Welcome to my ongoing tangential series if cholera trivia!
There’s historical precedent for the cholera-water drinking from my very own city! Local hygienicist Max von Pettenkofer studied cholera and drew all the right public health conclusions - making sure the Munich water supply was brought in to a mountain stream 50 km to the south, installing a very forward-looking and large-scale sewage system and coming up with building regulations that ensured the city ended up being one of the cleanest of its time. He was able to count on a great seal of support from Mad King Ludwig, who apart from being quite mad was a huge fan of state-of-the-art infrastructure.
However, Pettenkofer clung to the miasma theory until the end of his life and got into a very public row with fellow hygienicist Robert Koch, who in 1883 discovered Vibrio Cholerae.
Pettenkofer was so sure he was right that he made a show of himself and several of his assistants drinking what he thought was supposedly cholera-infested water - of course, it really was infectious, and at least one of the assistants contracted cholera and subsequently died. Pettenkofer escaped unharmed, probably because he‘d previously been exposed.
He died by his own hand a few years later as a very bitter man because despite his considerable achievements, science had passed him by.
I do a nice little city tour in which cholera landmarks feature heavily, lile the one street that was actually built to Pettenkofer‘s ideas.
I was just heartbroken about poor Chloë. She had just broken out of her constricting role as a pampered lapdog and attained real freedom. She held her own with the pariah dogs and clearly enjoyed becoming one herself. She was a hero who saved Fleury from the sepoy! And for that she is killed. There is a feminist message there!
Doctors haven't changed a bit! I read recently that the cure for scurvy was discovered and used in the Navy hundreds of years before the doctors accepted it, and in fact many, many sailors died over those hundreds of years because of the doctors' reluctance to accept evidence, listen to sailors' experience or run trials. I can imagine Dr Dunstable doing the same thing... and our modern-day doctors too. Although, Farrell is right in pointing out that we enable this kind of non-rational approach by judging trustworthiness on, well, a non-rational basis. The sleep of reason indeed.
One thing I find a bit jarring about this book is that what it's describing is pretty awful, harrowing really, but because of the humour and Farrell highlighting the ridiculousness of the situation and the characters, I find myself not really engaging emotionally with it. Which is probably a good thing, because otherwise it would be a pretty miserable reading experience I suppose, but I do find it strange being so emotionally unengaged from the characters and the environment.
Good point. The juxtaposition of humour and horror is, I think, the most interesting part of this novel - and reading it, it becomes clear why Hilary Mantel admired it. Her novels do the same. Wolf Hall is very funny, while being a book about beheadings. I'm not sure whether I feel unengaged. On this second read, I feel especially captivated by the Collector, and less so by Fleury. I do think that jarring quality is deliberate though: I'm always very distrustful of books with no humour in them, because life is funny and ridiculous, even in its darkest moments.
Very true! And you're right about Mantel's similar horror and humour combination... but I find myself being more emotionally engaged with Mantel's characters because of the humour, I find it humanising, and you're right, true to life. Whereas for this book, I'm enjoying it and I'm finding it really interesting and funny, and I'm engaged in the story... but I don't care about any of the characters particularly, even the Collector, who I find the most interesting and possibly has the most interiority throughout the book (?), or the women, who seem to be the least ridiculous. I am curious if that would change on reread though!
I agree with not being emotionally engaged in the sense of identifying with any of the characters, or admiring any of them either. I think calling them by their titles, The Collector, etc, is somehow partly responsible for this--they seem like types instead of real people to me.
Yes, I agree with you. For me, I just think so much of it is so farcical, I can't take it seriously. I have been wondering if it's the passage of time and I might have felt differently if I had read it back in the late 70's when it was written? I don't have an answer to that.
I must admit it is so outrageous and ridiculous and idiotic and terrible that I found it really funny! Another perfect slapstick moment with a very dark side.
I keep trying to “figure out” who was able to survive and rise to the occasion of this horror show. I mean of course humans will fall and rise continually. The Collector and Dr. McNab are my picks. The Collector because he is able to part with his possessions and ego( to a degree) and McNab just seems so steady and confident in his beliefs. Padre and Dunstaple are not able to adapt nearly as well, though Padre seems to have his ditch digging moments. And just when the Magistrate who was stepping up and on the threshold of something, he succumbs to just giving up. The women take secondary roles with this author, but adapt fairly well. Anyways, agree with Simon’s commentary that truth and falsehood distinctions are complicated by our emotions, our senses and our critical need for certainty and meaning. Doesn’t that just explain it all?
It figures the opium manager was trying to make a buck off reselling the food he was trying to get through the auction. And the idea of auctioning the dead people’s food seems so strange. I must say it feels like I’m right there living this nightmare because of all the strange details being described. Killing Chloe was heartless because she was actually doing a great job as a guard dog. It was definitely a hideous experience. I did not read any of the links to the diaries Farrell read as research for this novel. I think the links were in one of the tangent articles about cholera.
So much to comment on. I do miss the daily chat of 2024 WP where every chapter and all the characters received a ton of attention from so many.
That said, I love this book also. How sad Farrell died young, with beautiful words and pages never written. A couple of random phrases (of so many) from Siege that delighted me:
“.. the floor around him was thickly covered with tiny discarded wings, as if with the residue of his own aerial poetic thoughts.”
“…he had taken care to position himself in a noble pensive attitude..”
“…the sepoy sped back and forth in the clearing like a trout in a restaurant tank.”
“…more than one lady gave a handful of pearls for a bottle of honey or a box of dates.”
While there is no way I would ever “slow read” most books, this has been a unique and revelatory experience and one of the better parts of my days. Thanks, again, to Simon and all who also contribute.
Poor Dr McNab. The wilful ignorance of the people in failing to listen to scientific reason and doing mental gymnastics in order to hang on to their own worldview and prejudices was very depressing, because it’s so accurate. The sleep of reason does indeed breed monsters.
But, but…McNab was comfortable saying “ I don’t know” and “ I can’t explain” because science is always evolving. Everyone scoffed at his note taking/ documentation. But also this reminds me of the argument that medicine is both an art and a science and the fact that some people, and ethnicities have natural immunity to fatal diseases.
Welcome to my ongoing tangential series if cholera trivia!
There’s historical precedent for the cholera-water drinking from my very own city! Local hygienicist Max von Pettenkofer studied cholera and drew all the right public health conclusions - making sure the Munich water supply was brought in to a mountain stream 50 km to the south, installing a very forward-looking and large-scale sewage system and coming up with building regulations that ensured the city ended up being one of the cleanest of its time. He was able to count on a great seal of support from Mad King Ludwig, who apart from being quite mad was a huge fan of state-of-the-art infrastructure.
However, Pettenkofer clung to the miasma theory until the end of his life and got into a very public row with fellow hygienicist Robert Koch, who in 1883 discovered Vibrio Cholerae.
Pettenkofer was so sure he was right that he made a show of himself and several of his assistants drinking what he thought was supposedly cholera-infested water - of course, it really was infectious, and at least one of the assistants contracted cholera and subsequently died. Pettenkofer escaped unharmed, probably because he‘d previously been exposed.
He died by his own hand a few years later as a very bitter man because despite his considerable achievements, science had passed him by.
I do a nice little city tour in which cholera landmarks feature heavily, lile the one street that was actually built to Pettenkofer‘s ideas.
Oh wow—we are only a few hours away from you (in Bern). It would be so fun to go on your tour one day!
You‘d be very welcome!
I was just heartbroken about poor Chloë. She had just broken out of her constricting role as a pampered lapdog and attained real freedom. She held her own with the pariah dogs and clearly enjoyed becoming one herself. She was a hero who saved Fleury from the sepoy! And for that she is killed. There is a feminist message there!
Yes, this one really hit me too: it felt like Fleury's own moment of dark dejection.
It’s so true. Through the entire novel he has had a plan for Chloë that hasn’t worked out as he expected.
All the females in his life are out of expectation from pubic hair having to tirelessly working to face eating 🤣
Doctors haven't changed a bit! I read recently that the cure for scurvy was discovered and used in the Navy hundreds of years before the doctors accepted it, and in fact many, many sailors died over those hundreds of years because of the doctors' reluctance to accept evidence, listen to sailors' experience or run trials. I can imagine Dr Dunstable doing the same thing... and our modern-day doctors too. Although, Farrell is right in pointing out that we enable this kind of non-rational approach by judging trustworthiness on, well, a non-rational basis. The sleep of reason indeed.
One thing I find a bit jarring about this book is that what it's describing is pretty awful, harrowing really, but because of the humour and Farrell highlighting the ridiculousness of the situation and the characters, I find myself not really engaging emotionally with it. Which is probably a good thing, because otherwise it would be a pretty miserable reading experience I suppose, but I do find it strange being so emotionally unengaged from the characters and the environment.
Good point. The juxtaposition of humour and horror is, I think, the most interesting part of this novel - and reading it, it becomes clear why Hilary Mantel admired it. Her novels do the same. Wolf Hall is very funny, while being a book about beheadings. I'm not sure whether I feel unengaged. On this second read, I feel especially captivated by the Collector, and less so by Fleury. I do think that jarring quality is deliberate though: I'm always very distrustful of books with no humour in them, because life is funny and ridiculous, even in its darkest moments.
Very true! And you're right about Mantel's similar horror and humour combination... but I find myself being more emotionally engaged with Mantel's characters because of the humour, I find it humanising, and you're right, true to life. Whereas for this book, I'm enjoying it and I'm finding it really interesting and funny, and I'm engaged in the story... but I don't care about any of the characters particularly, even the Collector, who I find the most interesting and possibly has the most interiority throughout the book (?), or the women, who seem to be the least ridiculous. I am curious if that would change on reread though!
I agree with not being emotionally engaged in the sense of identifying with any of the characters, or admiring any of them either. I think calling them by their titles, The Collector, etc, is somehow partly responsible for this--they seem like types instead of real people to me.
Yes, I agree with you. For me, I just think so much of it is so farcical, I can't take it seriously. I have been wondering if it's the passage of time and I might have felt differently if I had read it back in the late 70's when it was written? I don't have an answer to that.
Dunstaple drinking the “rice water” was hard to read. Anyone else feel their stomach curdle? 🤮
I must admit it is so outrageous and ridiculous and idiotic and terrible that I found it really funny! Another perfect slapstick moment with a very dark side.
Yes. I read that and thought have I really understood that correctly😫. Ha ha, it spoilt my breakfast. 🤣
Me too! Scary & very unappetizing.
Especially when he died because of it.
I keep trying to “figure out” who was able to survive and rise to the occasion of this horror show. I mean of course humans will fall and rise continually. The Collector and Dr. McNab are my picks. The Collector because he is able to part with his possessions and ego( to a degree) and McNab just seems so steady and confident in his beliefs. Padre and Dunstaple are not able to adapt nearly as well, though Padre seems to have his ditch digging moments. And just when the Magistrate who was stepping up and on the threshold of something, he succumbs to just giving up. The women take secondary roles with this author, but adapt fairly well. Anyways, agree with Simon’s commentary that truth and falsehood distinctions are complicated by our emotions, our senses and our critical need for certainty and meaning. Doesn’t that just explain it all?
With just 2 - 3 weeks of rations and ammunition left, it’s all very grim. Are any of the characters we’ve come to know going to be allowed to survive?
Yes, although I'm familiar with the overall course of the "mutiny", I'm really curious as to how this is going to conclude as a novel...
It figures the opium manager was trying to make a buck off reselling the food he was trying to get through the auction. And the idea of auctioning the dead people’s food seems so strange. I must say it feels like I’m right there living this nightmare because of all the strange details being described. Killing Chloe was heartless because she was actually doing a great job as a guard dog. It was definitely a hideous experience. I did not read any of the links to the diaries Farrell read as research for this novel. I think the links were in one of the tangent articles about cholera.
You can find the links in our library: https://footnotesandtangents.substack.com/p/the-siege-of-krishnapur-online-resources
Wow, i somehow missed the additional library on the siege as well. So extensive! Thank you, Simon. I will check them out
Thank you! I somehow missed this part of your awesome Substack offerings! Looking forward to reading more.
So much to comment on. I do miss the daily chat of 2024 WP where every chapter and all the characters received a ton of attention from so many.
That said, I love this book also. How sad Farrell died young, with beautiful words and pages never written. A couple of random phrases (of so many) from Siege that delighted me:
“.. the floor around him was thickly covered with tiny discarded wings, as if with the residue of his own aerial poetic thoughts.”
“…he had taken care to position himself in a noble pensive attitude..”
“…the sepoy sped back and forth in the clearing like a trout in a restaurant tank.”
“…more than one lady gave a handful of pearls for a bottle of honey or a box of dates.”
While there is no way I would ever “slow read” most books, this has been a unique and revelatory experience and one of the better parts of my days. Thanks, again, to Simon and all who also contribute.
Poor Dr McNab. The wilful ignorance of the people in failing to listen to scientific reason and doing mental gymnastics in order to hang on to their own worldview and prejudices was very depressing, because it’s so accurate. The sleep of reason does indeed breed monsters.
But, but…McNab was comfortable saying “ I don’t know” and “ I can’t explain” because science is always evolving. Everyone scoffed at his note taking/ documentation. But also this reminds me of the argument that medicine is both an art and a science and the fact that some people, and ethnicities have natural immunity to fatal diseases.
https://scientificorigin.com/born-to-resist-how-some-humans-are-naturally-immune-to-deadly-diseases
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3190445/