As a rite of passage, dissection was essential to the formation of student identity at the turn of the 20th century. This differs greatly from concepts of identity formation today. Modern audiences do not usually cite occupation when discussing their identities – work is expressed as something you do, not a defining characteristic of who you are. But, as Richard Rudisill discusses in Mirror Image: The Influence of the Daguerreotype on American Society, throughout the decades leading up to and immediately following the invention of photography, “work” was considered a “national indulgence,” it was the defining marker, the summation of the worth of the common American as put forth by enlightened opinion.

With occupation being connected with a spiritualized means of dignity and enlightenment, a need arose for its concentration into a solid, tangible form, one which would allow for personalized spiritual reflection.2 Out of this need for a symbolic and nationalistic totem of occupational identity was born a public interest in genre painting, and eventually, the introduction of photography. However, one occupation that seemed to initially struggle with the new visual syntaxes inherent to the photograph, and thus formulate a unified professional identity, was that of the medical profession.

At the same time as America as a country was becoming comfortable with its independence, seeking new methods of establishing its own identity, and its own culture and sciences, the medical profession had begun to adopt and replace the speculative, theoretical philosophies of the past with the empirical doctrines and fact-driven observation born out of the 18th century. Although the proliferation of quacks still threatened the purity of their profession, as did medical sectarianism, the first few decades of the 19th century saw an occupation becoming at relative peace with itself. Yet, in an age of increased representation, as photography grew its powers to commemorate and form identity, how best to visualize the identity of the medical profession to measure American professionalism?

Furthermore, with the increase in the country's medical and dental schools, and eventually hospitals, how did one differentiate the professional from the student? Plus, by the 1860s, what of the introduction of homeopathic physicians, Black physicians, or newly minted female physicians and students?