Source F is from the Reminiscences (past memories) of a colleague of Joseph Lister written in the 19th Century called ‘The Carbolic Spray’. The Source explains that Lister was constantly changing his ideas because they were unreliable or did not work, it explains that the Carbolic Spray was costly and not effective, the Source also states that although most thought it didn’t work, Listers friends still used the Carbolic Spray on their hands and that Lister could always recognise his friends from what he called the ‘anti septic hand’. This Source gives a negative image about the Carbolic Spray as it states that it did not work well, this gives the impression that Lister didn’t know what he was doing and therefore agreeing with the interpretation that Lister is a crank, we know this because it says “The other surgeons notices that Lister was constantly changing his techniques and came to the conclusion that this was because his results were not good” and this quote also gives the impression that Lister had no idea what he was doing, also agreeing with the interpretation in saying that he was a Crank. The Source also states that Carbolic Acid did not work so much so that Lister stopped using it, we know this because the Source says “Old time surgeons chuckled and said that Lister had abandoned antiseptics”. The Source gives the impression that Listers ideas about the Carbolic Spray were bad because it was costly and didn’t work well, we know this because the Source says “It was costly and cumbersome and often at fault”, this quote gives the impression that Lister had no idea what he was doing and implies that he was a Crank and also agreeing with the interpretation. This Source, however, can be used again Listers interpretation in saying because the Source states that Listers friends used the Carbolic Spray, because they are closer to him, maybe they gave him a chance and found that the Carbolic Spray did work and was good, we get this because the Source says “Lister would rather pride himself in this and say that he could recognise his friends when he shook hands with them, as he knew them by their ‘antiseptic hand’.
Source G is a 19th century print of the Carbolic Acid being used during an Operation. There appears to be 4 surgeons around an operating table and a patient on a table. The table appears to have clean sheets on it and it looks to be clean and fresh. The surgeons all appear to look clean, smart and well dressed; this would stop diseases and infection from spreading. The room looks to be big and seems as if it was built for the purpose of operating, which gives you the impression that this operation is taking place in a Hospital and not at a home. You can see a small table next to the operating table that is holding the Carbolic Spray which shows that it is being used often. The patient appears still and not in pain, and the surgeons do not appear to have to put in much effort to keep the patient calm and out of pain. The full room looks to be in a clean and professional state. This Source gives the impression that the Carbolic Spray works very well and is used in operations and that it does make a very big improvement! This Source would argue against Leeson’s interpretation as it gives the impression Lister was not a Crank and that he was a very important person who had a lot to offer in surgery and after care! This source can also be used to support the interpretation because someone called Simpson developed Anaesthetics which could mean that Listers work is not doing very much, it also meant that Lister could not have achieved much unless Simpson had invented the Anaesthetics, which could imply that Lister was a Crank.
Source H is a Record of Lister when he was treating fractures using Carbolic Acid. It explains that from 1864 to 1866, before Carbolic Spray was introduces the fractures treated were 34, and from that 15 people died, and only 19 recovered. The table to results then explain that during 1867 and 1870, after the introduction of Carbolic Spray the number of fractures treated was 40, and from that 34 recovered and only 6 died. This shows that the death rate decreased dramatically after Carbolic Spray was introduced and therefore implies that it works well and does the job that it is intended to do. This Source argues against the interpretation that Lister was a Crank because the fact that the Death rate decreased dramatically after the introduction of the Carbolic Spray implies that Lister made something that worked well. Also, the fact that Lister kept a record of results gives the impression that he was an organised person who knew what he was doing which also went against the interpretation. The Source gives the impression that Lister was a very important person who gave a lot to medical care and surgery and that he was not a Crank, but someone who dramatically improved surgery with the Carbolic Spray.
Source I is an extract of one of Pasteur’s lectures given at a university of Parris in 1864 about how he discovered the germ theory. Pasteur was responsible for creating the germ theory and this source highlights one of his experiments. The Source explains that if you leave something for a small amount of time then it becomes mouldy, but if you heat it, then it removes any germs that may be present. He continues to explain that if you block off the air from coming into contact with the matter, then it will stay fresh and will not get mouldy for weeks, months, and even years! Pasteur in his lecture explains that boiling liquid destroys germs, in the extract; it says “By boiling, I destroyed any germs contained in the liquid or against the glass”. He also explains that creating an airtight environment will destroy germs and we know this because during the lecture he says “I draw the neck of the flask into a point and a curve leaving only its end open” He then continues to say that “Now the liquid in the flask will remain pure, not only for two days, a month, a year, but three or four years”. Pasteur was a scientist, more importantly he had a narrow field of expertise. Lister took the germ theory and developed it into a more practical way and he saved lives! This source can also be used for and against the interpretation that Lister was a crank. It can be used to say that Lister was a crank because the whole Source is about Pasteur, and doesn’t even mention Lister at all, implying that Pasteur was more important, Lister was not a very good communicator with others but Pasteur was, this could imply that Lister is strange and a crank because he doesn’t communicate with other well, and because he didn’t try to explain his ideas very well at one point. This Source can also be used against the interpretation that Lister is a crank because Lister took Pasteur’s work and developed it in regards of surgery. No other person had done this. It was especially important when still so many people would still not accept Pasteur’s theory at the time. This shows that Lister was very important and not a crank because he was able to develop ideas to make them better to save lives. As well as this, many people would not have accepted Pasteur’s theory at the time because people believe in spontaneous generation, and they liked to keep their old ways because they believe that they were correct, because of this it could also be argued that Pasteur was a crank too, maybe all people who help develop and make new things are seen to be cranks!
Source J is Listers opinion about Pasteur’s work; it is from a book that was published in 1982 by Longman called ‘A hundred years of Medical Care’. The Source explains that Lister gave a lot of thanks and credit to Pasteur’s work. The Source continues to explain that Lister got his ideas when he was reading Pasteur’s books, we know this because the Source says “The flood of light ad been thrown upon this important subject by the writing of Louis Pasteur”. Because Lister read Pasteur’s books he began to roll up his sleeves, protect his clothes, pin a large clean towel over his waist coat and trousers. He also started to wash his hands, disinfect his hands with carbolic acid and put his instruments in the same disinfectant before he actually set to work. The source says “Lister removed his coat, rolled up his sleeves and, to protect his clothes, pinned a large towel over his trousers and waist coat. He washed his hands and dipped them into a strong solution of carbolic acid. His instruments lay in the same disinfectant. Then he set to work”. This source can be used against the interpretation that Lister was a Crank because Lister gave credit to others if he took their work to make it better, a crank may not give credit to others for their work. He was also the first to acknowledge and apply Pasteur’s work. This could also be used to support the interpretation that Lister was a Crank because he had to use other peoples work to better it and that he could not make his own research and better it, Pasteur had done all the hard work in researching and studying the germ theory, and Lister only had to apply it.
Source D could be used to argue that Lister was not a crank because of the fact that he had a book written about him, and it can also be used to argue that he was a crank because it explains that surgeons loved their old ways and didn’t want to change, so the fact that Lister wanted to change meant that he was different and strange, which implies that he is a crank. Source E could be used to support that interpretation that Lister was a crank because it shows one of Simpsons experiments with anaesthetics and how important he was in developing surgery, this is not about Lister which implies that his ideas were not important and that he was a Crank, the Source can also be used to argue that Lister was not a crank because Lister was no different than others, maybe all developers and improvers were seen as Cranks so what makes Lister any different? Source F can be used to say that Leeson’s interpretation that Lister was a crank Is true because it explains that Lister was always changing his methods and ideas so he could never come to any real conclusion as to how to best help surgery, this can also be used to go against the interpretation because it explains that Listers friends and relatives used it and that he noticed them from their hands which he called the ‘antiseptic hand’. Source G is an image showing the use of the carbolic spray, it can be used against the interpretation that Lister was a crank because the patient looks calm and the image looks organised and calm, this Source can also be used to support the interpretation that Lister was a crank because anaesthetics came first so Lister cannot be that important. Source I can be used to support the interpretation that Lister was a crank because it highlights the importance of Pasteur and that he was more important that Lister, Source I can also be used to explain against the Interpretation that Lister was a crank because Lister was able to take Pasteur’s work and develop them into something better and that saved lives! Source J is can be used to support the interpretation because even Lister admits that others were more important to him such as Pasteur, but it can also be used against the interpretation because he has the guts to give other people credit instead of just taking all the credit for something for himself, would a crank give someone else credit for their work? Source H can be used against the interpretation that Lister was a crank because he kept records of what he had achieved, would a crank keep records of their findings, and the source also shows that after the introduction of Carbolic Acid in surgery, the death rate fell dramatically!
I personally do not believe that Lister was a Crank at all, he was able to develop other ideas from other people and make them better to save lives, I don’t think that this is wrong because people are always using current ideas and bettering them, so I don’t believe that Lister should be seen as a Crank just because people think he kept copying ideas. I do not think that any specific person that improved medical care cam be better than anyone else, I think that they all rely on each other to make everything work correctly. Anaesthetics and Antiseptics work together to make things work better and to save lives and ease pain. Pasteur started the idea of antiseptic, and Lister developed it and made it better. Simpson developed Anaesthetics to make people pass out during operations; these two together I think rely on each other, without the two working together during surgery then surgery would not have been successful. Because of all this I think all people rely on all other people to keep everything working, so I do not believe that Lister was any more of a crank than the others were. If aftercare was poor, then patience would also die, Florence Nightingale was a nurse who introduced many schools so that training nurses could get new training in the art of medicine, she also made it so that ward floors were cleaned, and that beds were spaced further apart to give people more room. Nightingale also made sure that all equipment and bedding was washed fully between patients to prevent the spread of infection. She made sure that wards had a lot of fresh air and that all rooms were clean at all times. She also changed the look as nurses, in the early 19th century nurses were seen as drunken prostitutes, and after Florence Nightingale that all changed! The things Florence did made the death rate from aftercare go down dramatically!
The fact that Leeson came to the conclusion that Lister was a Crank could be down to many reasons, especially since he was Listers Assistant. He could have done this because they could have had an argument, just because they are colleagues doesn’t mean they have to be friends. It could also be due to the fact that Leeson may have thought that he was more important that Lister and that he wasn’t getting the credit that he should be getting, this could have caused him to feel professional jealousy. The other reason could also be due to the fact that Leeson actually believes that Lister was less important compared to other people; Leeson would spend a lot of time with him so he could have seen another side of him that would have been stranger making him see him as a crank. The other thing that could cause Leeson to say these things about Lister is the fact that the quote could have been written out of context.
