Breathnach Caoimhghin
Department of Physiology, University College Dublin, School of Medicine and Medical Science, Ireland.
Vesalius. 2006 Dec;12(2):69-72.
In 1906, at a late evening tea party in Sir Almroth Wright's laboratory when the pathologist was working on his opsonic index as a guide to the therapeutic use of tuberculin, Bernard Shaw instigated a discussion on patient selection in the face of limited resources. In converting the various responses into a play Shaw turned the choice between a rogue artist and an honest doctor into a moral dilemma, and then thickened the plot by involving the artist's beguiling wife innocently in the decision. He added a blackly comedic denouement to answer a public challenge that he could not write a convincing death scene. With his penchant for irrepressible exaggeration, his doctors are amiable but inordinately opinionated, each convinced that he alone holds the secret of healing. The senior physician escapes censure and even measured praise is bestowed on the panel doctor who accepts a full-time public post. This article summarises the play and how it came to be written.
1906年，在阿尔姆罗思·赖特爵士的实验室里举办的一场深夜茶会上，这位病理学家正在研究他的调理素指数，以此作为结核菌素治疗用途的指导，萧伯纳挑起了一场关于在资源有限情况下患者选择的讨论。在将各种反应改编成一部戏剧时，萧伯纳把一个无赖艺术家和一个诚实医生之间的选择变成了一个道德困境，然后通过让艺术家迷人的妻子无辜地卷入这个决定来加剧情节。他添加了一个黑色喜剧式的结局来回应公众对他无法写出令人信服的死亡场景的挑战。出于他那抑制不住的夸张癖好，他笔下的医生和蔼可亲但固执己见，每个人都坚信只有自己掌握着治愈的秘诀。资深医生逃脱了责难，甚至那位接受全职公职的会诊医生还得到了适度的赞扬。本文概述了这部戏剧及其创作过程。
