine, you live medicine. You live it through Hema, you live it through Ghosh, through Marion, and you come out at the other end and its 2009, but you feel like you have lived a lifetime and you have all the lessons of a lifetime. So I am drawn to those fictional narratives, not necessarily written by physicians, but which convey medicine in a convincing and inspiring way.

And in many ways, reclaiming the humanity of medicine is also the focus of your field of medicine, isn’t it? Can you tell us a bit about why that is important?

I think we live in an age of tremendous fracturing in medical care. It’s very difficult to find one person to take care of you, you end up going to six different people. We are in great danger of getting lost in the technology. We can easily mistake data for wisdom but it is not the same as wisdom. So I have been emphasizing the physican-patient relationship, that this interaction is timeless. No matter how routine it seems, no matter how many imagings and scans can help us see the patient inside out, we still need our presence with the patient. We should never underestimate the patient’s desire to get some help and that subtext of wanting comfort to be comforted, and that all-important ritual of baring their soul and baring their body and allowing you to touch them. And if you shortchange all that, you lose the patient’s faith.

Is there more attention paid to medical humanities now than, say, fifty years before?

I think there is more conscious attention to it as a field of study. It is amazing to me that there is a label that says “medical humanities” on it. But it’s a double-edged sword because medical humanities as a discipline has been hijacked by the English literature and semantics people. In many medical schools, the medical humanities division is run by someone with a Ph.d in English Literature and they have made this into a discipline that I worry is getting disconnected from the field of medicine. Some of those people look down on a physician who wants to teach medical humanities as if the physician does not have the right credentials for teaching this. And I wonder what is their credential to teach this, if they have never walked in a physician’s shoes?

I ran a program on medical humanities in San Antonio and I felt that my mission there was to restore medical humanities to medicine and take it out of the abstract. I am not against someone getting a Ph.d in medical semiotics and breaking down narrative and all that, but let’s not confuse that with talking to a medical student who is trying to picture himself at the bedside of a dying patient and introducing that student to Tolstoy’s Death of Ivan Ilyich. And that’s what medical humanities is to me.

In a way it actually mirrors the other disconnect, the one between patients and doctors at the bedside.

That is exactly right. They are parallel disconnects and in both cases there is a hubris – “don’t talk to us about medicine, we know all about it though we have never seen a patient, and we have no idea what a medical student is going through, we know what’s best for them, we are going to teach them about medical humanity.”

What do you think of Obama’s vision for healthcare and how do you think that will affect medical humanities?

I am convinced that some change is forthcoming. But at what level? The bottom-line is that this is a very expensive healthcare system. And I worry that Obama’s plan is to expand coverage and do all these wonderful things but he’s going to find the money for it, not by saving costs but by saying, well if we do preventive medicine, we will save this much money; if we do IT, we will save so much money. And all those are laudable but it’s somewhat pie in the sky. I think what we really need to do is cut costs. But every dollar spent on healthcare is a dollar of income for someone. So when you try and cut costs as Hillary Clinton tried to do, you are taking away income from doctors and pharmaceutical companies and x-ray manufacturers, and you run into this buzz-saw of lobbying that will simply decimate you. So Obama is trying to sidestep that by not addressing the cost issue, but I really think the hard solutions are painful, and will cause a lot of people to make less money than they are making and that will make them unhappy but I really don’t think there is another real solution. Frankly, we badly need more primary healthcare providers so that when you are ill you can go to your doctor. But right now there are more people who can put a catheter up your coronary arteries than treat you if you have the common cold. I think as a nation we have to understand that we cannot replace the presence of the physician with machines.

You have a fulltime job as a doctor and then you have this other life as a writer. How do you balance both – what does a writer need to balance two completely different lives?

See, I don’t accept that premise, that these are two different lives. I see it as one seamless life. I am always puzzled when people make this distinction between writer and physician. Really, its all one enterprise. But in terms of getting a piece of writing out there, the fact that I am a physician has nothing to do with it and putting MD next to my name would be irrelevant. So in that sense, if you were asking me what is the primary ingredient a writer needs, whether they are also a doctor or an actor or a garbage collector, I think it comes down to perseverance, and the willingness to revise revise revise until you get it right. The art is really in the revision.


About the Author:
Shahnaz Habib is a freelance writer, based in Brooklyn.

Join the conversation on Twitter and Facebook.

Book Review: Verghese’s ‘Cutting for Stone’ – A Scalpel’s Slice of Life

Tadias Magazine

By Chloe Malle

Published: Tuesday, June 2, 2009

I. The Hippocratic Oath

The title of Abraham Verghese’s first novel, Cutting for Stone, is intriguing, perhaps unrewardingly so. In the book’s epilogue, Verghese, a surgeon and professor at Stanford Medical School, closes with the following explanation, “Medicine is a demanding mistress, yet she is faithful, generous, and true […] every year, at commencement, I renew my vows with her: I swear by Apollo and Hygieia and Panaceia to be true to her, for she is the source of all…I shall not cut for stone.

In an interview he clarifies,

There is a line in the Hippocratic Oath that says: ‘I will not cut for stone, even for patients in whom the disease is manifest.’ It stems from the days when bladder stones were epidemic, a cause of great suffering, probably from bad water and who knows what else. […] There were itinerant stonecutters—lithologists—who could cut either into the bladder or the perineum and get the stone out, but because they cleaned the knife by wiping it on their blood-stiffened surgical aprons, patients usually died of infection the next day. Hence the proscription ‘Thou shall not cut for stone.’ […] It isn’t just that the main characters have the surname Stone; I was hoping the phrase would resonate for the reader just as it does for me, and that it would have several levels of meaning in the context of the narrative.

The lyrical sound of the title and its poetic medical significance are certainly convincing, however, I am not sure to what extent this title pervades multiple layers of the narrative as Verghese intends it to. Certainly the title confirms the intrinsic, if not central, role of medicine in the novel. Stone is the shared name of the three main characters but ‘cutting for stone’ is the name Verghese bestows upon the equally important character that medicine and surgery personify in the novel. But beyond rhetoric the title does not resonate emotionally throughout different levels of meaning in the novel.

The novel is rich and warm like the womb that opens the central conflict of the story, or like quicksand, disabling you from exiting Verghese’s world until the last page of the text.

The essence of Cutting for Stone is divided between Marion’s coming of age and Ethiopia’s. It is also tinged with a desire for the magical to impart its warmth and weakness upon the real. One of the most attractive things about Verghese’s first novel is the emotion the book evokes, the womblike comfort within its pages.

The novel recounts the story of Marion and Shiva Stone, Siamese twins separated at birth by their surgeon father, Thomas Stone. In the realm of magical realism the twins are born attached at the skull and almost as soon as they are separated from each other they are separated from both parents as well. Their mother, Sister Mary Joseph Praise, a nun working at a mission hospital in Addis Ababa, dies in childbirth. No one in the hospital was aware of her pregnancy, not even the presumed father, Dr. Thomas Stone. Stone, Mission Hospital’s main surgeon, disappears grief-stricken immediately after Sister Mary’s death. The twins are orphaned before they leave the delivery room only to be swiftly rescued by the Indian Ob-Gyn, Hema, and her soon-to-be husband, Dr. Ghosh. The plot is a rambling coming of age story that tracks Marion and Shiva’s childhood and rise to adulthood set against the background of Ethiopia’s turbulent political climate. The novel crosses three continents, coming to a treacherous climax in New York City.

It is no coincidence that Verghese was born and raised in Addis Ababa to Indian parents around the same time as his protagonist. Verghese’s own biography closely reflects that of the protagonist twins in his novel.

Part II: The African Bildungsroman

Cutting for Stone, knowingly or not, follows the formula of the German literary genre, the bildungsroman. The German Enlightenment term, coined by German philologist, Johann Morgenstern, refers to a genre of novels that follow a similar plotline mapping the psychological, moral and social development of a, usually young, protagonist. Examples of this range from the revolutionary model, Goethe’s Wilhelm Meister’s Apprenticeship to Harper Lee’s contemporary interpretation in To Kill a Mockingbird. Verghese’s novel follows the bildungsroman formula almost exactly: the protagonist matures from child to adult, this maturation is long and arduous and rife with challenges and conflicts, eventually one or all of these conflicts forces the protagonist to flee their home and begin a personal Odyssey. The independence and demands of this journey are what eventually enable the protagonist to integrate comfortably and successfully into society. I will not map out Marion Stone’s corresponding steps in hope that you will map them yourself whilst reading the book.

In The Situation and the Story, writer Vivian Gornick explains, “there is the story and then there is the situation, the writer must be aware of both.” In Cutting for Stone the story is Marion’s coming of age, the situation is Ethiopia. But it is not that simple. The story is also Ethiopia’s coming of age and these two wide-eyed adolescents—no not the twins, Marion and Shiva—Marion and Ethiopia, must mature in their own individual ways.

Cutting for Stone is by all measures a novel about Africa, but it is more importantly a novel about daily life and about growing up. It just so happens that our protagonist experiences daily life and grows up in Africa. Like the British Romantics, Verghese emphasizes the importance of place as well as plot and character, acknowledging their inherent union. Ethiopia is a central driving force of the narrative. It is the ghost character, like Thomas Stone, omnipresent yet never quite defined. Like the twins who center the story, the setting of the narrative is divided; it is at once the coming of age of Marion and the coming of age of Ethiopia. With creative chronological license Verghese maps the crashing tides of Ethiopia’s political climate throughout the twenty-five years of Marion and Shiva’s youth.

Ethiopia is a character like a magical realist creation, her intrinsic parts are outlined and detailed, but they are detailed in emotion, not in reality. Verghese writes Ethiopia like the regal male peacock adorned with all his iridescent feathered glory, when in fact, she more closely resembles the unplumbed female by his side. As readers, we enter that magical reality, coming to understand a place most of us do not know as if it is our own. Early in the novel Verghese describes Ghosh’s introduction to Ethiopia, “Ghosh didn’t understand any of this till he came to Africa. He hadn’t realized that Menelik’s victory had inspired Marcus Garvey’s Back to Africa Movement, and that it had awakened Pan-African consciousness in Kenya, the Sudan, and the Congo. For such insights, one had to live in Africa.” For such insights one had to live in Africa or in Verghese’s epic novel.

While reading I wonder if there is a sense of guilt involved for Verghese, if this ode to Ethiopia is a tax or homage owed to a fatherland—I use the expression fatherland rather than native land, or birthplace, because of the ambiguity and driving force that very subject ignites throughout the novel. In an interview Verghese reveals,

Even in this era of the visual, I think a novel can bring out the feel of a place better than almost any vehicle. […] I also wanted to convey the loss many felt when the old order gave way to the new. Ethiopia had the blight of being ruled by a man named Mengistu for too many years, a man propped up by Russia and Cuba. My medical school education was actually interrupted when Mengistu came to power and the emperor went to jail. As an expatriate, I had to leave. It was my moment of loss. Many of my medical school classmates became guerilla fighters who tried to unseat the government. Some died in the struggle. One of them fought for more than twenty years, and his forces finally toppled the dictator. Meles Zenawi, now prime minister of Ethiopia, was a year behind me in medical school.

While it is the omnipresence of Ethiopia, coming of age, and personal conflict that drive the novel there is also a very poetic emphasis on what is not present. Absence is a prevalent motif throughout the novel. The theme of things missing from the story is prevalent throughout the novel, things happening offstage like in Greek tragedy, or not at all. Until the end of the novel there is never any confirmation of Marion and Shiva’s conception. Three chapter titles are dedicated to absence: Missing Fingers, Missing People, Missing Letters.

Part III: The Writer’s Writer

There is no doubt about it; Verghese is a lyricist whose way with words rivals his mastery of the scalpel—though I cannot attest to this as I have never had the opportunity to be operated on by him. Indeed, he is a prose poet whose manipulation of words makes every minutia an event of Biblical and lyrical proportions. It is the sanctity of his syntax, the deliberate and precise choice of words and their order in the sentences in which they appear that sets his novel apart, forcing even the least interested reader to continue turning pages, trancelike and mystified. Simple sentences such as the following are rendered at once wholesome and cavernous by the depth and simplicity of his language. Of Ghosh’s barber Verghese writes, “One never doubted for a moment that it was Ferraro’s destiny to be a barber; his instincts were perfect; his baldness was inconsequential.” Many writers are lauded for their attention to detail, Verghese is to be praised for his dedication to detail. To Verghese, life is indeed, in the details.

The Baton Rouge Advocate writes, “Clearly Verghese paid attention in English Lit 101. He begins this entrancing novel with an opening sentence that is so full of implication it’s practically Dickensian.” It is true that Cutting for Stone can be read as a rolodex of mastered literary techniques and signatures. The scent of scribes past is at once foetid and intoxicating across the pages. Their influences and identifying traits mark Verghese’s pages, just as the archive of great writers mark every work of fiction, to its benefit or detriment, depending on the skill of he or she who whittles these influences into something they can use to better illustrate their essence of their own novel.

Most reviews of Cutting for Stone, including this one, cite different authors Verghese has drawn influence from, some as a critique of his writing, some as an accolade. Different historical-literary genres shutter through the critics’ lens like a widening aperture. While I don’t disagree with these comparisons I do believe that they distract from Verghese’s own brand of writing, one that may in turn be imitated in its own right.

Many critics have accused Verghese of foraging unsuccessfully into the realm of magical realism and according to Mexican literary critic Luis Leal they may be correct. Leal argues, “Without thinking of the concept of magical realism, each writer gives expression to a reality he observes in the people. To me, magical realism is an attitude on the part of the characters in the novel toward the world […] If you can explain it, then it’s not magical realism.” But won’t any child’s reaction to the world will be magical tinged by the real or vice versa, otherwise, how would we absorb and understand it all? For me one of the most beautiful qualities about the novel is Verghese’s ability to recount fifty years through the eyes of a child, with wonder, whimsy and heartbreak. This being said, the epic, rambling pace of the novel would be better executed with Verghese giving in to the story’s demand for a magical realist telling. Instead, the novel’s all too realist tone is difficult to swallow alongside its magical and leaping storyline. Imagine Paul Farmer writing Love in the Time of Cholera and you can begin to imagine Verghese’s first foray into fiction.

While literary forefathers stalk like quill-tipped ghosts across Verghese’s pages the real muse is medicine herself. The danger in this is that it risks losing the mystical tone the novel has so successfully created. Verghese’s fault lies in him knowing too much, the over-realism of his medical descriptions blunt the magic of the rest of the novel.

Indeed, too much medicine takes the magical out of realism. During passages such as the following my rapture is dulled completely,

With the colon swollen to Hindenburg proportions it would be all to easy to nick the bowel and spill feces into the abdominal cavity. He made a midline incision, then deepened it carefully, like a sapper defusing a bomb. Just when panic was setting in because he was going nowhere, the glistening surface of the peritoneum—that delicate membrane that lined the abdominal cavity—came into view. When he opened the peritoneum, straw-colored fluid came into view. Inserting his finger into the hole and using it as a backstop, he cut the peritoneum along the length of the incision.

It is as if Verghese believes the only currency he can trade with is his knowledge of medicine. I only wish his confidence in the poetry and lyricism of his writing was enough for him to abandon his crutch of medical vernacular.

There are moments though, when his descriptions leave the kingdom of Gray’s Anatomy and help the non-medical understand medical problems, such as the enigmatic and complex problem of obstetric fistula. Verghese’s haunting and powerful description of the arrival of a young girl with fistula to the mission is one of the most powerful in the book.

An unspeakable scent of decay, putrefaction, and something else for which words remain to be invented reached our nostrils. I saw no point in holding my breath or pinching my nose because the foulness invaded instantly, coloring our insides like a drop of India ink in a cup of water. In a way that children understand their own, we knew her to be innocent of her terrible, overpowering odor. It was of her, but it wasn’t hers. Worse than the odor (since she must have lived with it for more than a few days) was to see her face in the knowledge of how it repulsed and revolted others.

Verghese’s surgical sword is double-edged and while it jars the melodic pace of the rest of the novel, it is for the most part an important addition to the story and soul of the book.

Part IV: The Dueling Careers

A journalist interviewing Verghese asks, “Was there a single idea behind or genesis for Cutting for Stone?”

Verghese’s complex answer was the following, “My ambition as a writer was to tell a great story, an old-fashioned, truth-telling story. But beyond that, my single goal was to portray an aspect of medicine that gets buried in the way television depicts the practice: I wanted the reader to see how entering medicine was a passionate quest, a romantic pursuit, a spiritual calling, a privileged yet hazardous undertaking.” Verghese cares for his characters in the same way an ideal surgeon would, he feels for them. The Economist critiques, “surgery is indeed a wonderful metaphor, but it should be wielded with precision.”

He continues, “I wanted the whole novel to be of medicine, populated by people in medicine, the way Zola’s novels are of Paris.”

Indeed, medicine is the medium through which the tale is propelled forward, the catalyst to characters’ coming of age and falling apart.

Not by coincidence, Verghese’s life parallels that of the twin protagonists in the story. He executes a balancing act between two careers, conjoined unknowingly like Siamese twins, but unlike Thomas Stone, while Verghese fathered these twins, he did not abandon them, he raised and nurtured them to grow into unique but also inherently linked careers.

Cutting for Stone deftly conveys the eerie and perhaps poetic similarity between the seemingly disparate vocations of surgery and writing. As Verghese writes of Ghosh in the novel, “he had a theory that bedroom Amharic and bedside Amharic were really the same thing: Please lie down. Take off your shirt. Open your mouth. Take a deep breath…The language of love was the same as the language of medicine.”

Like medicine, writing is in the details. Describing Thomas Stone during the birth of his Siamese twins, Verghese has the patience to describe, “His hair was parted on the right, a furrow that originated in boyhood with every tamed by the comb to know exactly which direction it was to tilt.” Like medicine, writing is about people, about being interested by people, by humanity. Interviewed Verghese concludes, “The beauty of medicine is that it is proletarian, and its prime prerequisite is that you have an interest in humanity in the rough.” Though Verghese counters,

I think sometimes we make too much of the doctor-writer business—it’s in danger of becoming a cliché. I’ve not put MD behind my name on any books, except one that was called Infections in Nursing Homes and Long-Term Care Facilities. Unless I’m writing a diet book or a textbook like the one above, the doctoring seems kind of irrelevant—the writing has to stand on its own, don’t you think? […] I remember hearing the aphorism ‘God is in the details’ both in medical school and at the Writer’s Workshop. When we see a patient we take a ‘history’—the word ‘story’ is in there.

Part V: The Writer is I

In an interview Verghese explains, “To paraphrase Dorothy Allison, fiction is the great lie that tells the truth about how the world really lives. It is why in teaching medical students I use Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilych to teach about end-of-life issues […] A textbook rarely gives them the kind of truth or understanding achieved in the best fiction.”

As a child I owned a children’s book called, Lives of the Writers with 19th century Daumier-style caricature drawings of all the great writers in history and a brief but biting one-page biography of each author. Some quirky anecdote or sibling rivalry, information we, ostensibly, could not read from their books. Or could we? Is not every novel a life of the writer? Verghese’s certainly is.

By the end of the novel, the only thing lacking is a comprehensive biography of the man whom we cannot imagine having invented, nor even vicariously living the events detailed in these pages. The voice is too strong, the involvement too deep.

If it is, in fact, fiction then Verghese has achieved a feat indeed, he has made the living narrator out of the page. I don’t believe that is the case, I believe all of Marion Stone is Abraham Verghese, the question is, how much of Abraham Verghese is Marion Stone? Verghese includes a foreword and an afterword, but what I want is a during. I want a detailed autobiography of Verghese, to cross check the fraternal or identical twin-ness of the writer and the written. Though maybe that is too much to ask, similar perhaps to asking a doctor to betray the Hippocratic oath.

About the Author:
Chloe Malle is a freelance journalist currently based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia where she teaches English as a Second Language and assists an American physician at the local Mother Theresa Clinic. Chloe studied creative writing and comparative literature at Brown University.

Join the conversation on Twitter and Facebook.