– by Wood Institute travel grantee Erin Solomons*
In November 2016, I visited the College of the Physicians of Philadelphia, under a travel grant from the F.C. Wood Institute. Over the past year and a half, I have been pursuing a practice-based MPhil/PhD in Photography in the United Kingdom. This means that I use the creation of artwork and traditional research methods to critically assess my area of interest. Prior to enrolling in the program, my art practice used raw materials and photography to investigate mental health, trauma, and American identity. My work has reflected the boundaries between the human body and intrusive interactions upon it.
At present, my research objectives center on how bodily trauma can shift a person’s view of reality. I find this fascinating because past trauma can be carried in the present as a form of protection; if the same traumatic situation arises, then it can be seen and acknowledged.
Within my artwork, I use two mediums that are commonly interpreted as evidence of an event, particularly instances of trauma: bodily fluids and photography. So far, I have combined my urine and bile with an antiquated photographic process to abstract images to the extent that distinguishing between the two (bodily fluids and photographic process) becomes challenging. One of my goals in this series was to emphasize how a person’s experience of trauma can become embodied.
During my time at the College, I examined sources about humoral theory, 19th century medical treatments, and theories about insanity in the late 1880s. To clarify, humoral theory sought to balance four fluids in the body: blood, yellow bile, black bile, and phlegm. Treatments were based on the concept that one or more of these fluids was either abundant or lacking within the body. However, in the mid 1800s this began to change significantly.
A prominent aspect of 19th century wartime trauma was the fragmentation of the body. This is one of the reasons why the Civil War is one of my case studies. A key reference was a former president of the College, Silas Weir Mitchell, who created and sent out a questionnaire to Civil War veterans who had undergone amputation. A number of the questions specifically asked about the veterans’ bodies, and about how the amputees adjusted to life after surgery. A few questions addressed behavioral changes after the veterans were injured. I find this approach intriguing because it gave a subtle emotional nuance to trauma within the medical field.
As I delved deeper into a range of perspectives about physical and mental trauma from the Civil War, I learned about the shift away from bodily fluids in humoral theory towards evidence-based science in the mid to late 19th century. In hindsight, I think that parts of Mitchell’s questionnaire, possibly unintentionally, contributed towards a Behavioral Scientific understanding about humans – specifically, that they are social animals that require certain amounts of emotional connection. In this area of my research, I examine how intrusively violent interactions can leave physical evidence; but also, how emotional trauma is understood and handled.
As a way to compliment my archival references, I visited the Mütter Museum. Initially, I was drawn to a large wooden and glass display cabinet. The human skulls inside were collected as a method to disprove phrenology, which was a study about how the shape of a human’s head affected their personality. I could not help but wonder what set of circumstances happened for a person’s remains to be put in a place where they are displayed to an audience. Some of the skulls belonged to people who committed criminal acts, some committed suicide, and a number did not have identities, or rather a name. Historically, the bodies of criminals and people with extreme mental illness have been used in studying humans and in furthering medical practice. The human body runs the risk of losing portions or all of its identity when it becomes an object to be studied. However, the ways in which these remains are treated can help to further establish or diminish their humanness. I think the museum shows respect towards these specimens, through rules, like no photography. The museum also accounts for the original research intentions for why they are on display. How human these remains are allowed to be is dependent on how other people treat them. I view this as a metaphor for how much an individual relies on others to establish their identity, as well as their sense of self worth.
Two primary areas of research that I developed, while at the College, were how sensations and emotions from the original trauma can be carried into the present, and how to re-establish a human respect with the fragmented body. What I endeavor to illustrate in my research is how trauma can be embodied and carried on for the duration of a person’s life. However, I draw from Attachment theory, which is about the importance of social bonds and love, to assert that emotional connectedness and empathy can give the support necessary to process trauma.
By reflecting on circumstances where the live body has been visibly and dramatically injured, and the dead body is solely dependent on others to instill its human value, I created literal and tangible metaphors for my argument toward a more Behavioral Scientific approach towards emotional trauma. Even though the body and mind can survive unimaginable obstacles, a person’s life can become about surviving instead of living. I would like to thank the College of the Physicians of Philadelphia for this opportunity to develop my research in a way that might not have otherwise been possible.
*Erin Solomons is an MPhil/PhD candidate in Practice-based Photography at the University for the Creative Arts Rochester. She received an F.C. Wood Institute Travel Grant from the College of Physicians of Philadelphia in 2016.