My First Dead Body

Today I thought I would write just a quick blurb about … you guessed it… death! I was trying to think of interesting topics when I remembered that I saw my first real dead body just in the last 5 months! That’s pretty interesting; at least I think it is.

As I’ve mentioned in a previous entry, I have been lucky enough to have only one close family member die in my lifetime. He was cremated and there was no formal funeral. Since then, I have been in attendance at two funerals (an old elementary school teacher and a girl I once played volleyball with) but, thankfully, neither of them had open caskets. Unless you count family pets and /or road kill, I had never seen a dead body.

However, just this last November/December, my roommate and I were driving down Quadra after dark; we had just reached the downtown area when we saw someone being wheeled out of an apartment building on a stretcher. We were slowing down to stop at a red light and so it seemed to unfold before us very slowly. The moment I saw the stretcher I began to say, “Oh no, it looks like someone was hurt”, but before the words were even out of my mouth it registered in my mind that the person was in a body bag.

My roommate and I saw it at the same time and our jaws dropped open – it’s a miracle we didn’t rear end the car in front of us. It seemed very surreal since we were so removed from the situation but the feeling stayed with us all night. It makes you think about how our actions, conscious or unconscious, may affect others’ lives. I guarantee you that the man inside the body bag never imagined he would be the topic of this blog entry about “My First Dead Body”. 

Website Analysis

For this particular blog prompt, I chose to focus on Wikipedia because I couldn’t think of another website more geared towards the general public. Because my group and I have focused on Tse-whit-zen, the ancient Native American burial ground discovered in Port Angeles in 2003, I decided to see what Wikipedia had to say about it.  Unfortunately, I found Wikipedia to have a shocking lack of information on Tse-whit-zen, especially considering the amount of available information I know is out there. So, I decided to see how much information was to be found on the Hood Canal Bridge instead. The Hood Canal Bridge was the reason for the accidental discovery of Tse-whit-zen due to a large rehabilitation project which was to take place in Port Angeles.  The Hood Canal Bridge has much more written about it; therefore, I have decided evaluate it based on the rubric my group created.

Scope:  5/5 – This isn’t very relevant to this particular website as there is no introduction defining the scope of the topic or explaining why certain information was included or omitted.

Depth of Analysis:  4/5 – The information included is relevant, with no irrelevant information included. However, the background information provided does not have much depth and could use more connections to other material.  

Presentation: 5/5 – The information is presented in a very clear and accessible way with obvious headings and subsections and there are no grammatical or spelling errors. Three types of media are used as well: writing, images, and I’m including links to external websites .

Evidence: 2/5 – Despite the inclusion of reference material at the bottom of the page, many statements of fact are not referenced with a foot note or other form of in-text citation. The sources used are also imbalanced. Based on the topic, I feel that a variety of sources could be used rather than simply relying on an online encyclopedia.

Summary: N/A – I chose not to include this in the evaluation due to the nature of the website as an encyclopedia-like informational source.

References: 1/5 – While the citation style was consistent and without grammatical errors, the lack of references throughout the text was unacceptable. Furthermore, none of the sources used were scholarly or peer reviewed.

When discussing the Hood Canal Bridge, Wikipedia scored a 17/25 for a total of 68%. To improve the website, I would include far more references throughout the text, and increase the scope and depth of material by using more varied and credible sources. I’m glad I didn’t choose to evaluate the page on Tse-whit-zen!

Reference: 

Wikipedia, 2011. Hood Canal Bridge. [online] Available at: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hood_Canal_Bridge> [Accessed 20 March 2012].

"Gay Caveman"... Really?

Reading news articles about the “Gay Caveman” became very annoying within a very short period of time. Not only were the articles very limited in their scope and vocabulary, but most of them were nearly identical – likely due to the nature of getting the story out as quickly as possible which prohibits any actual research (or thinking) from being done. 

Refreshingly, I eventually came across an anthropologist’s blog, Rosemary Joyce, who is currently a professor at UC Berkeley and is an expert in sex and gender in archaeology.  Before reading her thoughts on the subject, I had formed my own opinions about the “Caveman”:

   

       1.) Clearly, an individual from the Corded Ware Culture (2900-2500BC) is not a “caveman” and it is obvious to me that the articles using the terms “gay” and “homosexual” are doing so to grab their audience’s attention.

       2.) The sexing of the skeleton may be incorrect. 

       3.) One cannot make assumptions about an individual’s personal sexual preference based on such little evidence about that individual or the culture.

       4.) It's more likely to be a third gender, significant individual or special circumstance.

However, Rosemary Joyce brought up a very excellent point that I had not considered. She says that in order to recognize third-gender individuals, we need to:

Not simply… look for a reversal, a kind of cross-sex pattern, but for something that really constitutes a third category. The Czech burial, even if we accept the sexing, does not show a third pattern. And in that very lack of other differentiation I find the greatest cause to be cautious about what might otherwise be an interesting example, one we could add to other such examples, of burial patterning that challenges the two sex/two gender model.

She bases this reasoning on studies from more recent cultures. For example, historic California Native American societies which gave third-gender individuals ‘specialized roles’ rather than a simple ‘role reversal’.

I found Joyce’s thoughts on this to be very interesting – especially when dealing with the case of the ‘gay caveman’. Based on her thoughts I would probably rule out the potential of a third-gender and I really don’t believe there is enough evidence to support the ‘homosexual hypothesis’. So maybe it really is an issue of improper sexing? Interesting none the less!

Joyce, Rosemary., 2011. “Gay Caveman”: Wrecking a perfectly good story. Ancient Bodies, Ancient Lives Word Press [blog] 7 April. Available at: <http://ancientbodies.wordpress.com/2011/04/07/gay-caveman-wrecking-a-perfectly-good-story/> [Accessed 25 February 2012].

Image: 

Masty, Steven., 2011. TIC Science Update: Gay Caveman Identified. The Imaginative Conservative Science Blog [blog] 15 April. Available at: <http://www.imaginativeconservative.org/2011/04/tic-science-update-gay-caveman.html> [Accessed 28 April 2012].

For our Monument Analysis project we decided to focus on Pioneer Square, or the Old Burying Ground, next to the Christ Church Cathedral on Quadra Street. I have visited the site before – several years ago – but never for research purposes.  It was refreshing see the park in a different perspective.

While many features of the site caught my attention, I found what struck me the most about Pioneer Square was the predominance of Naval/ Military/Police memorials that are placed in central positions throughout the site. I thought it was strange to add these very large monuments into a retired graveyard where many of the original stones have been relocated to a cramped position at the back of the park. Therefore, my questions are as follows: what is the relevance of military memorials to this particular place? And furthermore: what are the general attitudes regarding the placement and dominance of these monuments amongst the older established graves?

After doing some research I found that despite seeing only one original naval memorial (the Sutlej Memorial from 1866) at the site, there are actually over fifty British Sailors buried at the grounds (OCS, 2012). Naval burials occurred at Pioneer Square from its opening year in 1855 until 1868 (OCS, 2012). Unfortunately, those buried in the ‘Naval Corner’ of Pioneer Square were neglected and their grave markers left to deteriorate.  Below is a photograph taken from the Old Cemeteries Society of Victoria’s website which depicts the original Naval Corner with the HMS Sutlej monument from approximately 1866 - 1870. The public eventually became outraged at the state of the burial site and so the Canadian Naval Society commissioned the erection of a large granite memorial (OCS, 2012).  This information helps answer my first question regarding the relevance of military/naval monuments. I must assume that the other military markers (aviation, police, etc.) are included at the site due to the naval history there as well.

Along with a large number of naval personnel buried at Pioneer Square, there are reportedly 1300 individuals laid to rest there in total. This brings me back to my second question: what are the general attitudes regarding the placement and dominance of these monuments amongst the older established graves? With so many people buried at Pioneer Square with unknown or no affiliation to the military/navy/air force etc., is it appropriate to place a cenotaph larger and more central than all of the other monuments and dedicate it to the Canadian Scottish Regiment (seen below)? I do not think that I can answer this question as it requires deeper research into the creation, patronage, and ceremony surrounding the erection of this particular monument. However I do believe the placement is connected to the status of Pioneer Square as a park rather than graveyard – this distinction, I believe, diminishes the feeling of ‘sacredness’ from the grave site. Public monuments are very common in public parks.

The creation and upkeep of several ‘new’ monuments at Pioneer Square may also be a reaction to the neglect and deterioration that the Old Burial Ground previously suffered. These new monuments may be a way to renew certain obligations between the living and the dead (Barrett 1990, p.187). Therefore, the presence and appearance of these monuments act as a means of communicating the historical importance of the people buried there as well as space itself.

1.       Barrett, J. (1990) The monumentality of death: The character of early bronze age mortuary mounds in Southern Britain. World Archaeology: 22(2): 179-189.

2.       Pioneer Square - Victoria BC. 2012. Pioneer Square - Victoria BC. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.oldcem.bc.ca/psp/html/reports/history/index.htm. [Accessed 20 February 2012].

So the funny thing about being in a class about death is that as soon as you tell people about it, they begin to tell you their own creepy, weird death stories that they’ve encountered. This is how I came to learn about Japan’s ‘Suicide Forest’ also known as the Aokigahara Forest located at the base of Mt. Fuji.  

This place is what nightmares are made of. Hundreds of people have come here to commit suicide; for three decades a small task force of police and volunteers have been doing annual ‘Death Harvests’ to collect the bodies of those who have successfully managed to kill themselves in the forest.  In the past, the Harvest has collected up to as many as 70 bodies while many others are found throughout the year by people walking or hiking in the forest (who on earth would go walking in this forest? That’s what I want to know).  It has become such an issue that the Japanese government has commissioned signs to be scattered throughout the woods that read things like: “Your life is a precious gift from your parents. Don’t keep your worries to yourself – please seek counseling”.

There are other places in the world where abnormal amounts of suicides take place as well, for example, the Golden Gate Bridge has the highest occurrence of suicides than anywhere else in the world. In fact, there is a great documentary entitled “The Bridge” from 2006 that focuses on the Bridge and its jumpers (it’s a really interesting film, I recommend it). 

So while Aokigahara Forest is not so unusual in this respect, what I find really interesting is why so many people are attracted to this location for the purpose of ending their lives.  Unlike the Golden Gate Bridge, the Aokigahara Forest became popular for suicides after a bestselling novel was written in 1960 by Seicho Matsumoto in which the main characters commit suicide together in the Suicide Forest. Since the novel became popular, suicide rates in the forest skyrocketed.

Of course there are other factors that play a role in encouraging suicide at Aokigahara Forest, but I find the amount of influence a simple piece of popular culture has on suicide rates to be very frightening.  You have to wonder what this says about society in general.

"Japan's harvest of death". The Independent (London). 2000-10-24. Retrieved 2012-02-12.

Grave Goods

So a few days ago I decided to take a stab at the grave goods blog prompt from Erin. I thought it would be fun... little did I know that this subject has a secret hidden ninja ability to make me hyper emotional and teary eyed within minutes. It’s not deciding what I would like to be buried with that’s the hard part – what really gets me is picturing my poor little mom crying while placing my old favorite stuffed animal in with me. Oh god, it’s happening again, full on runny nose and watery eyes in the library. Maybe I’ll skip over that part and focus on my own choice of objects instead.

This part is a little tricky. Inanimate objects don’t hold much long lasting meaning for me. Due to frequent moves and changing interests, many of my belongings have come and gone throughout the last 5 years.  I have also lost, ripped, broken, and spilled on a lot of my favourite things and so I’ve learned to not let myself become too attached to belongings.  However, there are a few possessions that I have held onto and taken very good care of.

I have my four house plants that I’ve raised and cherished, but I can hardly imagine having them ritually sacrificed and buried with me, so that’s out. My down duvet is by far one of my most beloved objects, but I suspect I won’t be too worried about comfort once I’m 6ft under.  I also have my beautiful art history textbooks that weigh around 8 pounds each that I painfully lug around with me to each new home. Those are possible grave keepers.

Honestly, if I were to drop dead tomorrow (knock on wood), I think I would be satisfied simply being buried in an outfit that I often wear with my favorite necklace, some photographs of me with my friends and loved ones, and a flask of rye whiskey. I don’t know how well these things would communicate my ‘identity’, but they make me happy.

Phew, made it through without crying again. Till next week!

This past week I’ve been fighting off a gross head cold/ fever which is certainly not a great state to be in when trying to be imaginative; therefore, I’ve decided to blog about something that I don’t have to put too much thought into.

I’m going to discuss my thoughts on how I would like to be ‘disposed’ of once I kick the bucket. This class has certainly brought this topic into my mind at least once or twice this past month.  My family doesn’t seem to have any sort of tradition when it comes to this. Thankfully, the only person close to me that I have lost has been my grandfather; he was cremated and given to my grandmother in a plastic cylindrical container (human ashes, I discovered, are shockingly heavy for the amount of space they take up).  We didn’t have a funeral, just a small family gathering and he was never buried. He remains on a shelf in my grandmother’s house next to a picture of him. One of my uncles died unexpectedly before I was born and he was also cremated; he too remains in my grandmother’s house, fondly referred to as “the boy in the box”. It seems fairly obvious to me now that my family has, what I would call, a casual attitude towards the deceased.

                When I was young, I had always thought that I too would like to be cremated. Rather than being stuck inside a house, I wanted to have my ashes scattered somewhere nice.  As I grew older I started to give it a little more thought and decided it would be nice to have my friends and family plant trees in my honour as trees are in are very special to me (easily in my top 5 favourite things).  Today, I would like to just be buried under a tree sans-casket but I know there are pretty strict regulations about that type of thing, so I guess that’s out of the question. In all honesty, I’m not too concerned about what happens to my body after I die, as long as it’s treated with an appropriate level of respect and isn’t a burden on my loved ones. After all, I don’t want to be remembered as a corpse.