An obituary for the obituary - Part III

Our last installment explored a variety of benefits to the observed trend of what I’ve dubbed the “Facebook Obituary”. These benefits included the freedom of word count, word choice, content, and the use of photographs, among others. In my work I have observed, conversely, some drawbacks to the use of Facebook for obituary posting which I’d like to enumerate now. 

My goal in doing so is not to cast judgment on those who have chosen this route in mourning their loved one, but rather to point out ways in which their mourning or their grief might miss out on some of the under-appreciated benefits of the old traditions so they may seek them out elsewhere. I also do so in an effort to assist those conflicted with obituary-related decisions to make as informed a decision as possible.

Similar to our last installment, I’ll bold portions of this commentary that I think are core concepts to the grieving process and/or grief work as I understand it.

The first downside to the “Facebook Obituary” is that the post, unless otherwise directed to a certain page or group, definitionally goes out to only your “‘friends”, people with whom you've previously chosen to connect with. This is much different than the traditional obituary, which has historically been something for broader public consumption.

I suppose, in theory, it's possible that the post would then be shared by your friends to some of their friends, but I don't think this happens as often as we might think. Similarly, in theory, the use of hashtags might bring the post to a broader audience, though folks would need to be looking for that kind of content which doesn’t strike me as altogether too likely.

So this idea of a “friends-only” obituary is a major departure from the traditional obituary, which was written and presented in a way to communicate the most important details of an individual's life and death to family, friends, and strangers alike. The fact that the posting would be seen by folks who had not previously known your loved one, or hadn’t been a part of their life for years, I believe, tasked the author(s) with writing an obituary in a way that was immensely more therapeutic.

It asked the authors to widen their gaze to include someone's entire life, all the chapters of their proverbial book. It forced the authors to mention details that might otherwise be assumed to be well-known to those closest to them, but many times aren't as well-known as we estimate. It also asked the authors to write with the deceased's friends, colleagues, and acquaintances from both past and present in mind, and not so much their own. Overall it asked the authors to take a wider, more objective third-party view of the loss, perhaps even the view of the stranger, which in the early days of grieving and mourning a loss can be immensely healthy and profoundly therapeutic. This shift in perspective, even if it’s for only brief moments, is often a critical reprieve from the overwhelming thoughts and feelings of profound pain, loss, and sadness folks are feeling in these early hours and days of a loss.

Writing about a loved one who’s passed with an audience consisting only of your friends in mind seems to me to rob the author of the opportunity to step into this different perspective, see the loss from different points of view, and perhaps tell their loved one’s story in a slightly different, often more holistic, way.

The second downside I see in this trend is that the “Facebook Obituary” is almost always written by one person and only one person. Unlike the obituary of yesteryear which was a much more collaborative process, often including multiple different loved ones of the deceased, which in my estimation brought with it a host of therapeutic benefits.

I acknowledge that sometimes this collaborative process has proved to be more of a curse than a blessing for some families, often due to underlying family dysfunction and old conflicts bubbling up where they ideally wouldn’t belong. I’ve had plenty of folks share with me how in writing the obituary with their loved ones disagreements emerged related to who to include and exclude in the next-of-kin, which photograph to use, which adjectives to use, which facts about the person’s life should be included and which shouldn’t, just to name a few.

The problem is, as far as I can tell, if these conversations and disagreements are handled with care, with respect, and with a mutual understanding of everyone’s pain, these can be really healthy and therapeutic moments.

More often than not I’ve seen loved ones bond in these difficult moments. For example: I’ve seen the choice of the photograph become an opportunity for loved ones to sift through photos together, during which they invariably pull some out and say “remember this day?” or have a laugh or have a cry over a mutually emotional memory. All of which wouldn’t happen if this weren’t a collaborative process. Similarly, I’ve seen loved ones learn things about the deceased they might not have otherwise learned if another loved one hadn’t shared about it during the obituary writing, which folks tend to cherish in this moment of loss.

And, ultimately, the collaborative process of writing the obituary serves the purpose of a loved one having their pain and their grief validated by the pain and grief of the others involved, the value of which cannot be overstated. In our most difficult moments of grief and loss, we often feel so isolated and so strange in our emotions. Learning that others close to you are feeling a similar way is a lighthouse on the shore for folks lost in their grief. 

The third downside of the “Facebook Obituary” I’d like to point out here is that I fear the Facebook post provides an all-too-convenient box in which those who love the author can offer support and love. As this love and support, almost always, will only be returned to the Facebook user in the form of likes, hearts, comments, or direct messages online. All of which certainly have their place in our emotional world, but don’t seem to me to measure up to the love and support we’d receive otherwise. 

Contrast the digital hearts and D-M’s of the Facebook post with what used to come as a result of the public obituary. If a loss you read about in the paper elicited any reaction from you at all as someone who cared, or knew, or liked, or loved the deceased, you would offer your condolences and offer your support in the form of a making phone call, hand-writing a letter, ordering and sending flowers, making and offering food, or in some extreme (and I think lovely) cases in the form of an in-person visit. 

How much more meaningful and fulfilling must it be to have someone look you in the eye and tell you they care, and that they're “here for you”? Or to hear it in their own voice on the other end of the phone? Or to see it in their own handwriting, in an envelope they addressed, sealed, stamped, and mailed? Or to see it manifested in a beautiful aromatic bouquet of flowers or a warm delicious meal? 

Of course the “Facebook Obituary” doesn’t preclude someone from doing any of these things, and I sure hope they do one of them. But, in reality, I fear the convenience of hitting that reaction button and calling it a day is too tempting for most folks. Many of whom perhaps intend on doing more but maybe never get around to it. Regardless of the reasons, these old traditions forced folks to live out their love and kindness towards the bereaved in what seem objectively to me to be more substantial and meaningful ways. And I want that for people, especially those suffering with grief and loss.

In the next and final post in this blog series I’ll summarize all we’ve said here and reflect on where we might be heading in terms of our traditions around death and obituaries. In closing I’ll reiterate what I said in the beginning of this post: my goal here is not to cast judgment on anyone’s decisions on how to share the news of their loss, but rather to fully illuminate what I see as the benefits of the more traditional obituary. I do so because I firmly believe these benefits help make grieving and mourning our losses healthier.

An obituary for the obituary - Part II

The “pros” of the Facebook Obituary

Though I have some concerns about the “Facebook Obituary” trend, as I've coined it, I believe it's only fair that I acknowledge the positives. It's also important that we enumerate the positive aspects in an effort to bring awareness to what are generally considered in grief work to be important components of healthy grieving. I'll bold this part of the commentary below.

I have seen some exceptionally beautiful, thoughtful, and sentimental Facebook posts honoring the life and death of their loved one. In reading them I can imagine they are uniquely cathartic and I am glad folks are finding that release during a profoundly difficult time. I can certainly see how, when done with awareness and in tandem with other grief and mourning practices, the Facebook Obituary has its place in many people’s grieving.

First, I find it’s nice that the posts can be as long as they want to be, that the writer isn't handcuffed by word limits like you might find in a traditional obituary, either digital or in print. Our English language, or any human language, generally doesn't have the breadth or the depth to fully convey the profound and complicated feelings involved in grief and loss. And as such, having more space, more words, at your disposal to try and express the pain is almost always helpful. I do believe there is a limit to this, I'm sure most people would agree there is such a thing as a Facebook post being too long, no matter what the content is. But in my anecdotal experience folks generally don't cross over into this territory too often. A large majority of the time, the unlimited space is a benefit to the person posting. It gives the author space to acknowledge the many complexities of the person’s life, death, and the relationship they shared together. 

I think it's great that Facebook Obituaries can include one or two or, in some cases, a dozen photos of a loved one alongside it; the writer doesn't have to just pick one photo like in the more traditional obituary. I cannot overstate the frequency in which I hear of folks, often family members, struggling and arguing over which photo to use in an obituary and the unnecessary harm it causes for everyone involved. Some folks believe it’s important the photo reflects the person at their best, in their “prime”; some folks believe it's important the photo reflects who the person was as recently as possible. Arguments can be made that the photo is more for the family than it is for the public, and vice-versa. I'm not sure there are right answers in any direction to any of these debates. When given the opportunity, what I've encouraged folks to do is to try and choose a photo that the deceased themselves appeared to enjoy, which is often a photo somewhere in a frame in their home, or hanging on a wall, or, nowadays, was their profile photo on Facebook. I also remind folks they will have opportunities to choose other photos, ones of their preference, at other times in the grieving process to use in commemorating or memorializing the person. Thankfully, the Facebook Obituary helps solve this problem quite nicely, allowing the writer to include any number of photos with the post that brings them meaning and connection.

I think it's wonderful that it's free, that no one is paying by the letter or by the square inch. Grief and loss are too often, sadly, complicated by the financial implications for those who are most impacted by the loss and any way we can mitigate these complications is welcomed. I believe we can appreciate the difficult position newspaper outlets are in when it comes to maximizing the profit of every square inch of their print publication, or every pixel of their online edition, while also acknowledging the fact that the costs associated with obituary postings in newspapers have become, for most people, unreasonable. Newspaper obituaries have come to cost hundreds of dollars; longer obituaries which include a photo often cost many hundreds of dollars. Their digital counterparts, the online obituary hosting sites, do cost less, but will often still cost between $50 and $100 depending on the service and the amenities it offers. The cost of the obituary, of course, is relative; relative to the readership of the publication, which in every example is significantly down compared to prior years, and also relative to the other costs loved ones are assuming in laying the deceased to rest, which in every example is up significantly compared to prior years. We also find ourselves in the middle of a challenging economic moment for most average Americans. In this unique environment the costs of an obituary present more of a challenge to those who have suffered a loss than ever before, and I can understand the allure of a completely free option. Facebook appears to be offering that to folks.

Lastly, I believe the Facebook Obituary is fairly unique in that the author has complete autonomy over it. The author can speak for themselves, allowing other family members to do the same in their own posts, meaning there isn’t this pressure to agree on what needs to be said in a moment like this. There’s also very little restriction on what can be said; assuming nothing breaks Facebook’s policies the author can say whatever they want to say about the deceased in whatever language, tone, and tenor they like. Grief is a profoundly personalized experience; we all grieve and mourn losses differently. And each loss is different, too. Giving each person affected by a loss the ability to say what they want to say about the deceased, in the way they want to say it, is quite powerful. In grief work we believe the writing of the obituary to be a unique part of the process of mourning, grieving, coping, and healing. Historically this might have only been available to the next-of-kin, or the person otherwise appointed as in-charge, or might have been shared with a small group of loved ones. Now, with Facebook, everyone can enjoy the benefits of taking pen to paper, or in this case fingertips to keyboard, and processing their grief and pain by using words to share the news with others. And because the post doesn’t need to conform to traditional rules around the language and tone of obituaries, each person can feel comfortable speaking their truth about the complexities of the person’s life and death. Considering these two big differences, I can certainly see how the Facebook Obituary is a unique and welcomed opportunity for folks dealing with the loss of a loved one.

An obituary is most often one of the first steps in mourning, that is, the public-facing part of the grieving process; it comes before wakes, funerals, burials, celebrations of life, memorials, and other mourning practices. So much of writing an obituary is an exercise in accepting the loss just enough to share the news with others, while so many other parts of your being are in denial, anger, or depression. This is an important part of taking the first steps towards a place of greater acceptance and integration of the loss in your life, and it does appear to be something the Facebook post does allow for as much as a traditional obituary would. It also serves the purpose of alerting the people in your life that you've suffered a loss and could likely benefit from some support, presence, and kindness during this time. In a world where we seem more fractured in our connectedness by the day, this is critically important and I'm glad that the Facebook post serves this function as well. 

Adding these benefits to the ones outlined above, I can appreciate how and why Facebook Obituaries seem to be slowly replacing the old traditions. I believe these changes in obituary practices pose challenges as well, which we’ll explore in the next installment of the series, but the advantages do deserve acknowledgement. It is my hope this outline may assist someone in understanding why they may be considering a certain type of obituary for their loved one, validate someone’s frustrations with the current practices around obituaries, and/or give someone grieving permission to pursue the kind of obituary for their loved one that they feel is best for them in this moment.

An obituary for the obituary

Part One - Where we started and where we are

In my recent grief work I'm observing, at least anecdotally, a major shift in practices surrounding obituaries.

The word obituary in its original Latin phrasing means a notice of “departure”, and in the context of life and death certainly refers to the latter. I suppose there’s no way to know if it was always used exclusively for someone’s passing, but in modern times it certainly has been.

There are many writings online that will tell you the act of posting public obituaries for the deceased started in Ancient Rome, though I cannot seem to find a reliable source that establishes this as historical fact. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were true, though I’m fairly certain it would have looked and sounded much different than it does today.

What is more credibly established as fact is that up until the early to mid-1800’s in America, obituaries were more-so simple statements of fact regarding someone’s death. There’s reason to believe many of these obituaries were not even written by someone who knew or cared for the deceased; more likely they were written by someone at the newspaper and probably served as more of a formality or legality than anything else. 

Some have reflected, and I would as well, that obituaries in their modern form weren’t quite as necessary then as they are now. In those times communities were much smaller, tighter, more closely connected. Not to mention most folks in these communities likely attended service at the same church or bought bread at the same local bakery, allowing news of a passing to travel quickly and widely in these communities all on its own. There was nothing anyone could read in a newspaper that they hadn’t already heard through the proverbial grapevine.

History shows us that during the mid-1800’s, on the heels of events like Western expansion, the Gold Rush, and the Civil War, as young people of all backgrounds ventured off away from their communities, the practice of writing obituaries began to change. Obituaries became a place for not only sharing facts about the death but also a place for commentary on their life. Furthermore, there is evidence that during this time loved ones began to take on a more active role in writing the obituary itself. Perhaps this is because of the tragic and traumatic nature of many deaths during this time, and perhaps it's because lives were increasingly being lived outside of the community of origin more so than ever before, and a story needed to be told. 

In taking on a more active role in writing the obituary, I believe, people found unexpected catharsis and healing during a tremendously difficult time. Otherwise I’m not sure why in generations and generations since then loved ones have volunteered to write an obituary for the deceased during a time of immense sadness and grief, and at a time in which there are numerous other responsibilities which require their attention. The obituaries seem to have become a place for loved ones to process the full scope of their loss, to share the highlights as much as the lowlights of someone’s life, to introduce their communities to the descendents (who might need support), and to invite the community to mourn with them at the wake or funeral. These obituaries went out to friends, family, and strangers alike.

By all observations, traditions around obituaries would then remain fairly static for approximately 150 years. At which point things started to change drastically and rapidly. As you have probably noticed, in the past thirty years newspapers across the country and the world have hastily transitioned to digital publication, and the obituary section has gone digital as well. Precipitated by a large drop in readership in the early 1990s, this move to digital was likely due to the advent of home-based computers, the internet, and cable news channels all contributing to a change in how Americans got their news. The problem is that with the rising costs of newspaper publication, especially for local newspapers, the fees these publications now charge for hosting obituaries seem to have risen to the point where many folks now forgo a posting in the newspaper altogether. 

This appears to have correlated with an increase in the popularity of low-cost online obituary hosting services, many of which are offered through the funeral homes where folks are having their loved one's final arrangements carried out. Because these low-cost obituaries have become so popular, and so numerous, there's even successful third-party sites like Legacy.com which aggregate obituary postings from thousands and thousands of funeral homes and newspaper websites into one searchable database. They'll even send you a daily email containing the previous day's postings in an effort to keep you up to date; it used to be a newspaper thrown onto your front stoop, now it’s an email in your virtual inbox.

Most of this is relatively old news. What seems new, at least to me, is that even these online obituaries, which over the last two decades have boomed in popularity, appear now to be slowly changing in their utility for people. Obituaries now seem to be returning to the content of our earlier days, once again becoming more straightforward statements of fact: date, age, location, and sometimes the manner of death. I observe less and less reflection in these postings, less and less feeling behind the words. Quite often, I’ve been told, that's because a friend or a loved one isn’t even writing it anymore; it's someone from the funeral home or, I fear, an AI machine. Some folks I speak with have even told me that with the scourge of online identity theft, writing a more detailed obituary has become risky, and what a sad commentary on our culture that is.

What appears to have taken the place of the modern obituary is something we've probably all seen and maybe even done ourselves: the Facebook post. In the next chapter of this blog series, we’ll begin to explore and reflect upon what I, and we in the field of grief work, see as the pros and cons of the changes we’ve seen in obituary practices, including what I’m calling the “Facebook Obituary”.

Greetings & Introductions

First off - thank you for reading. I believe in the power of writing even when there isn't a reader, but the possibility of a reader really does bring a whole new energy to the exercise.

My goal in writing through this medium is to share some of my otherwise private reflections and meditations on my work and various other work-adjacent topics with anyone curious enough to come looking for them. My hope in doing so is that it is accessible and substantive and gives something to folks with whom I'm not otherwise connected.

This blog will generally work with a central concept of grief and loss, although posts will likely branch out to touch a number of different subtopics as I explore grief and loss from every possible angle. I can project ahead to some of these subtopics now although many of them, I believe, will emerge organically over time. I imagine there are many ways in which grief and loss will come up in my daily work, local happenings, world events, current affairs, and mental health more generally. I believe we could all benefit from closer examinations and deeper reflections on such matters and I hope to do my part here.

My goal is to post content on a biweekly basis, every-other-week, though you may have to forgive me if this proves to be too ambitious. I’m already finding it to be difficult to thread the needle between quantity and quality in blogging; seems like a more difficult balance to strike than I probably ever gave it credit for. But, I will try. 

I look forward to building a relationship with you through this medium and am grateful for your time and consideration of my words. If anything on this blog particularly speaks to you please consider using the contact page to reach out to me and let me know. I’d be thrilled to hear from you.

I feel that sets the stage rather nicely.

Onward.

Owen