John Edwards presses on in his attempt to win the presidential nomination. Mr. Edwards and his wife Elizabeth announced their decision last Thursday to sustain the presidential campaign despite Mrs. Edwards' incurable resurgence of cancer. Mrs. Edwards, in defiance of her illness, urged her husband to continue his run.
John Edwards, formerly a senator from North Carolina, campaigned in 2004 as John Kerry's running mate in the Democratic Party's unsuccessful bid for presidency. Elizabeth Edwards was originally diagnosed with breast cancer shortly after the 2004 campaign. Although the cancer subsided, X-rays recently revealed its spread into her rib and hip bones. Mrs. Edwards currently enjoys an otherwise healthy condition and plans to aid her husband on the campaign trail, though it is uncertain how the stress will affect the cancer's progress.
The Edwards' decision to remain in the running has sparked a fascinating debate on appropriate action in the face of mortality. Some have admired the couple for their perseverance and optimism, for refusing to abandon their goals and wallow in a pit of despair. Others have called the couple coldly ambitious for choosing to campaign with time that could be better spent with each other and their two children, ages eight and six.
Mrs. Edwards and her husband have offered several reasons why they continue their grueling campaign. She emphasized, according to the transcript from a recent interview on "60 Minutes," her desire "to live as full and normal a life as [she] can" and "deny cancer any control." The couple also stressed that, in the words of Mr. Edwards, they are doing a "service" and fulfilling their "responsibility to this country." Mrs. Edwards noted, "that would be my legacy … that I'd taken out [Mr. Edwards] from the possibility of giving a great service. I don't want that to be my legacy."
The Edwardses express a philosophy that I personally do not embrace on every level. Much of what they say I can agree with; I doubt most people would deny that living a "full and normal life" by pursuing one's goals and not falling prey to despair is a healthy outlook on life. And although Mr. Edwards' statement that they are performing a "service" to the country sounds slightly like a sugarcoated attempt at attracting voters, I can give it the benefit of the doubt. If they truly believe the country will be better off through their actions, then they have another good reason to continue their crusade.
However, I would ask if the drive the Edwardses possess to fulfill their goals exists for all the right reasons. Mrs. Edwards' concern for her "legacy" speaks of a desire to create something of permanence, something that will exist after her death and pervade the memories of those who might have otherwise forgotten her. A desire, a drive for permanence is a disservice to yourself and to those closest to you. Very few people's deaths are heralded by an entire nation, and even fewer are still remembered by the same number of people a year or so later. Worrying about your image in the eyes of complete strangers is a foolish cause, even more so when you use what you know to be the last several years of your life obsessing rather than tending to what you really care about.
I am not Mr. or Mrs. Edwards. I don't know their motivation firsthand. I don't know what they really care about, and I don't know what is best for them or their family. But Mrs. Edwards should have good reasons to spend one of what could easily be the last several years of her life working to change the minds of indifferent and cynical strangers instead of spending more time with those close to her.
Jack Garigliano ([email protected]) is a freshman majoring in English.
