Kay Redfield Jamison is a psychiatrist, medical school teacher, investigator, and authority on mood disorders, particularly mania and depression. She is also a professor of English (Saint Andrew’s, Scotland) and an accomplished writer (An Unquiet Mind, Night Falls Fast, Touched With Fire). Nothing Was the Same is her sensitive, yet disarmingly clinical, memoir of grief after the death of her husband, Richard Wyatt, MD, to cancer.
Dr. Jamison summarizes her objectives for Nothing Was the Same in the prologue:
• “When I was young, I thought fearlessness and an easy way with love would see me to the other side of something. Madness taught me otherwise. In the wake of my first insanity I assumed less and doubted more… Needwise, I avoided love… Before mania whipped through my brain I had been curious always to go to the far field, beyond what lay nearest by. After, I drew back from life and watered down my dreams.”
• “We had nearly twenty years together. He was my husband, colleague, and friend; when he became ill and we knew he would die, he became my mentor in how to die with the grace by which he lived. What he could not teach me – no one could – was how to contend with the grief of losing him.”
Jamison shows the reader that being the lover, friend, and husband of a patient suffering from severe mental illness can be a challenging task. Kay Jamison’s late husband suffered from dyslexia himself. Richard was every bit the academic physician (translate nerd, grind, passionate, disciplined), yet he also had the patience, love, and admiration for his wife, to more than suffer many of the consequences of her mental illness. An accomplished clinician and empathic partner, Richard was Kay’s strong ally in her battles with her disease. Dr. Jamison makes it clear that having come to depend on such an extraordinary partner, losing him would be devastating for anyone – even the strongest and most disciplined. For someone with severe mental illness, it would likely be devastating:
“Moods are contagious; they spread from the afflicted to those who are not… Moods are insinuating… pervasive; despair begets despair; suspicion and anger give rise to paranoia and rage… I could live with my mercurial moods, but it was not clear that someone else could or should… he (Richard) was not inclined to attribute to character what he knew to be disease…” and “… he was the kind of interested listener one waits for but seldom finds…”.
Jamison provides a memorable picture of a compassionate partner using humility and humor to model the best of doctoring and partnering while coping with one of her manic episodes. In a fit of rage, she threw a ceramic rabbit at him and it shattered on the wall. He responded, ‘Too much lithium. Your aim is off.’ He then began laughing hysterically, until she joined him in laughter. He later bought her another ceramic rabbit and told her ‘the first went to pieces, as had she’.
The author’s husband, Richard Wyatt, MD, coped with a litany of health problems of his own: IVB Hodgkin’s disease; radiation induced coronary artery disease; Burkitt’s Lymphoma; marrow stem cell transplant; inoperable lung cancer…
“Richard was thirty-three years old when he was diagnosed with IVB Hodgkin’s… in 1973 was a death sentence… he viewed the nearly 30 years of life after his diagnosis of Hodgkin’s as a gift neither deserved nor undeserved, but an astonishing feat of medicine… Radiation, which cured Richard of his first cancer, would come back three times; twice nearly to kill him and the third that was to succeed… Richard and I were optimists by nature, but not insensate…”
Dr. Jamison provides readers with graphic descriptions of her husband’s illnesses:
• “Richard was sick for a long time. He lost his hair, retched and vomited in places too many to mention, and became transiently psychotic from steroids. One day, as he put it, he shed his guts as a snake sheds its skin. Anticancer drugs were injected directly into his cerebrospinal fluid. He endured so many uncomfortable and harrowing procedures that what he went through was only partly imaginable to me. Yet he remained imperturbable and wryly engaged with life; he gave patience a good name.”
• “Our difficulty would be to navigate between false and reasonable hope, and to avail ourselves of new knowledge that might save Richard’s life while at the same time, keeping close to our hearts the inescapable truth that Richard was likely to die.”
• “Knowing that he was going to die, and knowing how little we knew about what was ahead of us, gave us an intimacy unlike anything we had known before.”
• “After a while he said in an even voice, ‘We should talk about the funeral.’ I tried to keep my voice steady, which was impossible. ‘Yes, of course.’ … No amount of God’s sun could take the chill from what we were doing.”
• “Science and medicine cannot be pushed beyond a certain point… He died because there are limits to knowledge. We knew those limits well… I wanted the unattainable (Osler’s maxim that in seeking absolute truth, we aim for the unattainable). I wanted Richard to live. I understood the concept of broken portions (the denouement of the Osler quote regarding limits of truth) but I wasn’t resigned to it.”
Richard lived and died with a dignity borne of strong values. He believed in karmic debts: “I decided that if I paid my debts I would not worry about death. As I was growing up, it occurred to me that I had been very fortunate – I had been given a great deal and I owed a large debt… By the time I was thirty-three years old and developed Hodgkin’s disease, I believed I had performed a sufficient number of good deeds that I had paid back my debts – I might even be even. Being successfully treated for Hodgkin’s left me in the hole again. So I spent the next few years getting myself on the right side of the ledger… For me, not being in debt means I do not have to fear death.”
Richard died less than one year after the attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon on 9-11-2001. Kay describes the couple’s mental balancing acts, trying to cope with national hysteria, their individual mental illnesses, and their pre-mortem adaptations and grieving, together and separately.
• “I listened to Richard’s comments at the meeting (about post 9 - 11 issues)… struck as always by his reasonableness… He made the case, as others did, that the government should not get swept up in programs that sounded good but were not backed by data (such as debriefing catastrophe victims)… he was dying, but still determined to do what he could to help.”
Richard spent much of his final days consoling his wife. He described Kay’s depression as “twenty degrees darker than total darkness”. He told her that he had coped with her moods by learning that “when you fall in love with a star, you accept solar flares, blackholes, and all”. He tried heroically to help her prepare for life without him, by urging her to go alone to Big Sur when he was too sick to accompany her. He attempted to answer her final question, ‘What will I do without you?’ by saying, ‘I don’t know. But you will be all right’.
I found the descriptions of the couple spending much of Richard’s final hours and days, jointly reading and writing, and sharing each other’s writing, inspiring. I found the involvement of Richard in planning his funeral including hymns and prayers, and picking his funeral plot, even when he was too ill to go to the cemetery, a little too detached. My vulnerability has limits, and I still practice denial even after fifty years as a physician.
One of the most unique contributions of Dr. Jamison’s memoir comes from her comparisons of grief and depression, or Mourning and Melancholia:
• “I did not get depressed after Richard died. Nor did I go mad. I was distraught, but it was not the desperation of clinical depression. I was restless, but it was not the agitation of mania. My mind was not right but it was not deranged. I was able to reason and to imagine that the future held better things than the present… I was forced to examine those things that depression and grief hold in common and those they do not. The differences were essential, the similarities confounding.”
• “I know depression to be unrelenting, invariable, impervious to events… Grief was different. It hit in waves, and caught me unawares. It struck me when I was most alive, when I thought I had moved beyond its hold… I learned to live in expectation of assault… Grief taught through indirection. It was an unyielding teacher, shrewd and brutal.”
• “Grief conspires to ensure that in time it will wear itself out. Unlike depression, it acts to preserve the self. Depression is malignant, indiscriminately destructive. Grief may bear resemblance to depression, but it is a distant kinship.”
• “Grief, like depression, is a journey one must take largely unattended. I pulled in my dreams and kept company with the past… Solitude allowed tending, and grief compelled solitude. Time alone in grief proved restorative. Time alone when depressed was dangerous.”
• “My mind did not retain full clarity after Richard died. Far from it. But my confusion during grief was different from that which I experienced when depressed. During both, I ruminated: my thoughts, repetitive and dark, churned over and over and made me doubt that I would ever create or love again. When I was depressed, however, each thought was not only dark but death-laden and punitive. No simple good came from the ruminations of melancholy.”
• “The capacity to be consoled is a consequential distinction between grief and depression… Depression, less comprehensible than grief, does not elicit the same ritual kindness from others. Human nature keeps us at a greater distance from those who are depressed than from those who grieve.”
• “Grief and depression have always been part of the human condition, yet we treat them differently. The rituals of grief defend against alienation. Depression by its nature alienates. Grief alienates only when it is perceived by others to be too prolonged or too severe…”
• “I knew to worry if I slept too little, got agitated, felt hopeless, thought of suicide… madness had prepared me for grief in other ways.”
Kay Redfield Jamison came to realize that her path through grief would require writing another book – this book about Richard:
• “It is in our nature to want to hold on to love; it is grief’s blessing that we come to know there are limits to our ability to do so. To hold on to love, I had to find a way to capture it and transform it. The only way I know how to do this was to write a book, this book (Nothing Was the Same), about Richard…”
• “Richard had said (when the author was writing An Unquiet Mind), write from your heart… I would write again from my heart, but this time, I would write alone.”
After reading Nothing Was the Same, I hope to carry with me a vision of humility and compassion, in action. Dr. Jamison describes two loving people, who also happen to be physicians, struggling with their separate and joint, mental and physical issues:
“… he said, ‘I don’t know what to do. Medicine is imperfect. I am imperfect. You are imperfect. Love is imperfect.” … Richard was the best he could be; we both were. Love was imperfect, but it was all we had.”
And yet: “We had more fun than we knew what to do with… We complemented each other well… We enjoyed being together… Life was fun together - ‘Your stillness is a sanctuary for me’...”
Nothing Was the Same was powerful, and insightful. Reading and trying to digest its messages, my moods swung from inspired to terrified, with many emotions in-between. I think I’m a better person (and doctor?) for having read it, but it was challenging. I recommend it highly for seekers with a Nietzschean point-of-view: “That which doesn’t kill us makes us stronger.”