Apr 282016
 

Prince memorialThe recent death of pop icon Prince was greeted with the usual outpouring of shock and grief, along with a fair amount of snark. The negative commentary was directed not at the dead musician, but at the people who expressed profound sadness. The naysayers criticized both the misdirection of the emotion (why aren’t you crying over the deaths of innocent refugee children?) and the shallowness of the feelings expressed. “Crying over Prince’s death?” one person wrote. “Really? You people care more about the death of a pampered rock star or an old dog than you do about a starving family in Africa.”

Harsh—and not necessarily true.

statue of griefThe thing is, on my social media and news feeds there are plenty of laments about social conditions around the world, along with a few—too few—suggestions for action that might help those who are suffering. The history of human cruelty is long and ugly. My sorrow about this is systemic; I feel it in my bones. Even on my most hopeful days, I fear manmade brutality may be a permanent condition.

That’s separate from the jolt inspired by the death of a public figure. Which is to say, you can grieve deeply for someone you didn’t know. It even makes sense.

I’m old enough to remember the death of John F. Kennedy. I hurt for weeks. My sorrow linked to my fear. I worried about everything from nuclear annihilation to the idea that someone my father’s age could die so suddenly and senselessly.

Nearly forty years later, my husband died on 9/11. I was so wrapped up in the immediacy of my pain that I couldn’t understand or welcome others who wanted to participate in my bereavement. Some of my anger involved the public spectacle that accompanied the deaths: the endless displays, the incongruity of Teddy bears, the presumption of some of the would-be mourners, the relentless pursuit of “human interest” stories by members of the media.

Now every tragedy, from mass shootings to traffic deaths, seems to call for temporary memorials. It can get wearying.

NOLA funeralBehind the pageantry, though, is a ritual as old as humankind. We mourn publicly and collectively because death is a lonely process. It terrifies us, especially when it’s unanticipated or takes someone young. We reach out for emotional support.  We commiserate to connect. We shake our fist at Death from the safety of a group.

Westerners may watch state funerals for Middle East dignitaries and react with horror to the public hysteria. Diana’s death unleashed a spectacle of communal lamentation that caught many by surprise and continues to this day. It can also come across as senseless. All of us have stories of friends or relatives who couldn’t cry at the funerals of their husbands or fathers—then when a certain movie star died, they couldn’t stop crying.

public mourningTry as we might, we can’t compel others to grieve as we would. My personal preference is to grieve hard but in private. Some people may throw themselves in the dirt at graveside. Some spend years draped in sadness. Some jump back into the business of living more quickly or more slowly than others believe is warranted.

Grieve in peace, or as loudly as you must. There is no single way to mourn.

Aug 272015
 

I once thought I could outrun Death–or at least avoid it–by turning away from the places it lived. When drugs and depression, a war in Southeast Asia and a plague in New York City took my friends, I promised myself I’d move out, duck, hide, stay beneath the radar.

An exercise in futility if ever there was one.

Death has driven itself into a twin tower, marched into the Middle East and Africa, put guns into the hands of narcissistic madmen and young warriors and knocked down desperately needed heroes. It has located friends across the country—young, old, prepared and unprepared. Our interconnectivity has insured we will not live one day without experiencing death live and in person.

No one likes Death. I hate the thought of it. Not my own, which will leave me with something or nothing but in any event less pain. No, I hate that it robs the living, leaving us with hollowed-out hearts. This is the nature of finite life, we’re told.

I might accept natural mortality were we humans not so determined to help Death do its work. What religious perversion or overweening egotism grants permission to kill? Of all the creatures on earth, we are the only ones for whom ass-backwards calculation factors into our violence. We almost never kill to survive. No, we’re impelled by fear or offense, a need to be heard or prove a point. We kill to dominate or subjugate. We know we’ll get attention one way or another. We’ve no lack of outlets ready to help.

Guns make it easier to kill. So does a mindset that allows for action without consideration. Of course I want to keep weapons out of the hands of people whose past meltdowns and dangerous or reckless behavior are a matter of public record. I’d also welcome an honest reassessment about the notion of giving and taking offense. We might ponder when free speech became an excuse for spewing hateful venom or showing horrific images. Maybe we can take a moment to reevaluate a culture that promotes entitlement and outrage.

We can’t stop Death but we don’t have to go into business with it.

man loading bulletscourtesy Graham Sale, 2015
Jul 082015
 

The novel I’m working on (I love saying that. Working on a novel. I recognize it’s an activity nearly as common as dog-walking. Still, I’m happily ensconced in my made-up world. “Imagination, free thyself.” It doesn’t get any better than that). Wait, where was I?

Ah yes: The novel I’m working on is set in New Orleans, a city practiced in resilience and experienced in all things magical, mysterious and inexplicable. The young girl at the center of the story copes with tragedy and with the blurred line between life and death.

afterlifeI thought about my protagonist as I recently tuned into yet another show about what lies beyond. Television writers and producers appear fond of the idea that we can reach out to, talk with or even resurrect the dead. Every show features a skeptic (always a person of science), a believer (usually associated with a classic religion like Catholicism), a child (because they are more open to what is inexplicable—or maybe more easily manipulated) and some new age person who assures the ones who are grieving that their beloved is “happy.” Honestly, though, the focus isn’t about the comfort of the departed souls but about comforting the survivors. Once we let go of the idea the deceased might be suffering in some unspeakable place or wandering aimlessly about, the needs of those puzzling over life and death become paramount. They’re the ones left behind to hurt and also to fret about what happens next. The departed presumably already know.

bridge-in-the-clouds

The skeptic in me squirms. The curious part of me ponders. Logic and belief fight for primacy. What do I think happens after death? What do I need to think happens? What difference does it make?

Thinking about it is human. Worrying about it is unproductive. What happens happens. Meanwhile I need to make certain any explorations into my ever-evolving beliefs don’t interfere with my life in the here and now. It’s far too easy, especially as one gets older and, let’s face it, less relevant in the world, to slip out of engagement. I’m guilty of passing, some might say wasting, time on various social media sites. Online social networking offers some interaction but it’s virtual. I’m not saying that makes it invalid, only that relying exclusively on that sort of interaction is limiting.

Most of us these days take in our surroundings indirectly. We share videos and read summaries of articles and get our news from our friends. As much time as I spend in front of a computer screen of one size or another, I’m a novice compared with the next two generations. Healthy and mobile for the most part, they seem to regularly wander past the wondrousness around them, heads down, looking at their hands or their wrists. When they catch a glimpse of something uniquely marvelous, they record it or photograph it rather than look at it in situ as it were. They see the world through the lens  of a Smartphone camera or worse, behind them, in the background to their endless selfies. If a tree falls in the forest and we’re all watching via Skype, what has actually happened?

Sometimes direct observation is impractical: We can’t all be Ernest Hemingway-style adventurers. Sometimes it’s impossible. Most of us will die but once, making post-life reporting unlikely. Meanwhile, this existence deserves our full attention. Who knows? Maybe we’ll stumble upon something while alive that suggests a journey far beyond anything we ever imagined.
huron-in-flight