Frances Farmer’s Brain
From an article by Raj Persaud in The British Medical Journal:
Yet the popular media view of psychosurgery, reinforced by its portrayal in Ken Kesey’s film One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and Frances, the 1982 biopic about the life of the rebellious movie and stage actress Frances Farmer, is that doctors chose particular patients to operate on precisely because they wanted to crush their spirit. A disturbing scene in Frances shows a balding and goateed psychiatrist, who closely resembled Walter Freeman, performing an “ice pick” lobotomy at Western State Hospital on the supine heroine. The film turned Frances Farmer into a well known symbol of the excesses of the procedure—a patient supposedly selected for her nonconformist political opinions and who was operated on only with the consent of her vindictive mother, who colluded with doctors in using the procedure to vanquish her soul and spirit.
But as Jack El-Hai points out in this meticulously researched account, it’s extremely unlikely that Frances was an accurate portrayal of the psychiatric treatment Farmer actually received. The author can find no reliable record in the hospital’s accounts of its operations that anyone fitting Farmer’s description ever received the procedure. Also, given Farmer’s personal accomplishments after her release from the institution—marrying, regularly hosting a TV programme in Indianapolis, and appearing on This is Your Life—combined with Freeman’s compulsive pursuit of his patients to accumulate evidence of the benefits of his controversial procedure, it seems odd that the neurosurgeon would neglect to record or mention what would have been his most celebrated success story.
EDIT: J.M. Kauffman points out his own extensive research, here.
July 4th, 2005 at 7:22 pm
You may want to reference my site, which Jack El-Hai used in his research (you can find me thanked in his acknowledgements), which has copious information debunking the Farmer lobotomy legend, some of which (unfortunately) was discovered after Jack’s book had gone into final galleys:
http://hometown.aol.com/jmkauffman/sheddinglight.html
October 14th, 2005 at 3:47 am
Does it really matter that a particular person was not lobotomized? It seems pretty clear that the revulsion this procedure recieves is well warranted. This is very like the “truth” of Anne Frank’s existance. You have to wonder about the motives of those that want accuracy.
October 14th, 2005 at 3:11 pm
I don’t know if it matters. What interests me though, is the interest itself. That people have taken time to research this very topic I find fascinating, in a macabre way.
October 28th, 2005 at 12:57 am
Anyone who has read Jack El-Hai’s book or my Farmer article must have their head in the sand (or some other unnamed place ;) ) if they think either Jack or I are defending the use of lobotomies. It is quite clearly stated several times in my article that I find the practice abhorrent. What is equally abhorrent is that a dead woman’s legacy has been mutilated by a cultist with his own agenda who freely admitted he had fabricated whole elements of Farmer’s story (including the lobotomy) to make his point (see my article for details). It seems that any questions about motivations are properly directed toward that author. I know I for one had no motivation other than to dispel rumor and outright fiction, and I believe Jack El-Hai’s motives were largely similar.
November 5th, 2005 at 3:37 pm
How would “Maria Shavzin” feel if someone published a book claiming she was a child molester. And she or someone else then vigorously denied it. And I then said “Does it really matter that a particular person is not a child molester? It’s pretty clear that this is a revolting practice.” Would “Maria Shavzin” then be questioning someone’s “motives” if it were her personal history and/or reputation that was on the line? Please respond, Maria, I’d love to hear what you think about this example.
November 12th, 2005 at 6:14 pm
“You have to wonder about the motives of those that want accuracy.” Thank you for the best laugh I’ve had in many a year–yes, let’s all wallow in inaccuracy like happy little *lobotomized* pigs. Are you also an apologist for the neocons at Downing Street and Washington, D.C.? ;)
January 5th, 2006 at 1:46 pm
check out “Frances Farmer will have her revenge on Seattle”, a song by the legendary Nirvana, on their album “In Utero” K?
June 27th, 2006 at 8:41 am
I don’t see anyveracity in your example. If one was a child molester, and there was a big argument over wether three or four children were molested, I would say the same thing, that the important thing is that molesting children is horrible, not all details are important. There are more important points to be maDE then squabling over the accuracy of meaningless minor points. If your opinion is that no point can be made unless every minute, inconsequantial, petty detail is proven to your satisfaction, then that is your opinion, and I do not share it.
August 28th, 2006 at 3:59 pm
Unfortunately Maria Shavzin completely misses the gist of my comment, which frankly doesn’t surprise me in the slightest. The “meaningless minor point” I was alluding to is how Maria would feel if I alleged SHE were a child molester when she, in reality, wasn’t. And then if my allegation took on a life of its own and EVERYONE simply assumed that Maria Shavzin was indeed a child molester. Would she then argue that the “important” point was that child molestation was wrong, or would she attempt to clear her name of the spurious allegation?
February 25th, 2009 at 2:47 am
Ok, how about this. If you, Gerry Erlanger were a child molester, it would be to your benefit to have the dtails be incorrect. It would benefit no one else.