The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks: Publication and Front Cover as a Protest Movement

The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks: Publication and Front Cover as a Protest Movement

            The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks details the emotional story surrounding a poor African American woman dying of cervical cancer, her family and the ethics surrounding an immortal cell line.  The publication of this book brought her ethically tangled story to the attention of the general public and facilitated ethical and legal justice for the surviving Lacks family.  The timing of publication, vivid book cover art and emotional language wrapped within scientific reason crafted a powerful protest that introduced the world to the study of bioethics.  In a unique combination of pathos, logos and ethos, Rebecca Skloot developed an effective protest movement involving the interest of the general public, the NIH and Hollywood.

The story of the remarkable HeLa cell line began with tragedy: at 30 years old, Henrietta Lacks arrived at John Hopkins University Clinic with symptoms of spotting in between menstrual periods. At the base of her cervix, doctors found a small lesion that was no larger than one inch in diameter. After a biopsy, doctors confirmed the lesion as cancerous.  For eight months, Henrietta endured chemotherapy and immense abdominal pain.  However, treatment was ineffective and Henrietta died at 12:15 AM on October 4^th, 1951 (Lucey).  While she was under hospital care, research was being conducted in Dr. George Gey’s laboratory to proliferate a tissue culture in a stable manner.  Previous cell lines had failed to provide Dr. Gey with the stability and immortality he needed to achieve the Tissue Culture Laboratory’s goal.  However, the biopsy specimen from Henrietta Lacks’ cervical carcinoma grew prolifically. This was the first human cancer cell line to become continually reproducible and the researchers named their discovery “HeLa cells” as a reference to the first two letters in Henrietta Lacks’ name (Lucey).  The sturdy nature of the cancer cells made fantastic test subjects that were sent to scientists in the United States and around the world.  HeLa cells would come to be,

“one of the most important tools in medicine, vital for developing the polio vaccine, cloning, gene mapping, in vitro fertilization, and more” (Skloot).

Henrietta’s cells had been manipulated, experimented-with, bought and sold all over the world and opened the door to a surge of biomedical progress and financial success. However, while the scientific community was making billions, Henrietta Lacks’ surviving family was struggling to make ends meet.  Her cells were making enormous profits and the family could not even afford their own health insurance. Rebecca Skloot’s book, The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, brings Henrietta’s story to the mainstream. The publication and vivid cover choice came as a powerful protest with convincing motives at the right time.

In order to explore the significance of Skloot’s influence on the subject, it is important to acknowledge the historical context surrounding the timing of her publication.  Although the content of the book is both compelling and thought-provoking, controversies around scientific progress and bioethics were rampant.  The negative connotation surrounding vaccinations, the recent cloning of Dolly the sheep, the term “Big Pharma,” and the idea of the invention of disease were fresh in the minds of the general public (“Cloning Dolly”).  Some articles written at the turn of the decade, including a particular one by Martha Rosenberg, an investigative health reporter, “demonized” some scientific progress (Novella). It was in this era of more widespread scientific distrust that Rebecca Skloot published her book. The conflict surrounding research laboratories unethically profiting from the success of HeLa cells with no credit or benefit to the Lacks family fits well within the overall sentiment at time of publication.

Rebecca Skloot’s front book cover is an effective means of protest by itself, which goes beyond the surrounding historical context.  Skloot’s choice of vivid color choice for a background of dividing cells is starkly juxtaposed to a faded black and white photograph of Henrietta Lacks.  The cells look vibrant and alive; their cytoskeleton (yellow) are positioned like the seeds of a dandelion about to fly-off in the wind to suggest the microscope stain was taken while the cells were in rapid movement. The photograph is black and white but is both faded and being slightly overtaken by the color in the background.  The combination of such color choice is mesmerizing and yet logically representative of the context of the novel: Henrietta’s life was overshadowed by the success of her cell line.  The red color pallet reminds the viewer of flames and may be due to an intentional appeal to pathos: red can both simultaneously and ironically appeal to love and anger. However, another important element is the picture of Henrietta.  By placing a picture of a proud mother on the front cover, Skloot has effectively represented identities of “motherhood” and African American Pride.  In a time where the injustice against females and minority groups is being examined, Skloot’s image choice is both profound and effective.

In addition to the visual importance, Skloot’s emphasis on word choice and inclusion of a brief introduction on the front cover simultaneously appeals to pathos and logos.  Ethos, the persuasion by credibility, is not invoked in the choice of front cover images or phrasing (“Ethos). Skloot’s use of passionate words and phrases persuade by accessing the emotional side of the viewer.  A reader sees the proud smiling woman and the word “immortal” perhaps initially believing this story to be that of redemption and legacy.  Then the explanation comes: “Doctors took…without asking.” Immediately, the reader’s view has turned from hope to distrust or anger.  Skloot is appealing to negative emotions that will hopefully convince the reader to ease their confusion by further investigations. She intentionally bolds the first two letters of Henrietta Lacks in her title to trigger the interest of the competent scientific community. It is a bold technique to both grab the attention of those familiar with HeLa cells while preparing to question the ethics of their actions.  It is highly likely that an educated scientific researcher knows what a HeLa cell is without knowing the convoluted ethical background surrounding their discovery, use and success. Skloot makes a similar nod to the scientific community by including part of her introduction on the front cover.  By giving a logical flow of the content of her book, she is appealing to logos while also mirroring the format of a common scientific abstract. She introduces the background, presents a problem and hopes the reader will turn the pages to see her hypothesis and results. Skloot also introduces the common identities of “motherhood,” “children,” and “moral” in her brief introduction on the cover. These identities help to attach the reader to the ethical argument that Skloot will eventually employ in her book.

The timing of publication and cover design played a small part in the outcome that would finally bring justice to the Lacks family and bring clarity to the issues of bioethics. Skloot’s passion to tell an emotional story rooted in bio-ethical injustice paid off.  Henrietta Lacks name is finally recognized at John Hopkins as both a memorial award and hospital wing (“Henrietta Lacks Award”).  In 2013, the outcry regarding biomedical research ethics reached the attention of the National Institute of Health.  After 60 years, the NIH negotiated that

“Lack’s genome data will be accessible only to those who apply for and are granted permission. And two representatives of the Lacks family will serve on the NIH group responsible for reviewing...access to HeLa cells” (Kaplan).

 In addition, after the book gained such popularity to be named by more than 60 critics as “one of the best books of 2010,” it is now in the process of being made into an HBO movie starring Oprah Winfrey.  Skloot’s protest very effectively changed the scientific outlook on bioethics while bringing justice to a family through recognition and policy change.

 (See works cited in comments if necessary)