HW 50 - First Third of Care-of-the-Dead Book Post

Precis

I immerse myself into the world of funeral family business where the role of the undertaker is almost as cartoonish as saying undertakers are death-fairies.  The funeral process represents the transcendence from life to death - the "in-between" we all fear to such an extent that we have made caring for the dead more a corporate industry than a tool for emotional catharsis.  You can never get used to the smell of artificially colored chemicals pumped into the lifeless bodies of the dead without losing sight of having to protect the dignity of the dead with the use of overly expensive caskets, embalming, the use of pink, purple chemicals to restore natural glow, and social constructs.

Quotes

- "When Glenn comes back from a removal with a small cardboard box, we gather around to see what he's brought.  Natalie opens it.  Inside is an infant, blue-grey.  She lifts it up.  It's still wearing a Muppets diaper.  'Aww' she says,'I can't wait to have kids." (Jokinen 17).

- "In my head, it sounds like a fairy-tale: the dead come from a magic place called the Silver Doors, from which they are whisked into boxes or made to drink potions that turn them from yellow to green, then they're painted pink and purple and powdered, and some are baked in an oven where they are turned into flour by special death-fairies" (Jokinen 19).

- "I have to provide, as a funeral director, the things people want.  It's how people feel about the body and what it needs to do, the idea of being resurrected, to be whole again" (Jokinen 41).

- "Some bodies will raise their arms in the retort like they're hailing a cab, a result of tendons contracting in the intense heat: what an odd relief, even in death, we find ways to express ourselves" (Jokinen 47).

- "This is the unembalmed, undecorated, raw look of death" (Jokinen 51).

Analysis

After having read the first third of Curtains, I can say with certainty that I've had my share of cringing and horrid visuals.  Like our Birth Unit, Care of the dead and the funeral process definitely have their dominant routines and practices, some atrociously industrialized and others not.  Neil Bardal Inc. - "The factory", where embalming and cremation takes places, is described to tag along with it a feeling of uneasiness from the nonchalance of the workers and single blinds separating the customers from the monstrous "retorts"/ovens and prepping and embalming rooms.  This exhibits that our society has created a far from slapdash structure and system for caring for the dead.  We have created a corporate industry where memento moris and burial robes are sold and bought, a clear demonstration of our society's desire for "fantasy of redemption" and escape from savage nature, in which we are all, or will be, participants of sex and death.  In light of this perspective, what truth are we hiding from?  Why do we force death into the ground in far, often remote, suburban land?  I'd like to think that we hide from the inevitable fate of man to grasp what Jokinen calls "grief therapy."  We desire grief therapy because we are always seeking refugee in times of hardship.  The easiest way of reaching some sort of safe-haven is to try to preserve the dead with modern technology: caskets with seals to keep out bacteria and worms.  This comes to question: What are we trying to protect?  To be frank, we, apart from funeral directors and undertakers, are foreigners to the department of dealing with the dead.  We can only sympathize, suffer, and inquire.

Works Cited

- Jokinen, Tom. Curtains. 1st ed. Philadelphia, PA: Da Capo Press, 2010. 1-279. Print

HW 49 - Comments on Best of Your Break HW

For Leah (T/W Group Member),
I wish I could express more empathy with this post but, I have not had as many care of the dead experiences as you have had.  Nonetheless, I admire your courage to describe how you felt while looking at your grandfather's dead body in line 9 of paragraph 1, "Looking at him in the coffin was so unnatural just by the fact it wasn't 'him'.  When I visited him in the hospital and saw his body there, it was completely different seeing him all dressed up."  I would've have liked your writing much more if you had defined what unnatural was and gave your reasoning for putting the word him in quotation marks.  Why was the dead body no longer the person you once you knew?  This is an important question to answer because it puts the reader in perspective on terms of the definitions you establish, which will make your thoughts more concise.

In light of other aspects of your posts, I like the fact that you bring up several interesting questions.  However, instead of listing one after another, spend some time focusing on one specific question so your thoughts are more insights than bubbles.

One thing that I must stress is Proofreading.  Proofreading will do wonders to writing.  Little grammatical errors will do no justice to your writing so, please watch out for those small errors (i.e. basic punctuation, spelling mistakes, and incorrect noun usage) - Clarify who you are talking about in each sentence, "then"is vague when a group of people is not mentioned before the "then."  Also, work on your transitions so your writing is more coherent.

Nice work.  I hope that you take my feedback to heart and I'll be glad to read your future posts.

For Abdul (T/W Group Member),

Thank you for sharing your story.  I imagine that your emotions at the age of 9 were very raw and influential.  I've actually never heard a story quite like the one you mentioned in your first paragraph.  The act of going to another's house to choose mementos seems odd to me...I wonder why you chose to use "clean up" as a euphemism - it would have been interesting if you had explained why you subconsciously used the euphemism.  I really liked your use of detail in line 7 of paragraph 1, "That was the last time I ever saw him alive. Now while in school doing a play called Little Shop Of Horrors I got a notice to leave immediately and go straight home."  You created a clear scene in my mind that somehow seems very familiar but I am not sure why.

I feel as if I can connect to the whole concept of having to be struck with news of a dying relative as a young adolescent.  All that seems to be necessary to do is to cry over and over.  Please clarify this sentence: "If you see one you should call the cops immediately, and that they can never come back to life in their physical bodies again."  It doesn't make sense to me according to the context of the short paragraph written.

Although vague, the $11,000 you mentioned was interesting.  To think that giving peace to the dead would be priceless - who thought?  The number certainly was thought-provoking and you should've furthered your ideas on that topic.  You could've asked yourself: "What makes the seeing off of the dead worth the $11,000 cost? When does the cost become negligible?"
----Great Post. I look forward to reading more of your work.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Ly (Substitute T/W Group Member),
I understand about your mom and her being into "wholeness". My family would agree with her, but to a different degree.
In Vietnam, we have a small dinner to moan for the dead. One for EACH. A bit weird, but it seemed more like a party, a celebration to me. And this goes with their funerals were super-colorful.

Anyway, at the end of the day, my mom always burned paper that looked like money, clothes, shoes, motorcycle (!), etc. The things that we use when we are alive. And one significant point if that she emphasis on burning EVERYTHING, a whole. We believe that what is broken on this side, will be fixed on the other.
I agree with you on the point “What qualifications must a human intervention fit? When does an act become atrocious or beautiful?” I guess the answer to this would differ for everyone because it would depends on where they are from, how they were raised, etc.
This leads me to my suggestions to make your article better.

I would like a more clear opinion of yours on how the dead should be treated?
With such polarized idea about treating the dead between your mom and sister, which do you think has a more pull?
Have you ever thought about how a person interpreted and inherited history impacted their opinion?

Overall, I like how you use two generation, that is your mom and sister, to give their opinion about something that has existed as long as....you get the idea. In addition, it sort of imply on how people minds evolved over time and how the dead will be treated in the future.

From Davendra (Substitute T/W Group Member),
I like the fact that you interviewed your family. As you said it gave you a chance to see a bit into the Chinese culture. I also had a small look into it as well. I find it interesting how culture influences one's views of something like caring for the dead. I also found the difference between the response of your mother and sister interesting. It was nice to see the how answers differ between generation.
I like one of the questions you raised in your last paragraph. "When does an act become atrocious or beautiful?” I believe it would be interesting to investigate into this.
Like Alina had said I think it would be interesting to see your views on cremation and burial and how your family, and cultural position influence that.

From Henry (Mentor),

While there is no single line that I believe can be called the greatest, I think that a very thought provoking thing for me is looking at these two together: "Cremation promises only ashes to be put in an urn – one that has no specific or permanent place on earth," and "Stephanie reasons that if we manifest love and have a desire to provide a seeing off for our dead loved ones, the act of disposing of the body is no longer a human intervention." These two lines sum up the ideas of the two interviewees and, upon examination, are opposite of the views that I not only hold in my own mind, but what I have always assumed are held by the majority.
This of course made me think. As you mentioned, your mothers ideas are based on the culture she came from, but of course children base their ideas of of those of their parents, leading to Stephanie's ideas. I say this simply because while you portray the ideas as different, to someone like me they seem completely similar. I don't believe in any sort of heaven, soul, reincarnation, etc. Because of this (which is most plausibly based on my parent's atheistic/agnostic beliefs), I view dead bodies as simply that - lifeless hunks of meat left to the closest relation to deal with. As soon as brain waves stop, there is no longer any personality contained with that physical form. And because of that, I believe that no action is any more moral than the next in terms of taking care of the dead body.
To see that, in your family, at least 2 members believe that there are certain restrictions on what defines human intervention and whether human intervention is wrong or not is extraordinary to me.
One thing that would make this post a bit more interesting would be analysis of the standards in various places. I would like to see how the dead are normally treated in the birth countries of each interviewee to compare their ideas on death to.
The thoughts I most agree with are displayed in paragraph two of your analysis. You talk about burial being not just for the dead, but for the people who have to deal with the dead. This is what I believe all burial is based on. Even in your mothers ideas about death, the reason that she cares about a person being buried in the proper manner, I would assume, is so that she can feel happy to know that this wholeness was maintained. I don't mind that people are buried for this, because it makes the bury-ers feel satisfied. I believe that all rituals are based around this idea of closure with the dead.

From Alina (Protege),
As always, I think you did a great job in analyzing your interviewees thought process and their beliefs behind what they were saying. The questions you ask are really insightful and make me think about how your post can be related to my own life.
"My mother describes this safe place to be a nice resting area – one that is forever in the ownership of the dead. To me, forever is a word that should not be used lightly because it carries a sort of high hope. However, forever promises a more ungraspable desire than a materialistic one."

I think the short excerpt from your post that I pasted above really says a lot about the many ways of interpreting one particular thing. It not only creates a contrast between the way different people can interpret burial, but also between the ways that people can interpret "forever". I liked that a lot and it made me think of my convictions on a different level.

The part of your blog that I could relate to the most was the ideas your sister was presenting you with, as I do agree with her on certain things, i.e. not thinking of cremation as a negative thing or her view on how burial is actually an intervention by the human race. Even though I have never had anyone in my family or as far as I know, distant ancestry cremated, I remain with the belief that it does not have to be seen as an ugly thing and can on the contrary, be seen as something beautiful.

I would like to hear what your thoughts on cremation and burial are and how your mother and sister have influenced your beliefs in your life.

The things you write about are inspiring, keep up the work!

HW 48 - Family Perspectives on Care of the Dead

The first interview I conducted was with my sister, Stephanie.  Her interview was recorded onto a word document and can be viewed and downloaded at the link below:

 DOWNLOAD LINK (CLICK HERE)

The second interview I conducted was with my mother, who requested that her name not be online.  Her interview was recorded onto a MP3 file.  You can download the MP3 file and listen to the interview at the link below: (Forewarning: My mother preferred to speak in Cantonese because it was much easier for her to answer the questions.  I will quote and translate the most interesting things she says in my analysis.)

DOWNLOAD LINK (CLICK HERE) 

(If the bar where you can press play and listen to the interview does not show up immediately, please refresh the page and allow for it to buffer before pressing play again.)

Succinct Summary

I dreaded interviewing my family on their perspectives on the Care of the Dead because I didn’t want to relive any funeral stories they had, in fear of feeling guilty about not understanding the inevitable emotional hurt or suffering that came along with death rituals (funerals, memorials, wake, and annual visiting of the grave).  Despite my mere apprehension, I decided that evaluating and observing my family’s perspectives on death would allow me to better understand care of the dead practices and its underlying beliefs in Chinese culture, a culture that I have unfortunately not pursued as much as I should.  My mother, often mentioning her age as a reason for her beliefs, says,

“In Chinese culture, we have a belief.  The body and life start out a whole – one entire body.  If it starts out that way then it should end that way as well.  It should be buried as a whole because it started out a whole…Each dead body should be given a unit – a section – to have peace where his or hers family members and friends can visit.  Burial provides a safe permanence where a body will always have its place.  In cremation, the body is destroyed – it is not whole anymore.”

Cremation promises only ashes to be put in an urn – one that has no specific or permanent place on earth.  My mother reasons cremation gives the dead less significance and opportunity to be “with” the living in a safe place.  A safe place is important because it represents the dead body’s spirit and a guarantee of a good sleep. 

My sister, on the other hand, says that cremation doesn’t need to be looked at negatively because “to some people, the body is materialistic while the soul is the essence of the body…Any way of disposing of the dead can be considered a human intervention if someone looks at the way to care for the dead in a way that does not manifest love.”  Stephanie reasons that if we manifest love and have a desire to provide a seeing off for our dead loved ones, the act of disposing of the body is no longer a human intervention.  By the standards she defines a human intervention to require, human intervention is bad.

Analysis

            After reading over my mother’s most insightful thought about the body as a whole, I wondered to my self: “What does it mean to be whole?  Why is it important that we begin the same way and end the same way?”  I believe that my mom’s desire to have this consistency in the world of life of death – to begin the same and end the same – derives from her wanting to mitigate change.  By mitigate change, I mean that it allows for us to feel like the dead are still with us and their memories and life live on through us.  A whole can represent the physical form some may want to preserve because the original physical form allows us to feel the essence of the body, which once walked along with the living. Destroying a person’s original physical form is equivalent to destroying their nature – the experiences that they had.  The people in our society hold fast to that idea because we value memory.  Valuing memory goes hand in hand with protecting memory; therefore, burying the body as whole, however you may define it be, lets the dead leave and rest gracefully in a safe place.  My mother describes this safe place to be a nice resting area – one that is forever in the ownership of the dead.  To me, forever is a word that should not be used lightly because it carries a sort of high hope.  However, forever promises a more ungraspable desire than a materialistic one.  A gravesite – a unit paid for by the dead person’s family member – is a new home for the dead.

            Following my mother’s interview analysis, the beliefs behind my sister’s interview must now unfold.  I inform my sister of the assumption that maybe Neanderthals buried their dead simply because they exuded an awful smell and not because the living wanted to let the dead have an easy path towards the next step after life.  My sister responds with a certain disposition and says that burying the dead is surely a human intervention with a few exceptions.  While I marvel and let her thought marinate in my mind, I ask myself: “What qualifications must a human intervention fit?  When does an act become atrocious or beautiful?”  Some may say that to care for the dead without intentions of manifesting love is cruel but, it is an act that will benefit someone nonetheless and I believe that is certainly one of main goals in the infrastructure created to deal with death.  We bury the dead not only to allocate a place for them but also to help us cope with emotional turmoil.  Is it selfish to want to “intervene” in order to alleviate the pain of another?  In my opinion, intervention can be selfish.  I wonder that if the tears that splash on our faces on the days our loved ones are buried, are to help us or to show the dead we mourn.  My sister’s believes that if love finds its way into care of the dead practices, interventions are no longer bad or selfish.  Love is necessary in the process of dealing with the dead.  In light of this, I ask: “How much love can compensate for death?  When are actions dealing with the dead justified as necessary?”

Future Death: The Dead Human Body as BioMass (Extra Credit)

             Getting off the Union St. R train station in Brooklyn, I didn’t know what to expect from the lecture about Future Death: The Dead Human Body as Biomass.  Secretly I hoped Dr. John Troyer, the speaker, was not going to bore me to death and lead me to believe that he, the possible epitome of boredom, was the model of all informative lectures.  Fortunately, Dr. Troyer was quite the opposite of what I expected: he hadn’t a glimpse of old age or a voice that projected only to display his excess of knowledge but, a hearty sense of humor to go ironically along with his discussion about the benefits and risks of different ways of disposing of dead bodies. I had reached the Brooklyn Observatory, located in a rather questionable alleyway lit by a single light bulb, an hour earlier, leaving me time to explore, with permission of course.  Not only had I found myself in a rather strange place (a deer’s head was mounted onto the wall) but also never had I thought I’d be going to a lecture about death and ways of disposing bodies. 

            Troyer introduced his presentation with, in my opinion, a humorous advertisement of the company that was funding his research and overall work.  He went on to explain that he works at Centre for Death and Society (CDAS) at the University of Bath, which is located in the United Kingdom.  I wondered then, “How much can there be studied on death and the infrastructure we use to deal with death?”  Thankfully, Troyer quickly answered that question by pointing out that crematoriums and burial grounds are instituted, some of which are municipal, in other words, essentially owned by the public (i.e. the Haycombe Crematorium in Bath).  He asked us – not intending for us to answer – When does a way of disposing of the public become accepted?  He points out when cremation was first invented; churches refused to accept it as holy and instead, marked it as sinful because burning the body connoted evil – the devil.  But, as we all know, when things become beneficial to us, practices that once seemed ludicrous and intolerable become dominant social practices.  Cremation allows for a dead body to burn into ashes that can be easily placed in an urn; thus, making dealing with the physical form of a dead body less difficult for some. 

            Already half way through the lecture, a great number of pictures and diagrams were used to inspire the audience to think.  Although burial, cremation, and resomation (liquefying the body) have its practical benefits, they all have their share of disparaging environmental impacts on the earth and its atmosphere.  Troyer uses diagrams that include numbers with no specific origin, making them more or less reliable, to illustrate the environmental impact of cremation on earth.  Cremation’s carbon footprint data reveals its shocking mercury emission among that of other chemicals (the mercury is in our teeth).  There are surely ways to counteract the emissions or rather, compensate the loss, in light of the benefits of cremation.  Bewildered at first, I didn’t know what to think when Troyer said that some cremation emissions could heat up several buildings in a town, keep a pool running, and frankly, save money.  Humored, Troyer showed us articles, with exaggerated titles, that depicted the idea of using the disposal of dead bodies to our advantage.  After some people had realized that using the cremation emissions as energy and as a way to save money, the idea soon became less atrocious and ridiculous as it did in the beginning.  But, I realized then that people would be horrified by the fact that the heat warming their bodies in a building is the result of a body burning to ashes.  Troyer had convinced me that there are several "green" aspects of the different ways of disposing of dead bodies but it was going to take time for society to accept new ways of caring for the dead – surely it is the future of the infrastructure we have already created to care for the dead. 

HW 47 - Peer Perspectives on the Care of the Dead

The interviews I conducted were recorded onto Microsoft word documents and they can be downloaded to view from the given links below:

Alina L. :  DOWNLOAD LINK (CLICK HERE)
Ly D. :  DOWNLOAD LINK (CLICK HERE)
Anna O :  DOWNLOAD LINK (CLICK HERE)
Steph C :  DOWNLOAD LINK (CLICK HERE) 

Below (in the scroll box) are the questions I asked each interviewee:

1. What are your initial thoughts on care of the dead? (i.e. how we dispose of dead bodies, rituals, etc.)

2. Have you ever attended a funeral/ritual dedicated to someone who has died? If so, what was it like? How did you feel? Have you ever questioned the customs that go along with the rituals?(i.e. dressing in black, or any other customs specific to your religion or place of origin)

3. If not, what do you know of these rituals? And how do you think they are conveyed in society?

4. Are the days dedicated before and after the burial of a dead person happy or sad? And why?

5. Does the way a body is disposed of determine any meaning to the life that the body once lived?

6. How many ways of disposing of the dead do you know of? What are your thoughts on the ones that you know? (the emotional aspects as well as the physicality factor of the form of the body after it is disposed of in a certain way)

7. Japan’s cremation rate is 99%. What do you think of this number? What does that tell you about our society in comparison to that of Japan’s? (U.S. cremation rate is about 38% according to the National Funeral Directors Association.)

8. Burial and Cremation seem to be the most common. However there are other ways – less common ways our society chooses to use:
- Resomation: Liquefying the body leaving the calcium and excess stuff from the bones. The liquid is separated from the chemicals and mercury, in our teeth, in order to accommodate less mercury/other chemical emissions. This way is considered very eco-friendly.
- Coral Reef Ball: The ashes from after the cremation are mixed into other materials to make a coral reef ball to drop into the ocean (kind of like an underwater gravesite) people would be given GPS coordinates.

9. Some people may say that the two mentioned previously are ethically wrong, why do you think some people may think this? Do you think it is ethically wrong or rather, beneficial to our environment, leaving a smaller carbon foot print?

10. Is cremation respectful to the dead? Why or Why not? What are your own personal opinions? What are your opinions based on?

11. Can burying the dead be considered a human intervention? (Consider this: Neanderthals could have buried their dead simply because they smelled and not in order to provide a seeing off)

12. How do certain ways of disposing of the dead become accepted in society if they were at first scorned?

13. How would you want your body to be handled once you die? And if you have not made the decision yet, who would you like to decide and why?

14. Any final thoughts on care of the dead?

Care of the Dead is certainly a touchy subject – it’s not often that we discuss how our future decomposing dead bodies may be sited, dealt with, or cared for, all of which are euphemisms for “disposed of.”  I can ask myself why such euphemisms are used to conceal the distinct distaste, discomfort, and sorrow we carry when we talk about the deceased – the once living and breathing organisms that we’ve created memories with and have recollected images of, in our minds.  This is surely a tough question to ask as our society has created an infrastructure, purely made to deal with how we care for the dead by instituting places like crematoriums and burial grounds.  I ask similar questions to my peers in light of discovering the how and why we choose to pick certain ways of disposing of the dead.  Frankly, I don’t think it could ever be as simple as saying that Neanderthals buried their dead just because they smelled but because there were underlying ethical and emotional reasons.  After collecting answers from four of my peers, I found myself with an array of terse, lackadaisical, lengthy, insightful answers.  However I decided to focus on one perspective because it seemed only logical to attend to the answers that were less bubbles but, more insights.   

Alina, a good friend of mine, reasoned that leaving any physical form of the dead body would be nothing less than a selfish act, performed in order to console those who are still living.  The left over ashes in an urn or decomposing body in a casket underneath earth’s soil represents the memory that the living cannot let go of. 

“If a body is buried in a graveyard, it is easier for the person's close relatives or friends to feel like they are next to the body. I think people need some proof that the person once existed and that is why they choose to bury the people in a wooden casket instead of let go. Like I mentioned earlier, cremation is probably the easiest way to forget a person, because once the ashes are released, not much ties one to the former life of that person. I think the selfishness or disinterest of the ones still alive is really what determines how the body is treated and how it is remembered.”

After hearing her reasoning, I thought to myself: What qualifications does a treatment of the dead body need to fit in order to be considered right, just, and unselfish?  When is deciding the fate of how a body is treated considered “okay” when the consenter is dead?  I find that society is caught up with the idea of leaving something behind after death– a legacy of some sort.  A burial of a body can tag along with it a stone with writing, which poses as the indicator/reminder of the flame that the human being that died once burned but then sadly flickered out.  When there is an unidentified dead body, it seems as though people believe the dead person did not receive his or hers seeing off by their loved ones.  I can see how the act of seeing a body off may be selfish because it relieves the living’s feelings but in actuality serves no purpose to the buried or cremated.  Examining our selfish intentions in this aspect is important because it will allow us to better understand what is considered acceptable and unacceptable in different ways of disposing of dead bodies.

            Although my initials thoughts and that if Alina's leaned more onto the category of bubbling, it touched on some important insights.  My initial thoughts were similar to but also different from that of Alina’s.  This is because I had never thought about our society’s need to bury the dead and give memorials and funerals as selfish and an act only to give peace to us rather than to the dead.  The funerals and burying may be a facade – a veil put over our own eyes to help us believe that everything is okay and that death is not a huge black abyss.  This is only one perspective among several others and I’m sure that the others will be further explored later in the unit.  

HW 46 - Initial Thoughts on Care of The Dead

I sat awkwardly on my chair, looking at all the raised hands of my classmates after the teacher had asked who had ever attended a funeral, a cemetery, or a memorial.  My arm laid to my side as I realized I had no real recollection of ever attending a funeral, seeing an open or closed casket, seeing a coffin being lowered into the ground then to be covered in soil, or mourning for someone who had passed away.  I felt like a needle in a haystack - the one person who hadn't the experience of attending a funeral.  Everyone had discomfort and compassion written all over their faces and, guiltily, a part of me wanted to be part of the consensus of emotions and facial expressions.  Soon I realized that maybe I was lucky to have not yet walked into the rather gloomy cemetery, dressed in black in respects to the dead, and seen a pale, dead face in an overly expensive casket.  Having watched several Lifetime movies, which usually consist of sorrow-filled plots, I have gained a somewhat artificial knowledge of the social norms and aspects around the treatment of dead people in our culture.

Unlike Spain's Día de los Muertos (Day of the Dead), the days dedicated to those who have died, in America, are treated with dullness, lack of color and vibrancy. The gray, carved tombstones in the graveyard stand still as the silent wind hits the stones with a chilling feeling as people pay their respects to the dead maybe once or twice a year with a bouquet of flowers, often tagging along, feelings of longing.  This visual has appeared numerous times in my experience of watching some television series.  It seems as though on the date of someone's death, the skies are dreary.  Our society has literally treated death as a subject only to be payed attention to on specific days and times.  I wonder: Does our society schedule the times we mourn for those who have passed in order to control our emotional turmoil or keep happier days more numerous?  Although the whole concept of scheduling the days we mourn is already quite eccentric to me, ways that our society uses to dispose of dead bodies is even weirder.  This begs to question: Where did cremation originate from?  Do the ashes of a dead body represent anything more than a once decomposing organism?  Is burning the dead body and putting the residual ashes in a vase respectful or are these tasks performed to accommodate the placement of the ashes?

Although these are all important questions to ask, I cannot say that I have a burning urge to answer them.  This is probably because I don't discuss the care of dead, much less death, with my parents.  It's not that my parents would refuse to talk about how people dispose of dead bodies but, the topic has not yet been necessary to bring up.  When my parents talk about someone who they knew that died, I don't find it in my heart to cry or be more curious.  Even if I had known the person once when I was much younger, my memory would fail me and lead me to be nonchalant about the issue.  My parents have said time and time again, "People die.  It's just something that we all have to experience one day."  It's easy to say this now because I have never had to cope with someone close to me, dying.  My experiences with the care of the dead are especially lacking.  My parent's experiences with the topic may be in size, a plethora, or they could very well be identical to that of mine.  Like I said, I wouldn't know because care of the dead has never been a topic that seemed necessary to discuss in comparison to death itself in my family.

FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS 

- Where does cremation originate from?

- Why are caskets so expensive?

- Why are people expected to wear black to funerals?

- What qualifications must a dead body fit in order to have a open-casket funeral/memorial?

- How does one decide how to dispose of a body?

- Do people plan out how their bodies will be disposed before the event that they die?

- What is the most popular way of disposing of the dead?

- How much land is dedicated to burying the dead?

- What religions look down on cremation? Why do these religions think cremation is disrespectful?

- Who decides how a person will be "cared-for"? ("cared-for" is a euphemism for disposed of)

- What role does the word "sorry" play in funerals?

HW 45 - Reply to Other Peoples' Comments

Reply to Alina:

I'm glad that you enjoyed my project and understand the main arguments I presented to you.  I intended to make my readers re-think and reconsider the reasons behind their opinions and so, I was more than happy to hear that you tried to put your self in a different perspective and evaluate your ideas and opinions.  However, I didn't intend for my reader to become unbiased because truthfully, no one person can be un-biased.  It's simply impossible because we base our decisions and beliefs on our past experiences and those that were told to us.  I hope that others become as captivated as you were after you read my project.  I'll be sure to look out for your insights and criticisms in the near future! 

Reply to Abdul M:

First and foremost, thank you for spending time writing such a lengthy comment.  I truly appreciate it.  I feel accomplished to know that you fully understood what aspects of abortion I wanted to focus on.  I had unintentionally chosen people of different races to interview but, now that you've pointed it out, I see the benefits of doing so.  Diversity or rather, opposing view points are always good to have in a persuasive paper.  I'll definitely make it necessary to provide all the possible perspectives of a topic the next time.  

I hope to create more writing pieces that are important to you so that my writing cannot only capture your interest but, provoke you to take a step forward in your actions as person with opinions subject to change or influence.  To answer your first question - doing this project definitely helped me evaluate myself and how I would argue my stance to an opposer.  Like that of my interviewees, I have been influenced by my parents and most likely propaganda.  My opinions on abortion, as well those on other topics, are subject to change as the surrounding popular influence changes along with them.

Thank you for saying that my post was better than yours but, I think that's degrading to you and your work.  Your work was especially revealing and I applaud you for your use of statistics, an area of which my project lacked in.  I will take into account for my next project that my reader will not always have prior knowledge to the topic I choose to talk about.  It would have been ideal if I had defined what abortion was.  Though I mentioned some statistics in my film, I should've put more statistics in my paper like you've just suggested.  Although offering more information about how political parties feel about abortion would be beneficial, I wanted to focus more on the opinions of my peers.  I will try my best to better educate and engage those who choose to read my posts.

Reply to Martyna:

Thank you for recognizing that the topic I chose to write about and explore as difficult and controversial.  However, the difficulty of my topic does not make up for my lack of creativity as many people have decided to explore the same topic in the same way.  I'm not sure I understand what you mean when you define abortion as being taboo...When you have the time, please help me understand what you mean by saying abortion is taboo.  What makes it taboo?  

I assure you that my peers were very comfortable answering questions - it was the camera that probably put them under pressure.  I find that my peers approach the subject with certain prior knowledge - knowledge that I surprised to have known that they had.  I've never actually known someone who was in the process of deciding if she wanted an abortion or not but, I'm glad that you were able to connect your experience of knowing someone who had to my project.  I'd really like to explore what the attitude towards abortion is like in Poland.  Although I am sure that some opinions on abortion in Poland are similar to that of the U.S., I also know that there are separate opinions and reasoning I have not heard of yet.  Like you have given up your spare time to read this, I can only ask you, with gratitude, to give me the opportunity to learn about these topics in the perspective of someone who was not originally from this country.

Reply to Stephanie:  

I agree that being able to understand different perspectives, allows people to be less biased.  However, my paper was far from objective.  I'd like to have been more objective but, it was difficult to find people to interview who were not liberal.  Offering my own take on the questions I asked at the end of my paper would have been helpful in letting the reader know what had interested me in talking about abortion.  When it comes time for me to conduct another experiential project, I will definitely be sure to answer the questions I pose to my own readers.  It wouldn't be fair of me to ask if I, myself, have not answered the questions yet.

I hadn't thought about defining what right and wrong meant to me or to the people I interviewed.  Thank you for pointing this out because I realize that making the distinction is important in understanding an opinion wholly.  It's even more so important because people do have different perspectives on the meaning of the words and to assume that all my readers have a generic definition of right and wrong is bad.  Thank you for taking the time to read my post and your criticisms are always welcome!

HW 44 - Comments on Other Peoples' Blogs

For Martyna (Classmate),

• I thought your presentation/poster was awesome.  The colors did birth justice as it is truly a miracle.  You draw an abstract representation of birth and represent the usual boring phrases, "as the birth progressed, the contractions get stronger" with a red tube that zig zags and gets bigger as it progresses to the right of the poster.  You strive to create a visual of the process of birth with the help of anecdotes from your family friend.  You clearly describe what Pitocin, Cesarean Section, and Epidurals are capable of doing.
• I appreciate that you chose to do something creative.  I have not yet seen anyone make a poster, even when the option was available.  The visuals really help further your story/timeline.  The timeline was helpful and extremely structured.  I value the fact that you were able to make the clear connections between your story and drawings.
• Your project matters to me because I am a woman, capable of giving birth.  Once I am old enough, I will want to have a baby.  It's important, to me, to know what the effects of pitocin are and the possible complications of a cesarean section.  This knowledge would be helpful in the event that I want to create a birth plan or acknowledge when my obstetrician or midwife makes a suggestion rather than thinking it was a necessary course of action to take.
• I wish you had gone into more depth about how investigating birth was important to you.  Although it was easy to understand the ideas you were trying to get across, I could not identify the intent in your choosing to do this project.
• Great Work! I wish I could have done something like this to make my project more aesthetically pleasing.  

For Chris (Classmate),

• It's no surprise that I ended up here, reading your investigative project.  Your speech was truly engaging and funny.  It's clear from the very start of your writing piece that you wanted to investigate the aspects of hospital birth and the reasons for your interest, which was purely curiosity.  You point out that most the medical procedures are taken in favor of both the doctors and the mothers to build on the reader's prior knowledge.  With the mountains of percentages and statistics, you evaluated which of the information you collected was in fact true or false.  
• I admire that although you have a prodigious amount of statistics, you don't immediately dive into that.  You take your time explaining your intent in conducting your experiential/investigative project.  One aspect of the post that I really valued was Lori Rosello's M.D. response to your questions.  It's not everyday that a hospital staff member would openly answer questions because of fear of losing their job if he or she says something detrimental to the hospital's reputation.  I thought when you asked about whether it was acceptable for a child to be born in a place where people would go to essentially meet their death was interesting.  Rosello jumped to defend the hospital, saying that they kept the sick away from the mothers and newborns.  I thought that was particularly interesting...I wasn't sure if she said what she said in due part to her strong conviction or because she wanted to keep her job safe.
• Your project matters to me because you present hospital birth and its aspects without the intention of inducing fear.  I've always been told anecdotes of the terrifying hospitals with its long epidural needles and excruciating surgical procedures.  You mention loads of percentages and information with the intentions of informing.  I find that being unbiased is difficult and you've achieved that somewhat in this investigative project.  
• By taking a quick glance at your writing, I can already pin point the numbers jumping out at me.  I wish you had cited your sources using MLA citations because all the information you provided would be solid.  There are small points in your paper which give me the slightest tick - for example in the first paragraph, line 19, you say "dominate practice" when you mean to say "dominant practice."  It's little errors like these that tick the best of us therefore, proofreading would only benefit you.  Also, more analysis!  I would have been more engaged as I was during your speech if you had made a more clear connection between how and why learning about hospital birth was important to you.
• I feel as if I was robbed of the excitement you induced while you talked about getting chased out of Babies R' Us because the video was less eventful than you had described it to be but, props for using such description as a catalyst to invite people to read your blog.  Thanks for your work!

For Abdul (Thinking/Writing Teammate),

• Your post was certainly informative and interesting to read.  You start out by giving an objective view point of how both hospital and home birth have its risks and benefits.  However, you ease into your core argument that it should not be about what is most convenient and best for the doctor but, what is best for the mother in labor.  Such aspects have much more importance than a group of people arguing their stance even when the group is not participating in giving birth.  
• I valued the fact that you provided substantial information and statistics regarding the ridiculous aspects of our birthing industry.  I had known that giving birth in a hospital cost money but, I didn't know the approximate cost.  $13,000 is big number and I'm sure every woman has to spend a great deal of time thinking about what other expenses may come in the future.  I also valued that you made this project somewhat personal by talking to your grandmother about it.  I, for one, would never have had the motivation to talk to my own grandmother, simply because I'd imagine the conversation to be incredibly awkward.  
• Your project matters to me because you express sincere concern for the woman's role in the birthing process.  It's clear that your intentions as a writer and an informer were to persuade us of a certain stance instead of being objective.  I feel respected as a woman because you argue what I would probably argue if someone were to go against my wishes if I were to give birth.  I also admire the fact that you went out of your way to interview the people around you.
• Your project definitely had its strong points - your quotes and evidence, among other things, demonstrate that.  I noticed a few mistakes here and there in your paper so, I'd say that proofreading your work once or twice would only clarify your point and make your argument more concise and coherent.  In your first paragraph, you mention "The obgyn....more safe" (line 6).  You should never assume that the reader has prior knowledge of what your discussing.  OBGYN is an abbreviation for obstetrician and from my knowledge, not everyone knows this - I know I did not before we started the birth unit.  You list a lot of statistics but, they lack analysis.  I wouldn't go as far as to say that there was no analysis at all but, investigating the emotional aspects of the statistics, I believe, would be well worth your while.  
• Aside from that, I enjoyed reading your writing piece.  The ending "If I had a home birth, you might not be here grateful Abdul."  It might've been a tad cliche but, I happen to like cliches, for they are understood by most and are worded in a way that is considered clever.  Thank you for your work!  It has always been a pleasure to read your work - I look forward to future insights.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FROM MENTOR AND PROTEGE

From Alina, (Protege)

Bianca, I really enjoyed reading your blog. I think you have a very strong argument in your last paragraph, where you make a very good job of presenting us with an argument as to why it is impossible to understand everyone.

"I could spend months, maybe years, trying to understand why some people believe abortion is right or wrong. The unfortunate truth is that I will never be able to fully understand. The best we can ever do, as humans who are capable of observing and evaluating, is to slowly unfold the creases of the reasons we place behind our conceptions."
Abortion,is an interesting and powerful topic, which has made people argue for as long as its idea existed and it is indeed very interesting to observe how peoples' opinions vary and why there is no way to fully dissect these opinions. The best we can do is indeed, observe and evaluate. You make your opinion clear and your examples support it very well.

Also, after reading your blog, it really made me put myself in perspective and try to evaluate myself from another point of view - one other than my own.
"Was this the conformity that struck Alina as it had Matt? As liberal as NYC may be, could it be that being part of the crowd was easier than to defend one's actual belief? "
This made me indeed wonder where my beliefs come from and explore whether or not it was really easier to give into the society's ideas than stand up for my own. Your point is very thought provoking and it allowed me to try and be somewhat unbiased and dig deeper into the roots of my ideas.
Keep up the good job, your post was very striking and captivating at the same time, as it could make one think. It was also well written and to the point, which made it interesting.


From Stephanie (Substitute Mentor),
I like that you pointed out the difficulty in determining whether or not abortion is right or wrong. I like that you also talked about how peoples opinion on abortion is based on their cultural background, religious background and social environment. Being able to understand different peoples perspectives, allows people to be less biased.

I would suggest you offer your take on the questions you asked at the end of your paper. I also think it would be nice if you define what right and wrong means to you and what it means to others because people have different perspectives on the meaning of the word.

HW 42 - Pregnancy & birth culminating project

Choice 1: Organize a personal experience around this topic and write a narrative/make a film of your experience. Post it on your blog - ideally with uploads of photos and/or video. + Narrative/Analysis

(IF THE VIDEO DOES NOT APPEAR AT FIRST, PLEASE REFRESH THE PAGE.)

Duration:  16:22            
Download Link of Video: Click here to download
*Edit in Thank You end clips: Thank You to Matt, Alina, Chloe, and Davendra.
**Citations of statistics and quotes used in the video can be found here.

Narrative/Analysis
       We weave our thoughts into a quilt of frameworks that embody our opinions.  These frameworks represent what we decide is just or or evil in this world.  Often, expressing one's conviction is easy while, understanding the reasoning behind one's opinion poses as a difficult task.  Although difficult, investigating the reasoning behind the opinions we have is well worth the effort because we will be able to better understand what and why we believe certain actions are morally right or unjust.  To understand the opinions we express so militantly when our beliefs are ever attacked, we must understand how we are influenced and persuaded by others.  Society places blame and injustice on the things it believes deprives it of its natural right and so, the contenders of this of world fight to protect their creed.
       Abortion, a controversial topic, stands as a knife to the throat of republican ideologies and, to democrats, stands as an exercise of the right to women to make health decisions for themselves.  Republicans and Democrats, both contenders, voice their arguments about abortion with vicious words and visualize their principles and doctrines to persuade the common man to favor one perspective over another.  Like these contenders, my peers have their own opinions on why they believe abortion, the law of the land, is acceptable or unacceptable.  To further my understanding of why my peers hold true to their sentiments, I have conducted interviews to reveal how some people in society have attempted to persuade and influence my peers of a certain stance on abortion and how my peers decide if abortion is acceptable or unacceptable by presenting to them arguments and statistics that political figures, among others such as family members, pose to attempt to exhort beliefs into their minds.
       When asked to express their opinions, my peers had openly acknowledged the lasting influence their parents had had on their beliefs about abortion.  It seemed that where you were raised and what you were taught to believe was important in developing your opinions on not only abortion but, other things as well.  "I've been going to church my whole life.  I've been raised to believe that any child is worth having.  It's always a good thing...My parents have taught me that abortion may be a sin but, if one decides to commit such sin, god will forgive if one can repent for oneself" says Matt.  Matt had expressed sincere discomfort while talking about abortion but, seemed to regurgitate the beliefs of religion that coincided with his opinion about abortion as if he had both heard and seen these words.  To regurgitate a belief, to me, means to submit to conformity - to the common belief.  To Matt, the common belief was that of his family's and so, it seemed logical or rather easier for him to express the one perspective he was allowed to explore.  We see now that limits, such as religion, create the basis of one's understanding of what is right and wrong.  It is true that it is ultimately our choice to believe in what we believe but, this ability is barricaded when we are given only one perspective to argue.
       Alina, on the other hand, had said that originally her parents had told her that abortion, under any circumstance, was wrong.  For sometime she had believed this statement until she had moved to another place - another city - New York City.  Her parent's fire of influence quickly went out as she saw herself surrounded by new beliefs and customs.  "Before I had moved to NYC, I was against abortion because my parents had taught me that.  After I came to NYC, my opinion changed, and I decided to be pro-choice" says Alina.  Was this the conformity that struck Alina as it had Matt?  As liberal as NYC may be, could it be that being part of the crowd was easier than to defend one's actual belief?  It turns out that Alina's pro-choice stance had another underlying reason - a reason defined by a woman's natural right to make health decision for herself.  "I do think that a woman has the right to choose and to control her own body...Ultimately, it's her own choice."  As Alina reasons and brings up this natural right of women, we jump into what society distinguishes what an individual's right is.
       Americans have been coaxed with ideologies of freedom - of having rights to essentially do and express what they believe.  We can ask ourselves how do we decide if abortion is right rather than an offense? In what context is it considered good or bad?  "Maybe the mother is not ready to take care of her baby.  She needs to have the option to abort" says Alina.  It's revealing to recognize that we desire that all the alternatives and options be available to us.  For these options would allow for women to calculate the benefits and risks of choice to their advantage.  Is it selfish for a woman to want to relieve herself of the financial burden a baby would bring if she could not support the baby?  If aborting a baby is to insure the baby will not have a difficult life because the mother is not able to support the baby, is abortion then acceptable?  These are certainly important questions to ask.  What benefits us the most in a situation will facilitate and dictate our opinions as it would for women who are financially unstable.
       I could spend months, maybe years, trying to understand why some people believe abortion is right or wrong.  The unfortunate truth is that I will never be able to fully understand.  The best we can ever do, as humans who are capable of observing and evaluating, is to slowly unfold the creases of the reasons we place behind our conceptions.