Barbara Ehrenreich’s “Welcome to Cancerland”

Barbara Ehrenreich, an American feminist who was diagnosed with breast cancer, gives her brutally honest opinion on how corrupt the idea of breast cancer awareness has gotten in her essay “Welcome to Cancerland.” Once Ehrenreich was diagnosed with breast cancer, she was motivated to read up more about the illness. What she found online was endless blogs, sites, and groups dedicated to helping calm the nerves of other patients. Ehrenreich noticed an overall positive mood that people promoted; as she got deeper into her treatment she was directed towards a lot of support groups and came across countless programs that worked with companies who were advocating breast cancer awareness. Ehrenreich discusses how this is more of a way for people and corporations to help women without being a feminist. But what they fail to address is what Ehrenreich describes as the real issues; she believes that the focus of this “awareness” should be on the causes of breast cancer, like environmental effects, and on the problems with detection and treatment of cancer. Breast Cancer awareness has strayed from its initial purpose and has turned into a corporation’s way of milking people’s money.

Ehrenreich brings up very valid points throughout her essay, but for me it was not effective in making me want to believe her. Logically it makes a lot of sense; she discusses how some programs are “an inefficient way of raising money” and how “the benefits of routine mammography ‘are not well established.’” She makes it very evident that there are issues that need to be solved; there needs to be a more efficient way of raising money that will go straight to the American Cancer Society, and the science behind mammography needs to be solidified. Even though she incorporates these issues into her argument, she develops a very angry tone when discussing her objections. She claims that the groups of optimistic and upbeat survivors are “not my sisterhood,” and that “what sustained me through the ‘treatments’ is a purifying rage, a resolve, framed in the sleepless nights of chemotherapy.” She leaves the reader with a lasting impression when she exclaims that “I will not go into that last good night with a teddy bear tucked under my arm.” Ehrenreich gives off a very bad attitude that is not appealing to readers. She just seems bitter towards people that are actually trying to help and support her. She makes the reader feel bad, and almost guilty, that they ever thought that they were being supportive by helping raise money and awareness. She should direct her energy and frustration on convincing people to work towards a better understanding of what the intentions are of breast cancer awareness. There’s no sense in putting people and optimism down, especially those who are also struggling, just because she doesn’t agree with it. She might as well appreciate their positive attitude, and use that positivity to help readers realize what other wonderful actions, and more beneficial actions, they can take to help.

Response to “Welcome to Cancerland”

Barbara Ehrenreich is an editor and author for Harper’s Magazine, has written a best-selling book, and holds a Ph.D in cell biology.  Her report deals with the struggles, challenges, and anger that she must deal with when she receives the bad news that she has breast cancer.  She opens and then, for the most part, goes on to write the rest of her essay in an anecdotal form.  Relaying her own emotions and story of her battle with cancer and lack of empathy towards the many groups and people who are out there to give her just that.  She is clearly bothered by the fact that she has cancer and feels as if it is an annoyance to her and her life.  But what infuriates her even more are the numerous organizations that she feels have “capitalized” on cancer.  Ehrenreich discusses the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation, Relay for Life, and the American Cancer Society all within her piece and feels as if they aren’t doing any good for cancer.  Questioning how much of the money that they raise each year actually goes to cancer research since they must keep up the demand for “pink ribbons and teddy bears.”  Additionally, she discusses how she went to one of the many websites that have been established as a sort of support group for the women and wrote out her feelings in a blog post waiting to see how people would respond.  She states that she is “angry” and discusses her “…complaints about debilitating treatments, recalcitrant insurance companies, environmental carcinogens, and, most daringly, “sappy pink ribbons”” (50).  The responses that she gets come with force and mainly rebut anything that she has said or feels.  Many of the other women feel she has a pessimistic view on her experience and needs to brighten up a little and pick her chin up.  These are exactly the type of responses that Ehrenreich was expecting to get and isn’t surprised, but that still doesn’t change her mood on the whole thing.  Near the end of her report she tells the audience that after treatment she is cancer free, but that still isn’t enough to please her.  Wondering how long it’ll be before more cancerous cells that are in hiding surface and invade her lymph nodes or bloodstream.  While attending the local Relay for Life in her town and taking part in the survivor lap she has some choice words to say regarding the whole title of being a “survivor.”  She is even so bold to go up and ask the other survivors what they think of the term that has been placed on them.  Once again she receives the responses that she expects, with a few who surprise her and actually feel similarly to how she does.  Overall, the message she is trying to get across is that it doesn’t matter whether she is cancer free or not because she is still dying and is going to die.  That none of the women who are cancer free should be celebrating in rejoice because they’re going to die to, and there’s no point in being happy about death.

Upon reading this report I became more and more perplexed and perturbed as I read it.  I couldn’t believe that someone could have such animosity for the many organizations and establishments that are out there to help people like her.  That she was upset with the fact that she had cancer and wasn’t willing to change that.  No one is ever happy that they have cancer, it’s a death sentence usually and is scary, but that doesn’t mean that you should hate on everyone else who is in the same position as you and feel as if they are living their “new” life incorrectly.  The fact that she is so pessimistic about the whole experience is what really threw me.  I couldn’t tell if it was that she is a cold, lonely person without a family or means of support and that’s why she was so bitter about the whole thing, or if she simply has a cold soul.  Being a “Debbie Downer” and taking the negative road the whole time, even when it came to the Relay for Life events and Susan G. Komen walks.  Feeling as if these people who participate aren’t doing the right thing or are acting in a foolish manner really baffled me.  I realize that there is always going to be someone who will have a sour opinion about an idea, topic, struggle, or life event, but that doesn’t mean that you should take this anger out on everyone else.  Aside from that though, Ehrenreich does use specific literary devices to convey these feelings.  Clearly ethos and pathos play a major role.  Ethos because she is often taking the road less traveled when it comes to the ethics and ways of coping with cancer.  Knowing that by doing so she will upset her reader, but not letting that phase her too much.  Pathos presents itself throughout the whole piece.  Cancer is a very emotional experience for the patient and their family, I know since both my dad and aunt had cancer.  She takes that emotion and runs with it, just not in the usual way that you would expect a survivor to.  The norm would be to come out feeling sad, lost, accomplished, changed, etc. by one’s experience with cancer, but she plays the anger, hate, and ruthless side of it.  Stating that she “will not go into that last good night with a teddy bear tucked under my arm” (53).  Showing that no matter what, when her time comes it’s not going to be in a childish or lovable way.  Additionally, she explains her story with narration, comparison, and examples, but does lack to give the definitions of certain scientific terms that she uses.