Any biography depends on the voices of the past - or perhaps I
should say on words from the past, because naturally I include
in the term 'voices' the written as well as the spoken word. If
one's subject is recent enough for surviving family, friends and
colleagues to provide oral information and impressions,
that is a bonus. Most particularly, of course, one requires ideally
the voice of one's subject - in letters and diaries or just odd
jottings (eg. 'Put out the cat!'). When I embarked on the biography
of Esmond Venner Keogh this last, highly desirable ingredient
was apparently completely lacking.
Bill Keogh (1895-1970) was a very private person; we all are,
to some extent, but with him, for various reasons, privacy was
almost an obsession, to the point that one sometimes feels that
he was careful not to let his right hand know what his left was
doing. He seemed to make almost a fetish of destroying personal
papers. Those I have unearthed were, with a few trifling exceptions,
found in public records.
The trouble with public records, of course, is that they do not
normally tell one much, if anything, personal. Thus I had records
from the three schools which Bill attended; I gleaned from them
the dates of his attendance at each, and the fact that his scholastic
performance was no better than mediocre, but nothing about Bill
as a boy. Again, in the meticulous records kept by the Army, I
traced him step by step to Gallipoli and France and home again
during Word War I, and twenty years later to the middle East and
back to Australia where he became Director of Hygiene and Pathology
in the Australian Army. I learnt with great accuracy where he
was and when, but nothing about Bill the person, save for a cryptic
note in 1917 saying simply 'G.S.W.R.H.', which an obliging Officer
translated for me as 'Gun Shot Wound, Right Hand'. University
records were equally bald, if less detailed: 'P' or 'N', Honours
awarded, financial assistance as an ex-serviceman. Speculum
was marginally better - at last a person could be vaguely glimpsed
in references to the 'rags' in which Bill took part, and in his
own well-considered and sensible criticism of the medical course
of the 1920s. As for the Victorian Health Department, that was
an almost complete loss, showing me merely that Bill could write
a competent Annual Report, which was scarcely a surprise in the
Director of a major departmental branch. The Commonwealth Serum
Laboratories (C.S.L), where Bill worked for some twenty years,
produced, after some heart-stopping fumbles, his file from their
personnel records; not 'personal' exactly, but revealing to me
where a very new doctor had worked at the start of his career,
and the medical problems and experiences to which he had been
exposed, which led to his life-long interest in public, as distinct
from clinical, medicine.
After all this searching of documentary material - and here I
am deliberately excluding oral information - I had in my hands
only the outline of a career, only the skeleton of a man. What
about the flesh and blood, the vital human being? It was not until
I reached the final stage of Bill's career, from 1956-68, as Medical
Adviser to the Anti-Cancer Council (A-C.C.), that I found any
substantial body of archival material which revealed to me 'Bill-the-person'.
Here I must hand out two bouquets. One goes to Bill's secretary
in his years at the Council. She kept filed in orderly fashion
all his correspondence as Medical Advisor. This appears to be
the only surviving corpus of archival material produced by Bill
himself, other than his professional papers, his formal reports
and such like. The correspondence has now been sorted, numbered
and boxed by the archivist who, happily for me, began his task
at the Council at about the same time that I undertook the biography.
The second bouquet goes to the Australian Science Archives Project.
They employed the archivist; without him and without the
model secretary, my life of Keogh would have been no more than
a stark and impersonal chronicle. Not only I, but many other biographers,
owe and will owe a great debt to the Project - and to all good
secretaries.
Now, let me describe briefly how the A-C.C. records brought Bill
to life. There is no space even to touch on many of the facets
of his personality which they revealed, but I want to share just
two or three of them. (Note that I am describing the mid-1950s
and the 1960s when cancer was still, in the community, virtually
a taboo subject, little understood, rarely mentioned; among the
lay population it was the Great Fear, the Great Unknown).
To deal with this fear, this ignorance, Bill encouraged people
to write to him with their worries, their queries and suggestions;
he replied to them all personally. There are hundreds of
letters. Some replies were factual and straightforward; thus,
several eager school childred, wishing to share in exciting medico-scientific
work, were advised to matriculate in appropriate subjects and
then attempt science or medical courses; thus, the gentleman wanting
to bequeath his body for scientific research was advised to contact
the University's Anatomy Department; thus, those offering their
services as interpreters to migrants were referred to the public
hospitals. All sensible and constructive suggestions, all directed
personally and courteously to each individual enquirer. On the
vexed matter of early and prompt examination if cancer were suspected,
Bill could offer no such quick and easy answer; there simply was
no public diagnostic centre in Melbourne for the detection of
cancer, as there was, for instance, in some US cities. Bill said
so; he could only recommend a writer to see his or her local G.P.,
knowing full-well that too often the examinations would be cursory
and the curt advice given to 'go home and stop worrying'. Bill's
feelings of frustration were apparent.
His responses reveal too how receptive he was to suggestions
from the public. One example struck me forcibly - from a lady
concerned about the link between lung cancer and smoking. She
suggested that a warning should be compulsory on the outside of
every packet of tobacco or cigarettes. Bill thanked her most warmly
for her 'interesting and thoughtful letter', describing the idea
as 'a novel one'. So novel indeed that it was more than a decade,
and Bill was dead, before it was adopted by authority. But Bill
recognised and acknowledged its value instantly.
The letters show us also Bill's patience. He was asked
the most extraordinary things. 'What about those black pieces
which appear when the potato is nearly cold?' one lady wrote,
alarmed that her home-brewed ginger beer might be the vehicle
of a carcinogenic substance. To her and to many like her, Bill
could be comfortably reassuring: 'As far as we know no food or
combination of foods will cure or cause cancer.' He was unfailingly
courteous to all enquirers, most especially to those battling
gamely with an alien language.
And finally, to letters from frightened people, Bill's responses
reveal concern and a deep compassion. The depths of ignorance
and fear were quite tragic: 'I live alone', wrote one woman, 'What
will happen to me if I get cancer?' and another 'If cancer is
diagnosed, is the operation compulsory?'. Bill was never dismissive,
never condescending. He was engaged, officially, in a 'public
education' program, yet his letters show us not the public
face of the writer, but quite clearly one human being communicating
directly with others in trouble, offering sympathy, information
and support.
There is, of course, a great deal of other Keogh material in
the Keogh papers, most of it of a strictly professional, medico-scientific
kind dealing with his research work, his committee work, his scientific
papers. What I have been trying to show here is how scientific
archives may have another use also, in that they may reveal not
merely the professional but also the personal side of the individual
concerned. Without the person revealed in the Anti-Cancer Council
letters, the Bill of my biography would have been less rounded,
less complete, much less human.
|