try another color:
try another fontsize: 60% 70% 80% 90%

cemeteries

      
sloving's picture

Looking at cemeteries through the viewfinder

Long before I came to work at the ICCFA, I knew that cemeteries are beautiful and fascinating places. Many photographers know that, as well.

Those of you on Facebook who would like beautiful photos of cemeteries to be part of your news feed can "friend" John Grant, whose profile photo as of today is him in front of a statue of a grieving angel. His "photos of the day" frequently are taken in cemeteries. There are hundreds of gorgeous and evocative cemetery photos among his albums. If you're on Facebook:

http://www.facebook.com/CemDesigns?ref=search#!/CemDesigns

His Web page:

http://www.johnthomasgrant.com/

ICCFA member Adam Sheer recently met a photographer, Ellen Zaroff, whose portfolio includes photos of grieving statues. You can see some of her beautiful black and white photos of cemetery statuary, taken at Cementerio De San Juan, Calvary Queens Cemetery and various other cemeteries, on her Web site. Click on "cemeteries" to read about what she calls "project grief," and go to the "folio" section to see the photos.

http://www.fridayzaroff.com/photos/

Todd Van Beck's picture

Common Sense Funeral Economics

I have been annoyed for years concerning the people who rant and rave about the cost of funerals.  I call the ranting and ravings “myths” and on this blog I would like to offer some practical realities concerning an analysis of funeral costs. It is not necessary to cover the exaggerations of the anti-funeral people – their war cry is always the same and I suspect their verbosity will have no end.

This blog is going to be short.  The readers are thinking privately and possibly out loud “Thank God Above, Glory Halleluiah, this time Todd will be short – it is a miracle.”  I totally understand; you ought to try living with me day to day.

Here are the myths:

MYTH NUMBER 1 “Funerals are too expensive!”

Here are the facts:

  • It takes 136 individuals separate steps and services to complete one average adult funeral.
  • The average funeral in 2008 was $6,500.
  • Basic cost analysis:  For each and every service the funeral comes provides based on the $6500 overall cost each service to the client comes out to be:  $48 per service.

MYTH NUMBER 2 “A funeral is the third greatest expense in life after buying a house or car.”

     Here are the facts:

  • Ask anybody this question:  “Have you ever remodeled your bathroom?”
  • Ask anybody this question:  “Do you have children in college?”
  • Ask anybody this question:  “Have you ever improved your kitchen?”
  • Ask anybody this question:  “Did you have to pay for your daughter’s wedding?”  (This question I find particularly sobering when viewed in the reality that the divorce rate in the United States is 52%.  One would have better chances of success in Vegas).

MYTH NUMBER 3 “Funerals are just too expensive – period.”

     Here are the facts:

  • The average funeral in America costs roughly $6,500.
  • The average American (this does not include untimely or young deaths) lives an average of 75 years.
  • Living 75 years equates into living 27,375 days.
  • This means that the average 75 year old whose funeral costs $6,400 has spent 4.2 cents for every day of their lives for a funeral 

MYTH NUMBER 4 “If we keep burying people at this rate the entire United States will become a cemetery.”

Here are the facts:

  • The world’s population is approximately 5 billion people.
  • One thousand people can be buried on one acre of land in a single grave space.
  • If everyone across the globe died at the exact same moment the entire world’s population could be buried on: 7,812.50 square miles of land, an area which is just a little smaller than the State of Massachusetts (8,257 square miles) and about six times larger than the State of Rhode Island (1,214 square miles) or about the size of Prince Edward Island in Canada.

MYTH number 5 "Wow, caskets are really expensive."

Here are the facts:

  • When President Abraham Lincoln died in 1865 his casket cost an even $1,500.  It was made of solid walnut, lead lined, cloth covered and was one of the finest burial receptacles made.
  • What would this casket cost today, calculating a mere 5% inflation, which equates to 1.05 increases annually on $1,500 over the last 144 years?
  • The Lincoln casket today would sell for, it the casket price kept up with the ups and downs of the economy over the last 144 years for the astounding fee of: $2,480,625 

There you have it – funeral demythologization in a nut shell.  

So next time you are at a cocktail party and some obnoxious funeral service self-appointed reformer starts that ancient babbling and ramblings of the Jessica Mitfords of the world (and remember my friends they are still out there) just pull up some of this stuff and you will stop the funeral director reformer, the funeral director wannabes in their tracks.  Also it feels good to share this stuff.

Anyway that’s one old undertaker’s opinion.    TVB

Todd Van Beck's picture

Burr Oaks Cemetery: "Reverence for the Dead" out the window

Well, my friends, a new industry scandal has happened again and in a big way.  No pushing things under the rug with this mess.  No polite excuses this time.  No escaping the brutal facts concerning how the dead were treated, and the ultimate consequences of how the living are being treated-- those whose loved ones were, I guess, buried or something in Burr Oaks Cemetery.  Unethical treatment of the dead always results in unethical treatment of the living – they go hand in hand. 

Lawyers have already come out of the woodwork, and with good reason.  The people who it is alleged did these dastardly deeds should have to give an accurate and truthful account of what happened.   Right now it looks like great big fines and long prison terms might just be in the offing if what has been alleged happened.

The reader might honestly ask, “Just what is the problem?”  Search for news concerning the Burr Oaks Cemetery in the greater Chicago area and you will find the answers. Let me give a quick overview.  It appears that greed was alive and well on the grounds of Burr Oaks Cemetery.  In a nutshell, it is alleged, with some mighty impressive probabilities, that dead bodies were removed, not buried, shoved here and there or God knows what, and then the grave lots were sold again, and, it is alleged, again and sometime again.  It appears that a group of cemetery employees had devised a dandy scheme to make a quick buck by using and abusing dead people by reselling graves in which a dead body had already been buried.

Pretty sick stuff, but that is the alleged story.  The sheriff has now arrived on the scene and the group of ghouls is being handled by the legal system and the word felony is being bantered around in the district attorney’s office.  One congressman from the district has made a sincere and urgent public call for major burial reform, protection of graves, security, systems of monitoring. In other words, the congressman wants people to give the care of dead bodies some serious attention – now there is an interesting idea, ethically caring for the dead. The thought has never crossed Todd Van Beck’s mind before (that’s a joke HA, HA). Now, as in the Tri-State Crematory (remember that gem) debacle several years ago, everybody is standing up in indignation and anger.  I do feel for the victims.  Most of them, I am certain, entered into the burial experience with a heart filled with trust, and it now is alleged that that sacred trust has been brutally violated.

However as sympathetic as I am to the majority of victims in any case, I am not naïve to “victims.”  Too many times I have served as an expert witness in legal cases where at the time of the death of a family member the next of kin basically says to the cemeterian and undertaker,  “To hell with Dad, cremate him, cheapest thing possible, don’t bother me with the details.”  We all know this happens, but in polite society we just don’t talk about this much – but we all know it happens and is happening more and more as time goes by.  Then two years later when the disengaged next of kin discovers that Dad was not actually cremated but instead his dead body was dumped in a forest, then a miracle of reconciliation and concern happens, and the next of kin says to their brand new lawyer friend, “Dad was a saint, we loved him so much.  We are mentally falling apart over this.  How much do you think we can get?”  Of course, regardless of personal motivation, when the dead are not taken care of as instructed by the next of kin, that is a breach of contract pure and simple and something needs to be done.

For years, I have been totally confused concerning the glaring gap between people saying on the one hand, “Oh, when you’re dead, you’re dead, it doesn’t make any difference,” or “When I am dead I don’t really care what you do which me – hell, I’ll be dead and won’t know the difference,” or “When I am dead just roll me over in a ditch.”

Then when something like Burr Oaks happens in real life, when dead bodies are alleged to actually have been in effect rolled over in ditches, and the body in question is now their mother or father, or son or daughter, or husband or wife, or brother or sister, or cousin, or simply a friend or just any human being who lived life and has had their dead body is treated in such a despicable manner – then the shouts and cries come that such treatment of the dead is a moral abomination and should never happen again. But it does happen again, and again, and again.

So why does something like Burr Oaks happen?  I mean, folks, they even desecrated Emmitt Till’s old casket.  Could the culprits just be stupid?  Mr. Till is possibly the most famous person buried on the Burr Oaks grounds, and his former casket was just put in an old garage and was not even closed.  Were they so greedy, so out to lunch, so slow to the switch that they possibly thought that abusing Emmitt Till’s original casket, which was to be used at a later date in a permanent memorial, would not be found out? That the result would not be the community going “nuts” and a possible prison sentence?  Obviously these cemetery ghouls (if they did what is alleged, that is what they are) did not soberly weigh the community and/or legal response to the discovery of such activities.

They are finding out now, but now it is much too late, as of course it was much too late at Tri-State Crematory.  It seems that so much in life comes to our attention much too late.  Are those not haunting words: "too late."?  Some of most grievous and disastrous happenings in recorded history and on the face of the earth have occurred simply because it was “much too late.”

So why does something like Burr Oaks happen?  We still have not yet answered the question.

I have one thought concerning why this type of irreverence for the dead, this violation of a basic human ethic which proclaims the right of the dead to rest in peace, stems not from the stupid, greedy people who get caught, but comes in part from the basic attitude of apathy and distance our culture has created putting a wall between the living and the dead.  People, many people, are totally removed from such moral issues as ethical care of the dead – is it just not a sexy, popular subject.  Apathy on the part of the regular members of the community concerning the safe and ethical care of the dead does in a true way open to door for the stupid and greedy to abuse the silent world of the cemetery.

In the “good old days," when families and communities regularly visited the graves of their loved ones and even went so far as to tend to the graves themselves, when there was a constant living visible presence of people – many people – on the grounds of cemeteries, incidences of such abomination to the dead were basically unheard of.  Certainly in the 1850s grave-robbing occurred, but with the burial vault that creepy activity was brought to an abrupt halt.  Also, I am not referring to the ever present incidences of cemetery vandalism where a group of teen-agers or weird adult cults dare each other to jump the cemetery walls and behave recklessly and/or participate in odd and strange rituals.

The group of alleged creeps at Burr Oaks obviously went undetected for some time with disastrous results, and heads will no doubt roll. How could this have happened? The state regulatory boards cannot possibly monitor the activities of every cemetery and funeral home in the United States – it is an impossible job, always has been and always will be. However, if each member of every community in this country got reconnected with the dead, with their own dead, and made certain that things were OK at grandpa’s burial site, even by asking a friend, if you live out of town, to stop by any take a look at “Pop's” grave, I believe things would be much different.  I know that sounds so simple, but I truly believe that a greater presence of the regular members of any community on the grounds of any cemetery would make a difference.

My sainted grandmother had a great saying, “An untended grave is a shameful thing,” and you know she was not talking about perpetual care, as I am certain my grandmother did not even know what perpetual care was.   She was talking about every human being giving attention to graves. Attention is where the words “attend or tend” originated.

When I drive by a cemetery and see tens, sometimes hundreds of people musing and walking around a cemetery looking at graves, it does my heart good.  It is a form of community cemetery security system no doubt.  When I drive by a cemetery and see no one on the grounds I worry, and I have worried about this human absence on cemetery grounds long before Burr Oaks.  An unvisited cemetery is just more vulnerable than one which welcomes and encourages and plans for the locals to come in and commiserate with the living and the dead.  In fact I believe it is the only place on earth where such unique commiserations can take place, and take place forever, for a cemetery is usually around for a long, long time.

I suspect privately that the folks at Burr Oaks did not welcome visitors on the grounds with a warm cordial handshake and say, “Spend all the time you need here, we are glad you visited.”  It would not surprise me to learn that with all that has been alleged, the management and staff and Burr Oaks probably found visitors, the regular members of the community, a nuisance.

Of course the most secure way to protect a dead body is to cremate it and scatter the remains to the wind so absolutely no one on earth knows where the body is.  This way it is quick, simple, safe – powerful motivators these days with today’s consumers. I wonder how well this, quick, simple and safe method of caring for the dead will work for cemeteries which in these times really, really need to sell graves to survive and prosper.  In a real perverted and sick way it appears that Burr Oaks really, really needed to sell graves, but what a bizarre and sick way to do it.  I really think there are better ways – don’t you?

Sadly I fear in the end everybody connected with death care will pay a price for the allegations of what happened at a place called Burr Oaks.

Here is an example of the price that just might be in the offing for the future of some cemetery and/or funeral home in the not too distant future.  Might it be that the outcome of the allegations about Burr Oaks will not be improved management of cemeteries, or improved community monitoring and visitation of cemeteries, or improved state regulations overseeing cemeteries, but instead something much more invisible, but yet extremely powerful such as this:  Archie Bunker in Tiny Rock, Iowa, (this story is national news everywhere) looks at his wife Edith after reading about Burr Oaks. With a wave of his hand, he simply says these chilling words, “Hell with it. Edith, they are not going to steal my body and resell my grave over and over again, ya just can trust people anymore. Honey, just cremate me, scatter my ashes over the Tiny Rock River, say a prayer and be done with it.  Do you understand me?”

And Edith responds, “Yes honey, I understand, anything you want.”

Of course as usual I am probably just overreacting, Burr Oaks will pass and the imaginary conversation in between Edith and Archie in Tiny Rock, Iowa, is pure fantasy and speculation.  I do this sort of thing all the time, and remember, my friends, Todd Van Beck is usually wrong. 

Anyway that is one old undertaker’s opinion.

sloving's picture

In honor of tonight's debut of "Lost: Season 5"

A lot of characters have been killed off in seasons 1-4, and no doubt more will die in seasons 5 and 6. As always when I watch a TV show or a movie, I notice cemetery/funeral scenes. Of course there aren't any funeral homes or official cemeteries on the island, at least none that we've seen. But there have been plenty of scenes showing people dealing with the aftermath of death.

STOP if you haven't watched all four seasons: MANY SPOILERS AHEAD! I'm going by memory here, so this may not be a complete list--feel free to add to it:

* After they've been on the beach a couple of days and wild boars have entered the fusilage foraging for food, Jack decides the decomposing bodies must be burned. Sayid, who is Iraqi and later confirmed as being Muslim, objects to imposing cremation on people who might not have wished to be cremated. (The writers assume viewers will know why he objects--or will look it up.) Dr. Jack says they can't bury all those people deep enough to keep the boars from digging up the bodies, so cremation it is. Claire gathers their belongings and uses the information she gleans to lead a service, where the remaining passengers do their best to say something to eulogize each of the deceased.

* Boone is buried with a service, at which Sayid speaks. Boone's stepsister, Shannon, has a hard time dealing with her grief. When they take refuge in the caves, she insists on dragging Boone's luggage with her and breaks down crying. Sayid understands and helps her with the luggage rather than telling her to leave it behind. Later Sun tries to comfort Shannon, telling her that Boone died bravely.

* When Shannon is killed, Sayid digs the grave himself, placing her by her brother. Another service is held; Sayid again speaks.

* Paralyzed by spider venom into a state mimicking death, Nikki & Paulo are buried alive. The less said about the infamous Nikki & Paulo story arc, the better!

* Libby and Ana Lucia are buried, with a service, after being murdered. Hurley, who was sweet on Libby, is later seen by her grave, talking to her.

* Jack was on Oceanic 815 because his mother asked him to go to Australia to bring his father's body back to the US. There's a scene where an Aussie at the ticket counter is telling him he doesn't have the necessary paperwork from a funeral home to have the casket put on the plane, and he manages to talk her into accepting him and the casket. Hmmm, that seems unlikely in these post-9/11 days! Wonder what went through that ticket agent's mind when the plane was lost?!

* One of the red herrings the writers throw in to keep Jeremy Bentham's identity a mystery until the last possible minute is the funeral home where his body is being held. The fact that the funeral director is black and the funeral home seems to be in a black section of the city are obviously designed to feed the fan theory that Bentham is Michael.

* After the Oceanic 6 return home, the service for Jack's father is finally held, though the casketed body he talked onto the plane is of course not on hand. Jack eulogies his father, with whom he had a difficult relationship, in a touching way, and says he loved him.

* Hurley visits Sun in Korea to see her baby. They then go to the cemetery together and visit Jin's grave, where Sun talks to Jin and "shows" him his daughter.

* We see Sayid with others carrying a coffin as part of a funeral procession in the Middle East. It turns out Nadia has been killed and he has returned to Tikrit to bury her.

* There's a lot of debate about whether Ben/The Others are in fact "the good guys," as Ben claims. The fact that Ben killed his father and then left his body in the van, not even bothering to bury him (his body falls apart when the survivors find the van and try to get it running), makes him seem pretty bad to me.

Will there be any time for scenes showing reverent treatment of the dead and/or dealing with grief in Seasons 5 & 6? The previews make the action in Season 5 look more frantic than ever, and we learned at the end of Season 4 that "everyone" died because Jack and the others left the island. During Season 4, there was no service for much-loved Claire, who appears to have died while everyone was on the move somewhere. Ditto Charlie, at the end of Season 3. (Of course there were no bodies in those cases.) Stay tuned ...

 

judyfaaberg's picture

Washington state seeks to force cemeteries to bury pets with their humans

Here's one, as my friend Todd Van Beck would say.

A Washington state Senator has proposed a bill that in essence forces cemeteries to accept the remains of cats and dogs "in any state of decomposition" and bury them with their humans.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?year=2009&bill=5063

Now we all realize there's an interest in dabbling in pet cemeteries. For example, an unrelated article in the Seattle Times earlier this week says that in Seattle there are 45 percent more dogs than there are children. Obviously, we love us some pets. There must be a heckuva marketing opportunity there.

Coincidentally, along comes state Senator Jacobsen, who last year introduced a bill that would allow bars and restaurants with liquor licenses to admit dogs, with their owners in tow.Obviously, Jacobsen loves him some pets. That one went down.

In memory of his much beloved and now-deceased cat, Jacobsen thought it was time to expand cemeteries' occupancy to include pets.

The association that employs me, the Washington Cemetery & Funeral Association, is going on record in opposition of the senate bill. The first section says that cemeteries... "must allow the burial of pet remains in  the same cemetery in which the pet's owner is buried in either: (a) An established and operating area of the cemetery; or (b) a section of the cemetery designated solely for the commingling and burial of pet remains and human remains."

Further, the bill says that "'Pet remains' means the body of a deceased cat or dog, includes the body in any stage of decomposition, and includes cremated remains."

Now, anyone who knows me knows that I have a standard Poodle named Beaujolais who is my constant companion and whom I adore. It would be cool to have her remains buried with me, in whatever state of decomposition we find her when I shuffle off this mortal coil.

However. Cemeteries in this state are formed for the purpose of the burial "of the human dead." And so it states in their declarations.

Try going back to the families who in good faith bought their graves in the knowledge that it was people-only. Try telling people of various religious faiths who believe various animals are anathema. Try telling your family member who is deathly afraid of dogs that, sorry, there's a good chance you're going to be buried next to a dog.

Try changing your charter to allow dogs and cats (as included in the current proposal) or any other animal one seeks to be interred with. Horses? Turkeys? Shrews?

We have several pet cemeteries in Washington. One owner who operates both a pet cemetery AND a people cemetery, David Bielski, was "shocked" by the bill, according to the Times. He thinks, as does the WCFA, "that's opening a whole can of worms that people don't really want to get into." Nevermind the reference to worms, it's a whole subject we don't want to get into.

So off we go to Olympia on Monday January 19 to see if we can shoot down this well-intentioned but intrusive (not to mention absurd) proposal.

Wish us luck!