When you die, your body becomes an inanimate object; it doesn’t really matter what happens to it after that. Yet in what must be the number one form of denial, our culture–most cultures–continue to act as though corpse was still a person. Euphemisms abound. When they’re buried in the ground, they’re “resting”. If you dig them up, you’ve “disturbed” them. I hate when that happens.
Calling a corpse the “remains of” so-and-so is good enough; at least it tells the truth. But all too often we refer to the remains as that person as we project onto it our vision of him or her. As we continue to identify with the body we identify any trauma as though it were being experienced by our loved ones or ourselves.
For example the recent flap over the identity of one of the, uh, sets of human remains buried in the Tomb of the Unknowns. The family of the guy who was killed in Vietnam demanded to return of “their son” even though, in reality, it was just a pile of bones. Or how about the huge outcry that greeted film from Somalia of the body of a dead U.S. Marine being dragged through the streets? Apparently the fact that he and others had been killed earlier wasn’t what people had a problem with. Just don’t mistreat the body.
I remember from a story from a few years back that a group on an indian reservation in Missouri, IIRC, wanted to build a new gambling casino over a tribal burial ground, on massive stilts. Other members of the tribe were outraged, saying “Can you imagine our ancestors lying there looking up at this thing?” Now, I would have favored putting the building somewhere else as well, but the point is, when you’re dead and buried, you don’t lie there and look up! Particularly galling is the flap over the 10,000 year old skull found in the Pacific Northwest. Despite its enormous value to anthropology, the nearest Native American tribe demanded it be handed over. Measurements indicate it wasn’t even of the same race, but just because they had been living there as long as anyone can remember, the Indians insisted the skull be treated as though it were actually one of them, a family member.
I’m not suggesting that there be any changes to the customs we obey in treating the dead (though how do reconcile cremation with these kinds of sensibilities?), just that certain truths be acknowledged from time to time. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter.
You’re absolutely right: a corpse is a lump of dead material. However, it is an important lump of dead material, in that every single human culture, to my knowledge, has believed it important (which in matters of this sort is really the acid test). Would you want a casino built over top of your grandma’s body, whether or not she was “looking up” at it?
Not every culture considers the body important once the spirit (soul, spirit, life-force, whatever you want to call it) has moved on.
Tibetan Buddhists have a tradition called “sky burial”, in which they take the body to a hilltop, chop it to pieces, and feed it to the birds. After the Chinese occupation, this practice was outlawed, but I’ve read it is still carried on in secret.
Wow! That is absolutely the best way I’ve ever heard of disposing of remains. Sounds of will being modified in the background.
RE: the Gran’ma’ma thing.
No matter what you believe, she’s not lying there under the soil. The part of your relation that was “her” has gone, either to a better place or just gone. I would have no problem with people building over old cemetaries. (And here in Seattle, we may have to start doing so if the housing market keeps up.)
I think that we have become desensitized to death in war. Airplanes are supposed to be safe, so when one crashes there are weeks of coverage. But everyone knows that people die in wars, so when people do die in wars, the media just reports the numbers and moves on. I think that video drove home to Americans that this was a real person that only a few minutes before the film was made was a living, breathing human being. We can’t see each others’ humanity directly; it is always filtered through their bodies. Their bodies therefore become symbols of, and equivalent to, their humanity. When I saw that video, I thought that that would be a horrible thing to do to a living human. How is it made better by the fact that they killed him first?
As the daughter of a mortician, I can tell you: it is just something that is VERY important to people…after all…some believe that we are reunited with our earthly remains.
I’m sorry, but there IS such a thing as respect for the dead.
Yes, there is no longer life in that body…but there was at one time.
As far as the Buddhist ritual mentioned, that sounds neat…
almost like the phrase, “Ashes to ashes, dust to dust,” or
“From dust you came and to dust you shall return.”
When Mrs. SS and I discuss what to do should/when one of us dies the conversation often gets a little weird.
If I had to pick my means of burial, I’d choose a Viking funeral. It seems like a waste of a perfectly good boat, and I’ll already be dead, but it still seems like a really cool event.
On a more level-headed note, I really don’t care. If the Mrs. needs a gravesite or marker of some kind, then she should have my body disposed of as SHE requires. If she doesn’t care, then I would hope that a dog food processing plant somewhere would turn me into “Puppy Chow”. (But current laws in this country won’t let that happen, either.)
As long as she treats my body well while I’m still using it, she’s free to do with it as she chooses once I’m gone.
My SO wants exactly the same thing. I keep telling him I’d probably get arrested. I have no idea how many laws I’d be breaking, but I’m sure there are a few.
My opinion is, once you’re dead, you’re dead. I have nothing against building on top of graveyards; in fact, I think graveyards are a waste of space. I try to avoid viewing the dead body at funerals (I’d rather remember them alive).
The funny thing is, although I have this opinion, I don’t want people looking at my dead body, even though I know I won’t “be” there. I will be cremated.
I’ve been to a number of “closed casket” funerals where they place a large (20x12 or so) photograph of the deceased on an easle near the casket.
My problem is that the picture has nothing to do with how you remember this person. You memories are of a certain smile, a laugh, an event, etc and to “spark” your memory you see your friend/relative in a posed position, in their best clothes, etc. Unless the guy is Lee Iacocca this ISN’T representative of your memories.
(Well, Christians don’t believe in funerals – let the dead bury their dead as they say. Right?)
Still, even though I know I’ll be dead, the idea of having my brains sucked out of my nose and being pumped full of embalming fluid just somehow doesn’t appeal to me. A nice hole in the ground and perhaps a nice cardboard box would suit me fine.
I always liked Chuang Tzu’s response to his followers when they asked him how he’d like to be buried, if I might paraphrase: “You can either put me underground to be eaten by worms or leave my above ground to be eaten by kites. It won’t matter much to me at that point.”
They have to pump you full of embalming fluid and bury you in a sealed vault. Otherwise, that’s how diseases spread.
Really, cremation is a good idea, but then again, it depends on your religion…
If you don’t care, then please: donate your body and organs to science. Help someone out.