"Thirteen Ways of Looking at Henrietta Lacks" Response

From his article, “Thirteen Ways of Looking at Henrietta Lacks,” John D. Lantos offers critique on the common narrative of Henrietta Lacks and how she was perceived by Rebecca Skloot’s The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. After offering a brief summary detailing the events surrounding Henrietta Lacks and her immortal cells, Lantos mirrors Wallace Stevens’ “Thirteen Ways of Looking at Blackbird” by writing about thirteen different ways of looking at Henrietta Lacks and her immortal cells. From the thirteen points, I find that Lantos’ comments on Skloot to be the most interesting; what was the intention behind Skloot’s The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks and did she go in to too much detail about the family? Furthermore, was the personal history of the Lacks family necessary to the overall story? As Lantos states, “Skloot’s brilliant journey of discovery starts to seem as exploitative as the discoveries of the scientists 50 years earlier. She turns Henrietta’s life and the lives of her descendants into what Karla Holloway (2012) calls ‘an open narrative for public consumption.’”[1] From this quote, then, I question the intention behind Skloot’s journalism on Henrietta Lacks and her family and whether Lantos is being too critical? Though I question Skloot’s intentions, I find that it would be a stretch to say that she was as exploitative as the doctors at John Hopkins University.

While reading The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, I found myself asking the same question as Lantos: what are Skloot’s intentions on writing about Henrietta Lacks and is her account of the family another form of exploitation? Furthermore, did Skloot, being a white woman, have the right to write about Henrietta’s life? After reading the book, I am still not sure where I stand on the situation at hand; I think that for some in the Lacks family, Skloot would be seen as sincere, while others might think of her like another doctor. I find that Skloot was sincere in her journalism; I think she had genuine interest about Henrietta Lacks, her family, and her true history. As she states, “[t]he Lackses challenged everything I thought I knew about faith, science, journalism and race. Ultimately, this book is the result. It’s not only the story of HeLa cells and Henrietta Lacks, but of Henrietta’s family – particularly Deborah- and their lifelong struggle to make peace with the existence of those cells, and the science that made them possible.”[2] Another question, though, that comes to mind is how did Skloot compensate the Lacks family after the commercial success of the book? In this sense, I think that one could say that Skloot exploited the Lacks family if they did not receive compensation for the book. With the book gaining widespread popularity and having a movie being made out of it, what role do the Lacks play in all of this?

Overall, then, I suppose I am grappling still on whether I think Skloot exploited the family or not. After finishing the book, I think that she was sincere, but it cannot be denied that she used the Lackses for her benefit to write her book. Furthermore, after the book’s success, I am not sure how she allocated the royalties from the book or how often she stays in contact with the Lackses; I suppose that warrants more research, if the information is available.

---

[1] John D. Lantos, “Thirteen Ways of Looking at Henrietta Lacks.” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, volume 59, no. 2 (spring 2016), 229.

[2] Rebecca Skloot, The Immortal life of Henrietta Lacks, (New York: Crown Publishers, 2010), 7.