|
A friend of mine has just been murdered... (pg. 10)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Lira |
Thanks guys. By the way, I'm just going to keep this discussion with Arbiter for fun, so to speak, but I'm not hung up on this mourning thing any more thanks to your support :)
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
Before I come to any conclusion about your mourning, I need to know if you wore sneakers to the funeral. |
Of course I did! However, this is now a cultural difference: we don't wear suits in such occasions here. And, actually, this was quite a shock for me in the first funeral I attended. I felt really really misplaced there because I was one of the very few people wearing black garments, and vowed I'd never do it again.
Here, I found a picture of a Brazilian funeral:
This was the funeral of a politician... and the guys wearing suits are the bodyguards :p
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
So you went to the funeral, "tr[ied] to be selfless," and you wonder how "the hugs felt fake?" Maybe it's because they were fake, and you were the one faking them. |
Precisely.
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
Maybe you were stupid for doing it at all. What did you hope to accomplish? To make yourself feel better? To make everyone else feel better? Is feeling better about something like this even a worthy goal? Perhaps it is preferable that we feel bad about things that are, in fact, bad. Perhaps those feelings are not something to be resisted or to seek to overcome at all. |
It's a gut reaction: If I see someone crying, or about to, my first instinct is to hug this person and/or show some compassion. However, I felt that doing this in a funeral without being sad yourself is so incongruous that you end up looking "stronger-than-thou".
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
To posit the idea of a lousy mourner assumes a proficient one. But unless we can agree on the purpose of mourning, if, indeed, it has one at all, by what criteria are we to distinguish between the two? People tell you that you're "too rational," but what good is irrationality? If your rationality prevents you from connecting with their irrationality, why not call the latter the problem? |
Now this is going to be a nice discussion if you're willing to talk about this some more.
I don't believe that emotions are strictly personal. Of course, the rush and the impulses I feel are limited to what goes on in my body, but the way I express these feelings is a social matter: if you're a kid and you hurt your knee, in our culture, it's okay to cry your lungs out and make the world know how painful the experience of scratching your knee is. Specially if there's any blood! However, if you're someone our age, and you bang your knee somewhere, I bet you (just like me) is going to take it like a champ and, if you feel like being very communicative about your experience, you'll just say something like "Ouch... I didn't see this chair here, who moved it? I guess I'll probably want to take a look at my knee later, I think it's bleeding but I'm not sure". This is the expected response.
For argument's sake, let's call "grief" the personal rush (or lack thereof) I feel inside me, and "mourning" how I (don't) express it.
Now, I tend to be very stoic (in suppressing bad emotions) and I am annoyingly cheerful when I'm around other people (at least for the very few minutes, then I go back to the standard hyper-reflexive pensive mode). So, whenever I go to a funeral, my first instinct is to see someone and think "OMG, it's been so long since I last saw this person, awesome!", but then I remember that having an overly excited reaction is not only inappropriate but downright rude. So I put on my poker face and try to convey the message that "I feel for your loss and I'm going to let you express your sadness the way you want and support you throughout your miserable experience". Naturally, it's well odd to explicitly put it this way because it isn't something I think, but something I feel. And there's some rationality behind this decision as well: though, of course, I hold the opinion that nothing we do will matter to the deceased (because they're dead after all), we sort of have to take care of the living, and not everyone is willing to share my naturalistic worldview (apparently it's too "bleak", though I find it liberating). So, in order to care for the living, I try to adhere to a number of social norms so they can express whatever feeling they want to express within the socially allowed scope.
In this case, letting people act "irrationally" in this case is a rational decision because it's an instrument of social cohesion and liberation. Much like an anti-carnival where you're allowed to whine and feel miserable instead of keeping your usual stiff upper lip in daily life. Don't you reckon? |
|
|
| wienerschnitzel |
When i was 20, one of my closest friends died in a car accident (close enough that he moved in with my family when his mum died, not close as in we ran in the same circle of friends). He was with his girlfriend driving back from calgary when she started getting tired and veering off to the right, so she over corrected to the left and the car went rolling into the ditch. I got a phone call from a mutual friend telling me "derek got in a car accident and they're taking him to the hospital in an ambulance, i'm sure he'd really appreciate it if you'd come meet him there and cheer him up." so based on this information i figured he probably shattered a few bones or had a concussion or something. My mum decided to come with me seeing as she wanted to cheer him up too.
We got to the emerg waiting room and i saw some our mutual friends there, they didn't look too worried about it. I thought the ambulance was taking a long time seeing as the accident happened about 30km outside of town. Finally, a doctor that we knew (a friends dad) came in and said "Ok, come with me and you can see him.." so they took us past emerg into a room and i knew something was off seeing as this was not triage.. and once we were all in the room he said "I'm sure most of you have figured out by now that derek died." :wtf: NO actually i didn't figure that out, how ed up is that? i actually screamed and started crying and rocking back and forth. my mum had to pull me out of the room because i was making everyone else upset..
after the inital shock wore off, i was more angry then anything, why didn't they just tell me he died? i could have dealt with it better at home over the phone.:mad:
the next day my friend called and asked if i was going to go view the body, something i was not really interested in doing. My friend was really pushy telling me i wasn't dealing with it properly and i needed to go see his body so i could come to terms with his death. I reluctantly agreed and once i was there and saw his dead body i vowed i would never do that again.. it just felt so wrong. i would have rather remembered the way he looked alive, not stiff and bruised in a casket with horrible make-up on.. my friend even made me touch him..:wtf: anyway.. my point is, i tried to play along with the 'mourning properly' too but it certainly didn't do me any favours. |
|
|
| igottaknow |
^- you go to funerals out of respect for the victim and their family. It also forces you to face that they're dead. Its one thing to tell you someone is dead, and quite another to see them lowered into the ground.
Lira: they had Brazil president on 60 minutes last night. I didn't know Brazilians are known for their laziness. I hope you guys get going on preparing for the World Cup.
You sound like a thinker not a feeler and that's why you were not able to cry, you instead keep a diary. :p |
|
|
| EddieZilker |
| quote: | Originally posted by wienerschnitzel
When i was 20, one of my closest friends died in a car accident (close enough that he moved in with my family when his mum died, not close as in we ran in the same circle of friends). He was with his girlfriend driving back from calgary when she started getting tired and veering off to the right, so she over corrected to the left and the car went rolling into the ditch. I got a phone call from a mutual friend telling me "derek got in a car accident and they're taking him to the hospital in an ambulance, i'm sure he'd really appreciate it if you'd come meet him there and cheer him up." so based on this information i figured he probably shattered a few bones or had a concussion or something. My mum decided to come with me seeing as she wanted to cheer him up too.
We got to the emerg waiting room and i saw some our mutual friends there, they didn't look too worried about it. I thought the ambulance was taking a long time seeing as the accident happened about 30km outside of town. Finally, a doctor that we knew (a friends dad) came in and said "Ok, come with me and you can see him.." so they took us past emerg into a room and i knew something was off seeing as this was not triage.. and once we were all in the room he said "I'm sure most of you have figured out by now that derek died." :wtf: NO actually i didn't figure that out, how ed up is that? i actually screamed and started crying and rocking back and forth. my mum had to pull me out of the room because i was making everyone else upset..
after the inital shock wore off, i was more angry then anything, why didn't they just tell me he died? i could have dealt with it better at home over the phone.:mad:
the next day my friend called and asked if i was going to go view the body, something i was not really interested in doing. My friend was really pushy telling me i wasn't dealing with it properly and i needed to go see his body so i could come to terms with his death. I reluctantly agreed and once i was there and saw his dead body i vowed i would never do that again.. it just felt so wrong. i would have rather remembered the way he looked alive, not stiff and bruised in a casket with horrible make-up on.. my friend even made me touch him..:wtf: anyway.. my point is, i tried to play along with the 'mourning properly' too but it certainly didn't do me any favours. |
That's ed up. Sorry that happened. |
|
|
| EricB. |
| what a weird ass month. a kid i knew from highschool just got arrested for murder |
|
|
| wienerschnitzel |
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
^- you go to funerals out of respect for the victim and their family. It also forces you to face that they're dead. Its one thing to tell you someone is dead, and quite another to see them lowered into the ground.
|
:rolleyes: i went to his funeral. i was talking about the viewing of the body, which was held at the funeral home the night before. He didn't have any family... he never knew his dad and his mum died 2 years previous. When someone tells me someone is dead, i totally get it. I don't need the visual. |
|
|
| jonSun |
| Sorry to hear about this Lira. Grieve the way which you feel comfortable with. |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
| why would you prod the body. shame on you wiener :p |
|
|
| wienerschnitzel |
| lol it was all kinds of wrong.. :wtf: |
|
|
| Arbiter |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
(snip) |
You say that your "first instinct" when you see someone at a funeral is to think about how good it is to see that person, but earlier you wrote that your "first instinct" when seeing someone who is crying, or about to, is hug them and/or display compassion. It seems to me that they can't both be your first instinct, unless none of the people at the funeral were crying or about to cry.
The nub of your later paragraph, I think, is that your very first impulse is one of happiness about seeing the person, but then, before you act on it and express that happiness, the rational gears start turning in your brain, and you realize that expressing your happiness would be incongruous with social expectations. Then, having so realized, your brain "queries its database" of social expectations for the appropriate response under the circumstances, and then you experience the instinct to express compassion or condolences, and proceed to act upon it. Is that accurate, and, if not, how would you describe the sequence of mental states that ultimately lead to your behavior?
One reason that I ask is because it seems to me quite different than the case of the scratched knee: certainly as experienced by a young child, but I think also by most adults. To illustrate, I hope it's not controversial for me to suggest that a child who hurts his knee does not instinctively think to suppress his feelings and then, only upon realizing that he is expected to cry, does he adjust his behavior to conform with social expectations. Nor, I think, does the typical adult have an initial instinct to bawl their eyes out, only to suppress that instinct upon comparing it with their knowledge of social expectations.
Also, when you talk about "looking 'stronger-than-thou,'" do you mean to express a belief that the hugs (et cetera) felt fake not only to yourself, but also to those toward whom you directed them?
If I read your post correctly, it seems that you are inclined to view the purpose of mourning as facilitating social cohesion among the living. If that is correct, and you are a "lousy mourner" because your behavior does not in fact facilitate social cohesion, then this problem could be conceptualized in at least three different ways:
- Your behavior might fail to facilitate social cohesion because the other members of your social group are able to perceive your conduct as being inauthentic.
- Your behavior might fail to facilitate social cohesion because, although the other members of your social group perceive it as authentic and perceive their relationship with you as more cohesive, you yourself are made uncomfortable by the dissonance between your true feelings and your behavior, and thus feel alienated from the other members of your social group.
- Your behavior might fail to facilitate social cohesion both because the other members of your social group perceive it as inauthentic AND because you are made uncomfortable by the process of trying to conform your behavior to social expectations rather than to your genuine feelings.
In the first case, it could be said that you are indeed a lousy mourner, and you just need to improve your ability to dissimulate so as to better deceive the members of your social group and thereby promote cohesion.
The latter two cases, though, present a more difficult scenario: no matter how you mourn, it is unlikely to facilitate social cohesion, because you are left with the choice of alienating others by refusing to conform with social expectations, or alienating yourself by conforming with social expectations despite your feelings to the contrary. If there is no mourning behavior that you could engage in that would serve the purpose of mourning, then, for you, mourning serves no purpose.
If that is the case, can the rational justification for mourning yet be sustained? I find myself doubting it. If mourning cannot facilitate social cohesion without an already high degree of cohesion, such that individual participants' individualized beliefs and feelings are sufficiently compatible with the socially expected behavior so as to avoid producing the opposite result, then mourning's function may be merely illusory. |
|
|
| stren |
| whoa. Terrible news. Hang in there man. Were you close with her ? |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by stren
whoa. Terrible news. Hang in there man. Were you close with her ? |
I'm close to people who were close to her.
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
You say that your "first instinct" when you see someone at a funeral is to think about how good it is to see that person, but earlier you wrote that your "first instinct" when seeing someone who is crying, or about to, is hug them and/or display compassion. It seems to me that they can't both be your first instinct, unless none of the people at the funeral were crying or about to cry. |
Well, the moment I spot a person, I think about how good it is to see them and, the moment I acknowledge the person I spotted is crying, then I feel the urge to display compassion. I took for granted the idea that I need to see a person first and that the visual information about their behaviour is not always readily available: specially when they're wearing sunglasses and/or facing the opposite direction.
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
The nub of your later paragraph, I think, is that your very first impulse is one of happiness about seeing the person, but then, before you act on it and express that happiness, the rational gears start turning in your brain, and you realize that expressing your happiness would be incongruous with social expectations. Then, having so realized, your brain "queries its database" of social expectations for the appropriate response under the circumstances, and then you experience the instinct to express compassion or condolences, and proceed to act upon it. Is that accurate, and, if not, how would you describe the sequence of mental states that ultimately lead to your behavior? |
Yes, I'd say this is so.
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
One reason that I ask is because it seems to me quite different than the case of the scratched knee: certainly as experienced by a young child, but I think also by most adults. To illustrate, I hope it's not controversial for me to suggest that a child who hurts his knee does not instinctively think to suppress his feelings and then, only upon realizing that he is expected to cry, does he adjust his behavior to conform with social expectations. Nor, I think, does the typical adult have an initial instinct to bawl their eyes out, only to suppress that instinct upon comparing it with their knowledge of social expectations. |
However, and this could be a cultural bias of mine, as I grew up I consistently received instructions as to how I should react in these occasions. At some point I believe I must have internalised these instructions as I internalised many more habits, from language to courtship.
Today I don't have to think before I decide to talk to you in English because of all the background information available when I make this choice (and this isn't always obvious to a child, as I found out for myself when the locals in France didn't really get what I frustratedly tried to telling them in Italian). Likewise, the first time I tried to show some interest to a girl as a kid, I found out that there's is such a thing as being "too direct"... let's just say I "naturally" developed smoother approaches after that :p
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
Also, when you talk about "looking 'stronger-than-thou,'" do you mean to express a belief that the hugs (et cetera) felt fake not only to yourself, but also to those toward whom you directed them? |
I don't know, perhaps as a hugger I did expect the huggee to show different signs, so when they failed to do what I thought would be natural, I was sceptical about the validity of my actions.
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
If I read your post correctly, it seems that you are inclined to view the purpose of mourning as facilitating social cohesion among the living. If that is correct, and you are a "lousy mourner" because your behavior does not in fact facilitate social cohesion, then this problem could be conceptualized in at least three different ways:
- Your behavior might fail to facilitate social cohesion because the other members of your social group are able to perceive your conduct as being inauthentic.
- Your behavior might fail to facilitate social cohesion because, although the other members of your social group perceive it as authentic and perceive their relationship with you as more cohesive, you yourself are made uncomfortable by the dissonance between your true feelings and your behavior, and thus feel alienated from the other members of your social group.
- Your behavior might fail to facilitate social cohesion both because the other members of your social group perceive it as inauthentic AND because you are made uncomfortable by the process of trying to conform your behavior to social expectations rather than to your genuine feelings.
In the first case, it could be said that you are indeed a lousy mourner, and you just need to improve your ability to dissimulate so as to better deceive the members of your social group and thereby promote cohesion.
The latter two cases, though, present a more difficult scenario: no matter how you mourn, it is unlikely to facilitate social cohesion, because you are left with the choice of alienating others by refusing to conform with social expectations, or alienating yourself by conforming with social expectations despite your feelings to the contrary. If there is no mourning behavior that you could engage in that would serve the purpose of mourning, then, for you, mourning serves no purpose. |
Which is pretty much the conclusion I arrived at :p
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
If that is the case, can the rational justification for mourning yet be sustained? I find myself doubting it. If mourning cannot facilitate social cohesion without an already high degree of cohesion, such that individual participants' individualized beliefs and feelings are sufficiently compatible with the socially expected behavior so as to avoid producing the opposite result, then mourning's function may be merely illusory. |
Indeed. However, in this case, it's not because mourning is itself a useless thing to do (despite its ineffectiveness on me), but because it's a shared set of behaviours in which I clearly don't partake.
:p |
|
|
|
|
