(Re)Constructing the Knights of Science: Parasitologists and their Literary Imaginations

摘要

The accolade "Knight of Science" reflects tellingly on the author, fellow parasitologist Ronald Ross, 2 and gestures more broadly to the romanticised construction of scientific expeditions. The implication here is that Dutton, who helped elucidate the aetiology of relapsing fever and discovered one of the causative agents of African Sleeping Sickness (Trypanosoma Gambiense), fought on behalf of science, risking his own life to propagate and advance tropical medicine as a discipline. The further appellation "Galahad" posits Dutton as Sir Galahad and scientific discovery as the holy grail of Arthurian legend. Colonial administrator Sir William MacGregor similarly lionises the profession in an address given at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in 1900, "you will in all probability be able to establish the existence of maladies at present unknown and unrecognised [. . .] can any man desire greater glory." he asks (978). The "glory" associated with scientific research, particularly research in the colonies, is a concept propagated by its association with the broadening of frontiers (both figurative and literal), but, for parasitologist Ronald Ross, an unfulfilled ideal that he struggles with his entire career. How far is this "glory" a true reflection on scientific pursuits or a constructed cultural image. In his Memoirs (1923) Ross recalls that "a witty friend of [his] once remarked that the world thinks of the man of science as one who pulls out his watch and exclaims: 'Ha! half an hour to spare before dinner: I will just step down to my laboratory and make a discovery!'" (v-vi). This unrealistic image of success is precisely the reason he proposes for writing his Memoirs, which, the subtitle boasts, include a "full account of the great malaria problem and its solution." However, regarding the public's delusions surrounding the "man of science" he goes on to say, "who, but men of science themselves are to blame for such a misconception" (vi). He criticises the history of discovery as a "record of results" that eschew "that sacred passion for discovery that leads to them" (vi). However it is just this "sacred passion" that is constructed in the many discourses related to parasitology and tropical medicine at the turn of the century. In Membranes Laura Otis examines the interdisciplinary discourses surrounding the changing concept of selfhood in the nineteenth century, noting a confluence between "political and biological thinking" (4). Following the development of microbiology, scientists, she argues, "assumed the heroic role of soldiers, the creators and defenders of empire" (28). The adoption of this heroic persona by parasitologists in the use of Arthurian archetypes and metaphors, as well as those of Ancient Greek and Roman mythology, served to romanticise parasitology by grounding it in literary history. The anxieties surrounding selfhood that Otis examines are pertinent to parasitological research, which necessitates discussions of self and other as host and parasite. The status of parasitologists as "creators and defenders of empire" is particularly fitting given their direct and indirect involvement in imperial expansion. The parasite as both "other" and somatic invader threatens the integrity of British selfhood. Stephen Arata recognises the fear that the "civilised" world might be colonised by "primitive" forces, which he identifies in late-nineteenth century popular fiction, as symptomatic of a widespread anxiety concerning the moral, social and imperial decline of Britain as a global power (622). This notion of reverse-colonisation, of "imperial practices mirrored back in monstrous forms" (Arata 623) articulates a fear that the Western world will fall victim to the dangers of the colonial environment – that Western sanitary science will prove ineffective against tropical disease. The dual fears of national and personal usurpation implicate ideas about national identity in the construction of "self"; parasitologists, who sought to alleviate the infiltration of British (and colonial) bodies, and in doing so strengthen Britain's position as a global power, recognised the significance of this relationship. The infusion of parasitology discourse with British myths about nationhood enabled parasitologists to create public selves that garnered cultural authority.