Death in a Consumer Culture

Thisbookhauntsuswithmoreandmoreabouthowpeople livewithdeath. Inmodern lifethere are these endless questions that are explored here. Issues of anticipation, ofbereavement,orhandlingofthedeadbody,oflivingwithitsirrevocablefactofmortality.Asweponderwhathappensbefore,during, andafterdeath; thisbookhelpsus todo that inarich,highlydetailedway.

SidneyJ.Levy,Professor,UniversityofArizona,USA

Deathisn’twhatitusedtobe.Theimmortalitysoughtbytranshumanistsmaynotbenew,buttheirtechnologiesare.LatterdayCartesiansmaynewlyattempttoseparatemindandbody,butissuesregardingtheformervessel,grief,andmemorializationofthespiritremain.Internetimmortality,environmentalism,andmodernmedicinealsoaltertheconcernsandpossibilities.This important volume pits everlasting questions against new techniques for treating andunderstandingdeath.

RussellBelk,Professor,YorkUniversity,Canada

Deathcomesbrilliantlytolifeinthisvolumeofinsightfulresearch.Fromdarktourism,onlinememorials,andcoffineroticatoeco-funerals,celebritydeaths,corpsecarnivalism,andmore,Dobscha’sDeath in a Consumer Culture provides a startling and valuable new view abouthow our culture of markets, media, and money interrelates with the reality and the longshadowofdeath.

RobertKozinets,Professor,YorkUniversity,Canada

This lively book provides stimulating new perspectives on death, and should generateproductive thinking about how death and dying are central parts of the marketplace. Theinternational castof contributorsoffersbothpractical and theoretical insights intoa spiritedrange of death-related topics that creatively reframes death as a consumer and marketpractice.

JonathanSchroeder,WilliamA.Kern,Professor,RochesterInstituteofTechnology,NewYork,USA

DeathinaConsumerCulture

Deathhasneverbeenmorevisibletoconsumers.Fromlifeinsurancetoburialplotstoestateplanning,weareconstantlyremindedofconsumerchoicestobemadewithourmortalityinmind. Religious beliefs in the afterlife (or their absence) impact everyday consumptionactivities.

DeathinaConsumerCulturepresentsthebroadestarrayofresearchonthetopicofdeathandconsumerbehaviouracrossdisciplinaryboundaries.Organizedintofivesectionscovering:TheDeathIndustry;DeathRitualsandConsumption;ConsumptionofDeath;DeathandtheBody;andAlternateEndings,thebookexplorestopicsfromcelebritydeathtourism,petandonline memorialization, and family history research, to alternatives to traditional corpsedisposalmethodsandpatient-assistedsuicide.Workfromscholarsinhistory,religiousstudies,sociology,psychology,anthropology,andculturalstudiessitsalongsideresearchinmarketingand consumer culture. From eastern and western perspectives, spanning social groups anddemographic categories, all explore the ubiquity of death as a physical, emotional, cultural,social,andcosmologicalinevitability.

Offeringarichlyuniqueanthologyonthischallengingtopic,thisbookwillbeofinteresttoresearchersworkingattheintersectionsofconsumerculture,marketing,andmortality.

SusanDobscha isAssociateProfessor ofMarketing atBentleyUniversity inWalthamMA,USA. She has written articles for Harvard Business Review, Journal of Public Policy andMarketing, Journal of Macromarketing, Consumption, Markets, and Culture, MarketingEducationReview,AdvancesinConsumerResearch,DevelopmentsinMarketingScience,andAdvertising andSocietyReview, and has presented herwork at numerous conferences. Sherecentlyco-chairedthe9thACRConferenceonGender,Marketing,andConsumerBehavior.

RoutledgeInterpretiveMarketingResearchEditedbyStephenBrownUniversityofUlster,NorthernIreland

Recent years have witnessed an ‘interpretive turn’ in marketing and consumer research.Methodologies from the humanities are taking their place alongside those drawn from thetraditionalsocialsciences.

Qualitative and literary modes of marketing discourse are growing in popularity. Art andaestheticsareincreasinglyfiringthemarketingimagination.

Thisseriesbringstogetherthemostinnovativeworkintheburgeoninginterpretivemarketingresearch tradition. It ranges across the methodological spectrum from grounded theory topersonalintrospection,coversallaspectsofthepostmodernmarketing‘mix’,fromadvertisingtoproductdevelopment,andembracesmarketing’sprincipalsub-disciplines.

1TheWhyofConsumptionEditedbyS.Ratneshwar,DavidGlenMickandCynthiaHuffman

2ImaginingMarketingArt,AestheticsandtheAvant-gardeEditedbyStephenBrownandAnthonyPatterson

3MarketingandSocialConstructionExploringtheRhetoricsofManagedConsumptionChrisHackley

4VisualConsumptionJonathanSchroeder

5ConsumingBooksTheMarketingandConsumptionofLiteratureEditedbyStephenBrown

6TheUnderminingofBeliefsintheAutonomyandRationalityofConsumers

JohnO’ShaughnessyandNicholasJacksonO’Shaughnessy

7MarketingDiscourseACriticalPerspectivePerSkålén,MarkusFellessonandMartinFougère

8ExplorationsinConsumerCultureTheoryEditedbyJohnF.SherryJr.andEileenFischer

9InterpretationinSocialLife,SocialScience,andMarketingJohnO’Shaughnessy

10InterpretingConsumerChoiceTheBehavioralPerspectiveModelGordonR.Foxall

11ManagingServiceFirmsThePowerofManagerialMarketingPerSkålén

12InteractiveMarketingRevolutionorRhetoric?ChristopherMiles

13BeyondtheConsumptionBubbleKarinM.EkströmandKayGlans

14Music,Movies,Meanings,andMarketsCinemajazzamatazzMorrisB.Holbrook

15GenerationYinConsumerandLabourMarketsAndersParment

16ConsumptionandSpiritualityEditedbyDiegoRinallo,LindaScott,andPaulineMaclaran

17ContemporaryPerspectivesonCorporateMarketingContemplatingCorporateBranding,MarketingandCommunicationsinthe21stCenturyEditedbyJohnM.T.Balmer,LauraIlliaandAlmudenaGonzálezdelValleBrena

18Motherhood,MarketsandConsumptionTheMakingofMothersinContemporaryWesternCulturesEdited by Stephanie O’Donohoe, Margaret Hogg, PaulineMaclaran, LydiaMartens andLornaStevens

19BrandsInterdisciplinaryPerspectivesEditedbyJonathanE.Shroeder

20AnalyzingMusicinAdvertisingTelevisionCommercialsandConsumerChoiceNicolaiGraakjær

21SensoryMarketingTheoreticalandEmpiricalGroundsBertilHultén

22DeathinaConsumerCultureEditedbySusanDobscha

AlsoavailableinRoutledgeInterpretiveMarketingResearchseries:

RepresentingConsumersVoices,viewsandvisionsEditedbyBarbaraB.Stern

RomancingtheMarketEditedbyStephenBrown,AnneMarieDohertyandBillClarke

ConsumerValueAframeworkforanalysisandresearchEditedbyMorrisB.Holbrook

MarketingandFeminismCurrentissuesandresearchEditedbyMiriamCatterall,PaulineMaclaranandLornaStevens

DeathinaConsumerCulture

EditedbySusanDobscha

Firstpublished2016

byRoutledge

2ParkSquare,MiltonPark,Abingdon,OxonOX144RN

andbyRoutledge

711ThirdAvenue,NewYork,NY10017

RoutledgeisanimprintoftheTaylor&FrancisGroup,aninformabusiness

©2016SusanDobscha

Therightoftheeditortobeidentifiedastheauthoroftheeditorialmatter,andoftheauthorsfortheirindividualchapters,

hasbeenassertedinaccordancewithsections77and78oftheCopyright,DesignsandPatentsAct1988.

Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthisbookmaybereprintedorreproducedorutilisedinanyformorbyanyelectronic,

mechanical,orothermeans,nowknownorhereafterinvented,includingphotocopyingandrecording,orinanyinformation

storageorretrievalsystem,withoutpermissioninwritingfromthepublishers.

Trademarknotice:Productorcorporatenamesmaybetrademarksorregisteredtrademarks,andareusedonlyfor

identificationandexplanationwithoutintenttoinfringe.

BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData

AcataloguerecordforthisbookisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary

LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationData

Deathinaconsumerculture/editedbySusanDobscha.–1Edition.

pagescm.–(Routledgeinterpretivemarketingresearch)

Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.

ISBN978-1-138-84819-1(hardback)–ISBN978-1-315-72617-5

(ebook)1.Death–Socialaspects.2.Deathcareindustry.

3.Consumption(Economics)I.Dobscha,Susan,editor.

HQ1073.D432016

306.9–dc23                 2015023565

ISBN:978-1-138-84819-1(hbk)

ISBN:978-1-315-72617-5(ebk)

TypesetinBembo

byWearsetLtd,Boldon,TyneandWear

Contents

Listoffigures

Listoftables

Notesoncontributors

Acknowledgments

Abrief,abbreviatedintroductiontodeathSUSANDOBSCHA

PARTIThedeathindustry

1Proclaimingmodernityinthemonumenttrade:BarreGranite,VermontMarble,andnationaladvertising,1910–1932BRUCES.ELLIOTT

2Themarketingofasiege:Leningradvs.Sarajevo–memorializingdeathanddespairBRENTMcKENZIEANDMARYCLAIREBASS

3MarketingdeaththrougheroticartCHRISTINAWELCH

4Authenticity,informalityandprivacyincontemporaryNewZealandpost-mortempracticesCYRILSCHÄFERANDRUTHMcMANUS

5Custodyofthecorpse:controllingalkalinehydrolysisinUSdeathcaremarketsPHILIPR.OLSON

PARTIIDeathritualsandconsumption

6Death,ritualandconsumptioninThailand:insightsfromthePeeTaKohnhungryghostfestivalRUNGPAKAAMYHACKLEYANDCHRISHACKLEY

7Ritual,mythology,andconsumptionafteracelebritydeathSCOTTK.RADFORDANDPETERH.BLOCH

8Voluntarysimplicityinthefinalriteofpassage:deathHAKANCENGIZANDDENNISW.ROOK

PARTIIIConsumptionofdeath

9Cheatingdeathviasocialselfimmortalization:thepotentialofconsumption-ladenonlinememorializationtoextendandlinkselvesbeyond(physical)deathTERRANCEG.GABEL

10Extendingthemourning,funeral,andmemorializationconsumptionpracticestothehuman–petrelationshipPHYLISM.MANSFIELD

11Greatgrannyliveson:pursuingimmortalitythroughfamilyhistoryresearchLEIGHANNC.NEILSONANDDELPHINA.MUISE

12Physician-assistedsuicideatthecrossroadsofvulnerabilityandsocialtaboo:isdeathbecomingaconsumptiongood?FRANÇOISEPASSERARDANDXAVIERMENAUD

13Dispatchesfromthedying:pathographiesasalensonconsumptioninextremisDARACHTURLEYANDSTEPHANIEO’DONOHOE

PARTIVDeathandthebody

14TheroleofbodydispositioninmakingsenseoflifeanddeathCOURTNEYNATIONSBAKER,STACEYMENZELBAKERANDJAMESW.GENTRY

15Consumeracceptanceofradicalalternativestohumandisposal:anexaminationoftheBelgianmarketplaceLOUISECANNING,ISABELLESZMIGINANDCATHYVAESSEN

16Theatreoftheabject:BodyWorldsandthetransformationofthecadaverKENTDRUMMONDANDERICKRSZJZANIEK

PARTVAlternateendings

17The‘mortalcoil’andthepoliticaleconomyofdeath:acriticalengagementwith

BaudrillardAI-LINGLAI

18Thespectreofposthumanismintechnologyconsumption:thedeathofthehuman?MARGOBUCHANAN-OLIVERANDANGELAGRACIAB.CRUZ

19PoeticallyconsideringdeathanditsconsumptionTERRANCEG.GABEL,EDITOR

20ExaminingdeathandlearningaboutlifeJEFFREYPODOSHEN

Index

Figures

2.1MonumenttotheheroicdefendersofLeningrad2.2“Shellcasing”lamps2.3Kovaci–Martyrs’memorialcemetery–Sarajevo7.1Responsestocelebritydeath

Tables

8.1Costofanadultfuneral–20128.2Death-relatedproductsandservices8.3CremationratesintheUnitedStates8.4Deathritualsconsumptiondomain9.1Consumption-relatedmemoriesofGary12.1SynthesisofDurkheim’sclassificationofsuicide12.2Informationoninformants

Contributors

Editor

Susan Dobscha (Ph.D., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University) is Professor ofMarketing at Bentley University in Waltham, MA. She explores gender issues inmarketing, particularly in the context of the Filene’s Basement Bridal Event; consumerresistancetomarketingtactics;andtheroleofconsumptioninawoman’stransitionintofirst-time motherhood. She has also studied sustainability issues related to consumerculture.ShehaswrittenarticlesforHarvardBusinessReview,JournalofPublicPolicyandMarketing, Journal ofMacromarketing, Consumption,Markets, and Culture,MarketingEducationReview,Advances inConsumerResearch,Developments inMarketingScience,andAdvertisingandSocietyReview,andhaspresentedherworkatnumerousconferences.She recently co-chaired the 9thACRConference onGender,Marketing, andConsumerBehavior.

Contributors

StaceyMenzelBakerisProfessorofMarketingatCreightonUniversityinOmaha,Nebraska.ShereceivedherdoctoratefromtheUniversityofNebraska-Lincoln.Herresearchfocusesonconsumerattachment,vulnerability,andresiliencyincontextssuchasdisasterrecovery,disability, and social services. Her work has been applied by businesses to promoteproductsandtodesignaccessibleservicescapes;bypolicymakersandagenciesintheU.S.,Canada, and U.K. to help shape public policies; and by scholars inside and outside herdiscipline, including those investigating the management of disasters and globalenvironmentalchange.

Courtney Nations Baker is a doctoral student in the Department of Management andMarketingattheUniversityofWyoming.

MaryClaireBass is agraduate student inBusinessCommerce,withamajor inMarketingandConsumerStudies fromtheUniversityofGuelph.Her interest inDarkTourismhasallowed her to utilize hermarketing degree knowledge and apply it to her interests inhistoryandtravel.SheisemployedbytheGovernmentofOntario,andresidesinToronto,Ontario,Canada.

Peter H. Bloch is the Pinkney C. Walker Professor of Teaching Excellence at the RobertTrulaske, Sr. College of Business, University ofMissouri, Columbia. He has a doctoratefromtheUniversityofTexas,awardedin1981.Hecurrentlyteachesconsumerbehaviorattheundergraduateanddoctorallevelsandisknownforhisinnovativeuseofinstructionaltechnology.Heisalsorecognizedforhisresearchonconsumerresponsestoproductdesignand the nature of enduring product interests. His current research includes themoderncultureofcelebrityandtheimpactofarchitecturalelementsontradeshowattendees. Inrecent years, he has presented and consulted on the creation of effective PowerPointpresentations.Anavidphotographer,hehastwicewonColumbia’scitywidephotographycompetition.Healsoenjoysattendingautoracesandwatchingclassicmovies.

GregoryW. Boller is Associate Professor ofMarketing at the University ofMemphis. Hiscurrent research interests center on empathy, business ethics, and performanceethnography.He teaches creativity and innovation as a core course in theUniversity ofMemphisMBAprogram.Inadditiontohisacademicresponsibilities,heisaworkingactor,andhasperformedinmorethan25stageproductionsand4filmsinthelast10years.

MargoBuchanan-OliverisProfessorofMarketingandCo-DirectoroftheCentreofDigitalEnterprise [CODE] at The University of Auckland. Her current research focuses ontheoretical and socio-cultural perceptions of digital technologies, the semiotics ofrepresentationandthepoliticsofgender.Shehaspublishedinleadingmarketingjournalsandisafrequentpeerreviewer.

Louise Canning’s academic career spans more than two decades during which timesustainabilityhasbeenoneofhercentralresearchinterests.Herstudiesofthehandlingofenvironmentalissueswithinmarketrelationshipsincludestheexaminationoftheinterfacebetween business and consumermarkets andmost recently the investigation of humandisposition as an act of consumption. She is a regular reviewer for internationalpublicationsandherworkhasbeenpublishedinleadingjournalssuchasEuropeanJournalofMarketing,JournalofMarketingManagement,andJournalofServicesMarketing.Shewas appointed Associate Professor of Marketing at Kedge Business School, France, inSeptember2013,havingpreviouslyworkedattheUniversityofBirmingham,U.K.

Hakan Cengiz is an Assistant Professor of Marketing in the Department of BusinessAdministration at Karabuk University. He served as former Head of Department ofBusinessAdministrationfrom2014–2015,andhealsocurrentlyservesasDeputyHeadoftheDepartmentofBusinessAdministration.HereceivedhisM.B.A.andPh.D.inBusinessAdministrationwith a concentration inmarketing fromEskisehirOsmangaziUniversity.His research interests include topics such as consumer culture, consumer lifestyle, socialmedia and digital marketing. He has won a Visiting Scholar Fellowship to attend theWaikatoUniversity for the 2015–2016 academic year.Hewas also aVisiting Scholar atMarshallBusinessSchool(USC)between2012–2014.

AngelaGracia B. Cruz is a Ph.D. Candidate inMarketing at The University of AucklandBusiness School. Her research follows an interdisciplinary approach and is broadlyconcerned with understanding consumption at the boundaries: between East andWest,between human and machine, and between life and death. She is Senior Scholar inMarketing and in Film, Television and Media Studies and has published in EuropeanJournalofMarketingandAdvancesinConsumerResearch.

HilaryDowney is a Lecturer inMarketing andConsumer Behavior atQueen’s UniversityBelfast (N. Ireland). Her research is concerned with those consumers marginalized andvulnerable in society (i.e. ageing, disabled consumers). As amember of the InnovativeResearch Methodology group (TCR) and co-editor/reviewer of the poetic chapbook atCCT,herconsumervulnerability-relatedpoetryisgivenaplatform.HerworkispublishedinJournalofPublicPolicyandMarketing,JournalofMarketingManagement,JournalofBusinessResearch,JournalofConsumerBehaviorand International Journal of SociologyandSocialPolicy,amongstothers.

BruceS.ElliottisaProfessorofHistoryatCarletonUniversityinOttawa,Canada,whereheteachesaseminarcourseongravestonesandcemeteries.HehaspublishedarticlesaboutgravestonesofBermudaandtheAmericanCivilWarheadstoneprogram.

Terrance G. (Terry) Gabel is Associate Professor of Political Economy and Commerce atMonmouthCollege,Monmouth, IL (U.S.A.).His interest indeath-relatedmarketing andconsumptionbeganwhile toilingas agravedigger in the summersofhisundergraduateyears. Scholarlymanifestations of this interest have included an exploratory analysis ofdeath-relatedconsumption(Gabel,Mansfield,andWestbrook1996)andamarketingandpublic policy examination of the life insurance settlement – i.e., “death bonds” –marketplace(GabelandScott2009).Mostrecently,hisdeath-relatedandotherpoetryhas

beenpublishedinbookletsproducedinconjunctionwiththethreemostrecentConsumerCultureTheoryConferences.

PilarRojasGaviriahasobtainedherDoctoraldegreeinEconomicsandManagementfromSolvayBrusselsSchoolofEconomicsandManagement (SBS-EM).Herdoctoral researchon homecoming tendencies of Latin American migrants living in Belgium integratesphilosophicaltheories,poetry,andresearchonconsumerbehavior.IthasbeenpublishedinJournalofConsumerBehaviour,Research inConsumerBehavior,Advances inConsumerResearch andLa Fabrique de l’Ethnicité: Consommation etMarketing. Her postdoctoralresearchfocusesontwopillars(i)Theinteractionbetweenphilanthropyandthemarketinthe construction of solidarity bonds among consumers; and (ii) The understanding ofaesthetic experiences of consumption in the construction of multicultural collectiveidentities.PilarisAffiliatedProfessoratUniversidadEsan(Lima-Peru).

James W. Gentry is the Maurice J. and Alice Hollman Professor in Marketing at theUniversityofNebraska-Lincoln.JimobtainedhisdoctorateatIndianaUniversityandhastaught at Kansas State University, Oklahoma State, and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. In addition, hehas visited at theUniversity ofWisconsin and theUniversity ofWesternAustralia.Hiscurrentresearchinterestsareelderlyconsumers,gender,family,andcross-culturalissues.

ChrisHackleyisProfessorofMarketingatRoyalHollowayUniversityofLondon.HisPh.D.fromStrathclydeUniversity focused on the creative process in top advertising agencies,andhehassubsequentlyauthoredorcontributedtosome150journalarticles,books,andconference papers on various aspects of critical marketing, advertising management,consumerculture,andmediapolicy.

RungpakaAmyHackleyearnedherPh.D.fromRoyalHollowayUniversityofLondon,andfirstandseconddegrees fromChulalongkornUniversity,Thailand,and theUniversityofBirmingham,U.K. Shewas Lecturer inMarketing at theUniversity of Surrey and thenDurhamUniversity before joiningQueenMaryUniversity ofLondon.Her teaching andresearch focus is on marketing communications, brand management, and consumerculture.Herresearchhasbeenpublishedinvariousbookchapters,conferenceproceedingsand journals including Journal of Marketing Management, International Journal ofAdvertising,JournalofMarketingCommunications,BusinessEthics:AEuropeanReview,MarketingTheory,andAdvancesinConsumerResearch.

EricKrszjzaniekisadoctoralstudentattheUniversityofWyoming.Hisresearchfocuseson

therhetoricalforcesassociatedwiththecreationandsustainabilityofwildernessspaces.

Ai-Ling Lai is a Lecturer in Marketing at the University of Leicester. She is primarilyinterested in interpretive consumer research, which draws on cultural and sociologicaltheories to challenge and to explore consumption and marketing issues. Currently, herresearch focuses on the topic of embodiment, mortality, self-identity, and existentialphilosophy.Inparticular,shedrawsontheconceptofmortalembodiment,drawingonthephilosophyofHeideggerandMerleau-Pontytounderstandpotentialdonor’sambivalencetowards organ donation. Recently, she has broadened her research areas looking atSinglehood in the Marketplace as well as Understanding Embodiment in Spirituality.Methodologically, she works within the interpretive tradition. In particular, her workfollows a linguistic-based approach inspired by hermeneutics philosophy and discourseanalysis.

Sidney J. Levy (Ph.D. Human Development, University of Chicago) was licensed as apsychologist in Illinois. He joined Northwestern University in 1961, taught there for 36years, and chaired Kellogg School’s marketing department from 1980 to 1992. He isCharlesH.KellstadtEmeritusProfessorofMarketing.In1982hewashonoredasaFellowby theAssociation forConsumerResearchand servedas theorganization’sPresident in1991.In1988hewasnamedAMA/IrwinDistinguishedMarketingEducator.In1997HEC-University ofMontreal named him the first recipient of a Living Legend ofMarketingaward.HeiscurrentlyCoca-ColaDistinguishedProfessorofMarketingatEllerCollegeofManagement,theUniversityofArizona.Hisarticleshavebeenwidelyrecognizedfortheirinfluenceontheworld’smarketingactivitywithintheconceptofbrandimage,broadeningtheapplicationofmarketingtonon-businessfields,andtheunderstandingofsymbolicandqualitativeaspectsofconsumerculture.

Phylis Mansfield is an Associate Professor of Marketing at Penn State University, theBehrendCollege.Shehaspublishedinseveraljournals,includingtheJournalofBusinessEthics, The Journal of Consumer Affairs, Psychological Reports, and the Journal ofConsumerMarketing.Shehasalsopublishedseveralbookchaptersandcases.Herresearchinterestsareinconsumerprotection,sustainabilityinmarketingstrategy,andethics.

BrentMcKenzie,Ph.D.,M.B.A.,isanAssociateProfessorintheDepartmentofMarketingandConsumer Studies, in the College ofManagement and Economics, at the University ofGuelph,inGuelph,Ontario,Canada.Hisresearchinterestsareintheareasofretailservicequality and shopping behavior, international consumer behavior and culture, and darktourism. He has a special interest in the Baltic State countries of Estonia, Latvia, and

Lithuania, and other regions of the former Soviet Union. He has engaged in extensiveresearch fieldwork, and conducted a number of workshops and presentations in thesecountries.Hisresearchhasbeenpublishedinsuchacademicandpractitionerpublicationsas the Journal of Business Research, Management Decision, the Baltic Journal ofManagement, the Journal of East-West Business, International Journal of ManagementPractice, International Journal of Business and Emerging Markets, KnowledgeManagement Research and Practice, and The Retail Digest. He is also a holder of anAcademic Research Fellowshipwith the Estonian Studies Centre, and Tartu College, inToronto,Canada.

DelMuise retired froma30-yearcareerof teachingatCarletonUniversity in2008.AfteralongpreoccupationwithAtlanticregionalhistory,hisleadingresearchstreamintherecentpast is heritage issues within Canada, particularly as related to museum policy andpractice,butalsotothebroaderareaofthepoliticsofmemory.Thepublicfaceofhistoryin Canada continues to inform current research, which led to a collaborative projectentitled Canadians and their Pasts. This project, initiated in 2005, featured a survey ofseveral thousand Canadians about attitudes toward the past, the findings of which aresummarizedinConrad,M.,Ercikan,K.,Friesen,G.,Letourneau,J.,Muise,D.,Northrup,D.andSeixas, P. (2013)CanadiansandTheirPasts (Toronto:University of Toronto Press).MorerecentlytheculturalpoliticsofidentityinCapeBretonandthequestionofroots-ledtourismhavebeenapreoccupation.

Leighann Neilson is Associate Professor of Marketing at the Sprott School of Business,CarletonUniversity.SheisaresearchassociatefortheCarletonCentreforPublicHistoryandSprottCentreforSocialEnterprise,whereherrecentresearchhasfocusedoncharityfundraisingmethods.Herbroaderresearchinterestsincludesocialandculturalinfluencesonconsumption;theinfluenceofcollectivememoryontouristicconsumption;marketingin nonprofit and cultural institutions and Canadian marketing, tourism and businesshistory.Sheisoneofthreecousinstracingherfamily’sDanish,Irish,andScottishancestralhistories.

RobertA.Neimeyer, is a Professor of Psychology, University of Memphis, where he alsomaintainsanactiveclinicalpractice.Hehaspublished27books, includingTechniques ofGriefTherapy:CreativePracticesforCounselingtheBereavedandGriefandtheExpressiveArts: Practices for CreatingMeaning, the latterwith Barbara Thompson, and serves aseditorofthejournal,DeathStudies.Theauthorofover400articlesandbookchaptersanda frequent workshop presenter, he is currently working to advance a more adequatetheoryofgrievingasameaning-makingprocess.HeservedasPresidentoftheAssociation

forDeathEducationandCounseling(ADEC)andChairoftheInternationalWorkGroupforDeath,Dying,andBereavement. In recognitionofhis scholarlycontributions,hehasbeen granted the Eminent Faculty Award by the University of Memphis, given theLifetime Achievement Award by ADEC, and made a Fellow of the AmericanPsychologicalAssociation.

PhillipOlsonisAssistantProfessorintheDepartmentofScienceandTechonologyinSocietyatVirginiaTech.HoldingaPh.D.inphilosophyfromEmoryUniversity,hecomestoSTSwith research interests in normative epistemology and ethics, and he is particularlyinterested in the ways that these two areas of research intersect. His current researchpursues an interdisciplinary study of the cultural, ethical, political, technological, andenvironmentalaspectsoffunerarypractices–especiallyemergingdispositiontechnologies(e.g., alkaline hydrolysis) and funerary trends (e.g., cremation and “green burial”). Inadditiontohavingpublishedseveralarticlesinepistemology,appliedethics,andfeministtheory, he has published articles on alkaline hydrolysis, funeral waste, and eco-friendlyfuneraltechnologiesinjournalsincludingScience,Technology,&HumanValuesandSocialEpistemology.HisdeathcareexperienceandresearchhavebeencoveredbyTheAtlantic.

JeffPodoshenisAssociateProfessorinthedepartmentofBusiness,OrganizationsandSocietyat Franklin andMarshall College in Lancaster, PA, U.S.A.His primary area of researchrelatestodeathandviolentconsumptionanddarktourism.Fullyimmersedinaliberalartsenvironment,heoftenblendsandbridgestheoryfromavarietyofdisciplinesinordertoexplainphenomenaandbuildtheory.HisworkhasappearedinmyriadjournalsincludingConsumption,MarketsandCulture,MarketingTheory,TourismManagement,JournalofCommunity and Applied Social Psychology, and International Journal of ConsumerStudies.

RuthMcManusisaleadingdeathstudiesscholar,authorofDeathinaGlobalAge(PalgraveMacmillan2013),andnumerousarticlesoncontemporarydeathpractices.Sheisaseniorlecturer inSociologyat theUniversityofCanterburyNewZealandandPresidentof theSocietyforDeathStudies.

Xavier Menaud is an Associate Professor of Marketing and the Head of the Master ofCommunication and Media at Paris School of Business. He earned his Ph.D. from theUniversityParis2PanthéonAssas.HecurrentlyteachesMarketingandCommunicationatthe undergraduate levels. His research explores Taboo issues in the field of ConsumerBehavior,aswellastheroleofNostalgiainAdvertisingandConsumerBehavior.

FrançoisePasserard isanAssistantProfessorofMarketingatPSBParisSchoolofBusiness.Her research focuses on the issues of consumer vulnerability, poverty alleviation, andpublic health. With a background in Social Sciences, she explores these topics acrossTransformativeConsumerResearch.HerworkhasappearedintheJournalofMarketingManagementandAdvancesinConsumerResearch.

StephanieO’DonohoeisProfessorofAdvertisingandConsumerCultureatTheUniversityofEdinburgh.An interpretive researcher, shehas longstanding interests in thecreationandconsumptionofadvertising,andinconsumptionexperiencesduringlifecoursetransitions.Herresearchexplorestheroleofconsumptioninsense-makingamongdyingorbereavedpeople, and service providers’ experiences of dealingwith grieving customers.Much ofherwork concerns books as a source of insight into consumption experiences and/or asource of comfort in bereavement for children as well as adults. Other studies exploreconsumption experiences among children, emerging adults and new mothers, and theworkinglivesofadvertisingcreatives.Sheisonseveraleditorialboardsandhaspublishedin journals including Human Relations; Journal of Marketing Management; EuropeanJournal ofMarketing; andConsumption,Markets and Culture. She co-chaired the 2014Interdisciplinary Child and Teen Consumption Conference and the 2015 InterpretiveConsumerResearchWorkshop.

Scott K. Radford is Assistant Professor ofMarketing at the Haskayne School of Business,University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. He received his Ph.D. from the University ofMissouriandhasundergraduatedegreesinEnvironmentalDesignStudies(Dalhousie)andPhilosophy (University of New Brunswick). His work has appeared in the Journal ofProduct Innovation Management, European Journal of Marketing, Journal ofMacromarketing,andJournalofConsumerCulture.Hiscurrentresearchisconcernedwithproduct design, innovation, and popular culture. He teaches undergraduate courses inMarketing Communication and Marketing Arts and Culture and has won severaluniversityteachingawardsandgrantsforhisinnovativeteachingapproach.

Dennis W. Rook received his Ph.D. from Northwestern University in 1983, where heconcentrated his studies in consumer behavior and qualitative research methods. Hesubsequentlypublishedresearchonimpulsebuying,ritualizedconsumption,focusgroups,projectivemethods,andindividualdepthinterviews.HehasservedontheeditorialreviewboardsoftheJournalofConsumerResearchandtheJournalofMarketing.In2002hewasthe co-chair of theAssociation forConsumerResearch’s (ACR)NorthAmerican annualconference,andhewaselectedTreasurerofACRin2004.Since1991hisprofessionalhomehasbeentheMarshallSchoolofBusinessattheUniversityofSouthernCalifornia,where

he served as Chair of the Marketing Department from 2007–2014. He has applied hisacademic orientation to consulting assignments with Anheuser-Bush, General Mills,McDonalds,Brown-Forman,Frito-Lay,Tropicana,Maybelline,andDiscoverCard.

CyrilSchäferwasaSeniorLecturerinsocialanthropologyattheUniversityofOtago,NewZealand.Hediedsuddenlyasthiscollectionwasinproduction.Hisresearchandteachinginterests includeddeathanddying, ritual, religion,evil,andhumancruelty.Hispreviousresearch examined the professionalization of the funeral directing occupation, thepersonalization of post-mortem practices, and the emergence of funeral celebrants inAustralasia. At the time of his death, he was engaged in research exploring globalmemorialization practices, attitudes toward organ donation, and death literacy incontemporary society. He was co-founder of the Society for Death Studies and theimmediatepasteditorofthejournal,Sites:AJournalofSocialAnthropologyandCulturalStudies.

John W. Schouten is Professor of Marketing at Aalto University School of Business inHelsinki, Finland, and theCenter forCustomer Insight atUniversity of St.Gallen in St.Gallen,Switzerland. Inaddition tohis research in theconsumerculture tradition,hehaspublishedanovel,dozensofpoems,andashortstory.

JohnSherry,Jr.,HerrickProfessorandChairofMarketing,NotreDame,isPresidentoftheConsumer Culture Theory Consortium, past President of the Association for ConsumerResearch,andFellowofboth theAmericanAnthropologicalAssociationandSociety forApplied Anthropology. He studies brand strategy, experiential consumption and retailatmospherics. His work appears in numerous journal articles and books. He has wonawardsforhisscholarlyworkandpoetry.

LaurelSteinfieldisAssistantProfessorofMarketingatBentleyUniversity.HerPhDfromtheUniversity ofOxford focusedon critiquing the current conceptualizationofmaterialism,reframingtheaccusationofmaterialismasamodeofdiscursivepower.PriortocomingtoBentleyshelivedinSouthAfricaforalmosttenyears,undertakingnumerousstudiesthatlookedatconsumerismaswellaswomenempowermentinAfrica.

Isabelle Szmigin is Professor ofMarketing at the University of Birmingham.Her researchinterests lie in theareasof conceptualizingconsumerbehaviorand the socialandpolicyissuesassociatedwithconsumption.2015sawthepublicationofherConsumerBehaviourtextbook co-authored with Professor Maria Piacentini of Lancaster University. She haspublished in a wide range of academic journals including Sociology, Psychology and

Marketing,TheEuropeanJournalofMarketing,andtheJournalofBusinessResearchandSociology.She ison theeditorialadvisoryboardof the InternationalMarketingReview,and the editorial board of the European Journal of Marketing and the Journal ofAdvertisingResearch.

Cathy Vaessen studied advertising and marketing in Belgium and the United Kingdomrespectively,andworkedfortheEuropeanWindEnergyAssociationasamediaplanningofficer from 2011–2013. She was recently appointed marketing analyst for the Belgianprint manufacturer C.P. Bourg. Her interest in environmental sustainability led her toexamine this in relation to human disposition for her postgraduate studies at theUniversityofBirmingham.

ChristinaWelch isaseniorLecturerinTheologyandReligiousStudiesattheUniversityofWinchesterwheresheleadsaMastersdegreeprogrammeonDeath,Religion,andCulture,andconvenestheCentreforGenderStudies.Shehasresearchinterestsintheconnectionsbetweenreligionandculturewithaparticularinterestinvisual/materialculture.Shehaspublications on the European representations of North American Indians and theirspirituality, expressions of spirituality at Greenham Common Peace Camp, and late-medieval British carved cadaver sculptures. She is currently co-writing a book on slowdeathsanddisease.

Acknowledgments

Thisbookwasnothingmorethananideainmyheadthreeyearsago.Iwouldliketothankthosepeoplewhohelpedturnthisideaintosomethingconcreteandexcellent.First,Iwouldlike to thank theparticipantsof the firstRoundtableonDeathat theNorthAmericanACRConference (several ofwhomare contributors to this volume) in 2012.Theirwillingness toshare rather personal experiences with attendees inspired me to move forward with thisproject.CeleOtneswasextremelyhelpful intheproposalstageof theprocess. Iwouldalsoliketothankmyassociateeditor,SineadWaldron,forencouragementateverystageandherability to keep me on track when I was feeling overwhelmed. I would also like toacknowledge my administrative assistant, Lorraine Johanson, who was instrumental inkeepingtrackofallthedocumentsastheycameandwentduringthecourseofthefinalstagesof the book. I would also like to thank Bentley University and especially the chair of theMarketingDepartmentandmy“workhusband”AndyAylesworth,fortheirongoingfinancialsupportofmyresearchthroughgrants,travelfunds,andmysabbaticalin2013–2014.

Onapersonalnote,IwouldliketothankallmyfamilyandfriendswholistenedtomeandsharedtheirverypersonalstoriesasIdevelopedtheideaforthisbook:tomyamazingfriendof36yearsandthebestcopyeditorinmarketing,ChristineDouglas;tomylongestfriendof38years,SabraFugate,forconstantlyencouragingme;andtomystrongestfriend,NatalieBurtLahr, forbeinga constant sourceof inspirationand strength tome.And finally, Iwouldbenothingwithoutmy two incrediblechildren.Haven,youare thekeel thatkeeps this familysteady even in the choppiest of waters; andGage, you are awonder to beholdwith yourcombinationofmagneticpersonalityandboundlessintellect.IamtrulyhonoredandhumbledeverytimeyoucallmeMom.

SusanDobscha

Marblehead,MA

Abrief,abbreviatedintroductiontodeath

SusanDobscha

Sociologically,deathcanbeviewedasthenucleusofaparticularculturecomplexinvolvingagroupofinterrelatedculturaltraitswhichfunctiontogetherinamoreorlessconsistentandmeaningfulway.Thestudyofthespecificareaswhichmakeupthiscomplex,suchastheculturallydefinedmeaningofdeath,therolesofthefunctionaries,bereavement,deathritesandpractices,andtheeffectofattitudestowarddeathuponthegenerallifeorganizationoftheindividual,couldbemademoremeaningfulbyviewingtheseareasasaspectsofalargerconfigurationsurroundingdeath.

(FaunceandFulton1958,205)

Iamnoexpertondeath.Yes,Ihavealayman’sunderstandingofit.Ihaveexperienceditinmany forms inmypersonal andprofessional lives. Ihave felt bereaved, visited tourist siteswheredeathiscommemorated,andmadetheheartbreakingyethumanedecisiontoeuthanizea beloved family pet. To date, however, I have not endeavored to undertake significantacademicresearchthatstudiesthemanyconsumption-andmarketing-relatedaspectsofdeathI find so fascinating. I was initially drawn to the topic of death, and specifically to howconsumption and marketing set up shop in the previously extremely private act of dying,whenIwasasked in2008 toconsultwithagreenburialorganization inMassachusetts.Thedirector had a dilemma: how to promote green (sustainable, eco-friendly– different terms,same coin) burials to consumers whose burial rituals were so firmly entrenched in theirChristian beliefs that they remained intact, even through rituals detached from formalreligiousdogma;specifically,theritualofdressingandenclosingtheirdead.Thisdilemmaledto a consumer researchquestion:HowdowepersuadeChristian consumers to re-think thetraditional rituals of clothing their loved ones in non-biodegradable garments and thenburying them in polyurethane coffins? How do we get these same consumers to changedeeply rooted,yetvery toxic,burialpractices in favorofmore sustainablemeasures thatatfirstglancewillmakethemveryuncomfortable,i.e.,buryingtheirlovedoneswithoutclothingorperhapsinashroud;encasingtheminapinebox;eliminatinggranitemarkers.Thequestionpiqued my intellectual curiosity so I turned to academic texts to give me some historicalperspectiveandinsightintothephenomenonofdeathasaculturalconstruct.Peopleofcoursehavebeenwritingaboutdeath since the firstwriters tookpen toparchment,butwhatwasheavilydissectedinartform(books,plays,paintings,etc.)wasnoticeablyabsentinacademicinquiry–whatIfounddidnotprovideclarity.FaunceandFulton(1958)notedseverallacunaeinsociologyregardingdeathresearchbutacuriousoverabundanceofresearchthatdescribed

andcomparedfuneralritesandritualsof“other”culturesexisted,particularlythefetishizationof “nonwestern and nonliterate societies (p. 205).” Also during this time emerged aninteresting sociological fascination with the “funeral director.” It seemed sociologists werecomfortablestudyingdeathintermediariesbecausetheywere“safe.”Theydidnotgrieveforfamilymembers but instead provided amarketmechanism for customspreviouslyhandled“in-house”orprivately(cf.Barnhart,Huff,andCotte2014).The“death-care”industryhasalsobeenbroachedbyeconomistsandmarketingresearchers(Banks1998;KempandKopp2010;KoppandKemp2007;Quilliam2008;Schwartz,Jolson,andLee2001)whoanalyzedthecostsof burial and the regulations designed to protect consumers from unscrupulous practices.Beyond describing death rituals and dissecting the roles of intermediaries in the funeralbusiness,socialscientistshavelargelyshiedawayfrom“messier”topics.Samuelclaimedthat

overthepastcentury,deathandsexhavebattleditouttobethenumberoneunmentionableinAmerica;thesetwotopicsaremostref lectiveofourshameandembarrassmentwhenitcomestoallcorporealmatters.Butdeathhassurgedwayaheadofsexasa“forbiddenquotient”

(Samuel2013,p.xiv)

and the literature acknowledges that “on a deeper level, death is a rich,metaphysical stewcombiningelementsofphilosophy,psychology,religion,anthropology,andsociology;itscloserelationshipwiththeoriesabouttheafterlifemakesthesubjectyetmoreintriguing(p.x).”Thesubjectofdeathisrich,yetthetaboosurroundingitpreventsitfrombeingcopiouslydissected.ManceauandTissier-Desbordes(2006)foundthat65percentofFrenchconsumersbelieveitisunacceptable to show death in advertisements.Women are more likely thanmen to labeldeathastabooandageincreasesthisdiscomfort.

Death,likesex,haslargelybeenignoredasatopicofinquirywithinthefieldofmarketingand consumer research, with the exceptions of Gabel, Mansfield, and Westbrook (1996);Gentryetal. (1995a; 1995b);O’Donohoe (2015);O’Donohoe andTurley (2000; 2007); Turley(1997; 2005; 2015); andTurley andO’Donohoe (2006; 2012), several ofwhomappear in thiseditedvolume.This avoidancemaybe attributed to ourgeneral distresswith thenotionofdeathanddying; indeed,when Iembarkedupon thisproject I receivedmanystrange looksandcommentslike“howdepressing!”and“that’smorbid.”Strangely,thetaboossurroundingdeath (similar to the topicof sex)were justasprevalent inour fieldas theywerewith thegeneralpublic. I foundthisparticularlyfascinatinggiventhemedia’swiderangingcoverageon death-related marketing and consumption. Consumers visit celebrity gravesites, writenegativeobituariesaboutaparentwhoabusedthem,attempttocloneabelovedpet,contestwillsandestates,useallmannerof tactics todisposeofadeceased lovedone’spossessions,considersustainableburials,choosetogrieveinpublicandontheinternet,andcuriously,hirestripperstoperformatfunerals(“StrippersperformatfuneralsinruralChina,”April24,2015).Assuch, Iwascompelled tocreatea largerdialogueon the topicofdeath, specificallyas it

relatestoconsumerbehaviorandculturalpractices. Ienvisionthisbookasa“touchstone,”astarting point, for those scholars interested in studying death, and this introduction as ascholarlymapofthebroadterraindeathoccupiesinconsumerculture(thinktreasuremapvs.GoogleMaps™).

Fivegeneralresearchthemesemergedasaresultofcanvassingtheliteratureondeath:(1)mortalitysalience;(2)ritualsandrites;(3)bereavement;(4)dispositionofpossessions;and(5)deathconsumption. Being that these themes are similar to those introduced by Turley andO’Donohoe(2012)intheirmuchmorecomprehensivereviewoftheliteratureondeath,Iwillbriefly introduce each as a service to scholars interested in learning more. First,mortalitysalience is a psychological construct thatmeasures the degree towhich subjects fear death.Disturbingly, it is typically“manipulated” ina labsetting, i.e., subjectsaremade to feel likedeath is either impending or remote, and it has been linked to a variety of consumptionbehaviors(seeFerrarro,Shiv,andBettman2005).DeathAnxietyisarelatedconstructthatisalsomanipulatedinlabstudies.Itrepresentsacorollarytomortalitysalienceinthatitreflectsthe degree towhich someone fears the state of not existing (Tomer andEliason 2006). Forexample,Gale (2014) found thatdepictionsofdeath inadsamplifiedconsumers’ feelingsofworry,catastropheandnegativestereotyping.

As mentioned earlier, sociologists and anthropologists have studied rituals and rites adnauseam. However, the focus of these studies has been on the death rituals practiced byremotetribesindevelopingcountriestothecompleteexclusionofthedeathritualspracticedbywesternandotherliteratesocieties.BonsuandBelk(2003)providedanotableexceptionbyfocusing less on the uniqueness ofGhanan customs andmore on theways inwhich deathconsumptionritualswerepartofaperson’sidentityprojectthatsurvived,andevenchanged,upontheperson’sdeath.Theyalsocontributedtothediscourseondeathandconsumptionbylinkingdeath-relatedconsumptiontowhatMetcalfe(1981)identifiedas“theritualeconomy,”atermthatdescribeshowconsumerswillexpandorcontractthe“rangeofsocialandculturalcapital” they expend on a specific ritual depending upon their actual or aspirational socialclass. The ritual itself does not structurally change but “telescopes in scale, to expand orcontractinthegrandnesswithwhichitiscelebrated,withoutanyessentialchangeinformatorrationale(p.563).”

Bereavementistheprocessbywhichpeoplegrieve,before,during,andafterthedeathofalovedone.Gentryetal.(1995a)notedthat

familytransitionscausedbyeventssuchasdivorce,deathandacculturationareassociatedwithhighlevelsofstressandpainforfamilymembers,andtheyrepresentdiscontinuitiesinthemannerinwhichthehouseholdinteractswiththemarketplace.Changes in behavioral patterns in the short run are nearly always present, and frequently long-term behavioral patternschangeaswell.

(p.67)

Astateofliminalityisinevitableduringbereavementand,aspreviousresearchshows,when

consumersareinaliminalstatetheyaremorevulnerable,therebycompellingthemtoseekoutmarketsolutions thatmayormaynotmakethemfeelbetter (TheVOICEGroup2010).Grieving “restricts a person’s ability to note when he or she is being mischarged orovercharged(intentionallyorunintentionally),aswellaslimitshisorherabilityanddesiretoshare such informationwhen suchpractices arenoted” (Gentryetal. 1995b).Darmody andBonsu(2008)foundthatconsumersexperiencedambivalenceduringthebereavementprocess,and that they felt the less-acceptable positive emotions creep into the more-acceptablenegativeemotionsfeltduringgrieving.IdirecttheinterestedreadertoTurleyandO’Donohoe(2012)foracomprehensivereviewofthebereavementliterature.

DespiteJacoby,Berning,andDietvorstasking,“WhatAboutDisposition?”backin1977,thedispositionofpossessionsisstillanunderstudiedsubjectinmarketingandconsumerresearch,even though it constitutes one of the three stages of consumption (Solomon 2014). In 2000,Curasi,Price,andArnouldstated,

thetopicofdispositionandthedistributionofpossessionswillplayanincreasinglyprominentroleinsocietyinthecomingdecadesandshouldbeatopicofinteresttoprofessionalsdealingwithestateplanningandotherendoflifeissues.

(p.370)

Recently, Lastovicka and Fernandez (2005) sought to extend our understanding of howconsumers dispose of their possessions to strangers. Their studies focused on how sellers“employed rituals to renew, reverse, obscure, remove, lose, retain, or transfer intact theirmeaningful possessions’ public and private meanings (p. 822).” Both articles show thetransition from the perspective of “me” to “not me.” For example, the disposition chainchangesfollowingafamilymember’sdeath,from“him/her/them”to“nothim/her/them;”or,inthecaseofaweddingring,to“us.”Gentryetal.(1995a)foundthedispositionofaweddingringuponthedeathofaspousetobecompellingterrain.Discussionsregardingthedispositionofaspouse’sweddingringafterdivorceandthosedealingwiththedispositionofaspouse’sweddingringafterhisorherdeathweretreatedquitedifferently.Dialoguesurroundingtheliving spouse’s ring incited a heated debate concerning whether the living spouse shouldretain,disposeofor repurpose theartifactwhile the samedialogue surroundingadeceasedspouse’sringwascivillydiscussed.

The final theme, consumption of death, comprises several areas of inquiry. How doconsumers“consumedeath?”Funerals,onlinememorials,publicshrines,anddancingstrippersarebutafewoftheways.Commemorationcouldfurtherbeconsideredoneofthistheme’smajor areas of research, and typically concerns commemorating the “public dead,” e.g.,soldierswhodiedinbattleorcitizenswhodiedinsomesimultaneoustragicevent.Visitingthelocationsofviolentevents isanother typeofdeathconsumption, e.g.,visiting the settingofJFK’s assassination, the concentration camps, New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, or thekillingfieldsofCambodia.Stone(2006)described

thephenomenonbywhichpeoplevisit,purposefullyoraspartofabroaderrecreationalitinerary,thediverserangeofsites,attractionsandexhibitionswhichoffera(re)presentationofdeathandsuffering,isostensiblygrowingwithincontemporarysociety. As a result, the rather emotive label of “dark tourism,” and its awkward, if not more precise, sister term of“thanatourism,”hasenteredacademicdiscourseandmediaparlance.

(p.146)

The consumption of violent or abject events is not a violent act in itself. However, someconsumers have built physically violent components into their dark tourism experiences, asevidencedbytheemergenceofBlackMetalsubcultureinthe1990s(Podoshen2013).

This book is divided into five parts. These parts reflect the themes discussed abovewithsomenotableadditions.ThepartsTheDeath Industry,DeathRitualsandConsumption, andTheConsumptionofDeathextendourcurrentunderstandingofthesesubjectswhilethepartsDeath and the Body andAlternate Endings serve to expand our understanding of and tostimulate future research on the death/consumption relationship. The following are briefdescriptionsofthepartsandchaptersincludedinthisbook.

Thefirstpartentitled,TheDeathIndustry,extendsdiscussionsbeyondthefuneraldirectorsand federal regulations thataredesigned toprotect consumers fromunscrupulouspractices.Chapter 1 by Elliott sets the stage with an historical account of the cemetery monumentindustryinanewlyindustrializedU.S.A.Elliott’sanalysisoftheadvertising,salespromotion,andbrandingtechniquesusedbythecompetinggraniteandmarblemarkermanufacturersofVermontprovidesaninterestingfirstlookatmarketing’screepintothedeathindustry.Infact,the marketing of grave markers proved to be one of the first steps in the process of“distanciation” that enabled the death industry to take hold and thrive. The death industrycurrentlycontinuestothrivethroughtheburgeoningpracticeof“darktourism.”InChapter2,McKenzieintroducesthereadertothisconceptandthencentershisanalysisonthestrategiesthat marketers use to promote these tourist destinations. Similar to the distanciation thatpermits the contemplation of one’s own death, marketers of the abject, like the sieges ofLeningradandSarajevo,mustpresenttheseeventsinwaysthataresimultaneouslyhistoricallyaccuratebutpleasingtoconsume.Darktourismsitesmustnegotiatethedegreeofauthenticitythey portray in their marketing materials and their merchandise. In Chapter 3, Welchexaminesthedeathindustrybylookingatthecuriousconnectionbetweendeathanderotica.Welchdrawsparallelsbetweenthe“deathandthemaiden”artmovementofthefifteenthandsixteenth centuries and this period’s use of erotic art in calendars advertising coffins. Notunlike the Dolce and Gabbana rosary campaign (Rinallo et al. 2013), the seeminglycontradictoryconnectionbetweenthespiritual(death)andtheprofane(sex),whileseeminglycommoninwesternculture,mayprovideinsightsintodeath/sexconnectionsinotherculturalcontexts(e.g.,strippersatChinesefunerals).Chapter4examinesthereturningtrendofprivatefunerals.Thischapter iswrittenbySchäferandMcManus,andstudies thepracticesofsomeconsumers who choose to plan nontraditional, personalized, often quirky, sometimes

therapeuticfunerals.Muchlikethenon-traditionalwedding,thenontraditionalfuneralallowsconsumers opportunities to craft end of life “celebrations of life” where privacy andpersonalization somehow represent authenticity. Finally, Chapter 5 details how introducingnewdispositiontechnologies,likealkalinehydrolysis,candisruptfuneralprofessionals’claimsto the exclusive professional custody of the human corpse. The author, Olson, examinesfuneralprofessionals’effortstomanageboththeirprofessionalidentitiesandtheidentitiesofalkalinehydrolysis technologies inorder tomaintain control over theiruniqueoccupationaljurisdictions.

PartIIexpandsourunderstandingofDeathRitualsbylookingatthreeverydifferenttypesofceremonies.InChapter6,HackleyandHackleyexploreaThai“hungryghost” festival inanswer to Bonsu and Belk’s (2003) call to examine death rituals that occur outside oftraditionalwesterncontexts,andFaunceandFulton’s(1958)directivetolookattheseritualsin“literate” societies. They accomplish this by considering how these festivals presentopportunitiesforparticipantstoreconcilethetensionsthatexistintheirdailylivesduetotheculturalnormsaffixedtothem.Materialismdanceswithaestheticismandthestrictrulesthatguidebehavioraretemporarilyandactivelybroken.InChapter7,RadfordandBloch tackleconsumers’ complex relationships with celebrities by examining how these relationshipsintensify when favored celebrities die. Consuming celebrities’ deaths allows consumers togrieve inways thatmaybe considered inappropriate for familymembersor friends.Publicmemorials andoverly emotional displays of grief stand in stark contrast to the private andreservedwaysmostwesternersgrieve.Grieving thepassingofcelebritiesallowsconsumersopportunities toexpress theirextremedevotion tocelebrityculturewithout fearof ridicule.ThewasteandtoxicityassociatedwithmoderndeathritualsiscalledintoquestioninChapter8 byHenzgin andRook. The voluntary simplicitymovement has left an indeliblemark onhowsomepeoplechoosetoconsume,throughinitiativeslikethefoodmilemovement,buyinglocallyproducedgoods,downsizing theirhomesand raisingchickens inurban settings.Thischapter also explores how the movement is changing how consumers consume death bylookingatthelessharmfulburialriteofcremation.Whilenotafullysustainableoptionduetothe emissions produced during the cremation process, it ismuch better than the traditionalembalming/casketoptionstillchosenbythemajorityofconsumers.

PartIII,entitled,ConsumptionofDeath, iscomprisedoffivechaptersthatallbroadlydealwith how consumers consume death, particularly within certain consumption contexts.Chapters9 and 10 both dealwithmemorialization. InChapter9, authorGabel uses a verypersonalexperience,thedeathofafriend,toobservetheprocessofonlinememorialization.Thistypeofcommemorationallowsustoeffectively“cheatdeath”bycreatingavirtualandsocial space throughwhichmourners can sharememories about thedeceased thatwill liveindefinitelyononeofseveraldedicatedonlinesites.InChapter10,Mansfieldextendscurrentthinkingaboutthememorializationofpetsbydocumentingtheincreasingimportancehumans

haveplacedonpetssincetheirintroductiontothehomethousandsofyearsago.Asignificantconsumptionelementhasexpandedthisimportance,withconsumersspendingalmostasmuchforapetfuneralasahumanone.Chapter11hasNeilsonandMuiseexploringourcompulsiontodocumentourfamilies’pasts.Ancestry.comhasmadethisprocessinfinitelyeasierwithitsonlinedatabase.Whatcompelsconsumerstoresearchtheirgenealogy?Theauthorspositthat,similar to theonlinememorializationpractices studiedbyGabel, consumersare looking forwaystohedgethefinalityofmortality.InChapter12,PassarardandMenaudexamineaverytaboosubject,evenwithinthesociallyliberalcountryofFrance:assistedsuicide.Despitethefact that it is a highly regulated activity, more andmore consumers seek potential suicidesolutions.Byexaminingexistingtextsfromonlinesupportforums,documentaries,andfilms,theauthorstrytomakesenseofamarketplacewhereconsumersarewillingto“purchase”asuicidesolutionwhenthemedicalcommunityandgovernmentareunwillingto“supply”it.Inthe end,whoseneedswill prevail?Chapter13 ends this partwithTurley andO’Donohoe’spieceaboutpathographies,orwrittenautobiographicalaccountsofthose“facingorwitnessingterminalillnessorgrievingforthelossofalovedone.”Theyconcludebycontendingthatthemarketplacehasbecomeaplacewhereterminallyillpeoplecanasserttheiragency.By“livingwell” until the end, the authors of the pathographies’ were better able to navigate theinevitabilityoftheirdiagnoses.Thischapter,readinconjunctionwithPassarardandMenaud’schapteronassistedsuicide,providesathought-provokingcontrastinhowconsumersenactorperformtheir“denouement.”

PartIV,DeathandtheBody,iscomprisedofchaptersthatfocusonthematerialityofdeath.Whathashistoricallybeendiscussedwithintherealmofthespiritualorreligiousisactuallyinthe end a very embodied, corporeal experience. Archeologists Fredrik Fahlander and TerjeOestigaardstate,

There may be some that actually include the human body in the concept of material culture, but the majority wouldprobablynotseeitthatway.Thebodyis,however,oftenanimportantmaterialitythathasgreateffectontheoutcomeofsocialpractice.Thebodyasanactanthasverylittletodowiththeindividualorperson,butemphasisestheappearanceandbodily constitution in theprocessof subjectivationand categorisationaswell as inpracticalwaysof getting certain tasksdone.

(2008;p.4)

This part breaks new ground by connecting the consumption of death with the physicalelementsthatmayforceustoconsumedeathinthefirstplace.InChapter14,Baker,Baker,andGentryshedlightonthechangingnatureofbodydisposal.Inmodernity,howbodiesaredisposed of upon death is typically a foregone conclusion; the process is either formally orlooselybasedonspiritualorreligiousrequirements.Whatemergeswhensomeonechoosestodisengagefromspiritualrhetoricinfavorofconstructingadisposalplanthatisbasedonotherfactors?Theauthorsstudiedconsumerswhochosealternativeburialoptionslikebarrierreefdisposal.Theyfoundthatdisengagementfrom“protocol”wasdifficultforsomelivingfamily

memberswhovieweddisposaloptionsthatdidnotleaveavisiblemark(i.e.,agravestone)asa disruption of their mourning experiences. In Chapter 15, Canning, Smzigin, and Vaessenprovideanotherperspectiveonthematerialityofdeath:theenvironmentalimpacttraditionalburial practices have on pollution and land use. Their study of Belgian burial practicesdemonstrates that overcoming obstacles that relate to bodymateriality leads to sustainableburials. If ever there was one, The “Body Worlds” exhibit is a cultural movement thatvalidates such an assertion. Drummond and Krszjzaniek discuss this fascinating consumerspectacleinChapter16,whichisthemostsuccessfultravelingmuseuminstallationofalltime.Thehumancorpseisondisplaybutstagedinawaythatispalatabletotheaveragemuseumpatron. Not surprisingly, the curator of the exhibit, Dr. von Hagens, is a Barnum-esquecharacter with a flair for the theatrical, couched within the scientific. Drummond andKrszjzaniek speculate that the exhibit’s success is largely due to its ability to juxtapose ourdistasteforthehorriblewithourfascinationwith(anddesiretoachieve)immortality.

Part V, entitledAlternate Endings, forces our gazes toward future research with threechaptersthatmorebroadlyexploredeath’sroleinconsumerculture.InChapter17,Laicallsfor an expansion of our understanding of the role consumer culture plays in the creation,maintenance and disruption of the self. The body has been ignored in key theoreticaldiscussions about consumer culture that have covered topics like self, identity, materiality,sharing,andgift-giving(JoyandVenkatesh1994).Thisomissionoravoidance isremarkablegiven that consumer culture scholars seem to embrace and reproduce Baudrillard’sprovocativewritingintheirownworkyettheymysteriouslyomitand/orignorehisviewsontherelationshipbetweendeathandthepopularconceptof“symbolicexchange.”Turley(1997)acknowledgedthisomissionandcalledforconsumerculturescholarstoincludedeathaspartof the consumption landscape andnot just as a physical “omegapoint” at the endof a lifelived.InChapter18,Buchanan-OliverandCruzusethelensofposthumanismtoconfronttherole of death in a culturewhere boundaries between human andmachine are increasinglyblurred.Marketershavebeguntoembracethisambiguityintheirpromotionalmaterials(thePlaystation 3 “Baby” ad), and consumers have begun to do the same by espousing thepossibilityofimmortalitythatthetangledtechnology-humandebatedanglesinfrontofthemlikeacarrot–seeminglyachievablebutjustoutofreach.Inthefinalchapter,Gabelcuratesaselectionofpoemsthatfocusesondeathanddying.ThesepoemswerewrittenbyscholarsaspartoftheConsumerCultureTheoryPoetryInitiative,whichwasinspiredbySchoutenandSherry(2002).Itisfittingthatthefinalchapterinthisbookaboutdeathbefilledwithvoicesoftheliving.

References

Bonsu,SamuelK.,andBelk,RussellW.(2003)“Donotgogentlyintothatgoodnight:Death-ritualconsumptioninAsante,Ghana,”JournalofConsumerResearch,vol.30,no.1(June),41–55.

Curasi, Carolyn Folkman, Price, Linda L., and Arnould, Eric J. (2003) “Understanding theintergenerational transmissionofcherishedpossessions: Insights forestateplanning, trustofficersandotherend-of-lifeprofessionals,”JournalofFinancialServicesMarketing,vol.7,no.4,369–383.

Darmody,A., andBonsu,S.K. (2008) “Ambivalence indeath ritual consumption,”EuropeanAdvancesinConsumerResearch,vol.8,no.51.

Fahlander,F.,andOestigaard,T.(eds.)(2008)Thematerialityofdeath:bodies,burials,beliefs.Archaeopress.pp.1–16.

Faunce,W.A.,andFulton,R.L.(1958)“Thesociologyofdeath:Aneglectedareaofresearch.”SocialForces,205–209.

Ferraro,R.,Shiv,B.,andBettman,J.R.(2005)“Letuseatanddrink,fortomorrowweshalldie:Effects of mortality salience and self-esteem on self-regulation in consumer choice,”JournalofConsumerResearch,vol.32,no.1,65–75.

Gabel, Terrance G., Mansfield, Phylis, and Westbrook, Kevin (1996) “The disposal ofconsumers:Anexploratoryanalysisofdeath-relatedconsumption,”inNA–Advances inConsumerResearchVolume23,KimP.CorfmanandJohnG.LynchJr. (eds.),Provo,UT:AssociationforConsumerResearch,pp.361–367.

Gale, J. (2014) “Lethal consumption: an exploration into the use of death anxiety withinadvertisingcommunications,”JournalofPromotionalCommunications,vol.2,no.1,6–30.

Gentry,J.W.,Kennedy,P.F.,Paul,C.,andHill,R.P.(1995a)“Familytransitionsduringgrief:Discontinuitiesinhouseholdconsumptionpatterns,”JournalofBusinessResearch,vol.34,no.1,67–79.

Gentry, J. W., Kennedy, P. F., Paul, K., and Hill, R. P. (1995b) “The vulnerability of thosegrievingthedeathofalovedone:Implicationsforpublicpolicy,”JournalofPublicPolicyandMarketing,128–142.

Hallam, E., and Hockey, J. (2001) “Death, memory and material culture.” BloomsburyAcademic.Mortality: Promoting the Interdisciplinary Study ofDeathandDying, vol. 1,no.1,1996.

Hallam,ElizabethA.(1996)“Turningthehourglass:GenderrelationsatthedeathbedinearlymodernCanterbury,”Mortality,vol.1,no.1,61–82.

Jacoby, Jacob,Berning,CarolK., andDietvorst,ThomasF. (1977) “Whataboutdisposition?”JournalofMarketing,vol.41(April),22–28.

Joy, A. (2001) “Gift giving in Hong Kong and the continuum of social ties,” Journal ofConsumerResearch,vol.28,no.2,239–256.

Kastenbaum, R. (1986) Death, Society, and Human Experience. CE Merrill Publishing

Company.Kemp,Elyria,andKopp,StevenW.(2010)“HaveyoumadeplansforthatBigDay?Predicting

intentions to engage in funeral planning,” Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,Winter2010,vol.18,no.1,81–90.

Lastovicka, J. L. and Fernandez, K. V. (2005) “Three paths to disposition: Themovement ofmeaningful possessions to strangers,” Journal ofConsumerResearch, vol. 31, no. 4, 813–823.

Manceau,D.,andTissier-Desbordes,E. (2006) “Are sexanddeath taboos inadvertising?Ananalysis of taboos in advertising and a survey of French consumer perceptions,”InternationalJournalofAdvertising,vol.25,no.1,9–33.

O’Donohoe, S. (2015) “Consuming childhood grief,” in K. Hamilton, S. Dunnett and M.Piacentini(eds)VulnerableConsumers:Conditions,ContextsandCharacteristics,London:Routledge[forthcoming].

O’Donohoe,S.andTurley,D.(2000)“Dealingwithdeath:Art,mortalityandtheMarketplace”inStephenBrownandAnthonyPatterson(eds.),ImaginingMarketing:Art,AestheticsandtheAvant-Garde,chapter5,London:Routledge,pp.86–106.

O’Donohoe, S. and Turley, D. (2007) “Fatal errors: Unbridling emotions in service failureexperiences,”JournalofStrategicMarketing,February,15,17–28.

Rinallo, D., Borghini, S., Bamossy, G., and Kozinets, R. V. (2012) “When sacred objects GoB®a(n)d: Fashion rosaries and the contemporary linkage of religion and commerciality,”SpiritualandSacredConsumption,London:Routledge,29–40.

Turley,D. (1997) “A Postcard from the very Edge,” in StephenBrown andD. Turley (eds.),ConsumerResearch:PostcardsfromtheEdge,London:Routledge,chapter12,pp.350–377.

Turley, D. (2005), “Death where is thy sting? Mortality and consumer motivation in thewritings of Zigmunt Bauman” in David Mick and S. Ratneshwar (eds.), InsideConsumption: ConsumerMotives, Goals, andDesires, chapter 4, London: Routledge, pp.67–85.

Turley,D.(2015),“Askingfortrouble:Reflectionsonresearchingwithbereavedconsumers”inKathy Hamilton, Susan Dunnett and Maria Piacentini (eds.), Consumer Vulnerability:Conditions,ContextsandCharacteristic,London:Routledge,pp.55–65.

Turley, D. and S. O’Donohoe (2006) “Profit and loss: Service encounters and bereavedconsumers,”HumanRelations,vol.59,no.10,1429–1448.

Turley,D.andS.O’Donohoe(2012)“Thesadnessoflivesandthecomfortofthings:Goodsasevocative objects in bereavement”, Journal ofMarketingManagement, 28, 11/12: 1331–1353.

PartIThedeathindustry

1Proclaimingmodernityinthemonumenttrade

BarreGranite,VermontMarble,andnationaladvertising,1910–19321

BruceS.Elliott

Advertisements for cemetery monuments have been a feature of national mass marketmagazines for just over a century, but they were the product of a specific modernizingmoment:alaterealizationthatgravestonescouldbeadvertisedasconsumerproducts.Someinthestonetradesthoughtmonuments“non-advertisable”tothegeneralpublic.Thiswasnotprimarily because they were associated with death, for the nineteenth-century “ruralcemetery”movement andVictorian gravestone iconography of hands pointing heavenwardwiththeaffirmation“GoneHome”evidencealong-standingsentimentalizationofdeathandafocus onmemory and heavenly reunion. It was amarketing problem:monuments were aproductacquiredonce ina lifetimewhendeathprecipitatedneed (Hirschbaum1927).Therewasa“progressive”factionwithintheindustry,however,whowereconvincedofthevalueofadvertisement(Printer’sInk1919:p.41;AmericanStoneTrade1916:p.29).Theywouldnotonly move gravestone advertising into the national consumer marketplace, but shift itscontent beyond the ubiquitous Victorian assurances of quality and economy to thecommodification of sentiment andmemory, in the more comfortable window of pre-needsale.

Giddenshasargued,however,thatcentraltomodernitywasthediscomfitingdistanciationof social relationsover timeand spaceandwith theirdisembedding from local face-to-facecontextsagrowingdependenceonimpersonalmechanismsandexpertsystems(Giddens1990:pp. 21, 26–28). In themonument trade, consumer trust in local craftsmenwho learned thebusiness through apprenticeship gave way uneasily to industrial production and nationalcorporatestructures.(Elliott2011:p.16)Wholesalersinquarrytownsweresupplyingdistantstonecutters with finished monuments, lacking only the inscriptions, by the 1870s. Localmaterialsand iconographic formsgavewaytowhitemarble, thengranite,as transportationimprovements, metropolitan taste, and new technologies standardized monument types

(Gilmore1956:p.16;Elliott2011:p.39).Distanciatedrelationshipsamongproducer, retailer,andconsumerweremediatedbynew

communications mechanisms: trade publications, business associations, and credit reportingmitigated the uncertainties of business relationships disembedded from local contexts, andfosteredtrustinprofessionalexpertiseandtechnological innovation.Lateadditionsweretheprofessionaladvertisingagency2andthemassmarketconsumermagazine.Thoughthebulkofproduction was now taking place further up the supply chain, local monument dealersrequiredreassurancethatretailsaleswouldremaintheirpreservewhenretailadvertising,too,wentnational.Thischapterexplores the rootsofcorporatebrandingandnationalconsumeradvertising in themonument trade in the context of growing corporate hegemony and themediatinginfluenceofadvertisingprofessionals.Anequallyimportantfactorintheadoptionof national campaigns, however, was the competition for market share that underlay themarble/granite transition. This chapter therefore will compare the marketing strategiesadoptedbytheVermontmarbleandgraniteinterests.

David Nye postulated that marketingmost products relied upon personal connection orrecommendationuntilthe1880s,whenmonopoliesandcorporationsemergedthatwerelargeenough tomanage a nation-wide distribution system (Nye 1985: p. 113). In themonumenttrade, however, national advertisingwas pioneered not by the industry’s closest thing to amonopoly,theVermontMarbleCompany,butbytheupstartBarre,Vermont,graniteindustry.Themarbleandgraniteindustriesweredifferentlystructured.Thenewergraniteindustrywasmorefragmented,butitscorporateleadersprovedmorewillingtoadoptmodernmarketinginnovations to increase their market share at the expense of the older, more consolidatedmarbletrade.

Antecedents ofVermontMarblewerewholesalingwhitemarble slabs via the expandingrailnetworkbythe1850s.AggressiveentrepreneurRedfieldProctorconsolidatedanumberofquarryfirmsandfinishingplantstocreatetheverticallyintegratedVermontMarbleCompanyin 1880. By 1912 VMC controlled 45 percent of Americanmarble production, but its thirdpresident, Frank Partridge, was much less expansionist and aggressive. Lacking a RedfieldProctor,thegraniteindustryremainedlessintegrated.Therailway,moreover,cametoBarreonlyin1875,25yearsafteritreachedProctor(Busdraghi2012:pp.26–28;Gilmore1957:17),anditwasonly inthe1890sthatpneumatic toolsstreamlinedthecarvingof theharderandmoredurablegranite (Elliott2011:pp.37–38). In1915some30quarry firmssuppliedroughgraniteto160manufacturerswhointurnsoldtodealers(Printers’Ink1919:pp.43–44).Onlyin1930wouldthe largestBarrequarryfirmenter thewholesalemonument trade itselfasaverticallyintegratedcorporation(Clarke1989,62;BostonHerald1930:p.30).

MostBarremanufacturersdidbelongtoalocalAssociation,foundedin1886asaresponseto unionization (Wishart 1911: p. 9). As production consolidated, advertising agenciesconvinced themanufacturers tobrandtheirproductsandadvertisedirect toconsumers.The

ManufacturersAssociationadoptedBarreGraniteasatrademarkinDecember1910,aspiringtoachievethekindofnationaldominanceVermontMarbleenjoyed(MonumentalNews1911:p.94),andtakinginspirationfromanewfederal lawof1905thatfacilitatedtheregistrationandprotectionoftrademarks(Nye1985:p.119).OneofthelargestBarreproducers,Boutwell,Milne & Varnum Co., launched its own national campaign in 1912, and then helped theAssociation launchabroaderBarreGranite campaign in 1916.This campaign founderedonapportioningcostsduringthedifficultyearsof theGreatWar.Boutwells thenremounteditsowncampaign topromote itsRockofAgesbrand in1919.ThemoreconservativeVermontMarbleCompanyonlybeganadvertising in trade journals in1912, in response to theBarreinitiative, and it was only in 1927 that they made a belated entry into national consumeradvertisingtodefendtheirdecliningmarketshare.

TheBarreGranitecampaigns,1910–1917

In1910theBarreGraniteManufacturersAssociationadoptedatrademarkandannounceditsintention to launchanadvertising campaign targeting thepublic andaiming to educate theconsumer to request Barre Granite from their local dealers. It was made clear that thewholesalefirmswouldnotretaildirectlytoconsumers.(Wishart1911:p.9).Bythesummerof1912 the Manufacturers Association was urging retailers to purchase from a list of theirmembers printed in industry trade journals (Monumental News 1912c: p. 581). Themanufacturers also worked with the local Board of Trade to brand Barre as the “GraniteCenter of the World” through road signs and muslin signs for railway flatcar shipments(MonumentalNews1912b:p.494;1912d:p.990;BarreGranite1917a:p.3).Thebrandingofthecitybecameageneraleffort,butthemajorpushtosellBarreGranitewouldcomethroughtheBGMA working with the quarry owners, and through one of the latter operatingindependently.

Boutwell,Milne&VarnumCo.,oneofthelargestquarrycompanies,wasabletoimplementa national campaign of its own in 1912. The Hays agency of Burlington devised a three-prongedcampaign involving: (1) trademarkingBoutwells’darkBarreGranitewith thenowcentury-oldlogowiththewords“RockofAges”insideacircle;thistrademarkwasfirstusedon1August1913,andwasregisteredinOctober(USPTO,TESS,serialnumber71073570);(2)anelaboratetwo-toneadvertisingbookletentitledTheRockofAges;and(3)advertisingthatpublication to consumers through national magazines. The flagship magazine for thiscampaignwastheLiteraryDigest,whichhadalargercirculationandlessoriginalcontentthanthetraditionalliterarymagazines,butitwasreadbyahigherincomeclientelethanthetrulymassmarketserials(LamsonCollection1913).

The self-styled progressives within the Granite Association, including Boutwell, wereresponsible for hiring H.P. Hinman as Secretary in 1915. Hinman was a devotee of theadvertising journal Printer’s Ink, which he devoured cover to cover every week (Hinman1919:p.156).Theassociation’sofficeswereredesignedtofacilitatetheworkofHinmanandastaff of four,who communicated through speaking tubes and desk-top telephones (Hinman1917:p.3),andinSeptember1916theylaunchedBarreGranite,amonthly in-housebulletinforthemembercompanies(BGMAminutes1916,13September).

Under Hinman’s direction, a national promotional campaign was inaugurated in March1916, planned by a national rather than a local advertising agency (Granite, Marble andBronze1916b:p.38).ThoughTaylor-Critchfield-ClaguehadaNewEnglandbranchoffice inBoston, it appearsmuch of theworkwas done at its Chicago headquarters (Barre Granite1917b:p.2).Theyplannedafour-prongedassault:(1)advertisinginmassmarketmagazines,(2)circularletterstodealersexplainingthecampaignandenclosingproofsorreprintsofthemonth’sadvertisements,(3)afreepromotionalpublication(similartoBoutwells’RockofAgesbut touting the themeof thecampaign), and (4)a special issueofoneof thenational tradejournals, to pitch the Barre industry in general and to further educate retailers on theadvantages to them of the advertising program. The Association’s first circular letter wasmailed to6,000NorthAmericanretailmonumentdealers toexplain themagazineblitz thatwould follow. Then came a proof sheet of the first advertisement in theSaturday EveningPost.

Thiswas not the first use of national advertising in themonument industry, as theHaysagencyhadadvertisedthe“RockofAges”bookletintheLiteraryDigest,andthetradejournalGranite, Marble and Bronze noted that “this was the first of what is known as consumercampaignsinthemonumentbusinessthathasbeenlaunchedsincethedaysoftheconsumercampaignsoftheGeorgiaMarbleinterestsandtheWinnsboroGraniteCorporation”(Granite,MarbleandBronze1916a:p.42).InacircularlettertodealerstheAssociationintroducedwhatappears to have been the “most radical departure … in the monument industry”: themanufacturerswouldadvertisenationallybutcontinuesellingonlythroughretaildealers(deCarle/Grantfonds1916).

Thecampaignwasnotgivenanameintheliterature,butwecancallit,astheadvertisingagencylikelydid,theMemorialMasterpiecescampaign.Thiswasthetitleofthelavish,large-format 32-page picture book that constituted the third prong of the publicity effort. Thenewspaper ads reprinted its soft-focus photographs and expanded on its theme: “to dignifyand glorify aworthy industry” (MemorialMasterpieces 1916: p. 2). The first advertisementpicturedthemausoleumofCharlesFleishmann(1835–1897),theCincinnatiyeastandvinegartycoon (Lamson Collection 1916).Memorial Masterpieces dominated the first year of thecampaign,but in thesecondagreatervarietyof imageryappeared. InAugust1917,aproofwentouttodealersthatwasaccounted“DIFFERENT”and“dramatic”,thoughitwassimilar

inmany respects to the images traditionally employed in the trade journals to impress theretailers: a viewof 300quarryworkers perchedon ahuge ledgeof rock 200 feet long andweighing 69,000,000 pounds. The Association thought it had “real news value” and urgeddealers to “HANG IT INAFRONTWINDOW!”Thoughunidentified, itwas aviewof theBoutwell,Milne&VarnumCo.“RockofAges”quarry(LamsonCollection1917).ThefourthelementofthecampaignwasaspecialMay1916BarrenumberofAmericanStoneTradeoutofChicago.Theprospectofeducating5,100retaildealersabouttheadvantagesofBarreanditsproductjustifiedthechargeof$50foradoublepageadvertisementinthespecialnumber.Therealvalueofcourselayintheextensivecoveragethatcountedasnewsandwasthereforecostfree(BGMAminutes1916,29April:p.59).

The four elements of the campaign were mutually supportive. The Barre Associationmountedanextensiveexhibitionoftheirmembers’productsattheClevelandconventionoftheNationalRetailMonumentDealersAssociation,but took theunusualstepofadvertisingtheexhibitiontothegeneralpublic inthedailypress.TheythenpurchasedthecoverofthetradejournalGraniteMarbleandBronze forareprintof theirClevelandnewspaperadasademonstrationoftheireffortsto“helptheretaildealersellmore”.Theyclaimedthathundredsof“prospects”hadattendedtheClevelandexhibit,anddrewattentionofthedealerstotheirAugust advertisement in Saturday Evening Post promoting pre-need sale (Granite, MarbleandBronze1916c).

ThecollapseoftheBarreinitiative

Ayearandahalfintothecampaign,theAssociationcirculatedadealerquestionnaire,askingwhetherretailershadexperiencedpositiveresults.Themanufacturers’in-housejournalBarreGranitereportedthathundredsofreplieshadbeenreceivedandthattheresponsewas“moreencouraging than could have been anticipated by the most sanguine members”. Sampleresponseswereprinted,buttherewasnoattemptatstatisticalanalysis,andbecauseover160wholesalerssuppliedtheretaildealers,therewasnoeasywaytomeasureactualincreasesinsalesonthepartofthosebearingthecostsoftheprogram(BarreGranite1917c:p.1ff.).

DespitethepositivespinputonthecampaignbyHinmanandhisassistantsinthemonthlyissuesofBarreGranite,doubtswerebeginningtoinfectthemembership,andtheabilityofthequarry owners, in particular, to pay in their assessments was affected by the late entry ofAmericaintotheWorldWar,in1917.

Thequarryownersencounteredseriousdifficultieswithcoalpricesandtheavailabilityofrailwaycars,andfacedhavingtoshutdownproduction.InJanuary1918theyproposedtothemanufacturersthattheadvertisingcampaignbeeliminatedforafewmonthswhiletheymet

theirobligations(BGMAminutes1918,7January).Themanufacturershadfaceda25percentlabor shortageanda 47.5percent increase in stonecutters’wages since the start of thewar.SecretaryHinmandidtheroundsofthedealers’conventionsurgingretailerstoemphasizethe“dignityandattractiveness”ofsimplified,standardizeddesigns.Adoptionofthesandblasthadincreasedefficienciesatthetimeofthelastlaborcontractwhenbothwagesandroughstockhad increased in price, but there was no new technology to reduce costs now. Themanufacturersofferedadiscountforcashratherthancreditaspaymentdelayswerehurtingcashflows(AmericanStoneTrade1918b:pp.30–31).Asoutputlaggeddemandlaterin1918,Boutwell gave priority to supplying purchasers who paid in cash (American Stone Trade1918c: p. 32), a practice they would continue. Wartime constraints thus hastened atransformationofbusinesspractices, andcontinuingconcernover labordemandswould seethebulkoftheBarreindustryswitchtoanopenshop“AmericanPlan”in1922.ItwasnotuntilSeptember1918thattheAssociation’scircular lettersannouncedtoretailerstheir1918–1919campaign.Themostinterestingaspect,theAssociationthought,wastheadditionofCountryGentleman,oneofthe“favoritepublications”of“therichestbuyingclassintheworldtoday–theAmericanfarmer”(LamsonCollection1918).

ThecostsofadvertisinginthenationalweeklieshadcomeassomethingofashocktosomeoftheAssociationmembers.Incontrasttothe$50foradouble-pagespreadthatwouldreachthe5,100industryreadersofthetradejournalAmericanStoneTrade–andthatexpenditurehad been debated at a meeting – the fees for advertising in the national magazines wereheart-stopping: $6,000 for a full page in Saturday Evening Post, though the Post enjoyed acirculationof2,000,000copies (AmericanStoneTrade 1916).The1916campaignbudgethadbeen increased from$20,000 (BGMAminutes 1916,March) to $30,000,with$20,000 just forfourpagesinthePost.In1917whatSecretaryHinmancalledthe“strenuouseffortsonthepartoftheprogressivemembers”raisedthebudgetto$50,000with$30,000goingforameresixpagesinthesamemagazine.The“progressives”pointedoutthatthisamountedto“lessthan1percentofthesales”butthemorerecalcitrantmembersviewedtheexpenditureswithalarm.Thepro-advertisingfactionsucceededindoublingthebudgetto$100,000for1918,asHinmanasserted that theeffectof thenationalcampaignwas justbeginning tobe felt inapracticalway(Printers’Ink1919:p.42).

InNovember,however,theassociationdirectorsrecommendedthatthenationalcampaignbeterminated.Theadvertisingfundwasnotbeingsupportedby“manymanufacturers”and“somequarryoperators”.Whileeveryoneagreedaboutthevalueoftheadvertisingcampaign,the apportionment of the costs was thought inequitable. Some manufacturers thought thequarry owners should be solely responsible for its finance.The resolution to terminatewascarriedouton30November1918atameetingofthemanufacturers,byavoteof30to12.Asnoonewantedthecampaignended,acommitteewaselectedtotakeupthematterwiththequarriers;thistimeonlytwoopposed(BGMAminutes1918,30November).ByDecemberit

wasclear,however,thatnoplancouldbeadopteduntilthedelinquentaccountswerepaidin(BGMAminutes1918,19December).

TheRockofAgescampaigns1919–1927

Inthisatmosphereof frustrationanduncertainty,Boutwell,Milne&VarnumCo.decidedtorelaunchtheirowncampaignforRockofAgesDarkBarreGraniteandtospendthemoneyto“doitright”(Printers’Ink1919,42).AfactorinthisdecisionwasprobablythehiringofHaroldHinmanastheirsalesandadvertisingmanager(MonumentandCemeteryReview1918:p.70).

Therewere threekeyelements in thenewcampaign thatBoutwells launched in January1919:(1)theRockofAgesbrand,(2)a“CertificateofQualityandWorkmanship”whichwastoutedas“impregnableprotection:aninstrumentofhonor”and(3)anewnationaladvertisingcampaign(LamsonCollection1919a;Bell1925:pp.81–90).Thefirmpresentedthecertificateprogramasaguarantee toconsumers,but thecertificatesand the inspection systembehindthemwerealsoawaytocontrolthevalueoftheirbrandbysellingonlytocompanieswhoseworkmanshiptheyapprovedandwhorenderedpromptpayment.Thisreducedthenumberofmanufacturingcustomersfrom160to50orso(Printers’Ink1919:pp.43–44;AmericanStoneTrade1918:p.14).

The early advertisements for 1919were lackluster, andHinman claimed in an interviewwithPrinters’Inkthattheyservedprimarilytofamiliarizethepublicwiththename“RockofAges”.They consistedmostly of text on a background recreating the surface of the granitematerial,withsometimesapictureofagenericmonumentat the top,andsometimesnone.But the visual quality, and the variety ofmessage, improved as the yearwent on.Hinmanclaimedtherewasaswitchto“educationaladvertisements”,butthe1919campaignwasinfactamixedbagofapproachesandappeals(Printers’Ink1919:p.43).TheJuneadvertisementwasaviewoftheBoutwellRockofAgesquarryintendedtoimpressthepublicwithitsmagnitude–thesametacticusedbytheBGMAinAugust1917(LamsonCollection1919b).Twooftheyear’s advertisements were intended to ingratiate important intermediaries. July sawpublication of “The Dealer in Memorials: An Appreciation” (Lamson Collection 1919c)followedinOctoberbyaparallelpaeantotheCemeterySuperintendent(LamsonCollection1919e).

ThecampaignalsohighlightedopportunitiesandthreatstotheindustrythatmaterializedinthewakeoftheWorldWar.Onecircularletterurgeddealerstopushtheircommunityleadersto commissionwarmemorials, and offered a free design service for this purpose (LamsonCollection1919b).Magazineadsdrewattentiontothe“appropriateness”oferectingpersonaltributes to relatives and friendswho perished overseas, and retailerswere sent a brochure

explainingcenotaphs:erectingasecondmonumenttoaservicemaninterredoverseaswas,ifnothing else, good business (Lamson Collection 1919d). The November advertisementscounteredthe“propaganda”for“utilitarian”warmemorials:erectingusefulstructuressuchashospitals or libraries instead of granite monuments to a community’s war dead. Theadvertisement featured Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, where the president had “set us theexample of an ever-sacredMemorial dedicated to the nation’s heroes” (LamsonCollection1919f).

In July 1923 Boutwell, Milne & Varnum Co. commenced publication of Rock of AgesMagazine, a house organ targeting retailers, largely to tout the advantages of the recentlyadopted open shop or non-union American Plan. The early numbers vilified the GraniteCutters’NationalUnionanditsleadership(RockofAgesMagazine1923a).Butthemagazinequicklysupplantedthecircularsexplainingtheadvertisingcampaigns,printingadvancepullsofthemagazineadvertisements.Theadvertisingitselfremaineduninspired:aphotographofablankheadstonewith texturgingmemorializationasa “nobleobligation”, “a royal tribute”,“the perfect monumental granite”, and a way to “perpetuate your family name”. Anotherblandheadstonewasclaimed, implausibly, to “expresspersonality”.Eachadwarnedagainstsubstitutes, advising consumers to insist upon a “Certificate of Perfection” (Rock of AgesMagazine1924a,b,c,d,f).

These advertisements about advertisements pointed out that the Boutwells ads were“tireless agents”, “cutting down sales resistance” and cornering prospects “at odd times inunexpectedplaces”(RockofAgesMagazine1924e).

Alavishpromotionalbook,AtholBell’sTheStoryoftheROCKOFAGES,wasdistributedjust prior to a 1 July 1925 reorganizationwhen Boutwell,Milne & VarnumCompanywaspurchased by a consortium of Barre, Burlington, and Boston business interests, includingHinman,theformersecretaryoftheBarreGraniteManufacturersAssociation(RockofAgesMagazine1925a).TheBoutwell firm’sofficesweremovedtoBarre fromMontpelierand inMay1926thenameofthebusinesswaschangedtotheRockofAgesCorporation,followingothernationaladvertisersinassertingtheprimacyofthetrademarkedproduct(RockofAgesMagazine1926c).RockofAgesMagazinereportedadealer’scomplaintthatadvertisementswouldbemore

effectivewithphotographsofmonumentsinsteadofinkdrawings.Theeditorsfeltotherwise.Thecompanyemployedphotographsinitspamphlets(RockofAgesMagazine1925b:p.18)but their full response camemore than a year laterwhen theirAugust 1926 advertisementappeared on the cover of Advertising and Selling to illustrate an article about art inadvertising(Calkins1927,citedinRockofAgesMagazine1927a).

InFebruary1926RockofAgeshadrolledoutanewcampaignmastermindedbytheAlbertFrank&Co. agencywith advertisements featuring attractive ink-wash drawings of historicNewEnglandchurches (RockofAgesMagazine 1926a).They revised their list of consumer

magazines to each appeal to differentmarkets. To assist local dealers, booklets, letters, anddesignbookswereoffered freeupon request fromaRockofAgesServiceBureauor fromfieldagents (RockofAgesMagazine 1926b).RockofAgeshadaccepted theirdealers’viewthatmonumentpurchasesweremademostoftenbywivesorwidows,andtheyemphasizedthat all these magazines were read at home and that women responded favorably to theadvertisementsdepictinghistoricchurches(RockofAgesMagazine1926d).Yetinterminatingtheseries, theeditorsconcludedthat theserieshadmadea“subtleappeal” tothememorialinstinctinmen’sminds.Theylaudedthe1926campaignasoneofthemostsuccessfulinthehistoryofadvertising(RockofAgesMagazine1926f).GlenMitchell,ayoungChicagoartist,was identified as the creator of the appealing drawings in the second advertisement of theseason.

Printers’ Ink reproduced a half-tone of one, and Mitchell was awarded a GuggenheimMemorialFoundationFellowshipforstudyabroadanddepartedfortheMiddleEasttopaintreligioussubjectsenroutetoItaly(RockofAgesMagazine1926d).

TheFebruary1927RockofAgesMagazinedevotedunprecedentedspacetoexplainingthepast and forthcoming campaigns. The journal selection for 1927 had a combined paidcirculationof6million,readby25millionadults:LadiesHomeJournal,NationalGeographic,andThe Farm Journal, but alsoExtension andThe ChristianHerald,Architecture, andTheSpur,ahorseandhoundsmagazine(RockofAgesMagazine1926g).AugustHirschbaumoftheadvertisingagencyexplainedthatamajordifficultywithadvertisinggravemarkerswasthatconsumers were not in the market for one most of the time. For that reason they wouldoverlookadvertisementsdepictingmonuments.Thechallenge thuswas to captureandholdthe reader’s attention until the name of the company registered. They had decided NewEnglandchurcheswouldappealtoaneducatedclientele.Hirschbaumexplainedthatthiswasthe most recent type of advertising, an “indirect appeal” giving an impression of superiorlifestyleratherthandepictingproductsandprices.Thisstrategyhadbeenadoptedbymostofthemajordepartmentstores(Hirschbaum1927).

ThesameissuelaunchedanAmericanHistoryseries,withdramaticinkdrawingsoficoniceventsandsmall insetphotographsof thegravestonesof thechiefprotagonists.Thetext, inpseudo-eighteenth-century font, suggested how monuments endured, but the minusculephotographsconcealedthefactthatsomeoftheheroeswereinterredbeneathmonumentsofmarble(RockofAgesMagazine1927b).Theyassertedthattheseriesexertedastrongappealforbothruralandurbanresidents,andwaslocaladvertisinginthesensethattheadvertisingmediaweremagazines read in thehome (RockofAgesMagazine 1927c; 1927d).The serieswasintendedtomaintaininterestwhilestressingtheimportanceoferectingpropermemorials(RockofAgesMagazine1927e).

TheVermontMarbleCompanycampaigns1927–1932

ThelateentryintonationaladvertisingbyVermontMarbleCompanyatfirstappearscurious.Thoughgranitehadsurpassedmarbleasthemostcommonmaterialforgravemarkersbytheturnofthecentury(TheReporter1898),themarbleindustrywasstillanactiveplayerandhad,moreover,consolidateditssectormuchearlier,inthe1870s.TheVermontMarbleCompanyinProctorenjoyedamuchgreatermarketshareinitscommoditythanBarreGranitedidinits.Vermont Marble had long relied on personal contact with retailers, depending upon heftymonumentcataloguesandanetworkofregionally-basedtravellingagents,whosentpostcardstodealersafewdaysbeforetheyarrivedtotakeorders.ThoughtherehadbeenperiodicalsforthemonumenttradesinceTheReportercommencedpublicationinChicagoin1868,VMCbegan advertising in trade journals only in 1912– likely in response toBoutwells’ Rock ofAgespromotion(SeeforexampleMonumentalNews1912a).

Marblesaleswerestrugglingagainstthecompetitionfromgranite.AninternalanalysisbyVermontMarblein1926showedthatearningsfrommonumentworkwereshrinking.

Accountingforaboutathirdofsales tothetradebeforetheWar,monumentalworkwastheirmainstayintheimmediatepostwaryears,risingfrom37to53percentofsalesin1918,andto61percenttheyearafter,beforedecliningto54percentin1920andthenembarkingonalongslideto24percentin1926–1928(VMCAnnualReport1926:pp.17–21;1928,App.C).

Boutwell,Milne&VarnumCo.hadrecruitedHinman’ssuccessorassecretarytreasurerofthe BarreManufacturers, Athol Bell, and in 1925 commissioned him to write the lavishly-producedpromotionalvolume that reviewed thecompany’sachievements.Belldetailed theessentialstrategiesoftheirmagazinecampaign,effectivelysettingoutarecipeforcompetitorsto follow (Bell 1925: pp. 81–90), and indeed itwas followed twoyears later, in 1927,whenVermont Marble Company finally launched its own campaign. It was likely the widedistribution of Bell’s book that inspired a new Boston advertising agency, the KenyonCompany, to approach Vermont Marble in December 1926. They voluntarily undertook asurvey of the company’s relations with retailers, hoping to be retained to prepare anadvertisingplan (VMCAnnualReport 1926: pp. 14–15). (On theKenyonagency seeBostonHerald1925:p.24;1931:p.6).

What isstriking is thatBoutwells,whichhadbeenaggressivelypursuingtheconsumer innationalmagazinesformorethanadecade,hadamoretenuousconnectionwiththeretailersthan Vermont Marble did. In 1925 the granite firm was still engaged only in quarrying:providing rough stone tomostly localmanufacturerswhoproducedandwholesaledgranitemonumentstoretailers(Bell1925:p.88).ThenamewaschangedtoRockofAgesCorporationin 1926 following the retirement of JimBoutwell and the purchase of the quarries by newpartnerstheyearbefore(DailyMessenger1926:p.3).Itwasnotuntil1930thattheyacquired

ten Barre manufacturers in a $6 million merger, consolidating a third of the city’s graniteproduction, and becoming manufacturers and wholesalers (Clarke 1989: p. 62). VermontMarble Company by contrast had consolidated the Rutland County marble industry to aremarkabledegreeahalfcenturyearlier,firstastheProducersMarbleCompanytrustin1883,andthenthroughdirecttakeoversastheVermontMarbleCompany,openingafinishingplantthatwholesalednotonlyprecutslabsanddimensionstone,butthree-dimensionalmonumentsready for local inscription (Gilmore1956:pp.11–20).Theirexpansion renderedunprofitableolder but smaller firms in adjoining counties of Vermont and northwesternMassachusetts,effectivelyending themarble industry thereasVMCextended itsownsales throughout thecontinent(Brainerd1885;Stott2008:pp.187–238;Little1998:pp.179–234).WhereastheBarremanufacturers had been attempting to make for themselves a “national name” in 1916, adecadelaterVermontMarblewasattemptingtoshoreupitsexistingnationalmarketagainstthecompetitionposedbygranite.3

InFebruary1927VMCagreedtoadoptKenyons’plan.Inessentialsitmirroredsomewhatcautiously theBarre campaignof1916.The firstmajor innovationwasdue to technologicaladvances,asthedisplayadvertisementsproposedforLadiesHomeJournalweretobeinfullcolor. It was only in 1926 that the largest weekly magazine, Saturday Evening Post, hadofferedfour-colorpages,atacostof$11,000,nearlydoublethecostofablackandwhitepage(Marchand1985:p.7).Colorphotographswerenotcommoninmagazinestillthe1930s(Nye1985:p.114).TherestoftheKenyoncampaignconsistedofhalf-pageadvertisementsinblackandwhiteinCountryGentleman,ChristianHerald,andExtensioneverysecondmonth.Thesewereconservativechoices,appealingtomiddle-classwomen,prosperousfarmers,andreadersof the religious press. A memorials bookletAll That is Beautiful Shall Abide Forever wasprepared for distribution through retailers to consumers, equivalent to Barre GraniteAssociation’sMemorialMasterpiecesof1916,anddealersweretobeprovidedwithaplaqueidentifyingthemasofficialagents(VMCAnnualReport1926:pp.14–15).

Theyrushedanaccountof thecampaign, likely liftedfromtheKenyonproposal, intotheFebruaryissueoftheirexistingdealermagazine(launchedasVermontMarbleinAugust1925)(Proctoriana Collection, VHS, Doc. 127). Headed “National Advertising in Full Color”, itoffered local “craftsmen” theopportunity toput thenationalcampaign towork locally.Thecampaignwould openwith aMemorial Day advertisement in the Ladies Home Journal, ahugely popular family magazine, followed by the rural Country Gentleman and the twoprincipalProtestantandCatholicfamilymagazines,withacombinedcirculationof5millionhouseholds(VermontMarble1927,n.p.).

The second major innovation had been around for a while but was proliferating in the1920s: amovement beyond situational or lifestyle advertising that showed products in use(Marchand1985:p. xvi;Nye1985: p. 123) towhatMarchandhas called “social tableaux” inwhich images and text, according to Nye, attempted to weave a company name into

Americanculture(Marchand1985:pp.165–166;Nye1985:p.133).Burthaspointedoutthatthoughthistypeofadvertisingwaswidelyadoptedinthe1920s,itwaspioneeredbyBoston’sPettingillAgencyfortheLydiaE.PinkhamMedicineCompanyin1890(2012:pp.209–10),andBadaraccohasobservedfromastudyofprintingtradejournalsthattableauxadvertisingwascommonby 1906 (1990: p. 1046).AsMarchand studied the 1920–1940periodhe sometimesmissed the earlier origins of what he took to be innovations. This form of advertisingdependeduponanarrestingimagethatwouldconnectwiththereader,butitdependeduponthe text to link the image to theproduct.Theadvertisements thus constitutedamajor stepbeyond the traditional quarry andmonument views that hadmarked the early days of theBarrecampaignandweremoreakintoRockofAges’contemporaneoushistoricalseries.TheVMCcampaignemployedanartist,JohnNewtonHowittofNewYork,toproducedecorousoilpaintingsforadvertisementsthatexaltedthebondsoffamily(VermontMarble1927,n.p.).

InApril1927VMCchangedthetitleofitsretailermagazinefromVermontMarble toTheMemory Stone, their belated counter to Boutwell, Milne and Varnum’s “Rock of Ages”trademarkof1912.Alogowiththewords“TheMemoryStone”enclosedinalaurelwreathwas first employedon 7December 1928, though itwasnot filed as a trademarkuntil 1948(USPTO, TESS, serial number 71556739). The title of the campaign and of its promotionalbooklet,AllThatisBeautifulShallAbideForever,appearednowasasloganatthebottomofevery page. The magazine provided a preview of the bimonthly national advertisementsderived from Howitt’s canvasses accompanied by romantic and evocative prose (MemoryStone1927a,n.p.).

The June issueprovidedapreviewof the color advertisement thatwould appear in July,illustrating not a gravemarker but the touching tale of a family singing a hymn in an oldColonialchurch.Thefathergazesfondlyathisdaughterwithacaptionreading“Itsoundstohimlikehermother’svoice,singinginParadise,”aquotationfromLongfellow’sclassicNewEnglandpoem,“TheVillageBlacksmith.”Thetextbelowexplainedhowhisthoughtsturnedto her resting place,marked by amonument ofmarble. It thenmade the link toVermontMarbleas“America’snoblestmemorystone”,selectedasthematerialforArlington’sTomboftheUnknownSoldier(MemoryStone1927b,n.p.),towhichHowittwasalreadyboundwithhispaintbox (Memory Stone 1927d, n.p.). Using themost modern technologies and advertisingagency associative techniques, the content paradoxically referenced upscale traditionalAmerica and recalled the New England roots of the American character. September’sillustrationwasofanelderlywomanreadingonherporchwhileawell-dressedyoungcouplewalkedbywith theirdog.Thewreath enclosed the caption “Theheart thathas truly lovednever forgets”, a quotation from the IrishpoetThomasMoore.The text belowcontained agentle reminder of the obligation tomark the resting places of those dear to us. TheNewEnglandcontextoftheartcontinued,withHowittexplainingthatthedoorwaywasbasedononeinSalem,Massachussetts(MemoryStone1927c,n.p.).

The success of the campaign depended upon the image being sufficiently compelling orsympatheticastocausetheviewertomovebeyondthecaptionandreadthetextthataloneidentifiedtheproduct.Perhapsthecompanyalreadyhadmisgivingsaboutthedominanceofatmosphereoverassociation,forinDecember1927theadvertisementinCountryGentlemanandExtensionwas,much less subtly,anadvertisement for thenewconsumerbooklet,withthecoverreproducedtwo-thirdsactualsizeandrestinguponawreathoflaurelandoak.This,as theMemoryStoneobserved, turned thewholepage intoacoupon (MemoryStone 1927e,n.p.).

Thecompanyhadset sales targets:a10percent increaseoveraverage sales ineachstateovertheprecedingthreeyears.Nationallythequotawasundersoldby13percent,withonlyNewYorkexceedingit.Monumentsaleswereoffmorein1927thanduringtheyearbefore,despite the expensive national campaign (VMCAnnual Report 1927: pp. 10–11; chart 1928,App. C). Vermont Marble’s branch managers and salesmen reported, however, that apropagandapushwasvitallynecessary.Manydealerswere givingpride of place to granitemarkersintheirshowrooms(VMCAnnualReport1927:p.8).Thecompanywasalsohavingtocontendwithagrowinglistofcemeteriesnationwidethatrestrictedorprohibitedtheuseofmarblemonuments in favorof themoredurablegranite (VMCAnnualReport1927:pp.10,13).

By February 1928 they were becoming aware of the problem that had bedeviled theoriginal Barre Granite campaign of 1916: that consumer inquiries for the booklet andunsolicitedanecdotalreportsfromretailersweretheonlyevidencethatthecampaignswereworth the considerable expenditure: only 20 orders could be directly attributed to thecampaign(VMCAnnualReport1928:pp.13–14).

ByJune1928thenationalcampaignhadchangeddirection,reflectingaviewonthepartofthecompanythatitsmessagewastoosubtleandnotreflectedinincreasedsalesfigures.Thedecline inmarblesales to the trade in facthadbeenslowedbut theadvertisingnonethelesswas changed to highlight the actual product. Instead of the sentimental advertisementsevocativeofmiddle-classfamilyrelationssetinabucolicandiconicNewEnglandlandscape,theJuneandJulyadvertisementsrevertedtodepictinggravestonedesignswhichitwashopedwouldbemoreefficaciousintheirsimplicity.Noneofthisadvertisingwouldbeincolor,andnoneoccupiedafullpage(MemoryStone1928,n.p.).

Thereversiontomoreprosaicandliteraladvertisingmayhavebeenamistakeasthesalesfigures for1929 showeda furtherdropof$178,966,nearlyasmuchas in1927, theyear thecampaignhadbeeninaugurated,andreversingtheimprovedfiguresoftheyearbefore.AstheGreatDepressionbeganonlyintheautumnof1929itisunlikelythatitwassolelyresponsiblefor thedip. In futureyears theDepressionwouldhave a chilling effect on the industry, forgravestoneswereapurchasethatcouldreadilybedeferredinhardtimes.VMC’smonumentsales continued to drop, to a third of their 1928 levels by 1933,when they accounted for a

record low of only 17 percent of company sales to the trade, building stone carrying thecompany through the thirties (VMC Annual Report 1928, App. C). Though the efficacy ofnationaladvertisingwasfarfromclear,droppingitentirelynowappearedsuicidal.

Asmonumentsalescontinuedtofall,the1932campaignassumedamoredramaticposture.“Murdered by the Savages” read the first advertisement of the year. The concept was topresentcompellingVermontheadstonesof150yearsprevious,both tocatch theeyeand tomake the case for the durability of the material. The other innovation was that theadvertisementswouldnowberunningintherotogravuresectionsofmajorcitydailies,and4,6,and10-inchsizesweremadeavailableforuseoverthedealers’ownnames(MemoryStone1932,n.p.).OverthenextfiveyearsnofurtherarticlesonnationaladvertisingappearedinTheMemoryStone.

Aftermath

By1930RockofAgeshadpickedupthefullpagecoloradvertisingthatVermontMarblehadabandoned. The Barre Granite Association at last recommenced advertising in consumermagazines,in1931,ayearaftertheRockofAgesquarriesboughtouttenBarremanufacturersandfinallyenteredthemanufacturingandwholesalingline(Clarke1989:p.62).Recognizingthatcollectiveactionbythesmallerfirmswasnecessarytocompetewiththenewcorporategiant, the Granite Manufacturers Association held meetings with the independentmanufacturing firms and signed up virtually all of them, doubling the Association’smembership, and negotiated the participation of the six remaining independent quarrycompanies. They launched a publicity campaign paid for by subscription, and planned toemployBarreGraniteasatradename(BarreDailyTimes1931,n.p.).

Ironically in 1940 BarreGranite’s advertising agency, theH.B.HumphreyCo. of Boston,receivedtheadvertisingindustry’snationalmedalforexcellenceincopyforanadvertisementthattookthefocusoffgravestonesandtoldastoryaboutpeople:thetypeofadvertisingtheVermontMarbleCompanyhadexperimentedwithandabandoned13yearsearlier.TheimagewasaninkdrawingofawomaninEdwardiandresswavinggoodbyetoadepartingtrain.Theheaderread“AuntMeg…whonevermarried”.Thetextdevotedfourmeandering,narrativeparagraphstothestoryofAuntMeg,whosebeauJimFosternevercamebackfromthewar.The fifth transitioned from short story to the need for a suitablememorial for a departedlovedone.

The Aunt Meg advertisement came to be regarded as a classic example of advertisingtechniquepracticedsincethe1920s:turningconsumerneedintoacasehistory(Schwartz1966:p.38).TheBarreGraniteadvertisementwas included inJulianWatkins’s1949bookThe100

GreatestAdvertisements(Watkins1949).Thus in themonument industry,advertisingagencies,productbranding,andmassmarket

magazineswerelateadditionstothemoderncommunicationsstrategiesadoptedtonegotiatedistanciatedanddisembeddedsocial relations,as theVermontmarbleandgranite industriesmoved from being suppliers of dimension stone to providers of finished monuments, andextended their geographical reach across North America. As themore integrated VermontMarbleCompanylostmarketsharetothemoredurablegranite,itremainedconservativeinthetechniquesitadoptedtoextendmediaadvertisingbothtothetradeandtoconsumers.ThelesscentralizedBarreGraniteinterestssteppedinwhereconservativeVermontMarblefearedtotread,andadoptedinnovationsVermontMarbleabandoned.

Notes

1TheauthorisgratefultoKarenLaneofAldrichPublicLibrary,Barre,Vermont;PaulCarnahan,LibrarianoftheVermont

HistoricalSociety;EdLarson,executivedirectoroftheBarreGraniteAssociation;thestaffandvolunteersoftheProctor

FreeLibraryinProctor,Vermont;AnneTait;JuneHaddenHobbs;andDavidGerber.

2Hower(1949:p.7)andSivulka(1998:p.35)explaintheadvantagesofadvertisingagenciesinthiscontext,butTimVos

(2013)hasrecentlyprovidedamorecontextualizedinstitutionalexplanationoftheirorigin.

3 Rotundo attributes the demise of white bronze monuments partly to the success of the Barre Granite advertising

campaign(Rotundo1992:283).

References

Archivalmaterials

Barre Granite Manufacturers Association minutes 1915–1917, Barre Granite Association,Barre,VT.

Barre Granite Manufacturers Association minutes 1918, Directors meetings, Barre GraniteAssociation,Barre,VT.

de Carle/Grant fonds (1916), correspondence, March, DEC-056, Archives and ResearchCollections,CarletonUniversityLibrary,Ottawa,Canada.

LamsonCollection (1913), “Before you buy amemorial, get this book”,LiteraryDigest, 13September,BHC-283,BarreHistoryCollection at theVermontHistorical Society, Barre,

VT.LamsonCollection(1916),SaturdayEveningPost,25March,BHC-321.LamsonCollection(1917),H.Hinmantothemonumenttrade,4August,BHC-321.LamsonCollection(1918),H.Hinmantothemonumentaltrade,20September,BHC-321.LamsonCollection(1919a),circularletter,25January,BHC-283.LamsonCollection(1919b),circularletter,14June,BHC-283.LamsonCollection(1919c),SaturdayEveningPostproofsheet,26July,BHC-283.LamsonCollection(1919d),circularletter,16Augustandattachments,BHC-283.LamsonCollection(1919e),SaturdayEveningPostproofsheet,25October,BHC-283.LamsonCollection(1919f),circularletter,15Novemberandattachments,BHC-283.Proctoriana Collection, Doc. 127, Vermont Marble/The Memory Stone, Vermont Historical

Society,Barre,VT.RockofAgesMagazine,VermontHistoricalSociety,Barre,VT.USPTO,TESS(TrademarkElectronicSearchSystem),http://tess2.uspto.gov(Accessed:24

March2013).VermontMarbleCompany(VMC),AnnualReport1926,ProctorFreeLibrary,Proctor,VT.VermontMarbleCompany(VMC),AnnualReport1927,ProctorFreeLibrary,Proctor,VT.VermontMarbleCompany(VMC),AnnualReport1928,ProctorFreeLibrary,Proctor,VT.

Printedmaterials

AmericanStoneTrade(1916),May.AmericanStoneTrade(1918a),“Allwintermeetingsdemonstrateconfidence”,March:p.14.AmericanStoneTrade(1918b),H.Hinman,“AmessageoftheBarreManufacturers”,March:

pp.30–31.AmericanStoneTrade(1918c),“GraniteProducersorganization”,September:p.32.Badaracco,C. (1990) “Alternatives tonewspaperadvertising,1890–1920:Printers’ innovative

productandmessagedesigns”,JournalismQuarterly,67(4):pp.1042–1050.BarreDailyTimes(1931),7May,n.p.,typescriptinLamsonCollection,BHC-321.BarreGranite(1917a),“AnnualReportofSecretary”,January:p.3.BarreGranite(1917b),“Advertisingconference”,1(10),July:p.2.BarreGranite(1917c),“Dealersexpressthemselvesonadvertisingcampaign”,2(1),October:

p.1ff.Bell,A.(1925),TheStoryofTheRockofAges,Boutwell,Milne&VarnumCo.,Montpelier,VT.BostonHerald(1925),“Tomeetneedsofadvertiser”,14June:p.24.BostonHerald(1930),“Granitemergerinvolves$6,000,000”,8February:p.30.BostonHerald(1931),“KenyonCo.,Inc.,joinsN.Y.firm”,5January:p.6.

Brainerd,E.etal.(1885),TheMarbleBorderofWesternNewEngland,MiddleburyHistoricalSociety,Middlebury,VT.

Burt,E. (2012), “From‘truewoman’ to ‘newwoman’”,JournalismHistory,27 (4):pp.207–217.

Busdraghi, I. (2011), “Proctor and Barre: The marble and granite quarries and the Italianstoneworkers in Vermont, 1865–1915” in Bianco, R. and Broucke, P. (eds.) NatureTransformed:EdwardBurtynsky’sVermontQuarryPhotographsinContext.HanoverandLondon:UniversityPressofNewEngland:pp.24–35.

Clarke,R.(1989),CarvedinStone:AHistoryoftheBarreGraniteindustry.Barre,VT:RockofAgesCorporation.

DailyMessenger(1926),“RockofAgesCorporation”,24May:p.3,StAlban’s,VT.Elliott, B. (2011), “Memorializing the CivilWar dead: Modernity and corruption under the

Grantadministration”,Markers,27:pp.14–55.Giddens,A.(1990),TheConsequencesofModernity.Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress.Gilmore,R.(1956–7),“TheVermontMarbleCompany:Anentrepreneurialstudy,1869–1939”,

TheNewEnglandSocialStudiesBulletin,14(2):pp.11–20and14(3):pp.14–20.Granite,MarbleandBronze(1916a)“Barreadvertisingcampaign”,26(4),April:p.42.Granite,MarbleandBronze(1916b),“Newsfromthegranitecenters”,26(6),June:p.38.Granite,MarbleandBronze(1916c),September,coverandp.42.Hinman,H.(1917),“AnnualreportofSecretary”,BarreGranite,1(4):p.3.Hinman,H.(1919),letter:Printers’Ink,108:p.156.Hirschbaum, A. (1927), “Some of the whys of Rock of Ages advertising”, Rock of Ages

Magazine,4(8),February:pp.18–20.Hower,R.(1949),TheHistoryofanAdvertisingAgency:N.W.Ayer&SonatWork,1869–1949.

Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress.Little, M.R. (1998), Sticks and Stones: Three Centuries of North Carolina Gravemarkers,

UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress,ChapelHillandLondon.Marchand,R.(1985),AdvertisingtheAmericanDream:MakingWayforModernity1920–1940,

UniversityofCaliforniaPress,Berkeley,CA.MemorialMasterpiecesinBarreGranitefromtheGraniteCentreoftheWorld(1916).Barre:

BarreQuarriersandManufacturersAssociation.MemoryStone(1927a),“Changingthename”,2(5),April,n.p.MemoryStone(1927b),“Lookingaheadinthemagazines”,2(6),June,n.p.MemoryStone(1927c),“Thenextfull-colorpage”,3(1),August,n.p.MemoryStone(1927d),“TheartistinArlington”,3(2),October,n.p.MemoryStone(1927e),“Expandingthecoupontofillthepage”,3(3),December,n.p.MemoryStone(1928),“Newadvertisementsfeaturememorials”,3(6),June,n.p.MemoryStone(1932),“DramaticstoryofVermontMarblevividlytoldin1932advertising”7

(4),February,n.p.MonumentandCemeteryReview(1918),“ItemsofGeneralInterest”,December:p.70.MonumentalNews(1911),“Barrie,VT.Specialcorrespondence”,January:p.94.MonumentalNews(1912a),“Twentycenturiesbetweenthem”,May:p.361.MonumentalNews(1912b),“NewBarreGranitetrademark”,June:p.494.MonumentalNews(1912c),“BarreGraniteManufacturers’Association”,July:p.581.MonumentalNews(1912d),“OneoftheBarreGranitesignposts”,December:p.990.Nye,D.(1985)ImageWorlds:CorporateIdentitiesatGeneralElectric,1890–1930.Cambridge,

MA,TheMITPress.Printers’Ink(1919),“Elevatingatradethroughadvertising”,108,28August:pp.41–44.TheReporter(1898),“Thepassingofmarble”,September:p.25.RockofAgesMagazine(1923a),“OneresultoftheAmericanPlan”,1(1),July,n.p.RockofAgesMagazine(1924a),“Tobereadbytwentymillion”,1(12),June,n.p.RockofAgesMagazine(1924b),2(1),July,n.p.RockofAgesMagazine(1924c),2(2),August,n.p.RockofAgesMagazine(1924d),2(3),September,n.p.RockofAgesMagazine(1924e),2(4),“Yoursalespartner”,October,n.p.RockofAgesMagazine(1924f),2(6),December,n.p.RockofAgesMagazine(1925a),3(1),“TheRockofAgeschangeshands”,July:pp.8–10.RockofAgesMagazine(1925b),3(6),“Photosordesigns”:p.18.RockofAgesMagazine(1926a),“Morethan900,000readers”,3(8),February,[p.21].RockofAgesMagazine(1926b),“Yourhalfofahalf-madesale”,3(9),March:p.14.RockofAgesMagazine(1926c),3(12),“It’stheRockofAgesCorporation”,June:pp.3–4.RockofAgesMagazine(1926d),“RockofAgespainterhonoured”,4(2),August:p.13.RockofAgesMagazine(1926e),“Whobuysthememorial?”,4(2),August:p.14.RockofAgesMagazine(1926f),“Closinganotableseries”,4(5),November:p.34.RockofAgesMagazine(1926g),“Tohelpyousellmorememorialsin1927”,4(6),December:

pp.16–17.RockofAgesMagazine(1927a),“Artinadvertising”,February,4(8):pp.21–22.RockofAgesMagazine(1927b),“LinkingAmericanhistory”,4(8),February:p.30.RockofAgesMagazine(1927c),“Bothurbanandruralpopulations”,4(9),March:p.29.RockofAgesMagazine(1927d),“RockofAgesadvertisingislocal”,4(10),April:p.28.RockofAgesMagazine(1927e),“Howthepublicreacts”,5(3),September:p.25.Rotundo,B.(1992),“Monumentalbronze:ArepresentativeAmericancompany”,inR.E.Meyer

(Ed.),Cemeteries and Gravemarkers: Voices of American Culture, Utah State UniversityPress,Logan,UT:pp.264–291.

Schwartz,E.(1965),BreakthroughAdvertising,Prentice-Hall,NewYork.Sivulka, J. (1998), Soap, Sex, and Cigarettes: A Cultural History of American Advertising.

Belmont,CA:Wadsworth.Stott,A.(2008),PioneerCemeteries:SculptureGardensoftheOldWest,UniversityofNebraska

Press,Lincoln,NE,andLondon.VermontMarble(1927),“Nationaladvertisinginfullcolor”,2(4),February,n.p.Vos,T.(2013),“Explainingtheoriginsoftheadvertisingagency”,AmericanJournalism,30(4):

pp.450–472.Watkins,Julian(1949),The100GreatestAdvertisements(MoorePublishing).Wishart,C.(1911),“AddressofChas.H.Wishart”,TheReporter,February:p.9.

2Themarketingofasiege

Leningradvs.Sarajevo–memorializingdeathanddespair

BrentMcKenzieandMaryClaireBass

Introduction

A growing area of tourism interest has focused on the field of Dark Tourism, or researchexaminingthedesireforpeopletovisitsitesofdeathandthemacabre.Althoughresearchonthis topic is not new, there exists a need to better understand how to compare the“performance” of the resulting museums and memorials that have been established tocommemorate thesesites.For instance,previousresearchhasstudiedmuseumsthat focusedon specific forms of death, such as the Holocaust and genocide museums, while othersexamineddeathatbattlefieldsites,aswellasprisons.Acommonalityofpreviousstudieshasbeentobetterunderstandthesupplyanddemandforsuchsites,particularlywhyformalizedsites exist and why people choose to visit them. What appears to be missing from theliterature iscriticalexaminationof thewaysofmeasuring thesuccessof themarketingandcommercializationofsuchsites.

Inordertoaddressthegapinknowledge,thischapterwishestoextendtheunderstandingofhowdarktourismsitesaremarketed.Thisexaminationistakenfromtwoperspectives.Thefirst is to examine a specific type ofmemorializing, one that centres on the concept of thesiegeof a city.Althougha siegehas adirectmilitary connectionanddirective, a siege alsoincludes a greater emphasis on the impact upon the citizens and society in which thesemilitaryandpoliticalactionsoccurred.Inotherwords, inadditionaltothemilitarydeaths,asiegealso includesciviliandeaths,deaths thatmayormaynot resultdirectly fromphysicalconflict,butalsostarvation,exposuretotheelements,etc.

The second perspective is to better understand how the military and civilian deathsresultingfromasiegeareemphasizedorminimizedforpoliticalandeconomicgainbywayofattractions,museums,andotherrevenue-generatingactivities.Thusthisresearchtakesacase

studyapproachtocompareandcontrasthowtwocitieswithsimilaritiesintermsofdeathanddespairinthetwentiethcentury,bywayoflivingthroughasiege.Respectively,thesiegesareLeningrad(SaintPetersburg) inthethenSovietUnion,nowRussia, in1941–1944(872days),and Sarajevo, in Bosnia and Herzegovina (previously part of Yugoslavia) from 1992–1996(1,425days).Theresearchexamineshowthesecitieshave“succeeded”inthecommercializingofsuchhorrificevents.

Toexaminethisquestion,multiplemethodsareemployed.Thefirsttakesasecondarydataapproach by examining themajormarketing literature related to how to best evaluate theperformance,botheconomicandpolitical,ofsitesofdeathanddespair.Thesecondplacesthetwo sieges within a dark tourism framework under the guise of the authenticity of theattractions as they relate to the siege. The final method presents the finding of personalinterviews conducted by one of the authors with knowledge experts of this topic in SaintPetersburg(MonumenttotheHeroicDefendersofLeningrad)andSarajevo(survivorof thesiege). These findings are linked with the research literature to develop a greaterunderstandingofhowtobestmeasurethecommercializationofsuchsites.Thisstudyhelpstoadvance the understanding of a growing field of business, the consumption of death, withongoingpoliticalandsocietaldebateastotheappropriatenessofsuchsites.

Background–theSiegeofLeningradandtheSiegeofSarajevo

Asiegeisdefinedasamilitaryoperationinwhichenemyforcessurroundatownorbuilding,cutting off essential supplies,with the aim of compelling those inside to surrender (Oxford2014). The history and details of a siege must first be understood before the methods ofpackaging and placement on the scale of darkness can be analysed (Stone 2006). Thebackgroundof these sieges is first discussed toprovide anoverviewof the root causes andplayersofthewar,andthewayinwhichthesiegewaslifted.1

TheLeningradSiege lasted900days, startingonSeptember8,1941. It is rememberedbythe city as a “period full of suffering and heroism” (City of St. Petersburg 2014). NaziGermany’sgoalwhenattackingLeningradwastoeliminatethepopulationofandtakecontrolofthecity.TherootpurposeofobtainingcontrolofLeningradwasformilitaristicgains.ThecityhadalargeamountofartillerycampsthattheNaziscouldusetotheiradvantage,andtheNazis,with theassistanceofFinnish troops, encircled thecity to isolate communicationandstarve the inhabitants of the city todeath.TheLeningradNavogord strategic offensive anddefensive,alsoknownastheRedArmy,protectedandfoughttopreventthecityfromfallingtotheenemy.Estimatessuggest that therewereover600,000fatalitiesdirectlyattributedtothesiege.Inordertostaveoffstarvation,strictrationsoffoodthatwouldequateto125grams

ofbreadper personperdaywere required (SiegeofLeningrad 2014).Ultimately, the siegewasbrokenonJanuary27,1944,whentheRedArmysuccessfullyfoughtofftheNazis.Thus,from a strategic standpoint, the City of Leningrad was victorious in outlasting the Nazis’militaryaimsofthesiege.

Incontrast,theSiegeofSarajevoismostoftenrememberedasasiteofconflictandtragedy.WiththedeathofMarshallJosipTitoin1980,thesocialistleaderofYugoslavia,thesubsequenttwodecadessawthebreakupofYugoslaviaintoanumberofindependentnations.Theregionof Bosnia and Herzegovina declared their independence in 1992, from Yugoslavia. Almostimmediatelyafter thisdeclarationa siegewas imposed firstby theYugoslavPeople’sarmy,whichwasmadeupofSerbian-Croatian forces,and thenby theArmyofRepublikaSrpskawhosesoldierswerepredominantlyBosnianSerbs.Intotal,thesiegelastedfromApril5,1992,untilFebruary29,1996.At1,425days,thesiegeofSarajevolastedjustover1.5timeslongerthanthesiegeofLeningrad.ThestrategybythemainlyethnicSerbianforces,mirroredthatofLeningradinthattheaimwastoisolatethecityfromallcommunication,andaccesstofood,withtheaddedperilofconstantsnipers,duetotherelativeproximityofthesiegelinetothecity,firingatthosewhowouldventureintothestreets.

Theresultwasatotalof13,952casualties,11,541ofwhichwereSarajevocivilians.Unlikethemilitary end to the siege of Leningrad, the siege of Sarajevo cease-firewas a result ofbrokered agreement, officially known as the General Framework Agreement for Peace inBosnia and Herzegovina, but commonly referred to as the Dayton Accords led byinternational community, and also led by the government of President Bill Clinton of theUnited States (Palmer and Posa 1999). The result was newly negotiated territories on theconditions that the Serbian forces would surrender Sarajevo (Šarcevic 2008). As noted byŠarcevic (2008), there has been a continued question as towhat degree this ethnic conflictcontinuestochallengeSarajevotothisday.

ThemarketingoftheSiegesofLeningradandSarajevo

Asnoted,LeningradandSarajevoarebothcities thatwere the focusofmilitarysieges thatcausedmasscasualties,primarilycivilian.Bothcities though,arearguablybetterknown forothereventsandattractions.Leningrad, formerly,andcurrently,knownasSaintPetersburg,wasfoundedbyCzarPetertheGreatandishometomanyworldfamousmuseumssuchasthe Hermitage and the Winter Palace, while Sarajevo was the site of the assassination ofArchdukeFranzFerdinand (a cited contributing factor to the start ofWorldWar I) and the1984WinterOlympics.Forthisstudyit is theirsharedhistoryasbeingsubjectedtothetwomostwellknownsiegesofthetwentiethcenturythatisofinterest.

Fromamarketing perspective, the sieges are remembered and thememorials,materials,and ephemera related to the sieges have been packaged as dark tourism sites in differentways.ThesiegeofLeningradhasbeenpositionedasatouristattraction,withtheprimarygoalof focusingon theheroes thatdefendedand fought toprotect thecity fromNaziGermany.Thishasbeenaccomplishedbycommemoratingthestrengthsof thecitizensof thecity,andextensivedocumentationandexhibits related topreserving thememoryof their role in theultimateliftingofthesiege.

Alternatively,thesiegeofSarajevohasbeenpackagedandrememberedasasiteofconflictbetweendifferentethnicgroups,butmoretellingly,itisthepainandsufferingthatcanstillbefeltbythepeopleofthecitythatisthefocusofitsexistenceasasiteofdarktourism(Burke2011).Thiscanbepartiallyattributedtothefactthat inSarajevothreeethnicgroups,Serbs,Croats,andBozniaks,influencedthestartofthewar,andthesesamegroupscontinuetoliveincloseproximitytooneanotherinSarajevotothisday.Whatis interestingtonoteishowthetwocitiescouldenduresuchsimilarmilitarybasedatrocitiesandbepresentedtotouristsinintenselydifferentways.Furthermore,thesuccessofpackagingandcommodificationofbothsiteshasinfluencedtheirsuccessasdarktourismattractions.

Thescopeandframeworkofdarktourism

Onewayinwhichtobetterunderstandtherolethatthesiegesplayintouristrelatedsitesinthesetwocities, isbywayofdarktourismcategorization. It is important tograspthatdarktourismiscertainlynotthesoleformoftourisminLeningradandSarajevo,butratherthatbytakingadarktourismperspectivethereistheopportunitytoutilizea“siege”asanotherwaytoadvancetheunderstandingoftherealmofdarktourismresearch.

AsnotedinStoneandSharpley(2008),darktourismisdefinedasvisiting“sites,attractionsor events linked inonewayor anotherwithdeath, suffering, violenceordisaster” (p. 574).Traveltodarksitesisnotnew,butinmanysocieties,visitingsitesassociatedwithdeathis,andhasbeenaconsiderablepartofthetouristexperience;thiscanbeseenwiththeexistenceofpilgrimage,oneof theearliest formsof travel.However, thecommercialmarketingof suchlocationstoencouragetouristvisitationsisjustlydebated.ThetermitselfiscreditedtoLennonand Foley (2000),which itself has built from the term “thanatourism” (Seaton 1996) or thestudy of tourism related to death. Sites of dark tourism can be at the actual location thattragedy occurred, or a site that commemorates deaths that have occurred somewhere else(Wight2006).

According to Dr. Philip Stone, founder of the Institute for Dark Tourism Research(http://dark-tourism.org.uk/),darktourismsitescanbeclassifiedbasedonarelativescalefrom

“darkness” to “lightness”.There are six levels in this scale and it incorporates the followingfactors: thepurposeof thesite;proximitytothetragedy; levelof tourist infrastructure: timesincetheevent:andmannerofremembranceusedatthedarktourismsite(Stone2006).Thedarkestsite’ssolepurposeistomemorializeandeducate,incomparisontolightersiteswhoseprimarygoalistoentertain(Stone2006).Furthermore,thedarkestsitesareoftenconsideredthemost authentic as they are located at the actual sites of death,while lighter sites focusmoreonbeingatouristattractionwithdeathbeingthefeaturethatismarketed.

Authenticityanddarktourism

Although of the same ilk as Stone, the researchers Heuermann and Chhabra (2014) havefocusedonthescopeoftheauthenticityofthedarktourismsite.Therehasbeenagrowthinresearchonauthenticityandheritageintourism(Chhabra,Healy,andStills2003)asthereisagrowing interest by tourists seeking an authentic experience.Authenticity for the tourist isachievedwhentheattraction,orsite,isasrealisticaspossible.Conveyingauthenticityisoftenachieved by providing the visitor with original buildings, artefacts, and sites where actualeventsrelatedtodeathoccurred(Apostolakis2003).TheresearchofHeuermannandChhabra(2014)categorizedthedifferenttypesofauthenticityasitrelatestotourisminfiveways.Thefirstclassificationisthatofanobjectivistsite.Thesesitesrelyonthesite’sactualheritagewithlow tourism infrastructure (Chhabbra 2010). The second level of authenticity is theconstructivist site. These sites have a higher tourism infrastructure and are packaged andstylizedtoappealtothegeneralpublic(HeuermannandChhabbra2014).

The third level of authenticity is called a negotiation site, which represents a balancebetweenobjectivist simplicity and constructivist infrastructure authenticity (Chhabbra 2010).Thefourthlevelofauthenticityiscalledanexistentialistsiteandthesesitesfocusonprovidingauniformfront,aimedtoillicitcertainemotionalresponsesandaresultingstateofmindforthe tourist viewing it. Finally, the last level of authenticity is named theoplacity. Thisclassification represents a balance between the emotional aspect of existentialism and thesimplicity of an objectivist site (Chhabbra 2010). As thework of Heuermann and Chhabra(2014) represents a relatively unexplored framework for analysing different types of darktourismsites,onehastheabilitytoclassifythedifferentsiege-relatedtouristsitesofLeningradandSarajevowithinthisscaleofauthenticity.

AuthenticityandtheSiegeofLeningradandtheSiegeof

Sarajevo

The official touristwebsite of both these cities alongwith tourism socialmedia siteswereexaminedtoanalysethewaythecitiesandtouristattractionsarepackagedtoattracttourists.Thewaythesedarktourismsitesarepackagedisderivedfromthetourismwebsiteofthecityortheindividualwebpageofthesiteitself.Thepackagingperspectivewasextractedfromthewaythecityorthesitecommunicatesthestoryofthesiege.Touristexperiences,bywayofweb site postings, were used to measure the “success” of the dark tourism site and wereanalysed by using reviews from the site “TripAdvisor” (TripAdvisor.ca) to find commonthemes inpositive reviewsandpoor reviews.Thisanalysis thusprovidesdata toalignwithChhabbra’s (2010) levels of authenticity. The analysis resulted in the classification of darktourism sites into the two categories of authenticity labelled negotiated authenticity, andtheoplacityauthenticity.

Negotiatedauthenticity

Thefirstsitescomparedandcontrastedaretwodifferentmuseumsites ineachcitythatarerelated to the sieges. They are dark tourism sites that have a negotiated authenticity. InLeningrad,TheStateMemorialMuseumofLeningradDefenseBlockadecommemoratesthehistory of the citizens, defenders, and offensive soldiers who lived and fought through thesiege (CityofSt.Petersburg2014).St.Petersburg’spride in theirvictoriousbattle is seen intheirdescriptionofthememorialmuseum,“Thesacrificeandtheextraordinaryenduranceofthesurvivorsisetchedontheconscienceofthecity,asourceofimmenseprideandprofoundsorrow” (City of St. Petersburg 2014). Common themes among reviews by visitors to thisattractionstatedthatithadalargeemotionaleffectonthem,andthatitwasacompellingsitethatdidnotsugarcoattheeventsduringthisperiodinordertopleaseawideraudience.

ArelatedsiteinSarajevowastheCityHall,whichwasdestroyedduringthesiegeandonlyrecentlyre-opened.Insidethebuildingoneseesthebulletsshotintothewallduringthesiege.TheSerbforcesfrequentlyshelledthebuildingthroughoutthesiege.TheofficialtouristsiteofSarajevodoesnotdefineitsrelevancetothesiege,butmerelyonlysaysitwasdamagedwhenthecitywasundersiege(CityofSarajevo2003).Reviewerscommonlystatedthough,thattheethnicnatureoftheconflictisclearlyvisiblewhenvisitingtheCityHall.

Takentogether,bothofthesesiteshavesimilarmemorialandeducationalpurposesforlifeduring the sieges, but their packaging differs. Sarajevo would be relatively darker thanLeningrad from the objectivist authenticity perspective as it is more dominant in thenegotiatedauthenticity,duetotheremainingshelldamageatthesite.Sarajevo’smaintourist

sitedoesnotmarketCityHallasasiteofprideandresilience,asisthecaseofLeningrad’s,butmerelyidentifiesitforpotentialvisitorsasabuildingdamagedduringthewar.

Asecondsetofdarktourismsites,whichwouldbeclassifiedasdarkrestingplaces,alsofallwithin the category of negotiated authenticity. The purpose of the Monument to HeroicDefendersofLeningrad (discussed ingreaterdetailbelow)was tocommemorate theheroicefforts of civilians and soldiers of the Leningrad Siege (City of St. Petersburg 2014). Therelated “Eternal Flame” in Sarajevo, is a memorial to all the citizens lost in the siege.Reviewersfoundthatthesitemadeapowerfulstatementabouttheconflict inthepast,andnow is apopular spot filledwith importanthistory.These siteswouldbe identified asdarkrestingplacesbecause theyaresites thathonour thedead throughmemorial.Butbothsitesarealso“negotiated”,becausetheyaretruememorialsites,buthavehadconstruction,suchasstatuesattheMonument,andthecreationofan“eternalflame”forthosewhoperishedduringthesiege.

Theoplacityauthenticity

Thesecondcategoryofauthenticity,intermsofdarktourismsitesinthesecities,wasplacedwiththerealmoftheoplacitlyauthenticity.Thereasonbeingwasthattheyprovideinsighttothe history of the siege and attempt to bring the stories of the siege to life by creating anexperience.InLeningrad,the“HistoursSiegeofLeningradBattlefield”(www.histours.ru)tourtakes tourists aroundLeningradand tells the storyofbattles,death, anddisasterduring thesiege. It also takes tourists to the road to life, which was Leningrad civilians only way oftransportinginartilleryandsuppliesduringthesiege.

ForSarajevo,TheSarajevoWarTunneltakesvisitorstoseethe(www.sarajevoinsider.com)only way for Sarajevo citizens to escape the city during the siege and the only way totransport food and supplies into the city during the siege. These sites could be classified asdarkerthanthoseoftheNegotiatedAuthenticitybecausetheyaresiteswhereactualdisasteranddeathoccurred.

Primarydatacollection

Asnoted,thesiegesofLeningradandSarajevocanbeplacedwithinexistingframeworksinterms of the authenticity of some of their dark tourism attractions. This placement andclassificationofsitesthatrelatetothesiegesofLeningradandSarajevoprovideinsightastotheir assignment within the field of dark tourism. To compliment these findings, primary

researchwasalsoexploredbasedoninterviewsconductedbyoneof theauthorswiththoseliving inthetworespectivecities.Withrespect to thesiegeofLeningrad, thecuratorof themost prominent dark tourist site of the siege of Leningrad, The Monument to the HeroicDefendersofLeningrad,wasinterviewed.ForSarajevo,duetotherelativerecentoccurrenceof the siege, an interviewwas conductedwith a citizen of Sarajevowho lived through thesiege.Thepurposeoftheinclusionofthistypeofdataforthisstudywastoprovideinsightsthatdirectlyrelatetopersonalinterpretationsoftherelativityoftherespectivesiegestodarktourism. For both cases a series of questions were asked with the stated aim of betterunderstandingthesiegesassitesofdarktourism.

As early as 1942 therewas a desire to create amemorial to the siege of Leningrad (orblockade as it is referred to in Russia). Since thewarwas still going on, thiswas deemedimpossible and itwas on the 30th anniversary of the end of the siege in 1972 that severalcompetitionstocreateamemorialcommenced.Theaimwastoworkwithartists,sculptors,andarchitectsonthecreationofsuchamemorial,andonMay9,1975(the30thanniversaryoftheendofWorldWarIIfortheSovietUnion)itwasdeterminedthatthesitewouldbeonamain street circle 9 km from the locationof the front line.The three selected to create thememorialwereanarchitect,asculptor,andanartist,whoallweredefendersofthecity.Theupper part of thememorialwas the first to open (see Figure2.1). Itwas to be the centralmonumentandmuseumaboutthesiege.Itwasalsothesightofannualeventsmemorializingthe siege.2 People place flowers, bow down in remembrance, hold concerts, and conductintellectualcompetitionsforchildrentolearnabouttheblockade.

Figure2.1MonumenttotheheroicdefendersofLeningrad(BrentMcKenzie).

Thememorial itself is specifically designed to not just housememorabilia andmaterialsaboutthesiege,butalsoasanartisticexpression.Therearemanysymbols.TheceilingdepictstheLeningradskyduringthewar,andthereare900lampssurroundingtheexhibits.The900represents thedaysof the siege, and theyaremade fromshell cartridges that fellupon thecity;thus“lightfromthedarknessoftheblockade”(seeFigure2.2).ThismemorialisatouristsiteforthoseoutsideoftheSaintPetersburgarea,andinternationaltourists,butitsrelevanceismostlyforthesurvivorsofthesiege,andtheirrelatives.

ThesecondinterviewwaswitharesidentofSarajevowholivedthroughboththeWaraswell as the siege, and in fact was injured by shell shrapnel in her apartment. What wasinterestingfromtheinterviewwasthefocusonlivingthroughtheperiodbycreatinganew“normal”orthecreationofadifferentreality.TheintervieweetalkedaboutcontinuingtogotoUniversity,studyforexams,etc.duringthesiege,butthatitwasveryhardtoknowwhatwas going on. Because of the lack of, or inconsistent access to, electricity, any news wasreceived by way of a car radio or the local newspaper, “Oslobodjenje” (Liberation) whichmanagedtopublishduringthefirsttwoyearsofthesiege.

Figure2.2“Shellcasing”lamps(BrentMcKenzie).

Aslifewasjustdaytoday,becauseoftheongoingshellingandconstantthreatofsnipers,therewasaneedtohide inclosetsandthe interiorofbuildings,andevenwhenthereweresome“nicemoments”suchasreceivingUNrationsandcleanwater,youcouldnotdwellonthem.TheintervieweeeventuallyescapedfromSarajevothroughtheaforementionedtunnelto the airport, and made her way to relatives who had previously escaped to Croatia.Althoughwhenmeeting peoplewhowant to talk about the siege, shehas awillingness toshare these types of stories, butmost touristswant to focus onmorewidely knowneventssuchastheassassinationofArchdukeFranzFerdinandin1914,andthe1984WinterOlympics.One additional dark tourism site of interestmentioned by the interviewee,was somethinggenerally only discovered once visitors had arrived in Sarajevo. These are the cemeteriesrelatedtothesiege.Therearemilitarycemeterieslocatedrightinthetown(seeFigure2.3),andpeopleoftenhadtoburytheirdeadwherevertheycouldbecauseoftheongoingconflict.

A final comment of interest was about the “awkward politics” that continue to exist inBosnia and Herzegovina. For many there is a belief the war is not completely over, thuschallengingthecreationofpermanentmemorialandsiege-relatedattractions.

Figure2.3Kovaci–Martyrs’memorialcemetery–Sarajevo(TamirMostarac–permissiongivenbyauthor).

Discussionandconclusions

Based on this analysis of major dark tourism sites in Leningrad (Saint Petersburg) andSarajevo,onecanconcludethat thesecitieshavepackagedthesiegesasmemorialanddarkconflictsitesthatfallwithinthescopeofdarktourism.ThroughthisanalysisandresearchitisevidentthatsitesinLeningradarebothpackagedandreceivedassitesofdarktourismwhereheroismoccurred. For Leningrad, there is pride in remembering the soldierswhodefendedand fought Nazi Germany to protect their city. This packaging can be attributed to astraightforwardremembranceoftheprotectionofthe“Motherland”fromforeignforces.Thesoldiers of Leningradwere additionally victorious in battle andwere able to fight off thisenemy. This fact can help us to better understand how tourism surrounding the siege inLeningradispackaged.

Incontrast,althoughmanyofthedarktourismsitesrelatedtothesiegeinSarajevoarealsopackagedandreceivedassitesofconflict, theyrepresentamore complicated interpretationand sense of remembrance. This result may be ascribed for those in Sarajevo as havinglingering feelingsof conflict, feelings that in comparison to those that survived the siegeofLeningrad,arelessunifying.ThissocialenvironmentasnotedbyMikhailova(2014),inBosniaand Herzegovina, has created a current state that is not at war, or at peace, but rathersomewhere inbetween.Unlike inLeningrad, the residentsofSarajevodidnotexperiencea

clear resolution, or sense of victory resulting from the siege, since theDaytonAccordwasimposedonthoseinvolved.

Consequently,itissuggestedthatintermsofdarktourism,Sarajevowouldbeviewedasa“darker”citythanSaintPetersburg(Leningrad)intermsofhowthesiegeisrememberedandmarketed. As noted, the level of objectivist authenticity is very high. The damage fromartillery attacks can still be seen throughout the city. The tragedy that occurred withinSarajevo is communicated into the way the sites are marketed and at the tourist sitesthemselves.Theproximityof the event topresentdayalso results indarker experiences incomparisontothetragediesinSarajevo,versusLeningrad,regardlessofthefactthepersonalatrocitiesinLeningradwereonamuchgranderscale.

Thusthepackagingstrategiesormarketingpracticesthatexisttodayareinfluencedbythewaythateachofthesiegeshasbeendepictedandthusremembered.Thehistoryandstoryoftherespectivewarscreatesasentimentwithineachcitythathadbeenbesieged.InLeningrad,the victorious action of the soldiers is communicated through tourist sites and can be seenthrough tourist feedback provided in online sites such as TripAdvisor. In contrast, touristfeedbackandcommentaryon these forumson thesiegeofSarajevo isoftenconflatedwiththewaritself.Thedevastationthatresultedfromthewarisoftenplacedwithinthecontextofmorewell-knowntourismsitesinSarajevo,suchasthelocationsofthe1984WinterOlympics.Fromthisanalysis,itappearsthattherootcausesandplayersinthesiege,combinedwiththeendingof thewar, can influencehowdark tourismsitesarecommunicatedand“packaged”intotourismexperiences.

Darktourism,asanidentifiableformoftourism,hasarelativelyshortperiodofexistence.Itcanbearguedthatbecauseoftheongoingdebateastotheexactnatureofwhatconstitutesdark tourism, it can be considered a fragile framework. It is suggested that one of thecontributions of this chapter is to continue to advance the understanding of dark tourism,throughacomparativestudyofanothersiteofdeathanddestruction,thesiege.Althoughnodefinitive conclusions about how the sieges of Sarajevo and Leningrad advance theunderstanding of the concept of dark tourism are suggested, by taking a comparativeapproach, does provide some key insights as to how a siege can bemarketed from a darktourism perspective. From a theoretical perspective, the comparative nature of this studyadvances the understanding of the role of dark tourism taxonomies and particularly for arelativelynewformofclassificationoftheroleofauthenticityanddarktourismasadvancedbyHeuermann and Chhabra (2014). Secondly, this research suggests that utilizing multipleresearchperspectives canadd to the confidence in the classificationofboth the categoryofdarktourism,aswellasthespecificsitesorattractionsthemselves.

Intermsofcontributiontopractice,thefindingsofthischaptercanbeusedbybothtourismattractionprovidersaswellasotheraffectedstakeholders suchasgovernmentalagencies intwoways.The first is beingable tobetter communicate thevalueof such sitesnotonly in

terms of historical perspectives, but also in terms of their impact on the tourism sectors inthesecitiestoday.Second,forthosechargedwithoperating,maintaining,andmarketingsuchsites, there is a greater understanding of taking amulti-message perspective on how thesesites can bemademore attractive not only to visitors, but to those directly and indirectlylinkedtothehistoryoftheeventsthatoccurred.Futureresearchshouldexaminethesesameissuesforothertypesofdarktourism,inothercountries.

Notes

1ForamorethoroughhistoryofthesiegeofLeningradonecanlookto“The900Days:TheSiegeofLeningrad”(Salisbury

1969).FormoredetailontheeventsofthesiegeofSarajevo,lookto“Sarajevoundersiege:AnthropologyinWartime”.(Ek

2009).

2TherearememorialeventseveryyearonSeptember8,1941,startofthesiege,theMay9endofwar,January27,theend

of the siege “Leningrad day of liberation” and February 23, the “Day ofDefenders ofOurMotherland” in honour of

militarypersonnel.

References

Apostolakis, A. (2003) “The convergence process in heritage tourism”, Annals of TourismResearch,30/4,pp.795–812.

Burke,S.(2011)“SarajevoRose”.Retrievedfromwww.theharvardadvocate.com.Chhabra, D. (2010) “Back to the Past: A sub-segment of Generations Y’s perceptions of

authenticity”,JournalofSustainableTourism,18/6,pp.793–809.Chhabra, D., Healy, R., and Sills, E. (2003). “Staged Authenticity and Heritage Tourism”,

AnnalsofTourismResearch,30/3,pp.702–719.CityofSarajevo(2014)“TourismAssociationofSarajevoCanton–TheCultureandHistory–

UniqueSpiritSpace”.Retrievedfromwww.sarajevo-tourism.com/sarajevo-through-history.

CityofSt.Petersburg(2014)“The900-daySiegeofLeningrad”.Retrievedfromwww.saint-petersburg.com/history/great-patriotic-war-and-siege-of-leningrad/.

Ek, I. (2009) Sarajevo Under Siege: Anthropology in Wartime, Philadelphia: University ofPennsylvaniaPress.

Heuermann,K., andChhabbra,K. (2014) “The darker side of dark tourism:An authenticityperspective”,TourismAnalysis,19,pp.213–225.

Lennon, J. and Foley,M. (2000)Dark Tourism: TheAttraction of Death andDisaster, NewYork:Continuum.

Mikhailova,A.(2014)“TheDarkestPageoftheHermitageMuseum’sHistory”.Retrievedfromhttp://sputniknews.com/in_depth/20141108/1014517833.html.

OxfordDictionary(2014)“Definitionofasiege”.Retrievedfromwww.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/siege.

Palmer, L. and Posa, C. (1999) “The best-laid plans: Implementation of the Dayton PeaceAccordsinthecourtroomandontheground”HarvardHumanRightsJournal,Spring,vol.12,pp.361–383.

Salisbury,H.(1969)The900Days:TheSiegeofLeningrad,NewYork:Harper&Row.Šarcevic,E.(2008)“BosnianInstituteNews:EthnicSegregationasaDesirableConstitutional

Position?”Retrievedfromwww.bosnia.org.uk/news/news_body.cfm?newsid=2528.Seaton, A.V. (1996) “Guided by the dark: From thanatopsis to thanatourism”, International

JournalofHeritageStudies,2/4,pp.234–244.TheSiegeofLeningrad(2014).Retrievedfromwww.historylearningsite.co.uk/world-war-

two/world-war-two-and-eastern-europe/the-siege-of-leningrad/.Stone.P.(2006)“Adarktourismspectrum:Towardsatypologyofdeathandmacabrerelated

tourist sites, attractions and exhibitions”, TOURISM: An Interdisciplinary InternationalJournal,54/2,pp.145–160.

Stone, P., and Sharpley, R. (2008) “Consuming dark tourism: A thanatological perspective”,AnnalsofTourismResearch,35/2,pp.574–595.

Wight, C. (2006) “Philosophical praxes in dark tourism: Controversy, contention, and theevolvingparadigm”,JournalofVacationMarketing,12,pp.119–129.

3Marketingdeaththrougheroticart

ChristinaWelch

This chapterwill explore the recent phenomenon of erotic coffin calendar art produced toadvertisefuneralcasketsmanufacturedbytheItaliancompanyCofaniFunebrisince2003,andthe Polish company Lindner since 2010. The calendars of both companies were developedespecially for promotion purposes and typically feature a company coffin and a scantily-dressed young woman in a sexually suggestive pose. The use of erotically posed youngwomenisnotunusualinadvertisingterms,andfrequentlysuchtacticsareusedtomakegoodsattractivetohetero-normativemen.Advertsforexpensivecars,tobacco,designerclothingandaftershavetypicallyintimatethatthemenwhopurchasetheproductswill increasetheirsexappeal(ReichertandLambert,2003).However,thecoffincalendarsasaformofmarketingdonotseemtoconformtothe‘sexsells’marketingploy;fewpeoplepurchasetheircoffinbeforedeath, and even fewer would find this purchase increases their sexual appeal, plus one issimplyneversexywhendead.

Thus, the question arises as to where calendars sit in terms of contemporary consumerculture.Inexploringthisissuethischapterexaminesthejuxtapositioninthesecalendarsofasymbolofdeath(acoffin)withasymboloffecundlife(ayoungwomaneroticallypresented)through the notion of iconicity. Messaris has described iconicity as a form of ‘persuasivecommunication’ thatstemsfromtheemotional responseelicitedbypresented images (1997,pp.viii–xv).Twotimeperiodsandgenresofrepresentationwillbeconsideredinrelationtoiconicityandtheuseofdeathto‘sell’amessage.

Thefirsttimeperiodofthischapterexplorestheartisticbackgroundto,andiconicityof,thecoffincalendarphotographsthroughproto-andearly-ReformationartworksproducedintheDeath and theMaidengenre (1495–1550). Itwill highlighthow the iconicity of theseEarlyModernartworkswasusedtoemphasizeconcernsovermortalityduringa timeofreligiouschangeinEurope(fromRomanCatholicismtoProtestantism),andthencompareandcontrastthis with current concerns over mortality during the present period of religious change inEurope (from a period of Christian domination in public life to increased institutionalsecularizationfromthelatetwentiethcenturyonwards).

Thesecondtimeperiodexaminesthe1960sonwardsinrelationtoVidal’snotionofdeath

anddesireincontemporaryculture,acultureshearguesisobsessedwithcarsandespeciallycar-crashes.DrawingontheconceptofFuturism,andtheworkofBauman,andBaudrillard,sheexaminesthe‘closeconnectionsbetweencarsandculture’,anddetailshowcarcrashescanbereadto‘recoveracertaindegreeofcontroloverdeath’(2012,pp.4,17)inaculturewhichislargely‘deathdenying’(Becker,1973).

Thischapterthenprovidesanoverviewofthecoffincalendarsthemselves,anexplorationofthetwodistinctwaysinwhichtheycanbecontextualized,beforeconcludingthatwhilstsexsellsmostthings,eveneroticismstrugglestomakedeathpalatable.Itisimportanttonotethatthe reading of the visual representations is based around Northern European society’shistoricalandcontemporaryhetero-normativeChristian-basedculture.Further,sexualizedandhighly eroticized representations of young woman signify life and the soft-fleshiness ofwomanhoodinitsmostfecundstate,juxtaposedwithimagesofdeath;whetheraskeleton,adecomposingbody,oracoffin(themodernsignifierofmortality),all,bydrawingontheworkofLefebvre(1991),canbereadascold,rigidandinherentlyphallic(Welch,2013,p.2).

Thefirstcompanytomarketfuneralcasketsthroughtheuseofscantily-cladyoungwomenposederoticallywithacompanycoffinwasCofaniFunebri.Their initial foraywas in20031

and featured six bi-monthly photographs of angels and coffins togetherwith life-affirmingpoeticcantos;fiveofthephotographswereofwomendressedasangels,andonefeaturedaman.Theimageswereallsoftfocusandmildlyerotic.Thecovershotofthe2003Calendar,which was entitled ‘Angels’ (sic),2 featured two bare-shouldered women in scarlet dresseslayingon a scarlet sheet strewnwithwhite lilies.With its birds-eyegaze, the viewer looksdownonthetwowomenintightfrockswithbareshoulders,andcleavageonshow;itisnotclear what the calendar is promoting. Althoughwhite lilies are often seen as a symbol ofdeath,thereareechoesofthebedofrosesscenefromthefilmAmericanBeauty(1999),whichjuxtaposes the pale skin of a naked young woman with the scarlet of roses.3 The hint ofsexuality continues throughout the calendar althougheachof the six imagesdoes includeacoffin.The five shots that featurewomen typically show them in skimpyclothingexposinglargeamountsofcleavage,oralotofleg(andoftenboth).May/Juneistheonlypoeticcantoto be explicit about death. ‘… It is life in quest of life in bodies that fear the grave’.November/Decemberisthepagethatfeaturesamalemodel;imagedasanangelthereislittleofhimasasexualbody(unlikethefemalemodels).Intermsofpublicity,thecalendarhintsatdeath but seems more intent on flaunting female sexuality. But whatever its intent thecalendargavethecompanypublicitywithworldwidesales(Anon2003).

The sexy-woman theme continued in the 2004 edition,4 which retained to bi-monthlyformat but used Italian for the typescript. The cover image foregrounded the torso of awoman in a skimpy white bikini posed beside a coffin with a metal crucifix on the lid.January/Februaryfeaturedawomendressedasaschoolgirlsittingonacoffin;thecoffinorderdetailsfeaturedonthisandeveryotherpage.March/Aprilshowedayoungwomandressedin

acompanyT-shirt intheactofundressing;shelooksdownatthecrucifixonacoffinwhilstherhandsholdthematerialofherT-shirtjustbelowherbreasts.May/Junefeaturedaslightlyolderwomancrouchedbesideacompanycoffinwholooksdirectlyatthecamera,heroutfitmakingthemostofhercleavage.Theremainingphotographsareinthesameveinandappeartoadvertisethewomenasmuch,ifnotmoreso,thanthecoffins;notablythemodelswerethewives,friends,and/orgirlfriends(WAGS)ofthecoffinmakers(Anon,2003;Anon,2009).

The 2005 Calendar5 shifted to a monthly format allowing for a cover shot and twelvephotographs; there was a return to English typescript that continues into the present. Thiseditionlargelydepictedmodelsengagedinaspectsofcoffinmanufacture.For instance,MissJuly is shown holdingwith a chisel sitting astride an elaborately carved coffin, she is shotwearingblack strappyheels, black bikini-style lingerie and anunbuttonedwhite shirt.MissAugust, insimilargarb,sitsontopofacoffinandusesapowersanderwithherrighthand,whilstherleftthumbishookedintothetopofherpanties,andMissDecember,inarevealingblack dress, drills holes into a coffin to fix a name-plaque in place.MissApril however, isshown ina crucifixionpose standingagainsta coffin.Shewears theunbuttonedwhite shirtandblack lingerieofhercompatriots,but standswithherarmsoutstretchedon the lidofacoffinwhich restsona trestle.Thecoffinactsas thecrosspieceof crucifixioncross, and thelightingofthescenegivesitephemeralfeel.ItisclearinthiseditionthattheCofaniFunebricalendars are designed to shock. By erotically posing scantily-clad young women in thecompanyofcoffins,thisfuneralcasketmanufacturingfirmisjuxtaposingsexanddeath,andisunafraid to use religious symbolism to add additional layers of meaning to its annualpromotionalmaterial.

The2006Calendar6hasaraunchylook,andthetypescriptandlightinggivetheimagesagothicfeel.Severalphotographsdepictawoman(orwomen)withchains(April,June),whilstothersshowthemodelsbycandlelight.AllthemodelsareWAGSandaredressedinlingerieofvaryingkinds;allareposedagainstacompanycoffin.By20077thereisaclearmoveawayfromtheWAGScalendar,toamoreprofessionallookingmarketingcampaign.Thecovershotto the 2007 Calendar notes a change in style by clearly stating that the photographsweretakenbyMaurizioMatteucci,afashionphotographerandco-ownerofthecompany.Bythisstagethecalendarshadgainedaninternationalcult-followingandwhilsttheireffectoncasketsaleswasnegligible,theyhadraisedtheinternationalprofileofthefirm(MatteucciinAnon,2007)

The2007Calendarwasalsoexplicit in itsconnectionwithdeath.Entitled ‘TheLast2LetYouDown’,thephotographsfeatured‘charmingundertakers’.Theseundertakerswereyoungwomendressed in ablack tophatwithblack lingerie (blackheels, blackhold-up stockings,andablackbraandbriefsset).Theshotsfeaturedacompanycoffin,thesameforeveryshot,and either one or two young woman in erotic poses. The 2008 Calendar8 reverted to theWAGSstyleofpresentation,withthemodelsbearinglessfleshandposedinlessovertlyerotic

positions;whereasDecember2007featuredtwoyoungwomenseeminglycaughtjustbeforealesbianencounter(onewomenlayontopofacoffinwhilstanotherbentoverher),the2008calendarmarked a brief return to the soft eroticism of the earlier editionswithwomen inskimpydressesleaningoncoffins.

The2009Calendar9pushedattheboundariesofcoffinmarketing.Thefirstcalendartobeshotoutdoors, every image in the2009edition featuredamodel incorsetryposedwith thesame casket; the side panel of the coffin engravedwith thehead and torso of the crucifiedChrist,hisarmsoutstretched,andtheheadtiltedslightlytotheright.Thecoverimageechoedthe April 2005 photograph, and played on crucifixion imagerywith themodel standing infrontofthecoffinwithherarmsoutstretched,thecoffinagainactedasthecrosspieceofthecrucifixion-cross. Jesus’outstretchedleftarmisvisibleonthecoffinbehindher,andthefivestagesofgriefmadefamousbyKübler-Ross(1969)aresuperimposedontotheimage;Denial,Depression,Acceptance,BargainingandAnger.Fourphotographstakethedeath,Christianityanderoticismmixfurther.10AprilandOctoberbothshowacorsetedwomanposedwiththeJesus coffin; Miss April sits on the coffin with her legs apart fondling her breasts, Jesus’outstretchedrighthandpointsuptohercrotch,andMissOctobersitswithherlegsapartsoJesus’ head is between her splayed legs. Both July and August show the models posedsuggestivelywith a processional cross, and this unorthodoxuse ofChristian symbolismhasmeantthatMatteuccihaskepttheseimagesforprivateviewingonly(availablebypurchase);it is not entirely clearhowever,why these images aredeemedmore controversial than theposed crucifixion-style shot on the front cover, or having a carving of the crucified Christpointingtowardsfemalegenitalia.11Unsurprisinglythough,therehasbeensomecontroversyaboutthisparticularcalendar(Gillies2011).

The2010Calendar12pushedtheeroticismoftheimageryfurtherstill,withaBondageandDomination (BD) theme.Amalemodelwas included in several of the photographs but hetypically took the role of a gravedigger. The femalemodelswore fetishwear, and severalwerechainedtocoffins.Therewasalsoan increase inscenesof twowomenengaged in,orabouttoengagein,BDactivitygivingthecalendaraSwingersClubedge.13Giventhesubjectmatter, the coffins often took a marginal role in the photographs. The 2011 Calendar14

included for the first time fully exposed naked breasts. Several shots echoed the previousyear’sfetishismthemewithblackvinylclothing,andsuggestionsofBD,althoughonemonth(December)hadabridaltheme.Thecoffinswereagainbarelyvisible.Indeed,theirroleasamere prop for glamour photography had become increasingly evident as the years hadprogressed.

The 2012 Calendar15 took themarginalization of the coffin to a new level, as it did notfeatureasinglecoffinthatthecompanysells.Titled‘LaPetiteMorte’,theFrencheuphemismfor an orgasm, each of the photographs showed a skeleton in a see-throughPerspex coffin

reactingtothesuggestiveactionsoffemalemodels.MissJanuaryticklestheskeleton’sgroinwithafeatherdusterandheappearstogiggle;itisevidenttheskeletonismeanttobemalefrom thehetero-normativityof theposed scenes.MissOctoberholdsa ridingcrop, and theskeleton (in an upright coffin) positions his hands over his crotch, mouth aghast in mockhorrorattheanticipatedwhipping.MissJulypleasuresherselfandtheskeletontriestoescapehiscoffin,whilstMissDecember,crouchedoverahorizontalPerspexcoffinsimilarlytouchingherself, incites the skeleton to similarly masturbate; grinning broadly his bony hands arepositionedwherehisgenitalswouldhavebeen.

Tenyearsafterthefirstcoffincalendar,the2013offeringgoesbacktoitsrootsandfeaturesangels.16Explicitinitsportrayalofsexanddeath,thiscalendarwascalled‘2013SexyCoffinCalendar’andfeaturedforthefirsttimeamodelofcolour;fiveshotsshowingaBlack-skinnedangelwithblackwings,andsevenshotsshowingCaucasianangelswithwhitewings.Therewerenopoeticcantosthistime,butthesofteroticismofthe2003Calendarwasevidentwithless flesh on show, and only a minimal use of BD props such as whips and chains. ThiscalendareffectivelycelebratedadecadeofCofaniFunebrimarketingdeaththroughtheuseoferoticart.

In2010anothercasketmanufacturerenteredthecoffincalendarmarket,LindnerofPoland.Lindner’scalendarwasadirectresponsetoCofaniFunebri,andfromthestarttheysoughttoout-dothecompetition;thedirectorofthePolishfirmstatedthat,‘inPolandwemanufacturethe best coffins and our girls are more beautiful, so why not do better than them?’(TVSpain.tv,2010).Lindner’scalendarswereinlargerformatandmoreglossy,andtheywentfora‘sortofHollywoodfeelwithadarkeredge’(LindnerinAnon201017).

The 2010Lindner Calendar18 featured twelve photographs of youngwomen in differentoutfits,allposedagainstacompanycoffin;a sexybride sittingonacoffin,a farmhand inacorsethay-balingagainstacoffin,agypsy inaskimpydresspushingacoffin into thesea–eachmonthhada story theme. Itwasclear that the calendarwasadvertisingboth sexanddeath, although somemonths pushed Freud’s twin eros/thanatos (1924; 1962) theme to thelimitswith the femalemodel holding aweapon;MissApril in a camouflage design bikini,strappyhighheelsandaarmy-stylepeakedcap, lieson topofacoffinholdinga rifle;MissJuneinaredtartanbikiniholdsapistolassheleansagainstacoffin:MissOctoberissatonacoffindressedinaskimpyblackone-piecerestingherarmonalargesword,andMissAuguststandsinahaymeadowwearingablackbasqueholdingascytheinaGrimReaperpose.

The2011Calendar19hada1930sHollywoodgangster-movietheme;Miss Januarytries tostopashooting;MissMarchdefendsherstashofwhiskey;Mayshowstwowomenatacardtable,andMissAugustphotographsacrimescene.Againforegroundingandjuxtaposingerosandthanatos,thebackcoverphotographshowsacoupleseeminglyhavingsexonacoffin;awomanisperchedonanature-themedfuneralcasket,onestockingedlegiswrappedaroundaman; her arms hold his waist and neck. The front cover image meanwhile shows just a

woman’sbottominafrillythong,herhandsarebehindherbackandinonehandsheholdsapistol,whilstwrappedaroundherwristisapearlbraceletwithasmallcoffinhangingoffit.

The 2012 Calendar20 coincidedwith the footballWorld Cup and eachmonth featured anakedyoungwomanbody-paintedinoutfitsthatspokeofthecompetingnations;acompanycoffinwasapropineveryshot.February’smodelworeabear-skinhatandwasbody-paintedinaskimpyrepresentationofaBuckinghamPalaceguard(England);May’smodelwasbody-painted as Marilyn Monroe (USA); and September featured a model body-painted in thecolorsof Israel’s flag.Thiscalendarcouldbeseen toecho thewordsofEngland footballinglegendBill Shankley,who, in 1981, stated that footballwas ‘amatter of life and death’ (inWilson,2012:173).

The2013Calendar21 tookasurrealist turn,focusingonfantasyphoto-shoppedlandscapes.Several images had Biblical themes such as February depicting a (Jacobs) ladder of coffinsreachingintothesky,MarchechoingtheFallnarrativewithasnakewrappedaroundanakedwoman,andSeptember’simagebeingreminiscentoftheTowerofBabel;unsurprisinglythePolishChurch spokeout (Student, 2012).November’s scenehadavampiric edge showingawoman removing the heart fromhermale victim, and in several images, the line betweenfecundwomanas life,andasa symbolof lifeanddeath,wasblurred,as itwas in the2010Calendarwiththeweaponry.

ThecalendarsfrombothCofaniFunebriandLindnerhaveclearlybeenproducedtomarketfuneralcasketsthroughtheuseof‘sexsells’promotion;youngwomenineroticclothingandposes making the coffins appealing to a male hetero-normative audience. However, thewomenactingasa symbolof fecund lifeandsex, stand incontrast to the funeralcaskets,asignifierofdeath.Assuch,thecalendarscanbeseentostandasrecentadditionstothelongartistictraditionofrepresentationsofdeath(Llewellyn,1991;Guthke,1999;dePascale,2007;Townsend,2008).However,theuseofthecoffinasanallegoryfordeathresonateswithmanydeath studies theorists, such asWalter (1991; 1994),Bauman (1992), andDavies (2002),whoargued that contemporary Western society is increasingly one where death is hidden ordenied. Incontrast,materiality,commercialization,secularization,andthequest toholdontoyouthandfecundityforaslongaspossible,areallaspectsofasocietythattriestoholdontolifeand living.Notably,bothPolandand Italy,where thecoffincalendarsareproduced,aretraditionallyRomanCatholic countriesundergoingadecline in the institutionalauthorityoftheChurch(HalmanandDrauland,2006).Thishasresultedinachangeinreligiousobservancewith young Poles and Italiansmoving away from traditional religious practices and beliefs(Sansonetti, 2009, p. 138; Arnold, 2012, p. 204), and both countries reflecting the generalmodernpan-Europeanuncertaintyonwhathappensafterdeath(IpsosMori,2011).

Inordertoexplorethecoffincalendarsasaresponsetodramaticshiftsinsociety,andasacontinuation of death represented in art, an examination of proto- and early-Reformation(hereinproto/earlyReformation)DeathandtheMaiden(D&M)artworksispertinent.During

thisperiod, aspreviouslynoted,RomanCatholicismwasbeingchallengedbyProtestantismand nowhere was the battleground more contested than in death and after-life beliefs. InD&Mimages,erotic representationsofwomenasobjectsof sexualandworldlydesire (erosandvanitasrespectively)werejuxtaposedwithasignifierofdeath(thanatos);although,giventhisperiodofhistorypredatesthecommonuseofcoffins,deathhereissymbolizedbyabodyoraskeleton.

Thepotent links inWesternculturebetween thanatos (mortality)anderos (sexual desire)are long standing, andhave their roots in theBiblical Fall narrative, but rarely, if ever, haseroticabeenusedtoselldeathdespitebothbeingpotentthemesinartworksthroughouttheages.Perhapstheclosestformofpromotingtheimportanceofthinkingaboutdeath(MementoMori)viaerotic imagerydates to theproto/earlyReformation-eraandagroupofNorthernEuropeanartistswhodevelopedtheDeathandtheMaidenartisticgenre.Here,amaiden,thesignifier of this-world and material sensuality (vanitas), and especially the sin ofconcupiscence(lustfuldesire),stoodinstarkcontrasttothesymbolofdeathintheformoftheGrim Reaper. The juxtaposition of the two characters potently informed the early-Modernviewerthatafocusonthepleasuresofthis-life,wouldlikelyleadtoamostunpleasantafter-life. This form of representation acted as a Memento Mori highlighting that death wasinevitableandone’spost-mortemplaceofeternalresidencewasdecidedonhowonechosetoleadtheirmortallife(Welch,2013,p.11).

ReligiongroundedtheDeathandtheMaidenvisualtrope,withthekeyartistsusingtheirimageryto,ineffect,publicizetheProtestantnotionthatatdeatheachpersonaccountedfortheir own sins. Protestantism categorically removed the Roman Catholic post-mortemsafeguardofPurgatory.InPurgatory,oneaccountedforonesownsins,butprayerscouldbesaid for the dead-in-purgatory by the living to help alleviate the pain of purgation, andindulgencespurchasedbeforedeathcould speedup theprocessbywhichamortal cleansedtheir soul before unification with God. Although the notion of Original Sin (the sin ofdisobedienceandconcomitantsexualawarenessintheFallnarrative)wasimportantinRomanCatholicism, itcametoincreasingprominenceinProtestanttheology,andit is thattheologythatpermeatedtheproto/earlyReformationD&Martworks.

Initiated byAlbrechtDürer, the proto/earlyReformationD&M images typically featureddeathasapredatorymalewiththemaidensomewhatambiguousabouthissexualadvances.InhisYoungWomanattackedbyDeath;orTheRavisher(1495)22ayoungwomanturnsawayfromherravisher(awildlookingnakedman),yetherrighthandlieslightlyonhisrightarm,andshesitsperchedonhislapwithherlegswideapart.ThemaidenmaynotembraceDeathadvancesbutshe isnotdenyinghimeither.ThispiecebyDürer’s isnotableasDeath isnotonly personified in the engraving, but named in the title. Prior to this period, typicalrepresentations of death were of anonymous, featureless, ungendered skeletons or bodyshapes, such as those in the Three-Living/Three-Dead images, and Dance of Deathmurals

(Welch,2013,p.4).TheshiftinrepresentationfromananonymousimageofdeathtoDeathpersonifiedreflects

the increasing importance of Augustinian theology in proto/early Reformation thought.Augustine(354–430ce)inhisworkCityofGod(14:21),claimedthatbeforetheFallofAdamand Eve from the Garden of Eden, sexual intercourse would have occurred withoutconcupiscence,andthereforeEve,despitebearingchildrentoAdam,wouldhaveremainedavirgin;lustfulsexratherthanprocreativesexwasthereforesinful.HealsoarguedthatthesinofdisobediencecamefromeatingthefruitofTheTreeofKnowledgeofGoodandEvil,andthatitwasthissinthatbroughtlustanddeathtothehumancondition.HenotedthatGenesis3:17–19 situates Adam as entirely responsible for bringing death into the world (13:23)23;throughhisdisobedience,we return todust after a lifeof toil.Meanwhile,AugustinenotedthatbiblicallyEvewaslinkedwithlustassheencouragedAdamtoeatof,andgiveintohisdesire for, the forbidden fruit; for this sin she was punished with painful childbirth andconcupiscence for her husband (Gen 3:16). Thus, in the proto/early Reformation, a dualisticmodeofthinkingequatedAdamasmalewithdeath,andEveasfemalewithlifeandlust.

In Europe at this time, women were typically perceived as signifiers of wantoning, ofpleasure, and the ‘unruly’ (Purkiss, 1992, p. 74, 78); strongly associatedwith concupiscence,femalesweregenerallyregardedasdangerous.Luther(commonlyconsideredthefatheroftheReformation) firmlybelievingonly sexwithinmarriagewasblessed (1995, vol. 1: 134), anynon-maritalsex(includinghomosexualrelations)wasdeemeddepraved,andthereforebadforone’ssoul,familyandhonor(1966,vol.44:8).24Further,whilstsexualdesirewasnaturalandGod-given (Gen 1:28), concupiscence was sinful, and unmarried women, as autonomousfemales,were considered especially dangerous by those ofReformist persuasions (Wiesner-Hanks, 2000, p. 64). This understanding of women is clear in two proto/early Reformationartworks.

In 1517 Niklaus Manuel (Deutsch) (c. 1484–1530) engravedDer Tod und Das Mädchen(Death and the Maiden)25 which powerfully clarifies his feelings toward worldliness, andpedagogically situates the vanity of beauty and the sin of lust.Death (as a rotting body) isdepictedravishingayoungwoman;heiskissingthemaiden,hishandholdingupherbaroque-styledresstodisplayherbarelegsandtheplayfulgarter-ribbonsatherknees,shemeanwhileisholdinghisdecomposinghandathergenitals.Theimageisanallegory;humanitymayhaveitstemptingearthlypleasures,butatdeathwemusteachaccountforoursinsbeforeGod.Thistheme is echoed in an engraving byHans Sebald Beham entitledThree NudeWomen andDeath(1546–1550),26Death isdepictedasa leeringskeletonstaringwide-eyedataritualoffemale mutual masturbation. Although skeletal, Death is clearly male and the engravingshows thecircleof life (youth,maturity,oldageanddeath),whilstdidactically representingwomenassignifiersofunnaturalfleshlydesire.

TheengravingsofNiklausManuelandSebamBehaminformvisually,thatitistotheafter-

life,notthis-life,thatoneshouldturnone’sattentions.Thattheimagesaresopornographicisdeliberate.TheypotentlyresonatewithMessaris’notionoficonicity,anartistictropedesignedtostimulate the ‘lustful thoughts[they]supposedly[were] intended todiscourage’ (Sekules,2001,p.170).Onlybyengagingtheviewerinbodyandmind,couldthesoultakeprecedenceandensurethat itwasheavenly,notearthly,pleasures,whichwerethecenterofone’s livedexperience.

Thus,theD&Mimageryoftheproto/early-Reformationsoughttoforegroundtheafter-lifebyutilizing the fecundmaidenasanegativesymbolof this-life,with its immoralsensuality(eros),materiality(vanitas),andconcupiscence,withDeathactingasapotentsignifierofone’sacceptedmortality.However,thecoffincalendarsincontrastforegroundthis:life,utilizingthemaiden as a positive symbol of earthly sensuality, materiality and concupiscence. Whereproto/early Reformation society discouraged vanitas, contemporary society embraced it.Death now signified by a coffin, the current acceptable signifier of one’s unacceptablemortalityis justaprop,abackgroundtophysicalpleasuresofthis-life.AlthoughbothD&Mimagesexploiticonicity,whereoncetheyremindedtheviewertobecarefulofthepleasuresofthis-lifeasaneternalafter-lifebeckoned,todaythepleasuresofthis-lifearecelebrated,foraspartoftheoutcomeofsecularization,religiousnotionsoftheafter-lifeholdlesssway.

However, the coffin calendars can also be explored through the lens of Futurism. Vidalnotesthat‘Futuristvisionswerequiteclosetoourcontemporaryrealitywhenitcomestotheclose connection between cars and culture’ (2013, p. 4). This has certainly been the case interms of advertising with, since the 1960s, a notable rise in the linking of sexuality anddesirabilitywithautomobiles (LewisandGoldstein,1983;Bayley,1986;Stevenson,2004).AsBishopnotes:

Weareallfamiliarwithscantilycladwomeninadsfor…cars…forthemostparttheseadsareaimedatstraightmalesandthe stereotypical sexywoman– sexy, that is, in theminds and fantasies of straightmales…hugebreasts, cladonly in abikiniandposedinasexuallysuggestivefashion.

(2012,p.130)

Thelinkbetweenthemarketingofcarswithsex,andthemarketingoffuneralcasketswithsex is evident in both the Cofani Funebri and Lindner calendars. However, a deeperconnection between the calendars and contemporary culture is evident through Futurism’snotion‘toconqueranddominatenature’,andthroughthemovementsrejectionofemotionalsentimentality and otherworldliness (Vidal, 2013, p. 13).Death is part of nature, and just asFuturism sought to conquer, if not death itself, then the fear of death, by an appeals totechnology,theindustrial,andyouth,thesecalendarsdolikewise.AsWalterhasnoted,withthe advent ofmodern culture, death has become increasingly professionalized (1994, p. 48).Funeral directors have largely taken over from priests as figures of authority for all thingsdeathrelated,and,asaconsequence,deathhasbecomeincreasingprivatizedandindustrialized.

The otherworldliness of clerical rites for the dead, and the emotional sentimentality of apersonalcontactwiththedeceased,havetypicallybeenreplacedbybureaucraticformalities,andacoffinreplacingthecorpseasthefocusofattention.DeathinmoderntimeshasbecomeimbuedwiththetenetsofFuturism.

VidaldrawsontwospecifictheoriststoarguethatFuturismhasallowedmodernsociety‘torecoveracertaindegreeofcontroloverdeath’ (2013,p.17).ShedrawsonBauman’s (1992)notionthatculturalcreativityisaforcedrivenbytheknowledgethathumanityismortal,andincreatingendlessly,lifebecomesa‘stringofevanescentmomentswherenothinglasts’(Vidal,2013p.164).Withnothingimmortal,themortalhasnomeaning,andthusforBauman,whilstwe are ‘busy making life … preserv[ing] the past and creat[ing] the future’, we are busydenying death (Bauman, 1992, p. 170). For Bauman, death is defied through the ‘counter-mnemotechnic…ofculture’ (1992,p.31)withcultureactingasadevicetoforgetmortality.Baudrillardtoo,Vidalnotes,seesanincreasingdenialofdeathinmodernculture,althoughhetakesadifferentperspective (2013,p.164).Rather thanforgettingdeathbycreatingculture,Baudrillardarguesthatassocietyhasmovedawayfromsymbolicceremonies,deathbecomesdevoidofmeaning,ananomaly,evenanabnormality(1993,p.126).Asdeathanddyingritualshave become disconnected from their traditional religious roots (Walter, 1994, p. 48), andfunerals increasingly echo Futurism, modern society it seems pushes ever harder to denydeath,andthecoffincalendarsechothisnotionwiththeirinherentforegroundingofvanitas.

VidalpushesherFuturismargumentfurtherthough,andnotesthatFuturismwasfascinatedby thephenomenonof the car crash, andcaptivatedby speed.WithFuturism’sambition todominatenature,speedandthecrashedcar,sheargues,hasgreatsymbolicvalue(2013,p.17).ForVidal,speeddefiesnaturallimits(2013,p.159)andwithitstestosterone-fuelledinferences,driving cars fast denotes sexual arousal (Bayley, 1986, p. 77). The link between the car andmasculinity has been powerfully expressed by Lefebvrewho understood cars as inherentlyphallicobjectsthroughhisnotionofabstractspacewherecarswere‘extensionsofthebody’(1991, p. 50), acting as an ‘objectal “absolute” … symbolising force, male fertility, [and]masculineviolence’(1991,p.287).

With cars then a phallic symbol, signifyinghardness, aggression, and power, even powerovernaturethroughspeedandtechnology,thecarcrash/crashedcaractspotentlyasasymbolofFuturism’sdesire‘torecoveracertaindegreeofcontroloverdeath’(2013,p.17);deathisnotbroughtaboutbynatural causes in a car crash, but throughhuman-created technology.The potent link between violence, even death, brought about by technology appeared as aplot-lineinZola’sTheHumanBeast(1890),butthelinkbetweensexualarousalandviolencehasalonghistory,andwasintegraltothephilosophyofdeSade(1740–1814)(Clack,2002,p.82). Notably, since 1929, studies have noted how violence, especially the violence of carcrashes,hasbeenknowntoeffectsexualarousalinmen(2013,p.141),andVidalarguesthatthenovel(1973)andfilm(2004)Crash takethistoitsextreme.Vidalseesasaheadymixof

sexanddeathinthesymbolofthecar,withspeedandthecarcrashresonatingwiththeidealsofFuturism.

ThelinkbetweentheFuturisticphalliccarandthecoffinareclear;botharerigid,industrial,and connected with death and violence. Not only are both objects expressions of culturalcreativity, but both are items deliberately designed to obscure the natural processes of theworld.Thusbothaidhumanity inprovidingsomecontrolover thenaturalprocessesof thisworld,includingdeath.Acarallowsthedrivertotoywithdeath,survivingdeathorbringingdeathprematurely;vastnumbersofdeathsarebroughtaboutbyroadtrafficaccidents(WHO2013). It is perhapsno surprise then that just as cars are advertised through appeals to sex,promotedbyfecundwomen,eroticallydressedandprovocativelyposed,thatmodernsociety,withitsincreasedattemptstodenydeath,shouldfindcompaniesmarketingcoffinslikewise.Thecalendarswiththeirovertlysexymodelsandthis-liferemit,speakofFuturism’sdesiretocontrol,ifnotdeathitself,thentherealityofdeath.ThecalendarsresonatewiththeFuturisticdesireoftechnologicallytriumphingovermortality;likeautomobileadvertising,thecalendarimagesaredesignedtoimparttheimportanceofearthlypleasures.Theypromotesensuality,fecundity and human creativity, they highlight the erotic and the life-giving, they resonatewith vanitas and eros. Yet death is an ever-present reality even in these contemporarycalendars,whichnotethatthanatosdrivesusonwardstomakethemostofthis-life,especiallyinatimewhenunderstandingsofthenext-lifeareambiguous.

ThischapterthenhasexploredtheeroticcoffincalendarsintermsofDeathandtheMaidenart,andarguedthatthecontemporarycoffincalendarD&MimagesreversetheusualartistictropeofMementoMori–rememberyouwilldie.Theydrawontheproto/earlyReformationgenrethat,throughtheuseoficonicity,remindedviewerstolivethis-lifewiththeirafter-lifedestination in mind. But in their modern context, the coffin calendar D&Mworks, reflectcontemporarysociety’sviewthatoneshouldlivethis-lifewithlittlethoughttoone’sdemise.It has also examined the coffin calendars through the lens of Futurism.Drawing onVidal’sanalysisofcarsandcarcrashes,theseunusualmarketingploysechomuchofFuturism’sdesiretocontrol,asmuchaspossible,death.BothBaumanandBaudrillardhavearguedthatmodernsociety is death denying, and these coffin calendars resonate strongly with this sentiment;death in themodernWesternworld ismarginalized,whilst fecund life is foregrounded.Yet,notablyonlytwoofEurope’sfuneralcasketcompaniesmarkettheirproductsinthismanner,andthus itmustberememberedthatdespite theiradvertisingtoaconsumerculture-drivensocietywheresexsells,eveneroticismstrugglestomakedeathwidelypalatable.

Notes

1 See www.trovatuttoedicola.it/index.php?mod=calendari&act=show_calendario&c=2&id=43 (last accessed 24 November

2014).

2DespitebeinganItaliancalendar,thecovertitle,themonthnamesandthepoeticcantoswereallinEnglish.

3 For an image of the bed of roses scene from American Beauty (1999) see http://media-cache-

ec0.pinimg.com/736x/a0/ab/ca/a0abcadd317eba1c1e736a5ad11cfe5e.jpg.

4Seewww.trovatuttoedicola.it/index.php?mod=calendari&act=show_calendario_mese&id=462 (last accessed24November

2014).

5Seewww.qnm.it/bellezze/calendari/calendari_2005/calendario_cofani_funebri_2005/(lastaccessed24November2014).

6Seewww.qnm.it/bellezze/calendari/calendari_2006/calendario_cofani_funebri_2006/(lastaccessed24November2014).

7Seehttp://calendari.excite.it/2007/donne/cofani(lastaccessed24November2014).

8Seehttp://calendari.excite.it/2008/donne/cofanifunebri(lastaccessed24November2014).

9Seehttp://ww2.arezzoweb.it/calendari/calendario.asp?calendario=2009_cofani_funebri(lastaccessed24November2014).

10 All bar the two offensive months are available to view here www.trovatuttoedicola.it/index.php?

mod=calendari&act=show_calendario_mese&id=368(lastaccessed1October2014).

11Despitethe2005and2009calendarsclearlydrawingonreligioussymbolism,in2011Matteucciclaimedthatanyformof

censorship of the calendars was inappropriate as religious imagery was not present – see

https://mysendoff.com/2011/08/selling-death-with-sex-appeal/.

12 See http://foto.ilgazzettino.it/italia/calendario-cofani-funebri-2010-foto-dacofanifunebri.com/7–3812.shtml (last accessed

24November2014).

13Rome,whereCofani Funebri are based, has a Swingers Venue called Flirt, where couples canwear fetish gear and/or

engageinBDactivitywithlike-mindedothers;VanillaAlternativesintheUK,FunForTwointheNetherlands,andLava

ClubinPolandarejustthreeofthemanysimilarclubsacrossEurope.MatteuccihasaGothicedgetohisso-called‘pre-

mortem’ photography and as can be seen from his portfolio (www.fotocommunity.it/fotografo/matteucci-

maurizio/foto/1760123) there is an overlap between these adult clubs and his photographic interests. His models

frequentlywearfetishstyleclothing,andareoftenposedinsituationsreminiscentofadultsexualbehaviour.

14Seewww.qnm.it/bellezze/calendari/calendari_2011/calendario_cofani_funebri_2011/(lastaccessed24November2014).

15Seehttp://ww2.arezzoweb.it/calendari/calendario.asp?calendario=2012_cofanifunebri(lastaccessed24November2014).

16 See http://mag.sky.it/mag/life_style/photogallery/2012/10/15/calendario_belle_e_bare_2013.html (last accessed 24

November2014).

17InterestinglytheimagesusedtoillustratethisstoryaboutLindnerarefromtheCofaniFunebricalendar; itwouldseem

thatsexanddeathmightbringpublicitytothecoffincalendarcompaniesbutonlyonahomogenouslevel–thereare

severalexampleswheretheimagesfromthecompetitorcalendarareused.

18Seewww.kalendarzlindner.pl/2010-en/(lastaccessed24November2014).

19Seewww.kalendarzlindner.pl/2011-en/(lastaccessed24November2014).

20Seewww.kalendarzlindner.pl/2012-en/(lastaccessed24November2014).

21Seewww.kalendarzlindner.pl/2013-en/(lastaccessed24November2014).

22Seewww.wikiart.org/en/albrecht-durer/young-woman-attacked-by-death-1495(accessed24November2014).

23ForafullerexplorationofAugustineonsin,sex,anddeath,seeClack,2002,pp.21–37.

24SeeReggio(2012)forfurtherdetailsonLutheronmarriage.

25SeeDerTodundDasMädchen(Deutsch1517)http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Niklaus_Manuel_Deutsch_003.jpg

(Lastaccessed24November2014).

26 Hans Sebald Beham reworked (in 1546–50) a woodcut by his brother Bartel

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Death_and_Three_Nude_Women.jpg(Lastaccessed24November2014).

Bibliography

Anon.(2003)‘Morticiansexesupdeathwithracycoffincalendar’,TaipeiTimes,3November2003www.taipeitimes.com/News/feat/archives/2003/11/03/2003074485(lastaccessed24November2014).

Anon.(2010)‘ToplesscoffincalendarsparkscontroversyinPolishchurch’Metroonline5November2010http://metro.co.uk/2010/11/05/drop-dead-gorgeous-calendarsparks-controversy-in-polish-church-572108/(lastaccessed24November2014).

Arnold,M. (2012) ‘Howdoes religionmatter inPoland today?Secularisation inEuropeandthe“CausaPoliniaSemperFedelis” ’. InMalik,A.andPrzemysław,Ł. (eds.)EuropeandAmericaintheMirror:culture,economy,andhistory.Krakow:NOMOS199–238.

Augustine.A. (1998[c.413])CityofGod (translatedbyR.W.Dyson).Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Baudrillard,J.(1993)SymbolicExchangeandDeath(translatedbyI.H.Grant).London:Sage.Bauman,Z.(1992)‘SurvivalasaSocialConstruct’,Theory,CultureandSociety,9(1),1–36.Bayley,S.(1986)Sex,DrinkandFastCars:thecreationandconsumptionofimages.London:

Faber&Faber.Becker,E.(1973)TheDenialofDeath.NewYork:FreePress.Bishop, J.D. (2012) ‘Advertising Ethics’. In Shaw, L. (exec. Ed.)A Brief Guide toMarketing

Ethics.London:Sage:122–136.Clack,B.(2002)SexandDeath:areappraisalofhumanmortality.Cambridge:Polity.DePascale,E.(2007)DeathandResurrectioninArt(translatedbyShugaar,A.).LosAngeles:

GettyPublications.

Davies,D.(2002)Death,RitualandBelief:therhetoricoffuneralrites.London:Continuum.Freud,S.(1924)BeyondthePleasurePrinciple.NewYork:BoniandLiveright.Freud,S.(1962)TheEgoandtheId.NewYork:W.W.Norton.Gillies,M.(2011)‘SellingDeathwithSexAppeal’Mysendoff.com,August2011

https://mysendoff.com/2011/08/selling-death-with-sex-appeal/(lastaccessed24November2014).

Guthke,K.S.(1999)TheGenderofDeath:aculturalhistoryinartandliterature.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Halman,L.andDraulans,V.(2006).‘HowSecularisEurope?’BritishJournalofSociology,57(2),263–288.

IpsosMori.(2011)ViewsonGlobalisationandFaith.https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/News/ipsos-global-advisor-views-on-globalisation-and-faith.pdf(lastaccessed24November2014).

Janusz.(2010)‘SexyvideotriptotheafterlifeinLindnercoffins’TVSpain.tv22November2010www.tvspain.tv/blog/?p=2706(lastaccessed24November2014).

Kübler-Ross,E.(1969)OnDeathandDying.NewYork:Macmillan.Lefebvre,H.(1991)TheProductionofSpace.Oxford:Blackwell.Lewis,D.L.andGoldstein,L. (eds.) (1983)TheAutomobileandAmericanCulture.Michigan:

UniversityofMichiganPress.Llewellyn,N.(1991)TheArtofDeath:visualcultureintheEnglishdeathritual,c.1500–1800.

London:ReaktionBooks.Luther, M. (1966). ‘Christian in society I’. In Atkinson, J. (ed.) Luther’s Works Vol. 44.

Minneapolis,MN:AugsburgFortressPress.Luther, M. (1995) ‘Lectures on Genesis 1–5’. In Pelikan, J. (ed.) Luther’s Works Vol. 1.

Minneapolis,MN:AugsburgFortressPress.Messaris,P.(1997)VisualPersuasion:Theroleofimagesinadvertising.London:Sage.Purkiss, D. (1992) ‘MaterialGirls: the seventeenth centurywoman debate’ In Brant, C. and

Purkiss,D.(eds.)Women,TextandHistories,1575–1760.London:Routledge;69–100.Reichert,T.,andLambert,J.(eds.)(2003)SexinAdvertising:perspectivesontheeroticappeal.

Mahwah,N.J.:LawrenceErlbaum.Sansonetti,S.(2009)‘SocialindicatorsofsecularisationinItaly’.InKosmin,B.A.andKeysar,A.

(eds.) Secularism, Women and the State: the Mediterranean world in the 21st century.Hartford,CT:ISSSC:137–153.

Sekules,V.(2001)MedievalArt.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.Stevenson,H.(2004)BritishCarAdvertisingofthe1960s.Jefferson:McFarland&Co.Inc.Student,J.(2012)‘ChurchangryatPolishcoffinmaker’suseoftoplessmodelsincalendar’

GuySpeed3November2012.http://guyspeed.com/church-angry-at-polish-coffin-makers-use-of-topless-models-in-calendar/(lastaccessed24November2014).

Townsend,C.(2008)ArtandDeath.London:I.B.Tauris.TVSpain.tv(2010)‘SexyvideotriptotheafterlifeinLindnercoffins’,22November2010

www.tvspain.tv/blog/?p=2706(lastaccessed24November2014).Vidal, R. (2013)Death and Desire in Car Crash Culture: a century of romantic Futurisms.

Oxford:PeterLang.Walter,T.(1991)‘Moderndeath:tabooornottaboo?’Sociology,25(2),293–310.Walter,T.(1994)TheRevivalofDeath.London:Routledge.Welch,C.(2014)‘Deathandtheeroticwoman;theEuropeangenderingofmortalityintimes

ofmajorreligiouschange’.JournalofGenderStudies:1–20.www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjgs20(lastaccessed24November2014).

Weisner-Hanks,M.E.(2000)ChristianityandSexualityintheEarlyModernWorld:regulatingdesire,reformingpractice.London:Routledge.

WHO(2013)GlobalStatusReportonRoadSafety2013.www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/road_safety_status/2013/en/(lastaccessed24November2014).

Wilson,M,R.(2012)‘Anxiety:Attention,theBrain,theBody,andPerformance’.InMurphy,S.(ed.)TheOxfordHandbookofSportandPerformancePsychology.Oxford;OUPress:173–190.

4Authenticity,informalityandprivacyincontemporaryNewZealandpost-mortempractices

CyrilSchäferandRuthMcManus

Introduction

Personalised funeralshaveemergedasaglobalpost-mortemtrend inrecentdecades.Whilesubstantive national and regional variations in thesemortuary practices exist, personalised,celebratory rituals are typically correlatedwith late-modern processes of secularisation andindividualisation.Thesefuneralsareintegrallylinkedtothebiographyandpersonalityofthedeceased andaccentuate informality andmournerparticipation. Frequently juxtaposedwiththe traditional religiouspractices of thepast, personalised funerals aredescribed as creativeproductionsthatoffermournersamoretherapeuticbereavementexperience.Thisshifttonewritualisationsofdeathhasbeenassociatedwithanincreasingvarietyoffuneralproductsandservicesthatunderscorepersonalchoice,controlandidentity.

Thischapterelucidatessomeofthesemortuarytransformationsandspecificallyassessesthecurrentshift to increasinglyprivateresponses todeath inNewZealand,whichproblematisesome of the simplistic connections between individualism, capitalism and funeral options(Dickinson2012).Byanalysingfuneralprofessionaldiscourse,aswellasmediarepresentationsof personalisation, we argue that these discussions of contemporary funerary practicesfrequently elide the experiences of the bereaved and privilege a discursive construction ofsocietythatequatestheseputativechangeswithmoreenlightened(and“healthy”)attitudestodeath in the twenty-first century. Bereaved participants in this project, on the other hand,mobilised a competing discourse which recognised not cultural and societal mourningobligations,butprivilegedauthenticityandprivacyaskeyconcernsshapingfunerarypractices.Rather than consuming funereal goods and services as symbolic and experiential products(Sanders2010:64)or linkingconsumption to immortality ideologies (Turley2005),bereaved

participants emphasised a desire to resist post-mortem products and services which theyregardedasincompatiblewithbiographicalauthenticity.

Personalisationandtheethosofopenness

Much of the current literature examining the process of personalisation in North America,Europe and Australasia emphasises that funerary practices have undergone a remarkabletransformationinthelastthreedecades.InhisstudyoffuneralpracticesintheUnitedStates,Rasmussen(2007:16),forexample,assertsthattherehasbeenaproliferationofpersonalisedfuneraloptions,notingthattheterm“lifeappreciation”isindicativeofatrendtopreservethepeculiaritiesofmournersandthedeceased.Garces-FoleyandHolcomb(2006)emphasisethatthesenewritualsnotonlyexpresspersonalvaluesandbeliefs,butthattheyallowforactivemournerengagementandthereinforcementofcommunitybonds.KearlandJabobsen(2013:74)describethesepersonalisedcelebrationsas“therapeuticentertainment”thatassessespost-mortembiographiesasmeasuresofcompleteness.Inadditiontoaccentuatingtheindividualityofthedeceasedandtheprogressiontopersonalexpression(Roberts2010),thesecelebrationscanalsobeproductively linked to the transformationandwellbeingofmourners,who– intheir co-creation of post-mortem memories – affirm the continuing significance of socialrelationships in the face of death (Long and Buehring 2013: 97).While some authors haveargued that personalised constructions indicate a certain death denial or grief avoidance(Ramshaw 2010), significant shrift has reiterated the meaningful and empoweringcharacteristicofpersonalisedfuneraryforms.Thesechangesaretypicallyjuxtaposednotonlywith the impersonal religious practices of earlier periods, but also the bureaucraticmedicalisation of death and dying in the twentieth century. Rather than the sequestrationintrinsically associated with the modern depersonalisation and over-professionalisation ofdeath (Dickinson 2012), celebratory rituals can be located in a framework of neo-moderndeath that prioritises self-determination and control (Staudt 2014). These changes similarlyreflectadeathrevival(Dickinson2012:152)thatsignalsincreasingengagementwithquestionsofmortalityandprioritisestheemotionalneedsoftheliving(Wilce2009).

ResearchersinUKandEuropehaveobservedasimilarshifttocelebratoryrituals.Inastudyof Scottish funeral practices, for example, Caswell (2011) stipulates that these post-mortemrituals feature references to the life and personality of the deceased and provide scope formourner involvement in funeral arrangements. She goes on to note, however, thatrepresentations of this shift to personalisation frequently obscures the complex realities offuneral construction and that contemporary rituals continue to demonstrate a significantdegree of standardisation. An English study by Holloway et al. (2013: 50) elucidates this

assessment and reveals that rather than a simplistic post-modern plethora of post-mortemopportunities, contemporary funerals represent psycho-social-spiritual events that demand“the active participation by all actors in the co-creation and enacting of the funeral as ameaningful event”. Similar themes have been expounded on other parts of Europe.Winkel(2001:75),forexample,statesthatindividualityinthefuneralcontextisinextricablylinkedtothe involvement of friends and relatives and that this shift is itself related to an emergingemotionalisationandpsychologisationoftheselfinGermansociety.Whilesuchanalyseshaveaccentuated the processes of meaning-making, other European studies have reiterated thecontinuingsignificanceoffuneralprofessionals inthecollaborativeconstructionofrituals. IntheirassessmentofDutchmortuarytraditions,Venbrux,PeelenandAltena(2009)assertthatincreasingly informal approaches to death have been accompanied by a concomitantproliferationofdeathspecialistsofferingabricolageofpost-mortemservices.

AuthorsexploringAustralasianfuneralpracticeshavenotedsimilartransformations.Jalland(2006) has traced the history of death and grief in Australia, noting that a new form ofexpressive emotionality has accompanied the diverse rituals that emerged in the twentiethcentury. Other authors have equated secularisation and individualisation with a loss ofmeaningful, communal ritual.Crouch (2004: 135), forexample,hasasserted that celebratoryrituals avoid the realities of death and instead provide a superficial construction, which“merelypapersover the fragmentationof our existence, our terror and ignoranceofdeath,and our inability to accept the actuality… of suffering and pain”. Such critiques frequentlydrawontheseminalworkofscholarssuchasGorer(1965)andAries(1974),whoarguethatdeath in the modern era was denied or taboo. In the New Zealand context these death-denyingattitudeshavebeenreiteratedbyauthorssuchasSchwass(2005),whoaccentuateanincreasingunfamiliaritywithdeath.OtherauthorssuchasThomas(2013)haveoutlinedsomeof the fundamental differences between Maori and Pakeha (non-Maori inhabitants ofEuropeandescent)approachestodeath,emphasisingthatMaorideathistraditionallyapublicevent characterised by openly expressed grief, while Pakeha practices typically prioritiseprivacy. Assessments such as those by Crouch (2004) and Schwass (2005), however, fail toexpound on the complexities of funeral change and the various tensions inherent in thepersonalisationprocess.Whilefuneralexpertstypicallyemphasisecreativity,individualityandthe realisation of an efficacious grief process (Schäfer 2012), bereaved families focus onnegotiating inimical funeral expectations and composing an appropriate post-mortembiographyofthedead.

Significantforthischapterexploringfunerarypracticesisthatthesechangesareoccurringagainstawiderrevivalofdeath,orwhatWilce(2009)termsa“bereavementmovement”.Themedia is filledwithfeaturesacclaiminganewethosofopenness transformingdeath-relatedpractices,whileaplethoraofinternetsitesproclaimanewawarenessanddemocratisationofdeath. The prominent themes in this discourse are the diversity of contemporary funeral

optionsaccompaniedbyanewattitudetodeathtypifiedbyhonestyandtransparency.Asthischapterwilldemonstrate,thisattitudeisitselfadiscursiveconstruction(Frithetal.2013)thatemphasises a particular form of responsibilisation and model of grief that is not entirelyconsistentwith theassessmentsprofferedbybereavedparticipants.Ethnographic interviewssimilarlyrevealedthattheseputativechangesdonotcapturethecomplexityofcontemporaryfunerals and that bereaved participants articulated a discourse of resistance that criticallyevaluatedtherelevanceofpost-mortemproductsandservices,aswellaspredominantmodelsofbereavement,andemphasisedinsteadtheoverarchingdesireforauthenticity.

Methodologicalnote

The themes presented in this chapter emerged from 65 qualitative, semi-structured,ethnographic interviews conducted around New Zealand. The interview component wascomplemented by participant observation at a number of funeral homes and funeralprofessionalconferencesoveratwo-yearperiod(2012–2014).Apurposivesamplingapproachwas implemented to ensure data saturation (Guest et al. 2006), as well as socio-economic,religiousandethnicvariability.Thepresentprojectincludesparticipantsfromarangeofsocio-economic and ethnic backgrounds, including gentrified urban neighbourhoods,underprivileged rural communities andcosmopolitancity suburbs.Participants came fromavariety of personal and religious backgrounds, with the majority (85 per cent) identifyingthemselvesasnon-religiousorsecular.Thestudyincluded42bereavedindividuals(33Pakeha,fiveMaori,twoPacificIslanderandtwoAsian),aswellasclergy,celebrants,funeraldirectorsand funeral serviceproviders (23).Themajorityofparticipantswere female (42),withmostbereaved participants involved in post-mortem arrangements for older parents or partners.AlthoughnotsuggestingthattheparticipantsinthestudyarerepresentativeoftheentireNewZealandpopulation,itispossibletoclaimwithsomeconfidencethattheviewspresentedaretypicalanddemonstrateasignificantdegreeofhomogeneity.

Informedbyagrounded theoryapproach (Charmaz2006;AdamsonandHolloway2012),theanalyticalaimofthisprojectwastodecipherpotentialpatternsanddiversitiesinthewaysin which people organise and negotiate post-mortem arrangements and assess thepersonalisation process. The constant comparativemethodwas used to examine similaritiesand differences in participant responses and the research datawas coded using systematic,computer assisted qualitative data analysis software (Atlas.ti). Initial inductive, line-by-linecodingwasfollowedbyfocusedcodingandtheelaborationofanalyticallysignificantthemes.The codes were clustered into categories, and memos were generated to document codedefinitions, relationshipsbetweencodesandtheemergingthemesthat formthebasisof the

ensuingdiscussion.

Responsibility,costandfuneraloptions

Even a cursory assessment of the aforementioned “episteme of death” (Staudt 2014: 13), ordeath revivalism promoting an enlightened approach to mortality, reveals a number ofsubstantive contextual issues relevant to the ensuing evaluation. One clear theme in thisdiscourse is the connection between funeral options, openness, cost and responsibility. Themediaisrepletewithreportsdescribingidiosyncraticinstancesofpersonalisationrepresentedas exemplifying a new attitude to death and dying. These stories reiterate the shift toindividualised, celebratory practices and underscore the variety of funeral options currentlyavailable in New Zealand (for example, Arnold 2012; Heather 2014, Chapman and O’Neil2014; Harvey 2012; Carville 2013). In addition to emphasising that personalised practicessignifyasubstantivesocietalshift,mediareportsfrequentlyfocusoncallstodemystifydeath,drawing on earlier, traditional (as well as indigenous) practices that incorporated a prosaicfamiliarity with mortality. This theme is particularly prevalent in reports describingdevelopmentssuchastheDeathCafé1whichprovideforaforpeopleto“confront”mortalityandconsiderfuneraryoptions(Colvin2013).

Funeral options and thepossibilities of participating inpost-mortem identity constructionare also evident in the increasing number of pre-planning internet sites and softwareapplications.Sitessuchaswww.mywonderfullife.com,forexample,provideanonlineservicethatenables individuals toplanandpersonalise funerals toreflect the lifeandwishesof thearranger,whilewww.finalfling.comoffers“lifeplanningtools”forpeoplewhopreferto“beincontrol of life and death decisions”. A comparable New Zealand site(www.bettersendoff.co.nz)providesarangeofresourcestoallowpeopletopersonalisefuneralrituals.Funeralpre-planningandmemorialisationapplicationssuchas“iFuneral”and“LegacyOrganiser”, aswell as innumerable funeral director apps andwebsites, emphasise that pre-planning relieves bereaved families of further anxiety and stress, while ensuring that thepreferencesandfuneraloptionsofanindividualareclearlyarticulatedbeforedeath.

Explicit inmanyof theseaccounts is theassociationbetween funerals, financesandpost-mortemplanning.Althoughfuneralcostsandthemorerecentcorporatisationof thefuneralindustry have long been the subject ofmedia critiques and exposés (McManus and Schäfer2014), the contemporary reports emphasise the need for individuals to assume a significantdegree of personal responsibility for post-mortem preparations. Emotive news storiesproclaimingthatasignificantnumberofNewZealandersare“toopoortodie”(Stock2012)are interspersedwith stories that stipulate the need to openly discuss funeral arrangements

andcosts(forexample,Meadows2013;Simpson2014;O’Sullivan2014).Suchdiscussionsaredescribedaspromotingautonomy,preventing irrational funeral expenditure, andalleviatingpotentialfinancialburdensfortheliving.Theseexpressionsemphasisingtheneedtoconfrontthesocietal“deathtaboo”areaccompaniedbyconcomitantstorieshighlightingtheplightofunpreparedordestitute individualsunable toaffordrudimentary funeralarrangements.Oneillustrative example includesanews story reporting thedifficultiesof apensioner forced toleavehis rentedaccommodationafter spendinghis limitedsavingsona funeral forhiswife(Blundell 2014). This story generated hundreds of reader comments balanced betweenfrustrationatperceivedfuneraldirectoresurience,andincredulitythatthepensionerhadnotsavedorprudentlyplannedhisfuneralfinances.

Thesediscussionsof funeralcostsandarrangementswere framedasdemandingacertaindegreeofeffortandhonesty.Inonemediastoryaboutpre-planning,forexample,theCEOoftheFuneralDirectorsAssociationofNewZealandwasreportedasstatingthata“combinationofpoor financial literacy andanunwillingness to talk aboutdeath” contributed to theverysmallnumberofpeoplewhohadarrangedfuneralinsuranceorsetasideadequatefinancestopre-fund funerals (Stock 2014). Such media examples also resonate with the writings of anumber of academics who have recently emphasised that a paucity of post-mortem pre-arrangementsisproblematic,andemphasisedtheneedfora“cultureoffinanciallypreparingfordeath”(ValentineandWoodthorpe2013;Woodthorpe2014).AsFrithetal.(2013:429)havenoted in their discussion ofmedia representations of dying in Britain, such representationsconstitute instructional tales thatprivilegeautonomyandconsumerchoice,and further, thatplanning post-mortem pre-arrangements can be “taken as indicative of the person’s moralstrengthofcharacter”.Conway(2013)reiteratesthatcontrolassociatedwithdeathanddyingreflects a latemodern emphasis on self and individual autonomy but that this portrayal ofpost-mortem practices privileges a particular cultural experience that is not universallyrelevant.2

Asecondsubstantive factoralluded to in theaforementioneddiscussion is theroleof thefuneral professionals.Although alternative funeral services (such asDIY services and directdisposalfuneralproviders)areaffectingtheprovisionofconventionalfuneralservicesinNewZealand,mostpeoplecontinuetoutilisetheservicesoffuneralprofessionals(funeraldirectorsand celebrants). Funeral expert discourse emphasises a need for honesty, sincerity andtransparency in the construction of post-mortem arrangements. This honesty and opennessappliesnotonlytodiscussionsofdeathandfuneralpre-arrangement,butassessmentsofgriefandmourning. Funeral professionals in our project emphasised the significance of genuineemotion and the need to elicit appropriate emotional expression for the realisation of ahealthygriefprocess,andthisprocesswasitselfintegrallylinkedtohonestyandtransparency.Although few of the funeral professionals had formal psychological training, grief theoriesemphasising stage or phase theories of grief, as well as linear processes requiring

confrontation and “grief work” for healthy resolution, found common expression inprofessional interview responses. These responses resonate with the seminal findings ofWortmanandSilver(2001)whonotedthatmedicalised,essentialisedunderstandingsofgriefcontinuetoinformprescriptivegriefmyths.

In their evaluations of funerary changes, funeral specialists emphasised the diversity ofcurrentpracticesbutalsoaccentuatedthesaliencyofauthenticityandtransparency.Celebrantsand funeral directors reiterated that there was a need to recognise the superficiality thatcharacterisedmuchofhuman life inmodern (“Western”) societyand thequest foradeeperformofauthenticityonlydiscoverableunderthesurfaceofsociallife(Theodossopoulos2013:344).Asonecelebrantclearlyarticulated:“there’salwaysthatmissingfactorI’vefoundatalotof funerals, is that lack of transparency, I suppose. There’s this big privacy thing around aperson’slife,andit’salmostlikeabitofacover-up”(Valerie3).Discussionsoftencentredonaperceived lack of honesty and “realness”, with one funeral provider noting that traditionalfuneralfirmswerethemselves“distantandcoldandun-emotive”–withanewgenerationoffuneral directors described as “human and emotional and real” (Danielle, funeral director).Emotion,authenticityandnaturalgriefwerealsofrequentlyconflatedintheseassessmentsoffunerary practices, with one participant asserting that there had a been a significant shifttowards “being natural and authentic” (Catherine, funeral director). Reiterating the mediarepresentationsofanemergingsocietalconfrontationwithmortality,shewentontosuggestthat her funeral company focused on “responding to death naturally: death is a naturaloccurrence … we’re responding to families and their grief processes and loss processes asbeing a very natural thing” (Kaylene, funeral director). Celebrants and funeral directorsespoused a common sentiment that funeralswereoneof the fewexistingopportunities forhonestyandunconcealedemotionalexpressionincontemporarylife.

Professional participants emphasised that their rolewasnot simply to construct a funeralritual (or “celebration of life”) but to encourage families to discover the important (butoccasionallyunrecognised)griefresourcelocatedinthearticulationofthebiographicalstoryof the deceased. These narratives formed the focus of many celebratory funerals anddemanded that the bereaved survivors identify events ormoments in the person’s life thatsatisfactorily (and honestly) encapsulated the authentic identity of the deceased individual.Thesenotionsofauthenticityassumedthattherewasa“real”selfawaitingdiscoveryandthatsuperficiality concealed an inner reality (Theodossopoulous 2013: 340–342). Capturing the“essence”ofanindividualandpresentingthisbiographicalnarrativeinafuneralsettingwascloselylinkedtotherapeuticgoals,includingtherealisationofahealthygriefprocess.Funeralprofessionalsinthisstudyfeltthatoneoftheirfundamentaltaskswastonegotiatebarrierstoauthenticityandencouragefamiliestoprioritisetransparency.Professionalsfurtherarticulatedthat the personal and familial transparency associated with the construction of life-centredfuneralswas intrinsically linked toasocietal shiftpromotinggreateropennessarounddeath

anddying.Theseparticipantresponsesareclearlylinkedtotheaforementioneddiscussionofopenness

andchoice,withbothfactorspresentedaspredominantpost-mortemconcerns.Invitationstoengage with mortality by exploring post-mortem preferences were pervaded by calls forindividualstoconsiderthepotentialimpactoftheirinevitabledemise,pre-plantheirfuneralsandparticipate in the constructionofpost-mortem identities.Theaugmentationof funerarychoicesisrepresentedasapositivesocietaldevelopmentlinkedtoempowerment,agencyandindependence and contrastedwith the religiouspaternalismof earlier decades.At the sametime,transparency–inthecontextoffuneralarrangement–isassociatedwiththewell-beingofbereavedindividuals.Transparencyisnotonlycoupledwithconfessionandauthenticity,butis also a source of moral authority emphasising Birchall’s (2011: 8) contention thattransparency isavirtue, “thesecularversionofaborn-againcleanliness that fewcanfail topraise”.Whatisrelevanttoourpresentdiscussionisthatbothchoiceandtransparencyfocuson individual autonomy and reduce potentially complex funerary arrangements to simplematters of choice and honesty. What the ensuing section reveals, however, is that whilebereavedparticipantswereacutelyawareof thediscourseprivileginghonesty,anincreasingnumber of people were choosing to forgo the celebratory funerals described by funeralprofessionalsandselectingprivate,informalformsofdisposal.Thisemergingtrendhighlightsa number of important themes that elucidate the aforementioned shift to personalisedfunerarypractices.

Therealitiesandpracticalitiesoffuneralarrangement

An increasing number of people in New Zealand are choosing private funerals or directdisposals.Althoughbothpost-mortempracticestakevariousforms,theycommonlyhavefewof the formalised components associatedwith conventional clergy-ledor celebrant funerals.Some funeral professionals felt that these forms of disposal failed to fulfil the perceivedfuneralfunctionnotedabove,andothersequatedthepracticewithacontinuingformofdenialin contemporary society that ignored enlightened understandings of grief. An increasingnumberof funeraldirectorsofferedvarious formsofdirectdisposalandanumberofdirectcremation operators have emerged in urban centres around New Zealand emphasisingminimal-serviceandminimal-costcremationservices.Mostfuneraldirectorsprovidedprivatefunerals(whicharegenerallyattendedbyasmallernumberofmourners),andafewbereavedparticipantsalsonotedthatthesefuneralswerecheaperthantraditionalfuneralservicesandallowedthebereavedfamilytoorganisedisposalwithlimitedprofessionalinvolvement.Onefuneraldirectordescribedsomeofthekeyelementsofthesetwoformsofdisposal:

Direct cremation is driven by cost.We normally work with the family with the direct cremation and see what we canaccomplishandgenerallyitturnsouttobe,thatwewillstillhave–theydon’tcallitaservice–wejustcallitagathering,theyarejustgoingtodropDadoffatthecrematorium,buttheynormallysitthereforfortyminutesandthefundamentalsofwhattheyaredoingtherearebasicallythesameasaservicebutit’snotformalized.They’llsitthereandtalkabouttheirmemories,they’llhavesomephotos,they’lltakef lowersout.Theyhaveanopportunitytosaygood-byebutit’snotcalledafuneralbecauseDaddidn’twantafuneralandit’saprivatethingsotheyfeelquitesafeintheirexpressions…WhenIfirststarted, a private servicewas literally five or ten people at the crematorium, twominutes, itwas literally the committalprayerandthatwasit.Now,you’llhaveaprivateservice,butyou’llstillhave,therewillbetwentyorthirtypeoplethereandthey’ll still have service sheets, they’ll still have slide shows, so basically, all of the elements of a full service, just withinvitations.Sometimesthatcangoonlongerthananormalfuneralservice.

(Brian,funeraldirector)

Informality,privacyandcontroloverattendanceemergedas integral featuresof thesepost-mortempracticesandtheirsignificancewillbeexploredfurtherbelow.Funeraldirectorsandcelebrantsinthisprojectassertedthattherehadbeenasignificantriseinthenumberofdirectdisposalsandprivatefuneralsoverthedecade,withprofessionalparticipantsestimatingthatbetween 10–30 per cent of total disposals could now be categorised as alternative funeralservices.

Although funeral professionals frequently stated that public emotional expression in afuneral settingwas intrinsically linked to an efficacious grief process, bereaved participantsasserted that protection from the expectations of performative grief provided significantmotivationtoavoidpublicfunerals.Bereavedparticipantsemphasisedthattheirgriefwouldbeondisplayandthattheyhadaparticularaversiontothesurveillanceofgriefbyperipheralmourners. Funeral directors and celebrants attributed this development to insincerity and acontinuingdenialofdeathincontemporarysociety.Asoneprofessionalparticipantexplicitlynoted, death had been sequestered and people had lost their traditional knowledge ofappropriatebereavementpractices:

Ithinktheproblemisthatpeoplearen’treallypreparedforthewholethingaboutdeathandgrievingandIthinkthebiggestissueisthatpeoplearenottaughthowtogrieve.Theyarenottaughtthattheyareallowedtogrieveandtheyarenottaughtthedifferentexpressionsofgrief.

(Michael,funeralcelebrant)

In the absence of this traditional knowledge and overarching religious framework, funeraldirectorsandcelebrantsprofferedthattheirpositionasfuneralprofessionalswasinextricablylinkedtobroadereducationalrolesthatpromotedsocietalunderstandingofbereavement.4

Although bereaved participants in this project noted that funerals were ideally “for theliving”, many lamented the complexities associated with constructing appropriate forms offunerary ritual. The overarching concern for bereaved participants was achieving anacceptablelevelofcongruitybetweenthebiographyofthedeadandtheaccompanyingritual.Strategiesforachievingthissymbolicformofcoherence(Prendergastetal.2006:889)includedimplementingany expresswishes articulatedby thedead, butmoregenerally, it comprised

efforts to identify authentic biographical attributes. Someparticipantsnoted that alternativedisposal options were particularly appropriate for people that had led private lives withlimitedsocialengagement:

Welookedat[mydaughter],lookedatherandthought,“Right,thisisagirlwhoisaveryprivategirl”.Therefore,itwasjustgoing tobeprivate. I think forme, I like topersonalise things, forme I lookedather, thosewhoknewherwouldbe thereanyway.Evenouradvertisement[inthelocalnewspaper],wethoughtwe’dmakeitprivate.

(Sonya,bereavedparent)

AsaMaori familywith “respect for thingsMaori”, shenoted that therewere clear culturalexpectations surrounding funerary practices, but that taking the body to the family home(ratherthanthecommunityMarae)andorganisingasmallfamilyfuneral(ratherthanapublictangihanga)weremoreappropriateformsofburialthatauthenticallyreflectedthelifeofherdaughter.

One clear theme that appeared in discussions of private funerals was that an increasingnumber of people described New Zealand attitudes incommensurate or inconsonant withpredominant forms of existing ritual. Participants frequently referred to processes ofsecularisation, reiterating Belich’s (2001) contention that a discernible secular tone hashistorically been evident in levels of church attendance, the secular orientation of the state,and the acceptance of religious pluralism. Participants specifically identified the decline ofinstitutionalChristianityandtheconcomitantriseof“religionless”NewZealandersduringthetwentieth century. These participants noted theminimal religious content evident in familyfunerals and that mortuary practices were predominantly “down- to earth”, “simple” and“honest” affairs.While notions of Pakeha identity remain contested (see, for example, Bell2009), “informality” emerged as a leitmotif in descriptions of Pakeha funeral practices.Althoughsecular funeralcelebrants5haveemphasised thedevelopmentofpersonalised, lessformalised celebratory funerals (clearly distinguished from earlier, religious funerals), someparticipants stated that these personalised funerals retained important elements ofstandardisationthatwerenotnecessarilyconcordantwiththelifeofthedeceased.

Bereavedparticipantsalsonotedthattheywereprotectingthedeadfromfurtherindignityorscrutinybyorganisingsmallfuneralgatheringsthatavoidedsurveillanceandjudgement.Anumberofparticipants,asserted,forexample,thatthedeceasedhadsufferedvariousformsofillness and led difficult lives that would remain incomprehensible to most mourners. ThedaughterofaDutchimmigrantsimilarlynotedthatthelivesofherparentswerecharacterisedby isolation and remoteness and there was no way of meaningfully translating theseexperiences intoa formof ritualunderstandable to friendsandextended family.AsPaulineelaborated,thelifeofhersisterhadbeenextremelydifficultandaprivatefuneralgatheringwastheonlyperspicuouspost-mortemoption:

Wedidn’thavetoputupafront,inasense.Itwasavery…Ineverthoughtaboutthat,butwedidn’thavetoputonashow.

Wedidn’tdoanypretend.Patriciahadasadanddifficult lifeandeveryonewholovedherknewthat.Wedidn’thavetopolishitup.Itwaslovely.

(Pauline,deathofhersister)

Funeralswhichextoledthevirtuesofthedeadinsuchsituationswereparticularlyproblematicastheyepitomisedthesuperficialityandmeaninglessnessofconventionalpost-mortemritualsforbereavedinterviewees.Relatedtothisfeatureofprivatefuneralserviceswastheneedforintimacy. Participants in this project often engaged in careful assessments of who theyconsidered legitimate mourners, based on their relationships with the dead. Potentialmotivations for attending the funeral were scrutinised by mourners organising the funeralwith inessential (or tangential) attendees described as diluting the desired intimacy anddetracting from the required authenticity. Participants stipulated that the uncertain, difficultperiodassociatedwithdyingwasparticularlysignificantas it revealedthose thatsharedtherequisitelevelofintimacywiththedeadindividual:

Ithinkpeoplehavelotsofreasonsforhavingprivatefunerals,butIthinkpartofitistheydon’twantalotoffolkcomingwhohaveneverbeenthereforthemupuntilthattimeandtheyjustcomefortheshow.

(Jacqui,funeralcelebrant)

The placement of ashes following cremation was described bymany participants as themostmeaningfulcomponentofthepost-mortemprocess.AlthoughauthorssuchasHollowayet al. (2013) have clearly explicated the meaning-creating and meaning-taking processesintegrally involved in the construction of funerary rituals, some participants in our studyemphasised that funerals were little more than perfunctory obligations that held limitedpersonal relevance. Cremation rates in New Zealand currently exceed 80 percent of totaldisposals,andmostof theparticipantsdescribed thesignificanceofashdisposition linked toprivate funerals and direct cremation. Even for participants who had arranged celebrantfunerals,many felt that theplacementof ashesoffered a level of authenticity andmeaningabsent in personalised funeral rituals. In addition to providing bereaved family and friendswith a process to disengage from the materiality of the dead, ash disposals allowed theseindividuals to contribute to the biographical narrative of the dead in a creative andparticipative way. Ash disposal was intrinsically informal and free from the institutionalrestrictions (Prendergast et al. 2006) or the lingering influence of Christian beliefs that thebereaved families felt often permeated funeral arrangements. Not subject to some of thetemporalrestrictionsassociatedwiththefuneralitself,asheswerebothdivisibleandversatileallowing the bereaved to engage in deliberations surrounding identity and transcendence.Rather than the rhetoric of a grief process that culminated in various forms of closure,bereavedparticipantsemphasisedthetemporallyindefinitedimensionofashdisposition.

Ash disposition allowed bereaved participants to do something for the dead by ensuringthat this disposal was congruent with the authentic identity of the dead. Rather than the

authenticityarticulatedbyfuneralprofessionals–whichprivilegedemotionalexpressionandthe realisation of a healthy grief process – bereaved participants described a process ofidentifying and substantiating the essence of the dead.By placing the ashes in personalisedspaces connectedwith the biographical history of the dead, the bereaved individuals werefindingaplaceforthedeadandmemorialisingtheiressenceinaverypotentway.Notonlywastheplacementofasheslinkedtoaretrospectivefulfilmentofidentity(Davies2002),butitalsoallowedthedeadtoremainrelevantinthelivesofthelivingbypermeatingthespacesofeveryday life. Someparticipants noted that the scattering of ashes in personalised locationswascomfortingpreciselybecauseitcreatedanintimacywiththedeadnotpossibleinspacessuch as churches and cemeterieswhich felt unfamiliar to the bereaved interviewees. Someparticipantsexplainedthatitwastheinformalandmundanetenorofthedispersalwhichwasparticularlyappropriate.Oneparticipant,forexample,describedthedispositionofherparents’ashes:

Weknowwherethetreeis.AndofcoursewithMumbeingthere,DadinlifesaidafewtimesoverthisyearsaidhewantedtogotothesameplaceasMum.Sono,thereisnosignificancetoanyoneelse,onlyusthatknow…Weliterallyjustmetatthepark,scatteredtheashes,said“GoodbyeDad,”andthenwewentoutforafternoonteaaswell…Scatteringtheasheswasnicebothtimes.Itwasfunnyanditwaspersonalandprivate,andnobodyelsearoundusknewwhatwe’redoing.

(Tina,deathofherparents)

Thedisposaldescribedbytheparticipantwasanactofmemorythatreunitedherparents,aswell as a particularly intimate, personal event congruentwith thebiographyofher parents(whohadledquiet,privatelives).Whileafewparticipantshadnotreturnedtothescatteringsite,othersstructuredarangeofmemorialactivitiesaroundthesitenotingthatthevisitationsconstitutedcontinuingrelationshipswiththedeadaswellasself-reflexiveassessmentsofthegriefprocess.

While the distinction between immanence and transcendencemay no longer be clear inpersonalisedfunerarypractices(Quartier2013),privateashscatteringandpersonalisedformsofmemorialisationdonotfocussolelyontheworldlyachievementsofthedeceased.AlthoughNew Zealand is frequently described as a secular country6 with an “areligious habitus”(Schröder 2011: 44), bereaved participants described the presence of the dead in naturallandscapesettingsastranscendentandinfinite.AuthorssuchasHornborg(2012)havearguedthatemerging formsof spiritualityareconceptualisedas timeless,universalhumanessenceslocatedinsideeachindividualandsimilar(essentialised)notionsofspiritualitywerearticulatedbynumerous participants.While some participants included spiritual or religious content intheirpost-mortempracticestoassuagereligiousfamilymembers,mostemphasisedthatsuchinclusions held limited personal relevance. Funeral directors and celebrants also noted thatdiscussions of spirituality were difficult and potentially incongruous with non-religiousapproaches to life and death. Bereaved participants asserted that discussions of spiritualitywere potentially “awkward” and “embarrassing” and that it was difficult to articulate the

meaning of ash disposition but that these practices had broader meaning. The motherdescribingthescatteringofherson’sashesinthemountainsstated:

Wetalkedaboutputtingaweeplaqueuponthatrock[wheretheashesarescattered].Itiswayoffthetrack…nooneisevergoingtofindit.Everyyearwhenwegoup,wetakeapieceofcrystalorarosebushorsomethingandintherockthereisasortofalittleledge,andeveryyearwejustputalittlestonethereandthenextyearwhenwegobackwechecktoseethatitisstill thereandofcourse it isalwaysisstill there,andthathasgotsignificance….Iwantedtohavesomemarkerthathehadbeenontheearth,butIdon’thaveanurgencyaboutthatnow.Ijustsortofseemtoknowthathehashisrockandweknowthatit’shisrock.

(Elizabeth,deathofherson)

Descriptions of ash disposition were also suffused with symbolic notions of regeneration,renewalandecologicalsustainability.TheseresponsesreiteratethefindingsofauthorssuchasRumble et al. (2014) who have argued that remains are increasingly dispersed back intoenvironmentsthatsustaintheliving–ratherthanbeingsequesteredinspecialisedspacesforthedead–andthatemergingformsofdisposalarethemselvesintrinsicallyconnectedtonewmodesofspirituality.SignificantintheNewZealandcontextwasthatparticipantsidentifiednaturalsettingsassitesemblematicoftranscendence,withlinkstoRomanticrepresentationsofnatureuncontaminatedbythecoerciveconventionsofmodernity.Parks,beachesandriversinvoked the essence of the dead as well as signifying a certain timelessness and source ofspiritual nourishment.While such claimsmay be inextricably linked to Pakeha attempts tosecuretheirplaceinNewZealand(McAra2007:99),naturalspacesexudedacontinuitythatwas not only familiar butmade participants feel that theywere a part of somethingmoresignificant by revealing the relentless cycles of birth and decay, and the immateriality of(individual)humanlives.

Concludingcomments

Thisbrief examinationof funeralpractices inNewZealand critically assesses contemporaryrepresentationsofpersonalisation.Whatbecomesevidentinthisevaluationisthatprofessionaldiscoursesnotonlyprivilegeanemotionalauthenticityalignedwithnotionsofhonestyandtransparency, but also underscore the role of funeral professionals in the realisation of thisprocess. Together with wider media representations proclaiming a fundamental shift inattitudestodeath,thisportrayalelaboratesthesignificanceofindividualisation,funeralchoicesandautonomy.Whatbecomesveryclear inthisanalysis is thatadiscussionofpost-mortempossibilities and shifting societal sentiments obscures the lived experiences of bereavedindividuals,aswellaseliding theprescriptiveassumptions inherent in thisdiscourse.Ratherthan consuming funeral options that acclaimed the individuality of the deceased, bereavedparticipants mobilised a discourse that carefully assessed the value and suitability of these

funeraloptions,andemphasised the significanceofpost-mortempractices that reflected theauthentic essence of the deceased. In contrast to popular thanatological suppositions thatconflate personalisation with transparency, bereaved participants emphasised the appeal ofprivacyandinformality,notingthattheseprioritiescontributedtothebiographicalintegrityofthedead.Ratherthanframingsuchactionsasadenialofdeath,bereavedparticipantsfeltthatthiswasonefinalacttoestablishanauthenticmemoryofanindividualthatalsoconferredaformoftranscendencetothedead.

At a theoretical level, the competing discourses of authenticity evident in this discussiondraw attention to the discursive struggles that occur and the relationships of power thatproduce both the professional and the consumer in contemporary society. These discoursesalso structure the social context of funeral options in consumer society, resisting the easyhegemony that underpins the assumption that the commodification of funeral options is anuncontested social trend. Instead, the divergent discourses of authenticity elucidated abovespeak to the complexity andmulti-layeredness of funerary practices and demonstrate howdiscoursesofdisposalarecontinuallyconstitutedandre-constituted.

Notes

1DeathCafésareasocialfranchisedevelopedinEnglandwhichprovideindividualswiththeopportunitytodiscussdeath

anddying.Theobjectiveofthisdevelopmentisdescribedasincreasing“awarenessofdeathwithaviewtowardhelping

people make the most of their (finite) lives” (http://deathcafe.com/what/). There are a number of international

developments with related goals. Fora such as the Death Salon in the United States

(www.orderofthegooddeath.com/death-salon#.VEHFLecfVBI), Dying Matters in England and Wales

(www.dyingmatters.org/) or The Groundswell Project in Australia (www.thegroundswellproject.com/) aim to promote

opendialogue(anddeathliteracy)arounddeath,dyingandbereavement.Someofthesegroupsexplicitlylinkopenness

withaneedtomakeplansfortheendoflife.Deathoverdinner.org,forexample,states:“Howwewanttodie–represents

themostimportantandcostlyconversationsAmericaisn’thaving”(http://deathoverdinner.org/).

2Conway(2013:336)specificallyassertsthatthisinterpretationofpersonalisationrepresentsmiddleclassexpressivism.

3Pseudonymshavebeenusedtoprotectparticipantanonymity.

4There is a clear link between the augmentation of funeral services and the professionalisation of the funeral directing

occupation.See,forexample,Emke(2002)andRasmussen(2007).

5Secularfuneralcelebrants(alsoknownascivilcelebrantsorhumanistofficiantsintheUK)presentlyconductmorethan

60percentofallfuneralsinNewZealand.Celebrantsemergedinthe1970sandwerecloselyassociatedwithincreasing

secularisationanddiversificationofbeliefsandlifestylesduringthisperiod(Macdonald2011:239).

6 Although this definition, as well as the broader debates about the nature of secularity and the historical processes

involvedinthisshift,continuetobecontested(BaldacchinoandKahn2011).

References

Adamson,S.,andHolloway,M.2012.Negotiatingsensitivitiesandgrapplingwithintangibles:experiencesfromastudyofspiritualityandfunerals.QualitativeResearch,12(6):735–752.

Aries, Philippe. 1974. The reversal of death: changes in attitudes toward death inWesternsocieties.AmericanQuarterly,26(5):536–560.

Arnold,Naomi.2012.It’saboutdying,naturally:alternativeburialsontherise.NelsonMail.www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/lifestyle-entertainment/weekend/7556969/Its-about-dying-naturally[Accessed4February2014].

Baldacchino, Jean-Paul, and Kahn, Joel S. 2011. Believing in a secular age: anthropology,sociologyandreligiousexperience.TheAustralianJournalofAnthropology,22(1):1–13.

Belich,James2001.Paradisereforged:Ahistoryof theNewZealandersfromthe1880stotheyear2000.Auckland:PenguinPress.

Bell,A. 2009.Dilemmasof settler belonging: roots, routes and redemption inNewZealandnationalidentityclaims.TheSociologicalReview,57(1):145–162.

Birchall, C. 2011. Introduction to “secrecy and transparency”: the politics of opacity andopenness.Theory,CultureandSociety,28(7–8):7–25.

Blundell,Kay.2014.Funeralcostsoverwhelmwidower.TheDominionPost.www.stuff.co.nz/national/9751156/Funeral-costs-overwhelm-widower[Accessed23March2014].

Carville,Olivia.2013.Kiwifuneralsgoglobalonline.FairfaxMedia.www.stuff.co.nz/national/9168340/Kiwi-funerals-go-global-online[Accessed14February2014].

Caswell,Glenys. 2011. Personalisation in Scottish funerals: individualised ritual or relationalprocess?Mortality,16(3):242–258.

Chapman,Katie,andO’Neil,Andrea.2014.DealingwithdeathinaKiwiway.TheDominionPost.www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/capital-life/9934484/Dealing-with-death-in-a-Kiwi-way[Accessed15May2014].

Charmaz,Kathy. 2006.Constructing grounded theory:A practical guide through qualitativeanalysis.London:Sage.

Colvin,Kirsten.2013.Preparingfordeathwithacoffeeandachat.DailyLife.www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/life/9289702/Preparing-for-death-with-a-coffee-and-a-chat[Accessed15February2014].

Conway, S. 2013. Representing dying, representing class? Social distinction, aestheticisation

andtheperformingself.Mortality,18(4):327–338.Crouch, Mira. 2004. Last matters: the latent meanings of contemporary funeral rites. In

Makingsenseofdyinganddeath,editedbyAndrewFagen.AmsterdamandNewYork:Rodopi,pp.125–140.

Davies, Douglas. 2002. Death, ritual, and belief: The rhetoric of funerary rites. London:Continuum.

Dickinson,GeorgeE.2012.Diversity indeath:bodydispositionandmemorialization. Illness,Crisis,andLoss,20(2):141–158.

Emke, I. 2002. Why the sad face? Secularization and the changing function of funerals inNewfoundland.Mortality,7(3):269–284.

Frith,Hannah,Raisborough,Jayne,andKlein,Orly.2012.Makingdeath“good”:instructionaltales for dying in newspaper accounts of Jade Goody’s death. Sociology of Health andIllness,35(3):419–433.

Garces-Foley, Kathleen, and Holcomb, Justin S. 2006. Contemporary American funerals:personalizing tradition. InDeath and religion in a changingworld, edited by KathleenGarces-Foley,pp.207–227.Armonk(NewYork):M.E.Sharpe.

Gorer,Geoffrey.1965.Death,grief,andmourningincontemporaryBritain.London:Cresset.Guest,Greg,Bunce,Arwen,andJohnson,Laura.2006.Howmanyinterviewsareenough?An

experimentwithdatasaturationandvariability.Fieldmethods,18(1):59–82.Harvey,Sarah.2012.Funeralfireworks…whyKiwisgooutwithabang.SundayStarTimes.

www.stuff.co.nz/national/6867468/Funeral-fireworks-why-Kiwis-go-out-with-a-bang[Accessed14February2014].

Heather,Ben.2014.Don’twearblack–thenewfuneraltraditions.TheDominionPost.www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9673518/Don’t-wear-black-the-new-funeral-traditions[Accessed13March2014].

Holloway,M.,Adamson,S.,Argyrou,V.,Draper,P.,andMariau,D.2013.“Funeralsaren’tnicebutitcouldn’thavebeennicer”.Themakingsofagoodfuneral.Mortality,18(1):30–53.

Hornborg, Anne-Christine. 2012. Are we all spiritual? A comparative perspective on theappropriationofanewconceptof spirituality.Journal for theStudyofSpirituality, 1(2):249–268.

Jalland,P.2006.Changingwaysofdeathintwentieth-centuryAustralia:War,medicine,andthefuneralbusiness.Sydney:UiniversityofNewWouthwalesPress.

Kearl, Michael C. and Jacobsen,Michael H. 2013. Time, late modernity and the demise offorever: frometernal salvation to completedbucket lists. InTaming time, timingdeath:Social technologiesandritual, editedbyDortheR.ChristensenandRaneWillerslev, pp.59–78.Farnham:Ashgate.

Long,S.O.,andBuehring,S.2014.Searchingforlifeindeath:celebratorymortuaryritualinthecontextofUSinterfaithfamilies.Mortality,19(1):80–100.

McAra,Sally.2007.Landofbeautifulvision:makingaBuddhistSacredPlaceinNewZealand.Honolulu:UniversityofHawai’iPress.

Macdonald, Julie. 2011.Contemporary ritual-makers: A study of independent celebrants inNewZealand(Unpublisheddoctoraldissertation).MasseyUniversity,PalmerstonNorth.

McManus, R., and Schäfer, C. 2014. Final arrangements: examining debt and distress.Mortality,19(4):379–397.

Meadows,Richard.2013.Funeralexpensesafactoflife.FairfaxMedia.www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/9471177/Funeral-expenses-a-fact-of-life.[Accessed14February2014].

O’Sullivan,Patrick.2014.Deathplanningapartoflife.HawkesBayToday.www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503462&objectid=11237987[Accessed13March2014].

Prendergast,David,Hockey,Jenny,andKellaher,Leonie.2006.Blowinginthewind?Identity,materiality, and the destinations of human ashes. Journal of the Royal AnthropologicalInstitute,12(4):881–898.

Quartier,T.2013.OntheborderofdeathdimensionsofDutchmourningrituals.InChangingEuropeandeathways, editedbyE.Venbrux,T.Quartier,C.Venhorst,andB.Mathijssen.ZurichandBerlin:LitVerlag,pp.191–211.

Ramshaw, E. J. 2010. The personalization of postmodern post-mortem rituals. PastoralPsychology,59(2):171–178.

Rasmussen, Shane E. 2007. Arbitrary traditionality: Cultural authenticity and modernmainstreamAmericandeathways.UnpublishedPhD,UniversityofLouisianaatLafayette.

Ritchie, Jenny, Morrison, Sandy, and Vaioleti, Timote. 2013. Transgressing boundaries ofprivate and public: auto-ethnography and intercultural funerals. Studies in SymbolicInteraction,40:95–126.

Roberts, Pamela. 2010.What now?Cremationwithout tradition.OMEGA–Journal of DeathandDying,62(1):1–30.

Rumble, H., Troyer, J., Walter, T., and Woodthorpe, K. 2014. Disposal or dispersal?EnvironmentalismandfinaltreatmentoftheBritishdead.Mortality,19(3):243–260.

Sanders,G.2010.Thedismaltradeascultureindustry.Poetics,38(1):47–68.Schäfer,Cyril. 2012.Corpses, conflict and insignificance?A critical analysis of post-mortem

practices.Mortality,17(4):305–321.Schröder, IngoW.2011.Preliminaryanthropologicalreflectionsonsecularismandsecularity.

Kultūrairvisuomenė,2(3):37–47.Schwass,Margot.2005.Lastwords:ApproachestodeathinNewZealand’sculturesandfaiths.

Wellington:BridgetWilliamsBooks.Simpson,Heather.2014.Treatingdeathastaboorisksbillsstress.MarlboroughExpress.

www.stuff.co.nz/marlborough-express/news/9716415/Treating-death-as-taboorisks-bills-

stress[Accessed14April2014].Staudt, Christina. 2014. Introduction: a bird’s eye view of the territory. In Our changing

journey to the end: Reshaping death, dying and grief in America, edited by ChristinaStaudtandHaroldEllens.SantaBarbara:Praeger,pp.3–24.

Stock,Rob.2012.Arewetoopoortodie.SundayStarTimes.www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/6867599/Are-we-too-poor-to-die[Accessed2February2014].

Stock,Rob.2014.MoreKiwispayingforfuneralsinadvance.SundayStarTimes.www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/business/9858533/More-Kiwis-paying-for-funerals-in-advance[Accessed1April2014].

Theodossopoulos, D. 2013. Laying claim to authenticity: five anthropological dilemmas.AnthropologicalQuarterly,86(2):337–360.

Tomas, N. 2013. Recognizing collective cultural property rights in a deceased – Clarke v.Takamore.InternationalJournalofCulturalProperty,20(3):333–348.

Turley,D.2005.Mortalityandconsumermotivation in thewritingsofZygmuntBauman. InInsideconsumption:Consumermotives,goals,anddesires,editedbyS.RatneshwarandD.G.Mick.Abingdon:Routledge;67–84.

Valentine,C.,andWoodthorpe,K.2013.Fromthecradletothegrave:funeralwelfarefromaninternationalperspective.SocialPolicyandAdministration.48(5):515–536.

Venbrux, Eric, Peelen, Janneke, and Altena, Marga. 2009. Going Dutch: Individualisation,secularisationandchangesindeathrites.Mortality,14(2):97–101.

Wilce, JamesM.2009.Crying shame:Metaculture,modernity, and the exaggerateddeathoflament.Chichester:Wiley-Blackwell.

Winkel, H. 2001. A postmodern culture of grief? On individualization of mourning inGermany.Mortality,6(1):65–79.

Woodthorpe, K. V. 2014. I can’t afford to die: Addressing funeral poverty. InternationalLongevityCentre.

Wortman,C.B.,andSilver,R.C.2001.Themythsofcopingwithlossrevisited.InHandbookofbereavement research: Consequences, coping, and care, edited by M. S. Stroebe, R. O.Hansson,W.Stroebe,andH.Schut.Washington,DC:AmericanPsychologicalAssociation,pp.405–429.

5Custodyofthecorpse

ControllingalkalinehydrolysisinUSdeathcaremarkets

PhilipR.Olson

Controllingfuneraltechnologies

IntheprefacetoThisRepublicofSuffering,HarvardhistorianDrewGilpinFaustwrites:

It iswork todealwith thedead… to remove them in the literal senseofdisposingof theirbodies, and it is alsowork toremove them in amore figurative sense. The bereaved struggle to separate themselves from the dead through ritual andmourning. Families and communities must repair the rent in the domestic and social fabric, and societies, nations andculturesmustworktounderstandandexplainunfathomableloss.

(2008,p.xiv)

Funeralwork isperformedbyawidevarietyofactors,eachofwhomhasdifferent rolesandresponsibilitiesinthecollaborativeprocessesofcaringforthedeadandthebereaved.InantebellumAmerica,thedecedent’sfamilywastypicallyresponsibleforperformingmostofthiswork– though the dying, too,were expected to do thework of preparing themselvespsychologically and spiritually for a “Good Death.” Additional funeral work was dispersedacross a variety of trades, including clergy, carpenters, liverypersons, blacksmiths, surgeons,druggists, and chemists, each of whom performed specific types of funeral work ad hoc(Laderman, 2003; Plater, 1996, pp. 41–49). After the Civil War, growing numbers ofentrepreneurial undertakers perceived the social and economic advantages of consolidatingfuneralwork,therebyinitiatingtheprocessofprofessionalizingfuneralwork.

Today, funeral professionals play a prominent role in both the literal and figurativeremovals of thedead from theworldof the living in theUS, providinggoods and servicesintendedtomanageboththedecompositionofdeadbodies,aswellasthedecompositionofsocialties.Thesetwoformsofremovalroughlycorrespondtotwobroadcategoriesoffuneralwork,whichsociologistGeorgeSanderslabels“frontstage”and“backstage”work(Sanders2010,p.56).AccordingtoSanders, thisdistinctioncaptures“adivisionof labor inwhichthefront-staff are mostly comprised of salespeople and bereavement counselors … while

embalmers work behind the scenes,” preparing dead bodies for their separation from theliving (2010, p. 56). Several death studies scholars rightlynote thatUS funeral professionalstodayseektode-emphasizetheir“backstage”work,andtopromotetheir“frontstage”work(Sanders, 2010; Schäfer, 2007; Laderman, 2003; Emke, 2002; Prothero, 2001; Cahill, 1995).Indeed, funeral industry marketing executive Dean Lambert (2011, p. 48) urges funeraldirectors tofocus lessonthedispositionofcorpsesandmoreon“newandcreativewaystocelebratelivesandhelppeoplegrieve.”

Funeralprofessionals’prefermentoftheirown“frontstage”workfeeblydisguisesthefactthatphysicallyworkingwithdeadbodies continues tooccupyacentralplace in the funeralprofessions.Funeral consumersmay turn togrief counselors, eventplanners, andmerchantslocated, as Lambert puts it, “outside the traditional funeral industry” (2011, 48); but asHowarth(1996,p.15)remindsus,“[m]odernfuneraldirectorsacquirecontroloverthefuneralserviceviatheircustodyofthecorpse.”Moreover,funeralprofessionals’commercialcustodyof the corpse has been achieved by way of funeral professionals’ control over thetechnologicalmeans of body preparation and disposition. It iswell known that embalmingtechnologies played a powerful role in the professionalization of funeral work in the US.Throughtheappropriationandstandardizationofembalming,USundertakerstransformedthecareof the corpse into a technical skill, thepracticeofwhich continues tobe controlledbyprofessionalfuneraldirectorsandembalmers.AsLambertacknowledges,

[t]he average consumer neither has the skills nor the desire to perform the technical function forwhich funeral directorsreceivetraining.Itisahighlyspecializedtrade,whichisabarriertoentryintotherealmofembalmingandrestorativearts.

(2011,p.48)

Technological shifts and innovations canunsettleanynumberofboundaries thatwork toorganizeanddefinecommunitiesofpractice,givingpractitionersreasontoconfrontanewtheprevailingpractices,technologies,norms,professionalidentities,divisionsof labor,andsocialrelationsthathavebecomeroutineovertime.Thefuneralindustryisnoexception.Considerthe case of cremation’s increasing popularity in the US since the last half of the twentiethcentury. Early in their concurrent histories, embalming funeral directors and cremationistsviewed themselves as belonging to distinct communities of practice. Until the end of thetwentieth century, funeral directors viewed cremationists as industry outsiders, portrayingcremation as undignified, irreligious, and even un-American (Prothero, 2001, pp. 174–182).Today,cremationisdecidedlymainstream,andmoreandmoreUSfuneralhomesnowhousecremationretortsoftheirown,thoughmanycrematoriaoperateindependentlyofanyfuneralhome. To accommodate cremation, funeral professionals have had to domore than simplymake way for new machines, tools, and techniques; they have also had to welcome newfuneral actors, and retool their own professional identities. Indeed, funeral directors’ de-emphasis of back stagework is itself a retooling of professional identity in response to the

ongoing supplantation of a once identity-conferring technique (embalming) by a oncedisparagedprocess(cremation).

Thischapterexaminesfuneralactors’effortstocontrolaverynewdispositiontechnologythathasbeguntoenterNorthAmericanfuneralmarkets (andonlyNorthAmericanfuneralmarkets)over the last fouryears,namely,alkalinehydrolysis (AH).The introductionofAHtechnologiesintoUSfuneralworkinvolvesmorethanthepresenceofnewmachinesuponthefuneralstage;italsoimplicatesestablishedfuneralactorsinnewways,whileintroducingnewactorswhowishtocreateaplaceforthemselveswithinthefuneral industry.DrawinguponintensiveinterviewswithfuneralprofessionalsandAHsystemdevelopers,industryliterature,deathstudiesliterature,andhistoricalresources,IarguethatUSfuneralprofessionals’ongoingefforts to control AH technologies involve the management of a number of professionalboundaries,includingthedissociationoffuneralcontextsandfuneraltechnologiesfromnon-funeralcontextsandnon-funeraltechnologies;theseparationofprofessionalfuneralexpertisefrom other kinds of expertise; and the distinction between funeral industry “insiders” andindustry “outsiders.” Industrydebates aboutAHaffordus anopportunity towitness funeralprofessionals’ efforts to manage their professional jurisdiction, identity, and occupationalexpertiseinrelationtoapotentiallydisruptivetechnology.

Alkalinehydrolysisinfocus

AHisareductivechemicalprocessthroughwhichtissuesaredissolvedinaheated(sometimespressurized)solutionofwaterandstrongalkali.Infunerarycontexts,1asinglebodyissealedinacylindrical,stainlesssteelvesselintowhichthealkalisolutionisadded.Thedesignofthevesselandthedurationoftheprocessvary,dependinguponthetemperatureandpressureatwhich the process is carried out. Low temperature, unpressurized systems can hydrolyze ahumanbodyinabout12hours.Athighertemperaturesandpressurestheprocesscantakeaslittle as three to four hours. The process yields an inert, sterile effluent and brittle bonematerial.Theeffluentcanbedisposedofthroughmunicipalsewersystems,providedthefluidiscooledandthepHadjustedtomeetlocalrequirements.Thebrittlebonematerialiscooled,dried,andcrushed,andmaybereturnedtothedecedent’sfamily.AHremainslegalinonlyinnine US states and one Canadian Province since its initial introduction into US death caremarkets in early 2011, and today only a handful of funeral service providers offer AHdispositionasanoptiontotheircustomers.

ThestoryofAHoriginatesinnon-funerarycontextsnearly20yearsbeforeitsintroductioninto US and Canadian funeral markets. In the early 1990s, two biomedical researchers atAlbanyMedicalCollege,Dr.GordonKayeandDr.PeterWeber,usedAHtodisposeofdead

laboratory animals. In 1994, Kaye andWeber’s now-defunct company,Waste Reduction byWasteReduction(WR2),wasawardedapatentthatdescribesanapparatus2thatisnowwidelyknown as a “tissue digester” or “caustic digester.”Versions of this apparatus continue to beusedinternationallyinavarietyofnon-funerarycontexts,includingbio-containmentfacilities,biomedical and veterinary research facilities, diagnostic centers, the food service andpharmaceuticalindustries.3Manyofthesedigestersaredesignedtohydrolyzelargeamountsofanimalwaste (between1,500and10,000pounds) inasinglecycle.But in2005,WR2alsodesigned and built the first single-human-body digester for the Mayo Clinic’s anatomicalbequests program. It was this machine that paved the way for AH’s introduction into thefuneralindustry.Byprocessinghumanbodiesoneatatime,theMayoClinic’sAHsystemfitwith a prevailingWestern funerary norm that prohibits the comingling ofmultiple humanremains,intheinterestofshowingrespect(materiallyandsymbolically)fortheindividualityof the human person even after death. After the collapse of WR2, JoeWilson and SandySullivan(chiefsofWR2’sUSandUKoperations,respectively)eachformedtheirown,separatecompaniesdevotedtodevelopingAHtechnologies,andtobuildingamarketforAHwithinthefuneralindustry.Wilson’sIndiana-basedBio-ResponseSolutions,Inc.(BRS)andSullivan’sScotland-basedResomation,Ltd.aretheleadingmanufacturersofsingle-bodyAHsystemsforcommercialfuneralapplication.

DespitethefactthatAHtechnologiesenteredfuneralmarkersonlyaftertheywerefirstputtouseinavarietyofnon-funerarycontexts,somefuneralprofessionalsarekeentoinsistuponindustryjurisdictionoverAHdispositiontechnologies,andtoestablishregulationsthatwouldallow only licensed funeral professionals to offer funerary AH. For example, Ohio funeraldirectorandAHpioneerJeffEdwardsurgesregulatorstokeepAHwithinthefuneralindustry,andtopreventindustryoutsiders–Edwardsmentionstireshopowners–from“takingaformof disposition from the industry” (Parmalee, 2011b, p. 24). Edwards was the first funeraldirectortoofferAHdispositiontohiscustomers,andoverthecourseofroughlytwomonthshehydrolyzed19bodies,beforetheOhioDepartmentofHealth(ODH)orderedhimtostop.While Edwards views AH as a disposition technology that falls squarely within theoccupational jurisdiction of licensed funeral directors, from the point of view of the OhioBoard of Embalmers and Funeral Directors (OBEFD), Edwards’ use of AH jeopardized hisstandingasalegitimatefuneralprofessional,“[s]pecificallyforusinganunauthorizedmethodofdispositionondeadhumanbodies…”(Parmalee,2011b,p.25).WithoutspeculatingaboutthemotivesbehindtheODHandOBEFD’sresistancetoEdwardsadoptionofAH,Edwards’case makes clear Bowker and Star’s observation that membership within communities ofpractice“largelyrevolvesaroundthenatureoftherelationshipwiththeobjects”thatmembersviewasbelongingtothatcommunity,andthat“[a]cceptanceorlegitimacyderivesfromthefamiliarityofactionmediatedbymemberobjects”(2000,p.299).Indeed,thetransitionofAHfromlaboratorycontextsintofuneralcontextsinvolvesbothatransformationofthematerial

and symbolic identity of AH systems themselves, as well as disruption of the social andprofessionalidentitiesoffuneraldirectors.

Technologiesandidentitiesintransition

A comparative history of the funeralization of arterial embalming in France and the USillustrateshowjurisdictionalclaimstoaparticulartechnologycanshapedeathcaremarkets,aswell as professional and technological identities. PascaleTrompette andMélanieLemonnier(2009) point out that, in nineteenth-century France, physicians proclaimed exclusivejurisdictionoverembalming.ResistingtheeffortsofFrenchembalmingpioneerJ.N.Gannal(1791–1852) tocreate “anewoccupation (‘embalmers’),distinct fromthehealthprofession,”physicians reproached Gannal “for practicing without the slightest medical diploma”(TrompetteandLemonnier,2009,p.13).InFrance,itwasnotuntilthelatetwentiethcenturythat embalmers began “to build their occupation as an independent body of experts”(Trompette and Lemonnier, 2009, p. 18) with “control over the corpse” (Trompette andLemonnier,2009,p.16).IntheUS,however,theprofessionalizationofembalmerstookplacemuchmorerapidly.SpurredonbytheexigenciesofdealingwithcorpsesproducedbytheUSCivil War (Faust, 2008), and unencumbered by vigorous resistance from physicians,embalmingundertakersswiftlyformedthematerialinfrastructureandprofessionalnetworksuponwhich to build a unique professional identity and to direct a consolidated death caremarket.

Atthesametimethatembalminghelpedtocreateauniquesocialandprofessionalspaceforfuneralprofessionals,thisspacealsotransformedembalmingtechniquesthemselves.

For example, before suffusing the corpse with embalming fluids, the funeral embalmer,unlike the anatomical embalmer, “sets” the body’s facial features in preparation for ritualviewing. Furthermore, the arterial embalming fluids used in typical funerary contexts aremuch less concentrated than those used to preserve corpses for anatomic study. A lessconcentratedfluidyieldsamore“lifelike”softnessinthetissuesofacorpsethatisintendedforviewing within the brief interlude between death and final disposition (usually burial orcremation). Furthermore, funeral embalming standardly involves the aspiration (suction-removal) of organ material from the body cavity – a procedure that is obviously notperformed upon bodies whose cavity organs are to be preserved for study. Thus, whileembalming technologies helped to create a unique social space of professional death care,distinct from, albeit intimately connected to, domestic, medical, and clerical domains,embalmingtechnologieswerethemselvestransformedtofittheuniquenessofthespacestheyhelpedtocreate.

Alkalinehydrolysisintransition

The uniqueness of funeral contexts from other professional, commercial, and industrialcontextsismaintainednotonlybymanagingtheboundariesofprofessionalidentity,butalsothrough themanagement of the boundaries of technological identity.Consider for exampleSwedishbiologistSusanneWiigh-Mäsak’sinterestincontrollingthetechnologicalidentityofher innovative disposition technique, Promession. In 2001,Wiigh-Mäsak founded PromessaOrganic,acompanydevotedtodevelopingamethodoffreezedryingdeadhumanbodiesandprocessing them into compost. According to science writer Mary Roach, Wiigh-Mäsak isdecidedlyagainsttheideaofmarketingPromessionasatechnologyforthedisposalofdeadanimals. Paraphrasing Wiigh-Mäsak, Roach writes, “[i]f Promessa becomes known as acompanythatdisposesofdeadcowsorpets…itwilllosethedignitynecessaryforahumanapplication” (2003, p. 274). Given that AH technologies entered funeral markets after theywere firstused innon-funerarycontexts todisposeofanimalcarcasses,wemightexpect toobserveefforts,onthepartoffuneralstakeholders,tocontrolandtransformtheidentitiesofAH technologies as they transition into funerary contexts. The record does not disappointthose expectations. SamanthaWilson, a biologistwithAH systemmanufacturerBRS, statestheproblemclearly:“Thescientificcommunityhasbeenusingthe[AH]processforwelloveradecade,butthis[thefuneralindustry]isanentirelydifferentindustrythatrequiresutmostsensitivity”(Kenevich,2011,p.17).

Onewayinwhichfuneralveteransandnewcomersalikehavesoughttocontroltheidentityof funeraryAH is by renaming the technologies. Today, funeraryAH technologies go by avariety of names, including alkaline hydrolysis, flameless cremation, and by the cremation-signalingtradenamesBio-Cremation,Resomation,andAquamation.Butin2003,whenMaryRoach’sbestseller,Stiff,waspublished,AHhadnotyetdebutedonthefuneralscene,andhadnot yet acquired a distinctive funerary appellation. In her book, Roach refers to envisionedfunerary AH systems as “mortuary digesters,” adopting a version of the names standardlygiven toAHsystems innon-funerarycontexts (i.e., “tissuedigesters”or “causticdigesters”).Yet,asRoachpointsout,theAHsystemusedbytheFloridaStateAnatomicalBoard(FSAB)to dispose of donated human cadavers has since 1998 operated under the name, “reductivecremation,” a classification that facilitatedAH’s implementation under Florida law (2003, p.254). As I have indicated elsewhere, several other states that have legalized AH for thedisposition of dead human bodies have elected to classify or regulate AH as a form ofcremation(Olson2014,682–683).Withrespect to thefuneralizationofAHtechnologies, thisrenamingismuchmorethanamatteroflegalclassificationandregulation;itisalsoessentialfordistinguishingnon-funeraryAHsystemsfromfuneraryAHsystems(regardlessofwhetherAH is viewed as a form of cremation or as an alternativemethod of disposition), and fordistinguishingtheprofessionalidentityoffuneralserviceprovidersfromlaboratoryworkers.

First,thenamesgiventofuneraryAHvisuallyandaurallylinkthetechnologytocremation,thereby shaping the identity of the technology by associating it with technologies alreadyinternal to the funeral industry. Second, as AH system developer Joe Wilson puts it, “thelaboratoryterm‘tissuedigester’didnotbearanysensitivitytothefuneralindustry”(Wilson,2011, p. 32). In particular, use of the laboratory term in funerary contexts would overlookfuneralprofessionals’uniqueexpertiseinoverseeingthesacredriteofpreparinganddisposingofhumanremains.JoeWilson’scompany,BRS,Inc.(BRS),whichmanufacturesbothfuneraryAHsystemsandnon-funeraryAHsystems,enforcesthedistinctivenessofprofessionalfuneralexpertise, and the distinctiveness of funerary AH systems, by establishing a separate webdomainforitsfunerarysystems,andbyusingtheterms“digester”and“tissuedigester”onlyin reference to its laboratory systems” (Bio-Response Solutions, Inc., 2008a; Bio-ResponseSolutions,Inc.,2008b).

It isnotonlynamingpractices that areused todistance funeraryAHsystems fromnon-funeraryAHsystems.AHsystemdevelopersalsodistancefuneraryandnon-funerarysystemsfrom one another by adapting the design of AH systems to both fit and reinforce thedistinctivenessoffunerarycontexts.InStiff,Roachreportsonherencounterwithalargenon-funeraryAHsystemoperatedbyaveterinaryschooltodisposeoflargeamountsofbiologicalmaterial.Thetypeofsystemsheobservesiscommoninnon-funerarycontexts.Insystemslikethese,thevesselsinwhichtheAHprocesstakesplacelooklikehuge,stainlesssteelpressurecookers,withastainlesssteellidthatislatchedtothetopofthe“pot”whenthesystemisinoperation. Depending on the size of the digester, large systems can process up to fourthousandpoundsofbiologicalmaterialatonce.Thematerialtobehydrolyzedisloweredintothevessel fromabove, and innon-funerary contexts the remainsofmultipleorganismsareroutinely processed simultaneously.While providing a graphic description of the veterinaryAH system at work, Roach perceptively reassures her reader, “Of course, for mortuarydigestions, some alterations will bemade in the name of dignity” (2003, p. 256). Stiff waspublishedtwoyearsbeforethedesignofAHsystemsbegantoadapttotheuniquesocialandprofessional spaces of US death care culture, but Roach rightly identifies the principalconsiderationthatcontinuestoguidetheredesignoffuneraryAHsystems,namely,morality.

Critics who categorically oppose funerary AH commonly contend that AH fails todemonstrate proper respect for the sacred human corpse. A variety of concerns about thedignified treatment of human remains have been raised in the name of publicmorality ingeneralandreligiousethicsinparticular.AdversariesofAHcommonlyexpressdisgustatthethoughtofsacredhumanremainsbeingflusheddownthedrainlikeeverydaybodilywaste,andatthethoughtofthoseremainssomehowfindingtheirwaybackintothebodiesof thelivingthroughfoodandwater (Olson,2014).Butevenamongstproponentsof funeraryAH,themoralcharacteroffuneraryAHsystemsisamatterofseriousconcern.DisputesaboutthemoralityoffuneraryAHareplayedoutdiscursivelyandmateriallyinrelationtoanumberof

AH system design features that are laden with moral significance. One design featureimmediatelystandsoutas themostobvious (andmost important) feature thatsets funeraryAHsystemsapart fromnon-funerarysystems; funeraryAHsystemsarealwaysdesigned toprocess only one human body at a time. The exclusive use of single-body systems withinfunerarycontextsismorallyrequisite,asthisdesignfeaturedemonstratesrespectforawidelyrecognizedmoralrevulsiontotheideaofcominglinghumanremains.SomeAHproponentsarguethatfunerarysystemsdomorethansimplyconformtothenormativeinjunctionagainstcomingling, theyconformmoreperfectly thancremation systems. Inanarticlepublished inThe National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, Sister Renee Mirkes writes, while “cross-contamination of bodily remains between cremations is unavoidable … [t]he alkalinehydrolysis unit is completely cleaned between cycles, so there is no cross-contamination ofonebody’sremainswithanother”(2008,pp.687–688).

A second design feature that distinguishes funerary AH systems from non-funerary AHsystemshas todowith thepositionororientationof thebodywhen it isplaced in theAHcylinder, and while the AH process takes place. In non-funerary systems, and in systemsdesignedforpetfunerals,theremainsareloweredintothevesselfromabove.Butinsystemsdesigned for human funerals, bodies are always slid into the vessel horizontally, therebyconforming to thenormativebodyorientationof traditional cremationand earthburial.Aspointedout(Olson2014,pp.685–686),theorientationofthebodyduringtheAHprocessisapointofcontentionamongstAHsystemdesigners.Forexample,SteveSchaal,presidentoftheNorth American Division of Matthews Cremation has criticized the design of competitorBRS’s funerary systems because theBRS systems tip the vessel at an angle during theAHprocess.AccordingtoSchaal,BRS’ssystemsfailtorespectthedignityofthehumancorpsebytippingitatanangleduringtheAHprocess.4

In preparation for their introduction into sacred funerary contexts, the technologicalidentitiesofAHsystemshavereconfiguredandpurifiedoftheirpreexistingassociationswithlaboratory animal disposal. This reconfiguration and purification have taken place boththroughtherenamingAHtechnologies,andbyadaptingthedesignofAHsystemstofittheuniqueness of funerary contexts. Efforts to separate funerary AH from non-funerary AHconformtoandfacilitatebroaderinterestsininsulatingthesocialspacesofdeathfromothersocialspaces.Inthemid-nineteenthcentury,Gannalappealedtotheseparatenessoftheworldof the dead from the world of the living as grounds for liberating embalming from theexclusivecontrolofphysicians,andforcreatinganewoccupationalidentity.“[W]hat,”Gannalasks,

is the subtle link between the art of healing a person who is ill and that of embalming a dead man. – As far as I’mconcerned,Ican’tseeanyworthmentioning.YouaskmewhatrightIhavetoembalmcorpses…Why,Ihavetherightofanembalmer;theanswerissimple.

(1845citedinTrompetteandLemonnier,2009,p.5)

In the US today, funeral professionals routinely and rapidly remove dead bodies fromdomestic or medical spaces, transporting the dead to specialized funeral spaces (typicallyfuneralhomesorcrematoria)inwhich,andthroughwhich,funeralprofessionalsassertexpertauthority over the bodies of the dead. The case of AH reveals that the management ofdisposition technologies continues to be an important part of the work that funeralprofessionalsdotocreateandmaintainauniqueprofessionalidentitywithinadistinctsocialspace.

Professionalidentityintransition

Death care scholar Spencer Cahill argues, based on his ethnographic study of a cohort ofmortuary science students, that the professional identity of occupational neophytes isgroundedin

an occupation’s publicly recognized claim to a distinctive and definitive occupational jurisdiction…. [O]ccupationswith adefinitivelicenseto“carryoutactivitiesratherdifferentfromotherpeople”haveafoundationonwhichtobuildneophytes’professionalidentities.

(1999,p.117)

Onekeywayinwhichfuneralprofessionalsmaintaincontroloverthedeadhumanbody(andthusdeathcaremarkets)isbydefiningauniquesocialspaceoverwhichtheythemselveshaveauthoritative,expert jurisdiction.Thepresentstudydemonstrates thatone importantway inwhich funeral professionals manage the boundaries of their professional jurisdiction is byexercisingcontrolovertheidentitiesofthetechnologiesthatareusedtoperformworkthatisspecifictotheirprofessionalidentity.Yetnewtechnologiesarenotsimplypassiveinrelationtofixedprofessionalidentities;newtechnologiesalsoacttochangeprofessionalidentities.InwhatfollowsIwillexaminetheimpactoffuneraryAHonUSfuneralprofessionals’socialandoccupationalidentityasmoralauthoritiesandtechnicalexpertswithrespecttothedisposalofdeadhumanbodies.

Throughthestandardizationoffuneralembalming,USundertakerstransformedthecareofdeadbodiesintoatechnicaloccupationthatrequiredspecializedknowledge,practicaltraining,andskill.ThelinkbetweenembalmingandtheprofessionalidentitiesofUSfuneraldirectorsisevidentinthewordsofonemortuarysciencestudentinterviewedbyCahill:“[T]heonlytimeyou feel like a real funeral director is in the embalming lab. The rest of the time, you justmemorizethingsyou’regonnaforget”(1999,p.115).OnecrucialreasonforwhyembalminghasbeensointegraltoUSfuneraldirectors’professionalidentityisthatembalmersthemselvesaretheultimateauthoritiesontheskilledtechno-artistryofembalming.RecallthatLambertspecificallyidentifiesembalming,butnotcremation,asuniquetofuneraldirectors’“technicalfunction” and “specialized trade.”Moreover, bydisdainfully referring to direct cremation as

“bake and shake” (Prothero, 2001, p. 175), funeral directors’ have evoked the artlessexpediencyofafamiliarconveniencefoodtocriticizecremation.

Asisthecasewithcremation,oneneednothavehighlyspecializedknowledgeortechnicaltrainingtooperateafuneraryAHsystem.AsfuneraryAHproviderMikePhillipsofCentralFloridaCasketStoreandFuneralChapelputsit,“Icouldpullsomeoneinoffthestreet,giventhemthismanual,andtheycouldoperateitthemselves.Anybodycoulddothis.”5Andwhilegiving me a tour of the Resomation-built AH system he operates at Anderson-McQueenFuneralHome, JohnAnders referred to thepipes that feedand relieve theAHsystemasa“plumber’snightmare.”Similarly,hereferredtothesystem’scircuitpanelasan“electrician’snightmare.”To funeralprofessionals likeAnders, the technicaldetailsof theAHsystemarenotonlyunknownbutalsosomewhatintimidating.Andersiscontenttoconsignresponsibilityfortheplumbingandelectricaldetailstospecialistsoutsidehisprofession.Asisthecasewithfunerary incineration technologies, deep technical expertise is inessential as a basis forclaiming professional authority over funerary AH technologies. Lamenting cremation’sconsumer status as an alternative to funeral services centered on the skillfully embalmedcorpse (Parmalee 2011a, p. 12), Edwards also explicitly articulates concern about theprofessional consequences of further deskilling funeral work through AH. Without strictregulation, Edwards worries, unskilled business persons outside of the funeral profession(Edwardsmentionsa shopowner)couldbeginofferingAHto funeralconsumers (Parmalee2011b, p. 24), thereby weakening funeral professionals’ exclusive jurisdiction over thecommercialcareofdeadhumanbodies.

The introduction of AH technologies into US funeral markets involves more than thepresenceofnewmachinesuponthefuneralstage;italsoimplicatesestablishedfuneralactorsinnewways,andintroducesnewactorswhowishtocreateaplaceforthemselveswithinthefuneralindustry.Indeed,thestatusoffuneralactorsasprofessional“insiders”or“outsiders”isintimately bound up with the “insider” or “outsider” status of the technologies they use.EdwardshaseveryreasontobesensitivetothewaysinwhichtheindeterminatestatusofAHtechnologiescandestabilizetheboundariesoffuneralprofessionalism.AlthoughEdwardswasno newcomer to the funeral profession, having enjoyed professional status as a licensedfuneral director for several years prior to offering AH, his work with AH technologiesthreatenedhisstatusasamemberingoodstandingofthecommunityoffuneralprofessionals– at least in the eyes of the OBEFD, which accused Edwards of engaging in “immoral ornonprofessional conduct…” (Parmalee 2011, p. 25). It is understandable, then, that Edwardsinsists upon the insider status of funeraryAH, for if AH technologieswere internal to thefuneralindustry,thenEdwards’useofthosetechnologieswouldnotthreatenhisprofessionalstatus. Moreover, the national media attention given to Edwards’ controversial use of AHtriggered concern amongst subsequent adopters of AH technologies. One early adopterexpressed disappointment about the way in which AH was introduced into Ohio funeral

markets.“Itcausedsomeotherstatestodig inrightaway,”statesJasonBradshaw,“andthisone [Edwards] is kind of a rogue person out there doing this, and it gave it [alkalinehydrolysis]more of this rogue status.”6 Bradshawworries that AH’s status as a legitimatefuneral technology could be damaged ifAH is used by rogues, “out there,”whose outsiderstatusrubsoffontheidentityofthetechnologiesthemselves.

TheperceivedlegitimacyoffuneraryAHdependsnotonlyontherelationshipbetweenAHtechnologiesandtheprofessionalstatusofAHserviceproviders,butalsoontherelationshipbetweenAHtechnologiesandtheprofessionalstatusofAHsystemengineers,manufacturers,anddistributors.EstablishedfuneralprofessionalswhoofferAHdependuponnewactorswhopossessatechno-scientificexpertiseregardingAHsystems.Thisexpertiseentersintofuneralwork partly in the form of skills that are designed into or embedded in AH systemsthemselves:skillsthatfuneralprofessionalswhooperateAHsystemsneednot(andmostoftendonot) possess. Established actors’ newfounddependence generates uncertainties about thegroundsuponwhichauthorityoverfuneraryAHmaybeclaimed,andblurstheboundariesoffuneralprofessionalismingeneral.Establishedfuneralprofessionals’lackoftechnicalexpertisemayprovidenewactors,whopossessno formal funeral training,withgrounds forclaimingstatusasfuneralindustryexpertsorinsiders.BRS’sJoeWilsonconsidershimself“partofthefuneralindustry,”andhiscompanyhasplanstoofferAHdispositionforpetsbyestablishingapet-losscenterinthecompany’snewplant–thoughWilsonstatesthatBRScurrentlyhasnointerestinmovingintothehumandispositionbusiness.7BRSisafuneralnewcomer,andthecompany’s relationship to the funeral industry is mediated only through the funerary AHsystems itmanufactures.Meanwhile, BHS continues tomanufactureAH systems for use inpharmaceutical and bio-containment contexts, pointing out that BRS is “all about killingmicrobes.”8 Lacking formal training as a funeral director, Wilson understandably positionshimself as a techno-scientific expert with “35 years’ experience in designing and buildingbiohazardous processing systems for medical facilities and biocontainment laboratories,”addingthatBRShas“themostexperiencedengineeringteamintheindustry”(Wilson,2012,p.1). Yet according to early funerary AH adopters Jim Bradshaw and his son Jason, ofMinnesota-basedBradshawFuneralHomes,Wilsonis“notconnectedwiththeindustry,”andis“sortofanindustryoutsider.”9FortheBradshaws,theprofessionalidentityofanAHsystemsupplier can affect the legitimacy of the technology itself. “I think we felt,” states JasonBradshaw,“thatwearedoingsomethingthatwasoutsidethenormenoughwherewewantedourown legitimacycomingfromacompanythatwasconnected in the industry.”10 In 2011,theBradshawspurchasedanAHsystembuiltbyResomation,Ltd.,butdistributedbytheonehundredyearoldfuneralgiant,MatthewsInternational,aleadingmanufacturerofcremationretorts, and a supplier of a wide range of memorialization products and funeral industryservices.

Resomation,Ltd. distances its funeraryAH systems fromnon-funeraryprecursors in two

ways: firstbyavailing itselfof thedecidedly insiderstatusofMatthewsInternational,whichResomationhas appointed as the sole distributor ofResomation systems inNorthAmerica;secondbymanufacturingonlyfuneraryAHsystems.OneoftheleadingpublicproponentsofResomation’s AH systems, Dean Fisher, appeals to his own funeral pedigree to reinforceResomation’s funerary fitness. Fisher, who heads UCLA’s anatomical donations program(which operates a Resomation-builtAH system), grounds hisAH expertise primarily in hisstatusasafuneralindustryinsider.Ina2012articleaboutAHregulationpublishedinaleadingfuneraltradejournal,TheDirector,Fisherproposesanumberofregulatorypolicies fromhispositionas“alicensedfuneraldirectorfor27years,”butsecondarilyassomeonewhohas“astrong working knowledge of alkaline hydrolysis” (Fisher, 2012, p. 34). Fisher does notemphasize his technical expertise, but instead draws particular attention tomoral concernsregardingtheregulationofAHsystems,notably,concernsaboutthedignifiedtreatmentofthehumancorpse,thepreventionofthecominglingofhumanremains,andthepurityofthebonemattertobereturnedtodecedents’families(Fisher,2012).Fisher’sinsistenceuponthemoralpurity of funerary AH systems both fits and reinforces funeral professionals’ belief in theimportanceofmaintainingauniqueprofessionalidentitywithinadistinctsocialspace.

Conclusions

USfuneralprofessionals’senseoftheirownidentitiesischanging.Funeralprofessionalshavetraditionally justified theircustodyof thecorpsebothbywayof their technicalexpertise incaringforthebodiesofthedead,andbywayoftheirperceivedmoralauthorityregardingthedignifiedhandlingofhumancorpses.But the increasingdivisionof funeral labor into“frontstage”and“backstage”worksignalsawillingnessamongstfuneralprofessionalstotolerateasomewhatfracturedprofessionalidentity.Andinlightoftheelevationoffrontstagework,thesentimentexpressedbyonemortuarysciencestudentinterviewedbyCahill–“theonlytimeyou feel like a real funeral director is in the embalming lab”– is undoubtedly losing someprofessionalpower.Nevertheless, tolerancefordiversityorambiguitywithintheboundariesof funeral professionalism does not imply tolerance for ambiguity at the fringes of funeralprofessionalism. “Ifwe start decidingwe’re going to play on the fringes, that’swhere anyindustry gets into trouble,” notes early AH adopter Jim Bradshaw.11 I follow Cahill inmaintaining that a keyway inwhich funeral professionalsmaintain control over the deadhumanbody isbydefiningaunique social spaceoverwhich theyalonehave jurisdiction. Ioffer that the introduction of AH technologies into US funeral markets obligates funeralprofessionalstoperformtheprofessionallaborofsimultaneouslymanagingtheboundariesoftheir professional identity, aswell asmanaging the technological identities of funeraryAH

systems. Indeed, AH developers and AH providers are currently working out theirprofessionalidentitiesontheverysurfacesoftheAHsystemstheydesignanduse.FuneraryAHtechnologiesmayallowactorswhopossessno formal trainingasembalmersor funeraldirectorstoclaiminclusionasfuneralprofessionalsorexperts.Ontheotherhand,thefuneralindustry’s current de-emphasis of back stage work could supply funeral professionals withgroundstoresisttheinclusionoftheseactors,thoughpossiblyattheexpenseofmarginalizingthebackstagework(andworkers)uponwhomfrontstagefuneralprofessionalslargelyrelyinordertoretaincontroloverthedeadhumanbodyinUSdeathcaremarkets.

Notes

1Iusetheterm“funerary”specificallytorefertohumanfuneralcontexts.

2USPatentOffice,PatentNo.5,332,532.

3TelephoneinterviewwithJoeWilson,CEOofBio-ResponseSolutions,Inc.(Conducted6January2014).

4 Interview with Stephen Schaal, President, North American Region, Matthews International Cremation Division.

(ConductedinCharlotte,NC,10November2012).

5Telephone interviewwithMikePhillips,FuneralDirectorandOwner,CentralFloridaCasketStoreandFuneralChapel.

(Conducted15January2014).

6InterviewwithJimandJasonBradshawofBradshawFuneralServices.(ConductedinStillwater,MN,3July2013).

7TelephoneinterviewwithJoeWilson,6January2014.

8TelephoneinterviewwithJoeWilson,6January2014.

9InterviewwithJimandJasonBradhsaw,3July2013.

10InterviewwithJimandJasonBradshaw,3July2013.

11InterviewwithJimandJasonBradshaw,3July2013.

References

Bio-ResponseSolutions,Inc.(2008a).Tissuedigestermodels.Availableat:www.bioresponsesolutions.com/Digestermodels.html(Accessed:29December2014).

Bio-ResponseSolutions,Inc.(2008b).Alkalinehydrolysisdisposition.Availableat:www.bioresponsefuneral.com(Accessed:29December2014).

Bowker, G.C. and Star, S.L. (1999). Sorting things out: classification and its consequences.

Cambridge:MITPress.Cahill,S.(1995).“Somerhetoricaldirectionsoffuneraldirection:historicalentanglementsand

contemporarydilemmas,”WorkandOccupations,22(2),pp.115–136.Cahill, S. (1999). “The boundaries of professionalism: the case of north American funeral

direction,”SymbolicInteraction,22(2),pp.105–119.Emke, I. (2002). “Why the sad face? secularization and the changing function of funerals in

Newfoundland,”Mortality,7(3),pp.169–184.Faust, D. (2008). This republic of suffering: death and the American civil war. New York:

RandomHouse.Fisher,D.(2012).“Creatingpolicyandlegislationforalkalinehydrolysis,”TheDirector,84(1),

pp.34–36.Howarth, G. (1996). Last rites: the work of the modern funeral director. Amityville, NY:

BaywoodPublishingCompany.Kenevich, T. (2011). “Suppliers of alkaline hydrolysis,” In The funeral director’s guide to

alkalinehydrolysis.Wall,NJ:Kates-BoylstonPublishers,pp.15–18.Laderman, G. (2003). Rest in peace: a cultural history of death and the funeral home in

twentieth-centuryAmerica.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.Lambert, D. (2011). “Alkaline hydrolysis: why are we talking about it?” In The funeral

director’sguidetoalkalinehydrolysis.Wall,NJ:Kates-Boylston,pp.48–49.Mirkes, Sr. R. (2008). “The mortuary science of alkaline hydrolysis,” National Catholic

BioethicsQuarterly,8(4),pp.683–695.Olson, P. (2014). “Flush and bone: funeralizing alkaline hydrolysis in the US,” Science,

Technology,andHumanValues,39(5),pp.666–693.Parmalee,Thomas.(2011a).“NFDATakesaStandonHowtoClassifyAlkalineHydrolysis,”In

Thefuneraldirector’sguidetoalkalinehydrolysis.Wall,NJ:Kates-Boylston,pp.11–14.Parmalee,Thomas. (2011b).“JeffEdwards:TrailblazingProfessionalRemainsaControversial

Figure,”InThefuneraldirector’sguidetoalkalinehydrolysis.Wall,NJ:Kates-Boylston,pp.23–26.

Plater,M.(1996).AfricanAmericanentrepreneurshipinRichmond,1890–1940:thestoryofR.C.Scott. Brunchey, S. (ed.) Garland studies in entrepreneurship. New York: GarlandPublishing.

Prothero,S.(2001).Purifiedbyfire:ahistoryofcremationinAmerica.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

Roach,M. (2003). Stiff: the curious lives of human cadavers. New York:W.W. Norton andCompany.

Sanders,G.(2010).“Thedismaltradeascultureindustry,”Poetics,38(1),pp.47–68.Schäfer,C.(2007).“Post-mortempersonalisation:pastoralpowerandtheNewZealandfuneral

director,”Mortality,12(1),pp.4–21.

Trompette,P.,andLemonnier,M.(2009).“Funeralembalming:thetransformationofamedicalinnovation,”ScienceStudies,22(2),pp.9–30.

Wilson, J. (2011). “How I’ve spentmycareerpromotingalkalinehydrolysis,” InThe funeraldirector’sguidetoalkalinehydrolysis.Wall,NJ:Kates-Boylston,pp.31–36.

Wilson,J.(2012).UnpublishedlettertoMr.EdDefort,EditorofTheDirector,dated3January2012.

PartIIDeathritualsandconsumption

6Death,ritualandconsumptioninThailand

InsightsfromthePeeTaKohnhungryghostfestival

RungpakaAmyHackleyandChrisHackley1

Introduction

AconsequenceoftheprecipitousriseofAsianeconomiesinrecentdecadesand,inparticular,theemergenceofChinaasaglobaleconomicpower,hasbeenincreasedresearchintoAsianconsumption (Fam et al., 2009). However, there are still relatively few studies that usequalitativemethods(EckhardtandDholakia,2013;HackleyandHackley,2013),andfewerstillthatfocusonritual.InthischapterweseekinsightsintoAsianconsumerculturebyexaminingtheritualelementsofahungryghostfestivalheldannuallyinThailand,SouthEastAsia.

Asian brands and consumer practices in food,martial arts,music, electronic games, highfashionandmanyotherareas,havemadesignificantinroadsintoWesternmarkets(KniazevaandBelk,2012;HongandKim,2013;Seo,2013;Kuang-YingLooandHackley,2013)yetthenuancesofAsianconsumercultureremainanenigmatomany in theWest (McGrathet al.,2013;Venkateshetal.,2013).AsianconsumercultureisperhapsmostnotedintheWestforthestereotypicallyostentatiousconsumptionanddisplayofluxurybrandsbytherapidlygrowingmiddle and upper classes (Chadha and Husband, 2007; Lu, 2008). From an anthropologicalperspective,brandconsumptionis implicatedin identitywork,groupidentificationandclassdistinction (Belk, 1988), although the cultural, historical, political and economic contexts ofconsumption differ profoundly around the world.Western style consumption carries manytensionsandcontradictionswithintheWest:thisisalsotrueforEasternconsumerswhotrytoassimilatetoWesternconsumerculture(TiwsakulandHackley,2012).Consumptioncannotberegardedasanunproblematicpracticeinanycontext:itisasiteforthenegotiationofpower,status,socialclassandidentitythroughpracticesthatdifferinlocalculturalcontexts.ThereisaneedformoreconsumerresearchthatfocusesonthemanylocalcontextsofAsianconsumerculture, and rituals arounddeath and thehereafter offer rich potential sources of consumerculturalinsight.

Since Rook (1985) first introduced ritual into the consumer research field, variouscommentators(e.g.Arnould,2001)haveremarkedontherelativelysmallnumberoffollow-up studies. Amongst the studies of ritual consumption, rituals connected to death are evenmore neglected. Yet, rituals surrounding death are intimately bound up with consumptionpractices of various kinds, from the burningof papermodels of consumer goods to placateancestorsinAsiandeathrituals,totheritualizedgift-givingandfeastinginsomeWesternandAfrican funeral rituals, and onward to the carnivalesque festival consumption of Dia deMeurtos, theMexicanDay of theDead, or its counterpart, All SoulsDay, and other deathfestivalssuchasHalloween,theJapaneseBonfestival,theSouthKoreanChuseok,QingminginChina,orthemanyvarietiesofghostfestivalsheldaroundtheAsianworld.Inthischapterour empirical focus falls on one particular example of a death ritual – the hungry ghostfestivalheldannuallyinDansaiProvince,North-EastThailand.

ThehungryghostisanenduringfeatureofEast,South-EastandNorthAsianreligiousandfolk mythology, representing the negative spiritual consequences of earthly desire.Paradoxically, many rituals that invoke the hungry ghost also seem to embrace the overtmaterialism that, toWesterners, characterizesmuchAsian consumption, for example, in theformofburntofferingsofpaperversionsofLouisVuittonbags,Mercedes-BenzcarsandGucciwristwatchestobeconsumedbythedeadintheafterlife.PaperburningritualshavebeeninexistenceinChinafor1000years(Blake,2011)buttheusesofpapermodelsofbrandedgoods,though, dates from the emergence ofWestern-style consumption in theEast.Manyhungryghost rituals have feasting, dancing, music, entertainment performances and otherconsumptionpracticesattheircore,includingfoodandotherofferingsforvisitors,andfortheghoststhemselves.

In this chapter, our study of the hungry ghost religious mythology reveals the uneasyassimilation of traditional Asian values and Western consumer culture by connecting thepresent,thepast,thelivingandthedead.Themythologicalfigureofthehungryghostcanbeseen to work not only to oppose the values of individualism and materialism with whichWesternconsumerculture isoftenassociated,but toassist in theirculturalassimilation.Ouraiminthechapteristwofold.First,wewishtoprogresstheuseofritualinconsumerresearchwithafocusonanareaofdeathritualthathasnotbeenpreviouslythesubjectofresearchinthe field. Second,weuse insights fromdeath ritual to openup a newperspective inAsianconsumer culture research. Specifically,we draw attention to the role of death ritual in anapparentparadox.RisingAsianeconomiesareknownintheWestfortheostentatiousbrandconsumptionoftenindulgedinbythenewmiddleandupperclasses,yetintheseverysameculturestherearelongstandingtraditionalvaluesofprudenceandmodesty.Wesuggestthatnot only does consumption feature significantly in the examples of Asian death ritual wedescribe, but it serves to reconcile the deep contradiction between Western-style brandconsumption,andEastern-stylemodestyandreligiousasceticism.Finally,wesuggestthatour

empirical focus on the unique tradition and spectacle of the Dansai hungry ghost festivalpermitsastrikinginsightintotheroleofghostsinBuddhistconsumercultureingeneral,andintheThaiTheravādatraditioninparticular.

Wewillbeginwithabriefoverviewofritualasithasbeenaddressedinconsumerresearch,including someof the examples ofwork focusing on death ritual.Wewill then outline theculturalbackgroundforourempiricalstudyofaThaihungryghostfestivalbeforedescribingourresearchmethod.Wethendelineateourkeyfindingsanddiscusstheimplications.Overall,weaimtocontributenewinsightsfromanovelempiricalsettingtothegrowingbodyofworkdealingwithritual,death,andAsianconsumerculture.

Ritualanddeathinconsumerresearch

Rituals connect individuals with common beliefs and values; they mark transformationaleventsorincidents,andtheyre-instantiaterules,normsandpracticesthatunderliethesocialorder(Driver,1998).Theymaybeconnectedtocalendricalritessuchasthesummersolstice,harvestornewyearcelebrations,andtheymaybeundertakentomarkritesofpassagesuchasthosefromsingletomarried,fromchildtoadult,orfromlivingtodead.Inalltheirvariousforms,ritualscarrysymbolicmeanings (RookandLevy1983;Gainer1995)andthestudyofritual has played a key role in advancing understanding of the symbolic aspects ofconsumption (Rook, 1985; Belk, 1994; Stanfield and Kleine, 1990; Wallendorf and Arnould,1991;Holt,1992;Houston,1999;Ustuneretal.,2000;Minowa,2008).

Studies of death ritual have hitherto tended to focus on the consumption activitiesconnected to funeral rites, both in theWest (e.g. Priceetal., 2000;Metcalf andHuntington,1991) andbeyond (BonsuandBelk, 2003: see alsoBond, 1980;Goody, 1962).The consumerresearch literatureondeathandconsumptionhasbegun tocontributevaluable insights intotheoriesandpracticesofhowconsumersmanage theexperienceof thedeathof lovedonesand the rituals which accompany the fundamental rite of passage from life, to death(O’DonohoeandTurley,2005,2000;BonsuandBelk,2003;BonsuandDeBerry-Spence,2008;Gentryetal.,1995;Davies,1997).Inaddition,studieshaveprovidedinsightsintothelinkagebetweentheachievementofsecular immortalityandconsumeraffluence(Hirschman,1990),andthemeaningsandpracticesofthedispositionofpossessionsofthedead(Kates,2001;Priceet al., 2000). Three consumer culture studies in particular look into death rituals and deathconsumption in a non-Western context: Bonsu and Belk (2003) (and a subsequentwork byBonsuandDeBerry-Spence,2008);ZhaoandBelk’s(2003;2008)studyofChinesedeathritualconsumption;andWattanasuwan’s(2005)researchonthepaperburningritualinThailand.

In anthropological studies, death ritual as a sub-category of ritual can takemany forms,

some of which reflect local traditions and myths. They can evolve into spectacular, and,sometimes, commercially inflected, tourist attractions. Death rituals might celebrate life ordeath, and they might serve to distil fears and superstitions into a single time period andevent, therebydissipating their power to instill fear ordread (Driver, 1998). In theWesterntradition,deathritualmaybefocusedonfuneralritesthatenablethelivingtocometotermswith the loss of lovedones and also, perhaps,with their ownmortality.These strategies ofgrief management are sometimes grouped under the category terror management theory(TMT)(BonsuandBelk,2003).DeathritualaroundfuneralriteshavedifferentmeaningsintheEast and West. In the West, death marks the end of life, and therefore, of consumption(Borgmann, 2000: Hirschman et al., 2013). In Eastern death ritual, though there is no suchfinality,reflectingthedifferenteschatologiesbetweenBuddhismandTaosimintheEast,andtheWesternJudeao-Christian-Islamictradition.AsianBuddhistdeathritualscelebratedeathasanaturalprogressionontheWheelofLife.ForBuddhists,thedeadarealwayswithus,asaliteralpresenceineverydaylife,especiallyatpropitioustimes.Thedeadmaybemischievousor may be malign, if they are tormented ghosts, or they may be benign and contentedancestorswhobringblessingstotheliving.Thedestiniesofthedeadandthelivingareinter-twinedinBuddhistdeathrituals,andtheintimacyofthisconnectionisevidentinmanyAsiandeathrituals.

In rituals connected todeath, thepossessionsofboth thedeceasedand the livingassumesymbolicimportance(see,forexample,Belketal.,1989;Belk,1988,1991;Gentryetal.,1995;Turley,1995,1998;CarrollandRomano,2010).Forexample,thepossessionsofthedeadmighthave special status conferred upon them, to be preserved, gifted to special individuals, oreliminated,whilesomemournerswilloffergiftstothebereaved,orforthebenefitofthedeadthemselves.Symbolicexchangecanbesociallyvisibleindeathritual,suchaswhengiftsaregiventothebereaved(BonsuandDeBerry-Spence,2008;BonsuandBelk,2003;Langer,2007).InAsiandeathritual,exchangecanalsooccurwithinliminalspaces,forexamplewhereghostsor the deceased are placatedwith offerings such as food ormodels of consumer goods ormoney to be ritually burned, for use in the after life. These symbolic exchanges serve tomaintain relationships between the living and the dead, fulfilling Driver’s (1998) ‘gifts’ oforderandcommunitywithintransformation.

Wewillnowoutline the roleof thehungryghostmythologyacrosspartsofAsiaand, inparticular,intheThaiTheravādaBuddhisttradition.Wewillthenbrieflydescribethemethod,followedbyanaccountofselectedfeaturesof the festival thatwefocusonfor thischapter,before discussing themain themes that emerged from the analysis of the variousdata sets.Finally,wediscusstheinsightsthatemergetocontourourunderstandingoftheroleofdeathritualinAsianconsumerculture.

HungryghostsandThaiTheravādaBuddhisttradition

The hungry ghost is an entity that inspires countless folk myths, rituals and festivals incountriessuchasChina,Tibet,Thailand,Taiwan,Singapore,Japan,MalaysiaandHongKong.Thehungry ghost is typically a feature ofBuddhist spiritualmythology, although there aredifferent nuances in the differing traditions of Buddhism, and hungry ghost stories are alsoinflected by local history, tradition and mythology. Theravāda Buddhism is the dominantreligious tradition in Thailand (Kolm, 1985) and is also practiced in other Southeast Asiancountries including Thailand, Sri Lanka, Burma, Laos and Cambodia, whereas MahāyānaBuddhismispracticedinEastandNorthAsiancountriessuchasTibet,China,Japan,Taiwanand Korea (though Confucianism and Taoism exert some influence on this branch ofBuddhism in this region). Thai Theravāda Buddhism is inflected with many animistic,Brahamistic, and local folklore beliefs, alongwith regional emphases drawing from Taoist,MonandKhmertraditions.Thisamountstoahighlyvariableandlocalizedsystemofbeliefs,behaviorsandmyths.Therehavebeen someprevious consumer research studies that touchupon the hungry ghost cosmology within the Tibetan Mahāyāna Buddhist tradition (e.g.Gould,1991,1992)andinChineseTaosim(ZhaoandBelk,2003;2008)butnoneofwhichweareawarethatexplorethetraditioninThaiTheravādaBuddhism.

The hungry ghost is stuck between levels on the Wheel of Life, tormented by earthlydesires.Itmaybeahumanwholivedimmorallyordiedbadly,orwhodidnothaverelativestoperformthenecessaryritualstoenablehimorhertoprogressfrombeinganunhappyghostinHelltobeingacontentandbenignancestor.Hungryghostsmustbeplacatedordistractedlesttheycreatemischiefanddisruptthehappinessandequanimityofothers(ZhaoandBelk,2003).Gould (1991) refers toahungryghost in theTibetanMahāyāna traditionasa ‘preta’,using an Anglicization of the Sanskrit word to mean a recently dead ghost (Oates, 1974;Langer, 2007). In the ghost infused Thai Theravāda religious tradition (McDaniel, 2006) ahungry ghost (Anglicised as a ‘pred’) can subsist in that form on theWheel of Life for anindeterminate time, depending on the circumstances, so may not necessarily be recentlydeceasedandcouldbeanancientspirit.

Therearemanydifferent typesofghosts inThaimythology.Somecannot letgoof theirlovedones,othersclingtotheirformerhomesortosensorypleasures.Allarehungryinsomeway or other, most are tormented and some are malicious. They are described vividly instories, often as a frightening entitywith huge hands, long limbs and a tiny pin-hole sizedmouthsoitcannotfeeditselftoassuageitsdistress.Convenientlyforadults,thefirstauthorrecalls,childrenaretoldthattheytoowillbecomeahungryghostintheirnextlifeiftheyaredisrespectful to their parents. But the spirits of the dead are not just sources of frighteningstoriesforThaiBuddhists.AghostisaliminalentityinBuddhismasitisinatransitionalstate

towardsotherincarnationsontheWheelofLife.Whenlovedonesdie,thelivinghaveadutyto take part in rituals that will assist the transition of the deceased spirit from tormented,yearningghosttohappyandplacatedancestor.

Hungryghostfestivals

Hungry ghost festivals usually occur around the 15th day of the 7th lunar month in theChinesecalendar,althoughthiscanvarysomewhataccordingtotimezoneandlocalcustom.Accordingtothetypicalmythology,thisisatimewhenthegatesoftheHellrealmareopenedandforashortspaceoftimethehungryghostsareabletoescapetoroamthephysicalworld.In this,hungryghost festivals share somecommonmythologywithmanyother festivalsoflifeanddeatharoundtheworldsuchasSamhain,Halloween,PurimandelDiadelosMuertos,(e.g.Belk,1994;Santino,1995).

Festivals involving hungry ghosts in different regions can have a different character, anddrawondifferinghistories and formats. For example, the ‘Por-tor’ hungry ghost festival inPhuketprovince,Thailand,isintendedtoearnmeritforthelivingbyofferingfoodto‘PorTorKong’(theDevilspiritinchargeofthehungryghosts’realm)andtootherhungryspirits.Por-tor (this is an Anglicized spelling which approximates the Thai word) derives from theChineseheritage in SouthernThailandwhen the first immigrants fromChina andMalaysiacame towork in the tinminesofPhuket. In thePor-tor festival theconsumptionof food isprominent,especiallyofredturtlecakesthataresymbolicoflonglifeandgoodfortune.Thefestivalisheldtoworshiptheghostswhohavebeenreleasedfromtheirrealmbythegoddess‘GwanYin’toreturntotheirformerhomes.Thelivingassistthedeadintheirtransitionfromghosts toancestorsby inviting theghosts tocomeandeat,and inreturn for their solicitousmeritmakingtheghostswillblessthepeopleandgivelucktotheirvariousundertakingsinthetown.Inanotherexample,attheGeTaifestivalinSingaporetheghostsareassumedtobephysicallypresentattheperformanceandattendeesleaveseatsforthemthenstraintoseetheshow around the imaginary ghosts on the front row, performing their respect to theontologicallypresentspirits.

Hungry ghost festivals, then, can entail various ritual practices, some of which areintimately connected to consumption.There canbe feasting,music, trading, gift-giving, andmanyinvolvetheritualburningofpaperofferingsintheformofimitationmoney,orpapermodels of branded goods such aswatches, cars, handbags,mobile phones and evenViagratablets.The ritual burningof paper offerings echoes the ancient practice inChineseTaoism(Blake,2011)of theJosspaperburningritual (Wattanasuwan,2005).Thepaperofferingsareintendedtobere-animatedintheafterlifefortheuseofthedead, inspiteofhungryghostshavingcommitted the sinofmaterialism.Theofferingsare intended tobeofbenefit to the

dead as practical assistance in the afterlife, and also to reflect the respect and solicitousobservance of ritual of their living relatives, thereby assisting the ghosts’ passage on to thenextstageoftheWheelofLife.Thecorporealparticipantsalsohaveastakeintheobservanceof death rituals since they earnmerit for themselves and their families by engaging in theprocess.Placatedghostswillreturnblessingstotheliving.Meritisoftenconceivedinvarietiesof Buddhism as a spiritual concept that has amaterial dimension – the faithful hope for amorefavorabletransitiontotheirnextexistenceontheWheelofLife,buttheyalsohopetobenefit fromgreater luckandmaterialcomfort inthis life.Thebenefitsofmerit inthehereandnowareoftenboundupwithsuperstitionandfolkbelief,suchaswhenmonksareaskedtoprovideauspiciouslotterynumbersortoblessnewcarsorbusinesses.WewillnowdiscussthemethodofthisstudybeforeexaminingthePeeTaKhonfestivalingreaterdepth.

Method

Weuseamulti-methodapproachtoarriveatatentativeinterpretationofsomeoftheculturalmeaningsofoneexampleofahungryghostfestival,thePeeTaKhon.ThiseventwasnotoneofthoseweobserveddirectlyinThailand,forlogisticalreasons:theeventisabusandpick-uptruckjourneyofsome14hoursfromBangkok,andattendanceismademoredifficultbecausetheprecisetimingoftheeventisdecided,oftenatthelastminute,bylocal‘blackmagicians’(literally translated)orspiritual leaders,andcanbeanywherebetweenMarchandJune.Wechosetofocusonitbecauseitisaparticularlyvividanduniquelycarnivalesqueenactmentofthehungryghostmythology.

OurexaminationofthePeeTaKohnhungryghostfestivaldrawsonelementsofdiscourseanalysis, visual semiotics and cultural anthropology. Our discourse analysis (Potter andWetherell,1987)isappliedtothreesemi-structuredinterviewtranscripts(translatedfromThaiby the firstauthor)withanofficialat theThaiAuthorityofTourism,with the leading localfestivalorganizer,andwithalocalexpertonthefestivalinBangkok.Thetranscribedtextsaresifted and coded for structure, function and variation (Potter andWetherell, 1987) and theresultingthemesassimilatedwiththemesfromtheotherdatasources.Second,weconductedavisualsemioticanalysis(HodgeandCress,1988;Culler,1985;Pink,2006;Buckingham,2009)ofselected publicly available video ethnographies of the festival (ofwhich there aremanyonsocialmedia).Insodoingweattemptamediatedversionofnaturalisticobservation(BelkandKozinets, 2005). Third, we sought an ethnomethodo-logically informed ‘rich’ description(Geertz,1973)bycontextualizingthisinformationwiththefirstauthor’sfirst-handknowledgeofthewaysinwhichhungryghostmythologyissubsumedintoeverydayThailife,andalsowith informal sources such as archivematerial about the festival onThai tourismwebsites,

and informal observations and conversations with other Thai nationals with knowledge ofthese events.Assimilating and coding the various sources of data,we collated anumber ofsub-themesthatwedistilled intotwomainmeta-themesor ‘interpretiverepertoires’ (PotterandWetherell,1978),discussedbelow.

Webelieveouranalysistobewell-informedbutdonotclaimthatitisdefinitive.Therearenotonlylogisticalandinterpretivebutlinguisticissuestodealwithinthestudy.Thailanguageconsists of differing dialects and vocabularies in different regions. A person raised andeducatedinBangkokcanonlycommunicatewithgreatdifficultywithcompatriotsfromtheregionswhospeakonly the localdialect.Therewillbecontradictionsand inconsistencies inaccountsoftheoriginandmeaningsofparticulardeathritualpractices,andwedonotseektogloss over these to present a tidier analysis.We offer what we believe is a well-informedoutsider’sinterpretationwhich,aswenote,cannotberegardedasdefinitive.

ThePeeTaKhonfestival

In the following account,we draw on our transcribed interviews, archivematerial on Thaitourismwebsites, andouranalysisof thevideodata, andwecontextualize all thiswith thefirstauthor’snativeunderstandingofhowthefolkbeliefsandmythologiescelebratedintheritual percolate through to everydayThai life. It is important first to describe themythicalfoundation,ritualpracticesandlocalmeaningsentailedinthisuniqueritual.

The‘PeeTaKhon’orhungryghostfestivalisheldannuallyforthreedaysinDansaidistrictinthenorth-centralLoeiprovinceofThailand.Dansai isregardedasasacredplaceandthisfestival,likeallsuchfestivals,isuniquetothisdistrictandcannotbeheldanywhereelseinthisform.Itisconsideredessentiallylocalandcentraltotheidentityofthelocalpeople,althoughtoday it attracts an international tourist audience because of promotion by the TourismAuthority of Thailand (TAT). The festival is one of themost important Thaimerit-makingceremoniesinthe‘HeedSib-SongKlongSib-Si’traditionoftheTheravādaBuddhistcalendar(Ruangviset,1996).Italsoservesasafertilityfestivalcallingontherelevantspiritstoblesstheforthcomingharvest.

‘PeeTaKhon’ispartofthelargereventcalled‘BunLuang’,andincludesthe‘PeeTaKhon’festival (hungry ghost festival), the ‘Prapheni Bun Bung Fai’ (rocket festival) and ‘Bun PraWate’ (ameritmaking ceremony). Originally known as ‘Pee TamKhon’, which is literallytranslatedas‘ghostsfollowtheliving’,thefestivalisbasedonanoldfolkloretale.Accordingtothetale,theprocessionofghostsinthePeeTaKohnre-enactsthelastandtenthincarnationof theBuddha,PrinceMahavejsandon, leavinghisbanishment in the forest to return to thevillage,accompaniedbytheghostswhowishtoescorthimsafelybacktothetown.ThePrince

iswelcomedbacktothevillagewithmuchrejoicingfromhisparents,family,friendsandfromtherespectfulghosts,allofwhomjoininthefestivalcelebrationstomarkhisreturn.

Thefirstdayofthefestivalisanassemblyday,precursortothemainevents,andiscalled‘WanRuam’. In the earlymorning the town’s residents invite the Spirit knownas ‘PhraU-Pakut’fromthe‘MunRiver’toprotecttheareawherethefestivalisheld,inordertoblessthefestival. There is a small parade at this stage. Later in themorning the parade goes to thehouseoftheblackmagicianorwizard,called‘BanChowGuan’inordertoperformtheritual‘BaiSriSooKwan’(theritualofbringingbackspirits).Whenthisisfinished,‘ChowGuan’(theblackmagicianwhotakescareofaghostnamed ‘PeeHorLuang’),NangTieam,KanaSan,andNangTang(theblackmagician’shelpers),adancinggroupofPeeTaKhonandsomelocalresidentswouldbeinvitedtojointheparade.Theparadethenmovesto‘PhonChai’templeandmorelocalresidentsintheirghostoutfitsjointheparade.

The main procession, and the centre piece of the festival, begins on the second day. Itconsists of hundreds of elaborately costumed giant ‘ghosts’ with fierce masks, all dancing,laughingandwavinggiantphalluses as theymischievously and joyouslymove through thevillagetowardtheirfinaldestination,thetemple.Thetown’sresidentsputgreateffortintotheelaborateandcomplexgiantghostcostumes.Masksmadeofricehusksorcoconutleavesareworn,withhatsmadefromsticky-ricesteamers.Most,butnotall,oftheghostactorsaremen,even thoughmany female ghosts are represented with the costumes, evidently from theirexaggerated sexual characteristics. Female ghost actors have been present for the past tenyears, reflecting the prominence of female ghosts in Thai tradition, and also illustrating asofteningofthepatriarchalcharacterofsuchrituals.Theghostperformersintheparadearenot‘real’ghosts,buttheyare,inasense,partofthecontemplationofdeaththatissocentraltoTheravādaBuddhistbelief,andisalsoechoedinotherfestivalsaroundtheworld,suchasthe Mexican Dia de los Muertos, the Day of the Dead. Unlike some other merit makingfestivals,suchasPorTorandGeTai,theghostsarenotregardedasliterallypresentduringthePeeTaKhonparade.The festival is thought tobeunder theprotectionof, and inhonorof,spirits, and this is reinforced in themerit ceremonies at the temple towards the end of thefestivities.

Thegeneralsenseofatemporarydissolutionofsocialhierarchyisassistedbymuchalcoholconsumption and ribald fun, as onlookers are often teased by the ghosts waving the giantphallusesintheirfaces.WesternpopmusicandAmericanstars-and-stripesnationalflagsaddtothecarnivalesquesenseofaculturalhiatus.TheparadecontinuesuntiltheafternoonwhentheghostswelcomethePrinceMahavejsandonandhis familyback to theearth (thispart iscalled‘HaePhra’).Thethirddayisthedayofvirtue.Localpeopleattendagrandsermonandfollow Buddhist rituals at the temple. The exuberance of the previous days gives way tosolemnpiety,andthebehaviorofthe‘ghosts’changesaccordingly.

Findings

Sifting,codingandassimilatingthevariousdatasetsresultedinanumberofthemesthatwesubsumed into two superordinate interpretive repertoires, expressed as polarities:spiritual/material and sacred/profane. The overlapping themes comprised practices anddiscoursesthatnuancedthewaysinwhichconsumptionandspiritualityinteractedintheritualcontextofPeeTaKohn.

Spiritual/material

ThecodedbeliefsystemofPeeTaKhonfestival isevolvingin linewithsocialchanges.Theinterviewswithorganizerswerenotablefortheiremphasisonthepiousspiritualobservancewithin the events and there seems to be no evident tension between the commercial orprofaneelementsofthefestival,andthespiritualandsacredelements (Belketal.,1989).TotheWesternobserver, the festival seems tohaveapartyatmosphere that, on the faceof it,belies its seriousmeaning.LadyGaga’s songswere sometimesplayedas thehungryghostsdanced,andAmericanflagswerepartofthecostumeofsomehungryghosts.Anelementofculturalglobalizationseemedpresent,ashasbeenobservedinothernon-Westerndeathrituals(Bonsu and Belk, 2003). To the outsider, the juxtaposition of symbols of Western-styleconsumptionwithancientmythsanddeepreligioussymbolismseemsdiscordant.The levitysits oddlywith the ostensible piety, andyet thewhole effect seems thoroughlynormalized.Noneoftheinterviewparticipantssuggestedthatthereligioussignificanceofthefestivalwasinanywaycompromisedbyinfluencesofmarketizationordetraditionalization(McAlexanderet al., 2014). The spiritual elements seemed thoroughly inscribed into the material culturesurroundingtheevents.Theremaybemoretensionsthaninterviewsacknowledged,butthiswouldbedifficulttoassessinacultureinwhichharmonytendstobeprized.ThePeeTaKhonprovides a ritual setting in which the spiritual and the material seem juxtaposed andassimilated. Our interpretationwas that the carnival aspects of the parade signify that thismutualaccommodationisspecialandexceptionalandstandsoutsideoftypicaleverydaysocialinteractioninThailand,whichisnormallyrespectfulofthesocialstatusofthespeakers.

Thefestivalitselfisaconsumptioneventnotonlywithregardtoitsvaluetotourism(someotherhungryghosteventsarelimitedtolocalorethnicattendees)butalsoasanoccasiontosellfood,beer,souvenirsandothergoodsfromstallssetupalongtheparaderoute.Thelocalpeople are proudof the event and they invest significant amounts of time andmoney intopreparingthecostumesandstagingtheevent(andsomeofcourseearnrevenuefromsalesatthe street stalls). The festival also references the cultural belief that the living must offersustenancetoghostsintheformoffoodorotheritemsofvalue.Inreturn,theghostsdispense

spiritualmeritandreciprocalmaterialadvantagesfortheirlivingbenefactors.Itseemsthatinpartakinginsuchritualexchange,thelivingareacknowledgingtheirownliminalstatesontheWheel of Life.Consumption and consumerism aremerely aspects of the earthly landscape.Theirmoral status is relative tootheraspectsofaperson’s life, circumstancesandbehavior,andindeedtotheirpreviouslives.ManyBuddhistsbelievethatgoodmaterialfortuneinthislifeisaconsequenceofmoralvirtueshowninapreviouslife.Consequently,apersoncanbewealthy,fortunateandsuccessfulinthisworld,andalsomorallyvirtuousandpious,becauseoftheir conduct in a previous life. The ontological continuity between past and present livesmeans that material benefits can translate from one to the other. Prudence and materialasceticismareseenasmoralvirtuesinBuddhism,astheyareinmanyotherreligions,buttheircounterparts,ostentatiouswealthandmaterialabundance,maynotnecessarilybemoralvices.

Sacred/profane

Noneof the intervieweesremarkedontheoddnessof theribaldryandsexualsymbolismintheparadealongside thedeeplyserious religioussymbolism. Itappears tobeunique to thisfestival andhighly unusual inThai cultural representation, notwithstanding the elements offertility ritual thatmay have been absorbed into Pee Ta Khon.Mainstream Thai culture isdeeplyconservativeyetthehungryghostfiguresflaunttheirgenitaliaandusethemtoteaselocalresidents,otherparticipantsandtourists.Inaddition,modelsofexaggeratedgenitaliaandpriapic figures are also available for sale from streetside stalls, as they are, for example, inpartsofGreece.PlayfulnessispresentinotherThaifestivals,suchasSongkraninwhichwaterissprayedatstrangers,butwithoutthesexualribaldry.

This unique character gives the Pee Ta Kohn a Rabelasian, carnivalesque (Bakhtin, 2009;Belk,1994)flavor.Thelevitythatcanoftenbeanimportantpartofritual(Minowa,2008)isinthiscasedesignedtoenticetheghostsfromtheirrealmandencouragethemtojoininthefun.Thejuxtapositionofsacredandprofaneisespeciallynoticeablesincethecrudebehavioroftheghostsgiveswaytosolemnpietyanddecoruminthelastphaseofthefestival.Theyattendagrand sermon at the local temple and behave in accordance with Thai norms of socialdeportment.Thecontrastwiththeearlierimpishbehaviorisstriking,andsymbolizesthere-instantiationofsocialnorms.AswithBakhtinian(2009)carnival,ribaldbehaviorparodiesandsubvertsnormsofsocialrelationsandvalueswithinrituallydesignatedtimesandplaces.PartofPeeTaKhon’sritualpurposeseemstobetobothlegitimizeandcontainthetransgressionofsocialnormsofpolitebehavior.Thesenseofrenewalengenderedthroughritualhasanaddedresonanceindeathritual,sincetheimmanenceofdeathforthelivingisopenlyacknowledgedandcelebrated,ratherthansublimated.Inthiscase,profanity,intheformofribaldbehaviorbytheghosts,isameansoftemporarilysubvertingsocialnormsandstructuresinordertore-

instantiatethem.

Discussion

The water-throwing in the famous Songkran festival (celebrated throughout Thailand, itentails splashingwaterat friendsandstrangersalike)and thewavingofgenitalia inPeeTaKhonhintat the ‘grotesquebodies’ofBakhtin’s (2009)medieval ‘festivalof fools’ inwhichurineandexcrementwerethrownandsexualribaldry indulged.ForBakhtin (2009)carnivaltime represented a permitted transgression of the imposed social andmoral order into onecondensedevent,forthepurposeofre-inscribingthatsameorder.ThesubversivetoneofPeeTaKohn,then,canbeseeninsuchalight.Asthegatesoftheghosts’realmareopenedforatime,theycanmovebeyondtheirusuallimitstowandertheearthandinteractwiththeliving.Similarly,thehumanparticipantsinPeeTaKohnareabletoenjoythefestivallevityasa‘timeout’fromthenormalsocialhierarchiesandrulesofeverydayThailife.

Consumption is central to the ritual celebration, in the form of stalls that sell alcohol,souvenirsandfoodtotouristsalongtheparaderoute,andalsointheformofofferingsmadeto the spirits of the festival. Consumption is a set of practices that sit uneasily with somereligious traditions since it can result in the marketization and the subsequentdetraditionalization (McAlexanderetal., 2014) of the religion, diluting its spiritual value foradherentsanddamagingitshistoricalintegrity.Incontrast,theconsumptionpracticesthatarecentraltoPeeTaKohnseemtocoherewithitsritualmeaningandarenotseentodamageitsspiritualintegrity.Theritualseemstohavearoleinexposing,andalsoreconciling,whatisonthe face of it an ideological dilemma of spiritual asceticism versus material consumption.Abstentation frommaterial comforts is a route to spirituality in Buddhism, and individualswhodisplayexcessiveadherencetomaterialdesiresriskbecomingahungryghostafterdeath,andwandering in tormentwithunsatiateddesires.Yet thedistinction ismorenuanced thanthis:ghostsare thought toneedmaterialgoods in theafterlife,evenbranded items thatareburnedsymbolicallyforthemintheformofpapermodels.Theyalsoneedfood,whilemeritmaking death rituals often entail feasting,music, dancing and other consumption practices.Furthermore,aswenote,materialgoodfortuneinthislifecanbeenjoyedbyapiouspersonwhoearnsmanyblessingsbyobservingreligiousrituals,orwhohasearnedtheirgoodfortunethroughexercisingpietyandvirtueinapreviousincarnationontheWheelofLife.

The‘ghosts’inthePeeTaKohnfestival,althoughafigurativeratherthanaliteralpresencein this ritual, are heralded as liminal entities (Turner, 2009) on a physical and a spiritualjourney,but fullypresentneither in theirdestinationnor in theirplaceoforigin. Individualsandgroups takingpart in the festivalcouldbesaid todetach themselves fromtheirnormal

‘fixedpointinthesocialstructure’(Turner,2009,p.94)–thatis,fromtheirnormalroles,statusand ranks in Thai society to join in the irreverent and subversive levity.As the subversivebehavior gives way to more solemn piety during the final stage, the moral order is thusrenewedandreinstated,asinCarnivalandMardisGras.

Transgression is permitted in certain ritual settings: the taboo is immanent in thetransgression, and is re-instantiated through it (Bataille, 2007). The subversive sexualizedribaldryinPeeTaKohnreflectsataboointhesensethatsexualliberality,likeexcessivedesireformaterialgoods,cancondemnapersontothebleakspiritualdestinyofthehungryghost.Withintheritualsetting,theviolationofnormalcodesofpolitesocialinteractionrepresentsapermitted transgression. The subversive andmischievous character of the ghost processionspeaks to the roleofghosts inThai lifeasa sourceofmischiefanddangerandadds to thesenseof thecarnivalesqueas thenormal, everydayworld is turnedupsidedownand insideout.Thenormalconcern inThai society for respect,politeness, socialhierarchyanddelicatesocialbehavioristemporarilysuspendedastheprocessionweavesthroughthetowninaspiritoftransgressiveexuberance.

The event as awhole dramatizes a culturalmyth (Campbell, 1972;Harrison, 1912; Rook,1985),inthiscase,theculturalmythofthePrinceMahavejsandonandhisreturnfromexileinthe forest. It makes an intense and colorful spectacle of the usually hidden beliefs abouthungry ghosts that are so prevalent in everydayThai life. The living seek toneutralize thepotentialoftheghoststocausemischiefandharmbyhonoringthemwithritualofferings,andinsodoing they link thepresentwith thepast (Durkheim,1912).Thedeadarebeingswho,like the living, subsiston theWheelofLife,butatdifferent levels.Theexistenceofhungryghosts is a starkwarning of the bleak spiritual destiny that awaits thosewho cling to thedesiresof thematerialworld,yetconsumptionpractices,bothsymbolic (paperburning)andmaterial (feasting) are used to connect dead and living, and to generate virtue (andmerit)fromevil.Theideologicaldilemmaofmaterialismversusspiritualasceticismisthusresolvedthrough consumption ritual. The Pee Ta Khon illustrates the cultural significance of deathritualtoconsumption,andofconsumptiontodeathritual,andnuancestheunderstandingofAsian (specifically, Thai) consumer culture beyond simplistic notions of unproblematicallyostentatious material consumption. The tensions underlying Western-style consumptionpractices in the East are both revealed, and, to an extent, reconciled, through the ritualperformanceofreligiousbelief.

Concludingcomment

WeofferthistentativeandprovisionalreadingofthePeeTaKohnhungryghostfestivalasa

potentialsourceofinsightintothewaydeathritualcanbothreflectandassimilatesomeoftheunderlying tensions of Asian consumer culture, specifically the dilemma between spiritualasceticism and ostentatious material consumption. The field would benefit from furtherresearchfocusingonotherdeathrituals,includingfullyimmersiveethnographies.ThehungryghostisapowerfulmythologicalfigureacrosstheBuddhistworldbutthenuancesofmeaningsurrounding hungry ghost rituals of differing kinds in different regions and under differingreligious and folk mythologies need further close investigation. Death ritual can serve tosymbolically connect contemporary society with pre-capitalist forms of exchange (Blake,2011) and the Pee Ta Kohn is suggestive of an accommodation between the values ofcontemporaryconsumerismandtraditional,pre-capitalistvaluesofspiritualasceticism.

Note

1TheauthorswouldliketothankProfessorRussBelkforkindlycommentinguponanearlierdraftofthischapter.

References

Arnould,E.J.(2001),‘Ritualthreegiftsandwhyconsumerresearchersshouldcare’,AdvancesinConsumerResearch,Vol.28,pp.384–386.

Bakhtin,M.(2009),ProblemsofDosteovsky’sPoetics(11thed.),(C.EmersonTrans.),UniversityofMinnesotaPress,Minneapolis(originalworkpublishedin1984).

Bataille,G.(2007),TheAccursedShareVolumeI, (R.HurleyTrans.),ZoneBooks,NewYork(originalworkpublishedin1989).

Belk,R.W.(1988),‘PossessionsandtheExtendedSelf’,JournalofConsumerResearch,Vol.15No.2,pp.139–168.

Belk, R. W. (1991), ‘Possessions and the Sense of Past’, in Belk, R.W. (Ed.),Highways andBuyways: Naturalistic Research From the Consumer Behavior Odyssey, Association forConsumerResearchconferenceproceedings,pp.114–130.

Belk, R.W. (1994), ‘Carnival, Control, and Corporate Culture in Contemporary HalloweenCelebrations’, in Santino, J. (Ed.), Halloween and Other Festivals of Death and Life,UniversityofTennesseePress,Knoxville,TN,pp.105–132.

Belk, R.W. and Kozinets, R. V. (2005), ‘Videography inmarketing and consumer research’,QualitativeMarketResearch:AnInternationalJournal,Vol.8,No.2,pp.128–141.

Belk, R. W., Wallendorf, M., and Sherry, J. F. Jr. (1989), ‘The sacred and the profane inconsumerbehaviour:theodicyontheOdyssey’,JournalofConsumerResearch,Vol.16,No.

1,June,pp.1–38.Blake,F. (2011),BurningMoney:TheMaterialSpiritof theChineseLifeworld,University of

HawaiiPress,Hawaii.Bond, G. D. (1980), ‘Therava-da Buddhism’s meditations on death and the symbolism of

initiatorydeath’,HistoryofReligions,Vol.19,No.3,pp.237–258.Bonsu, S. K. and Belk, R.W. (2003), ‘Do not go cheaply into that good night: death-ritual

consumptioninAsante,Ghana’,JournalofConsumerResearch,Vol.30,No.1,June,pp.41–55.

Bonsu, S.K. andDeBerry-Spence,B. (2008), ‘Consuming thedead: identity and communitybuildingpracticesindeathrituals’,JournalofContemporaryEthnography,Vol.37,No.6,pp.694–719.

Borgmann,A.(2000),‘Themoralcomplexionofconsumption’,JournalofConsumerResearch,Vol.26No.4,March,pp.418–422.

Buckingham,D.(2009),‘Creativevisualmethodsinmediaresearch:possibilities,problemsandproposals’,MediaCultureSociety,Vol.31,No.4,pp.633–652.

Campbell,J.(1972),MythstoLiveby,Viking,NewYork.Carroll,E.C.andRomano,J.(2010),YourDigitalAfterlife:WhenFacebook,FlickrandTwitter

AreYourEstate,What’sYourLegacy?,NewRider’sPress,Berkeley,CA.Chadha,R.andHusband,P. (2007),TheCult of theLuxuryBrand: InsideAsia’sLoveAffair

withLuxury,NicholasBrealeyInternational,London.Collins,S.(1982),SelflessPersons:ImageryandThoughtinTherava-daBuddhism,Cambridge

UniversityPress,Cambridge,UK.Culler,J.(1985),Saussure,Fontana,London.Davies,D.J.(1997),DeathRitualandBelief:RhetoricofFuneraryRites,Continuum,London.Driver,T.F.(1998),LiberatingRites,WestviewPress,CO.Durkheim,E.(1912),TheElementaryFormsoftheReligiousLife,AllenandUnwin,London.Eckhardt, G. M. and Dholakia, N. (2013), ‘Addressing the mega imbalance: interpretive

explorationofAsia’,QualitativeMarketResearch:AnInternationalJournal,Vol.16,No.1,pp.4–11.

Fam, K. S., Yang, Z. and Hyman, M. (2009), ‘Confucian/Chopsticks Marketing’, Journal ofBusinessEthics,Vol.88,pp.393–397.

Gainer,B. (1995), ‘Ritual and relationships: Interpersonal influenceson sharedconsumption’,JournalofBusinessResearch,Vol.32,No.3,pp.253–260.

Geertz,C.(1973)‘ThickDescription:TowardanInterpretativeTheoryofCulture’,inGeertz,C.TheInterpretationofCultures:SelectedEssays,BasicBooks,NewYork.

Gervais,K.G.(1986),RefiningDeath,YaleUniversityPress,NewHaven.Gentry, J.W.,Kennedy,P.F.,Paul,C.,andHill,R.P. (1995), ‘Family transitionsduringgrief:

discontinuities inhouseholdconsumptionpatterns’,JournalofBusinessResearch,Vol.34,

No.1,September,pp.67–79.Goody, J. (1962),Death, Property and the Ancestors: A Study of Mortuary Customs of the

LodagaaofWestAfrica,StanfordUniversityPress,Stanford,CA.Gould,S.J.(1991), ‘AnAsianapproachtotheunderstandingofconsumerenergy,drivesand

states’,inHirschman,E.C.(Ed.),ResearchinConsumerBehaviour:AResearchAnnual,Vol.5,JaiPressInc.,London,pp.33–59.

Gould, S. J. (1992), ‘Consumer materialism as a multilevel and individual differencephenomenon–anasian-basedperspective’, inSpecialVolumes–Meaning,MeasureandMoralityofMaterialism,AssociationforConsumerResearch,pp.57–62.

Hackley,A.R.,andHackley,C.(2013),TelevisionproductplacementstrategyinThailandandtheUK,AsianJournalofBusinessResearch,Vol3No.1,pp.97–110.

Harrison, J. E. (1912),Themis: A Study of the Social Origins of Greek Religion, Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Hirschman,E.C.(1990),‘SecularimmortalityandAmericanideologyofaffluence’,JournalofConsumerResearch,Vol.17,June,pp.31–42.

Hirschman,E,C.,Ruvio,A.,andBelk,R.(2013),‘DeathStylesandtheIdealSelf,’inRuvio,A.andBelk,R.(Eds.),IdentityandConsumption,Routledge,London,pp.215–224.

Hodge,R.andCress,G.(1988),SocialSemiotics,Polity,Cambridge.Holt,D.B. (1992), ‘Examining thedescriptivevalueof ritual inconsumerbehaviour:aview

fromthefield’,AdvancesinConsumerResearch,Vol.19,pp.213–218.Hong, S. and Kim, C. H. (2013), ‘Surfing the Korean wave: a postcolonial critique of the

mythologised middlebrow consumer culture in Asia’,Qualitative Market Research: AnInternationalJournal,Vol.16No.1,pp.53–75.

Houston,R.H.(1999),‘Throughpainandperseverance:liminality,ritualconsumptionandthesocial construction of gender in contemporary Japan’,Advances in Consumer Research,Vol.26,January,pp.542–548.

Kates, S. M. (2001), ‘Disposition of possessions among families of people with AIDS’,PsychologyandMarketing,Vol.18,No.4,pp.365–387.

Kniazeva, N. and Belk, R. W. (2012), ‘The Western Yogi: consuming Eastern wisdom’,InternationalJournalofConsumerResearch,Vol.1,No.1,pp.1–27.

Kolm, S.C. (1985), ‘TheBuddhist theoryof “NoSelf ”’, inElster, J. (Ed.),TheMultiple Self,CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge,UK,pp.233–265.

Kuang-YingLoo,B.andHackley,C.(2013),‘InternationalisationstrategyoficonicMalaysianhighfashionbrands’,QualitativeMarketResearch:AnInternationalJournal,Vol.16,No.4,pp.406–420.

Langer,R.(2007),BuddhistRitualsofDeathandRebirth:ContemporarySriLankanPracticeanditsorigins,Routledge,NewYork.

Lu, P. X. (2008), Elite China: Luxury Consumer Behavior in China, John Wiley & Sons,

Singapore.McAlexander, J., Leavenworth Dufault, B., Martin, D. M., and Schouten, J. W. (2014), The

marketization of religion: field, capital and consumer identity, Journal of ConsumerResearchDOI10.1086/677894.

McDaniel,J.(2006),TheMapandtheWorldinBuddhism,Thaidigitalmonastery,Availableathttp://tdm.ucr.edu/index.html.

McGrath,M.A.,Sherry,J.F.andDiamond,N.(2013),‘DiscordantretailbrandsstrategyinthehouseofBarbie’,QualitativeMarketResearch:AnInternationalJournal,Vol.16,No.1,pp.12–37.

Metcalf, P. and Huntington, R. (1991), Celebrations of Death: Anthropology of MortuaryPractices,CambridgeUniversityPress,NewYork.

Minowa,Y.(2008),‘Theimportanceofbeingearnestandplayful:consumingtheritualsoftheWest Indian American Day Carnival and Parade’, European Advances in ConsumerResearch,Vol.8,pp.53–59.

Oates,C.(1974),TheHungryGhosts,BlackSparrowPress,LosAngeles.O’Donohoe,S.andTurley,D.(2005),‘Tilldeathusdopart?Consumptionandthenegotiation

of relationships following a bereavement’,Advances inConsumerResearch, Vol. 32, pp.625–626.

O’Donohoe,S.andTurley,D.(2000),‘Dealingwithdeath:art,moralityandthemarketplace’,inBrown,S.andPatterson,A.(Eds.),ImaginingMarketing:Art,AestheticsandtheAvant-Garde,Routledge,London,pp.86–106.

Pink,S.(2006),DoingVisualEthnography,2nded.Sage,London.Price, L., Arnould, E. J., and Curasi, C. F. (2000), ‘Older consumers’ disposition of special

possessions’,JournalofConsumerResearch,Vol.37,September,pp.179–201.Potter, J. andWetherell, M. (1987)Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and

Behaviour.SageLondon.Rook, D. W. (1985), ‘The ritual dimension of consumer behavior’, Journal of Consumer

Research,Vol.12,No.3,December,pp.251–264.Rook, D.W. and Levy, S. J. (1983), ‘Psychosocial themes in consumer grooming rituals’, in

Bagozzi,R.P.andTybout,A.M.(Eds.),AdvancesinConsumerResearch,Vol.10,AssociationforConsumerResearchconferenceproceedingsAnnArbor,pp.329–333.

Ruangviset,P.(1996),HeedSib-songKlongSib-siofLoeiPeople,Feature,Bangkok.Santino,J.(1995),AllAroundtheYear:HolidaysandCelebrationsinAmericanLife,University

ofIllinoisPress,Urbana,IL.Seo, Y. (2013), ‘Electronic sports: a new marketing landscape of the experience economy’,

JournalofMarketingManagement,Vol.29,No.13–14,pp.1542–1560.Stanfield,M.A.andKleine,R.E.(1990), ‘Rituals,ritualisedbehaviourandhabit:refinements

andextensionsoftheconsumptionritualconstruct’,AdvancesinConsumerResearch,Vol.

17,pp.31–38.Tiwsakul, R. A. and Hackley, C. (2012), ‘Postmodern paradoxes in Thai-Asian consumer

Identity’,JournalofBusinessResearch,Vol.66,No.4,pp.490–496.Turley,D.(1995),‘Dialoguewiththedeparted’,inEuropeanAdvancesinConsumerResearch,

Vol.2,F.Hansen(Ed.),AssociationforConsumerResearchconferenceproceedings,ProvoUT,pp.10–13.

Turley,D.(1998),‘Apostcardfromtheveryedge:mortalityandmarketing’,inBrown,S.andTurley,D.(Eds)ConsumerResearch:PostcardsfromtheEdge,Routledge,London,pp.350–377.

Turner,V. (2009),The Ritual Process: Structure andAnti-structure, Aldine Transaction, NewBrunswick.

Wallendorf, M. and Arnould, E. J. (1991), ‘We gather together: consumption rituals ofThanksgivingDay’,JournalofConsumerResearch,Vol.18,No.1,June,pp.13–31.

Wattanasuwan,K. (2005), ‘Remembering you, remembering your brands: immortalising thedecreased through the paper-burning ritual in Thailand’, 3rd workshop on interpretiveconsumerresearch,CopenhagenBusinessSchool,Denmark.

Ustuner,T.Ger,G., andHolt,D.B. (2000), ‘Consuming ritual: reframing theTurkishhenna-nightceremony’,AdvancesinConsumerResearch,Vol.27,pp.209–214.

Venkatesh, A., Khanwalkar, S., Lawrence, L., and Chen, S. (2013), ‘Ethnoconsumerism andcultural branding: designing “nano” car’,QualitativeMarket Research: An InternationalJournal,Vol.16,No.1,pp.108–119.

Zhao,X.andBelk,R.W.(2003),‘Moneytoburn:consumptionbythedeadinChina’,(abstract),inKeller,P.A.andRook,D.(Eds.),AdvancesinConsumerResearch,Vol.30,p.4.

Zhao,X.andBelk,R.W.(2008), ‘Desireonfire:anaturalisticinquiryofChinesedeathritualconsumption’, European Advances in Consumer Research, Association for ConsumerResearchconferenceproceedings,Vol.8,p.245.

7Ritual,mythology,andconsumptionafteracelebritydeath

ScottK.RadfordandPeterH.Bloch

Celebritywatching in thetwenty-firstcenturyhasbeenmagnifiedbyextensivecoverage inbothconventionalandonlinemedia.Today,nearlyeveryaspectofcelebrities’livesisvisibleto thepublic (James, 1993;McCutcheon,Maltby,Houran,andAshe, 2004).Weknowwheretheyvacation,whentheyarepregnant,andthecurrentstateoftheirweight.Inthiscontext,moderncelebritiesareknownnotsomuchfortheiraccomplishments,butfor the livestheylead(McCutcheon,Lange,andHouran,2002;McCutcheonetal.,2004)–theyarefamousforbeingfamous.Asaresult,realitytelevisionstarsareoftenmorefamousthanhighlytalentedartists,musicians,oractors.Althoughcelebritywatchingisoftenportrayedastrivial(Jenkins,2006), the connection to a celebrity is genuine and canprovide an important component inself-definition(O’Guinn,1991;RadfordandBloch,2012).

Throughmediaconsumption,peopleformvicariousrelationshipswithcelebritiesthataddmeaningtotheirlivesandenhancetheself(McCutcheonetal.,2002;Rojek,2001).Anactiveidentificationwithacelebrity leadsmanyfans to feel that theyhaveapersonalrelationshipwith the media figure (Giles, 2002); the celebrity may be even be considered a ‘friend.’(Caughey, 1984). Recently, celebrities have strengthened these relationships by encouragingpeopletofollowthedetailsoftheirlifethroughrealtimeTwitterfeeds(Greenberg,2009)andpersonalrevelationsinmediainterviews(Rojek,2007).

Of particular interest here is the casewhere public fascinationwith a famous individualintensifieswithdeath.Theendofan importantperson-celebrityrelationshipmayresult inaprofoundsenseoflossandfeelingsofgrief.Thischapterwillinvestigatetheintersectionofthepublicrealmofcelebritywiththeprivaterealmofgriefandmourning.Thisintersectionhasbecome increasingly relevant because the rise of celebrity culture has coincided with thereductioninpublicvisualiconographyofdeath(Aries,1985).Increasinglyinwesternsociety,expressionsofgrievingandmourninghavebecomemoresubduedandincreasinglyviewedasinappropriate(ClarkandFranzmann,2006).

However,fansofcelebritieshavebecomesurprisinglycomfortableinexpressingtheirgrief

publicly. Tributes range from depositing gifts at the site of the stars’ home, to impromptuceremonies, to posting emotional messages on Facebook or Twitter. Public displays ofmourning, such as those spontaneously enacted for celebrities, provide mourners with theopportunity to deal with loss in a culture where open mourning has been discouraged(Franzmann,1998;Haney,Leimer,andLowery,1997).Inotherwords,fanscanengageinmoredramaticmourningresponseswithcelebritiesthanwouldbedeemedappropriatewithfamilyorfriends.

Thesedeathrituals(BonsuandBelk,2003)serveasameansofdealingwiththesharedgriefthatfansfeelforthelossofcelebrities.Theseritualsdemonstratethetraditionalfivestagesofgrief (Kubler-Ross and Kessler, 2005), but in the realm of celebrity, they also include thememorialization of the deceased through product consumption (Gentry,Kennedy, Paul, andHill, 1995; Radford and Bloch, 2013) aswell as themythologizing of the celebrity throughstorytelling and shared experiences (Radford and Bloch, 2012; Wang, 2007). The currentchapterprovidesanoverviewofwhatweknowaboutconsumerresponsestocelebritydeathandidentifiessomeoftheprocessthatinfluencetheseresponses.

Celebritiesandcelebrityworship

As long as there have been heroes and accomplishments, there has been fame, whereindividualsaresetapartforsomeability,characteristic,oraccomplishment.Celebritiesinthetwenty-first century are known for their artistic accomplishments, their attractiveness, andlifestyle(McCutcheonetal.,2002;McCutcheonetal.,2004).AsexplainedbyJames(1993,p51)‘ThecelebritywasyetanotherpioneeringAmericancontributiontotwentieth-centuryfame.Celebritiesweren’t just famous forwhat theydid.Theywere famous for the lives they ledwhile they did it.’ Thismanifestation of celebrity has been created and perpetrated by theincreasinglyprevalentcommercialandsocialmedia(Boorstin,1962)andincreasingly,thereisa recognition that celebrities must manage and control their identities. Celebrities providesmallunguardedglimpsesoftheirlivesandthisauthenticityengagesfansonadeeperlevel,tothe point where they are engaging in emotional labor (Nunn and Biressi, 2010). This canincludepersonalizedmessages fromcelebrities to fans, tweets and retweets that respond tofans’comments,ortakingselfieswiththematfanconventions.

Connected to the ideaof celebrity are the commodities andproducts associatedwith thefamousperson. Inaddition to theproducts thataredirectly related to the reasons forbeingfamous–suchasmusictracksandconcertprogramsforasingerorDVDsforamoviestar–thereareahostofadditionalproductsthatareassociatedwiththecelebrityandarepartofthemarketing engine that commodifies the celebrity into a marketable product. Rein and

colleagues (1997) suggested thatcelebrity ismostlyabout thecommercialvalue thatcanbegenerated by an individual. Therefore, celebrity at its core is about being able to generatemoney. This may come from large speaking fees such as those commanded by popularpsychologistDr.Phil,multi-milliondollarmoviecontractsforHollywoodstarssuchasRobertDowneyJr.,orthesalaryandendorsementdealspaidtosportsstarslikeDavidBeckham.Inadditionto thedirectsalariescommandedbythese individuals, theyalsohavetheability tomarket a range of complementary products for which they receive some additionalremuneration.Celebritiesmaymarketthemselves,asOprahdidwithhermagazine‘O’,theymaymarketproductsassociatedwiththemselves,suchasPhilMickelsongolfcourses,ortheymay act as endorsers for other products such as Brad Pitt’s endorsement of Chanel.Manycelebrities who are well past the prime of their careers travel around the globe to sellautographsandphotosatconventionsorganizedbyfirmssuchasWizardWorldandCreationEntertainment. Research on celebrity endorsement has noted that there is a transfer ofmeaning between the celebrity and the consumer good, and then from the good to theconsumer(McCracken,1989).Thissametransferofmeaningshouldalsotakeplacewhenthecelebrity is connected in anymeaningfulwaywith a particular good. The engagement andassociatedconnectionwiththecelebritymayrendergoodsassacredtotheconsumer.

Para-socialrelationships

HortonandWohl (1956)coined the termpara-social relationship todescribe themanner inwhichindividualusersofmassmediainteractwithrepresentationsofpeopleappearinginthemedia.Theysuggestedthatthemediacreatetheillusionofaface-to-facerelationshipwiththepublic figure. Subsequent research suggests thatmedia consumers evaluate celebrities usingsimilarcriteriaastheywouldusetoevaluateindividualsinperson.Ithasbeenarguedthatnotonlyaretheevaluationsofthesefiguressimilartothosemadeinperson,butinfactthatthesubjectsmayevenviewthemediafigureasonewithwhomtheyhaveapersonalrelationship(Giles,2002).

These socio-affective relationships between fans and celebrities are characterized by thepleasurethatisderivedfromtheactivityofengagingwithacelebrity,thesharedenjoymentofthecelebritythatonecanderivefromcommunicatingwithothers,andthecentralityoffanstatustotheindividual(CourbetandFourquet-Courbet,2014).Fansofthecelebritybegintoidentifywiththecelebrityandinsomecasestheyeventakeontheattitudesandbeliefsofthecelebrity (Brown, Basil, and Bocarnea, 2003). This identificationwith the celebrity can alsoinfluence the behaviors of the fans and can equate to greater pro-social behaviors towardscausesthatareimportanttothecelebrity(Bae,Brown,andKang,2011;Brown,2010;Brownet

al.,2003).Celebritiesaregettingmoreorganizednowinmanaging thecauses that theycansupportwith their names.KevinBacon recently launchedSixdegrees.org, that is a portal tohelpcelebrities identifyacause that theywant tosupport inaspecificareaandOmaze.comallowsconsumerstocontributetocharitieswiththeirnamesbeingenteredintodrawingsforonceinalifetimeexperienceswithtoplevelcelebrities.Inadditiontoapersonalidentitythatisformedthroughinteractionwiththecelebrity,fansalsoexhibitasharedidentitywithotherfans.Group identificationhasbeen facilitatedby theavailabilityofonline communities andsocialmedia contexts and this shared identitymaybe characterized both as belonging to agroupand identifyingshared featuresandcharacteristics (i.e.groupal identity) (CourbetandFourquet-Courbet,2014).

Thereisabroadspectrumoffansidentifyingwithacelebritywhichcanrangefromcasualinteractions to a more passionate engagement. Maltby and colleagues (2006) noted thatconsumersmay engage in increasingly intense forms of celebrityworship that beginswithsimpleattractionandatitsmostextremeisborderlinepathological:

Thereisentertainment-social celebrityworship that ref lects anattraction toa favorite celebritybecauseof theirperceivedabilitytoentertainandsocialfocus.Thereareintense-personalattitudesref lectingintensiveandcompulsivefeelingsaboutthecelebrity.Themostextremeexpressionofcelebrityworshipisborderline-pathological, thoughttoref lectanindividual’ssocial-pathologicalattitudesandbehaviors.

(Maltbyetal.,2006,p.274)

These increasing levels of engagement with the celebrity are also characterized by higherinvolvement and identification with celebrity-related products (Brown et al., 2003). Peoplewho are particularly involved with celebrities will seek out media material and productsassociatedwiththecelebrity.Wecontendthatowningproductsassociatedwiththecelebrityisa normal course of engagement. For example, buying products that are directly associatedwith the celebrity’s source of fame, such as Taylor Swift’s new album,would be a normalform of engagement, and is in fact necessary to the source of fame. However, it is whenproducts that are only tangentially associatedwith the celebrity are sought, such as a useddinnernapkin,thatcelebrityidolizationbegins.

Belk and his colleagues (Belk, Wallendorf, and Sherry, 1989; O’Guinn and Belk, 1989)introducedtheconceptofsacralization,todescribehowproducts(aswellasentitiessuchascelebrities) become especially revered. Past research has examined the phenomenon in thecontextofsacredcollectionsorheir-loomsandtheincreasedvaluethattheyderivefromtheirhistory and personal connection (Curasi, Price, and Arnould, 2004; Grayson and Shulman,2000).Thevenerationofproducts,events,orplacesatthegrouporsubculturelevelhasalsobeeninvestigated.Forexample,O’GuinnandBelk(1989)studiedtheconsumptionofsacredexperiencesatareligiousthemeparkandBelkandCosta(1998)andKozinets(2001)lookedatthis phenomena among the subcultures of mountain man re-enactors and Star Trek fans,respectively.

When celebrity worship moves to higher levels, the goods associated with a famousindividualalsomayacquire sacredstatus through theprocessofcontamination (Belket al.,1989) or contagion (Newman, Diesendruck, and Bloom, 2011). Under these processes, theimmaterial characteristics of a person are transferred to an inanimate object. Particularlyreveredarethoseobjectsthatactuallyhavesomeremnantsofthepersonsuchasthebonesofamedieval saint, a sweat-stained scarf fromElvis, or an autograph from JamesGandolfini.Therefore, their contagion has led to a subsequent desire for and higher value placed onobjectsthataredirectlyassociatedwithareveredindividualorevent.Forexample,onecangotoasportinggoodsstoreandpurchaseaMajorLeaguequalitybaseballforafewdollars,butahomerunbaseballassociatedwithafamoushittermayleadtoviolentoutfieldscramblesandinonecasetoafan’sdeath(CNN.com,2011).

Thisperceivedrelationshipmayemergeinaparticularlysalientmannerwiththedeathofthecelebrity.Whiletherelationshipwasmostlyone-sided,theendofthatrelationshipfortheconsumermayresultinaprofoundsenseofloss.Thisislikelytobegreaterforcelebritieswithwhomthe individual feltagreaterattachment.While ithasbeennotedthat individuals feelsome connection to celebrities, most often that relationship has been likened to therelationshipwithafriendorneighbor,notafamilialorromanticrelationship(McCutcheonetal., 2002).However, griefmaybe exhibited and a sense of loss feltwhen these individuals,whothesubjectfeelsareapartoftheirsocialrelationships,arelost.Therefore,itiscertainlyconceivable that consumerswill exhibit grieving behaviors for a celebritywithwhom theyhavenoactualphysicalcontact,andwithwhomtheyhaveonlydevelopedaone-sidedpara-socialrelationship,similartothemannerinwhichtheywouldgrieveforthedeathofafriend,a neighbor, or an acquaintance. A natural part of death and grieving are the consumptionritualsthatareassociatedwithboththepublicandprivateprocessofmourning.

Deathandgrieving

Death isaparticularly intense lifeeventwhichmaymotivatevaryingbehaviors indifferentindividuals. It ispossible thatconsumerswill engage inmeaning transfer tocompensate forthe lossof a lovedone (Richins, 1994).That is, consumerswill imbueamaterial goodwithsome form ofmeaning that acts as a surrogate for the relationshipwith the individual. Inadditiontothemeaningofgoods,thelossofarelatedotheralsomayleadtothefeelingofalossofsomepartoftheself.“Thepriorpossessionsofthedeceasedcanbepowerfulremainsofthedeadperson’sextendedself”(Belk,1988,p.144).Thelossofselfandtheritualsofdeathmay result in a need to cling to items that have been contaminated by contact with thedeceased. More traditionally, individuals in Western cultures will often react to death by

spendingmoney (Gabel,Mansfield, andWestbrook, 1996). Followingahouseandavehicle,thethirdlargestpurchasethatconsumersusuallymakeisafuneral.Assuch,individualshavecometoassociatedeathwithspendingmoney.AsnotedbyGabelandcolleagues(1996,p.363)“themeaningofdeath[is]reducedtothespendingofmoney,possiblyinordertodemonstratehowmuchonecaredforthedeceased.”Grievingconsumersaremorevulnerablebecauselessthought and planning go into death-related consumption decision making. Funeral parlorshavebeenknowntoexploitthisconsumptiondisability.Insomecasesmarkupsof900percenthavebeenfoundondeath-relatedgoodsandservices (Gabeletal., 1996). Inaddition to theneedtofindmeaningbyacquiringanobjectrelatedtoacelebrityisthefactthatconsumersmaynotbeactinginthemostrationalanddeliberatemannerandmayeasilybeexploitedbymarketers who are trying to take advantage of their grief. This has led to a commonunderstandingthatdeathoffersanavenuefortheexploitationofgrievingconsumersandthatconsumerswill often pay higher prices for art,memorabilia, and other products associatedwiththefocalcelebrity.

Theideaofpost-deathsacralizationofapersonoranartifactisnotnew,norisitrestrictedto celebrities as defined above. The veneration of holy relics associated with saints andmartyrs was common in the Middle Ages (McCane, 1991; Rollason, 1989). More recentlypopularmediahassuggestedthatthereisa‘deatheffect’forfineartists,suchthattheirworksarevaluedmorehighlyaftertheirdeaththenwhentheywerealive.Somehavegonesofarasto propose that the only way for an artist to truly become wealthy is to die tragically.However,anartist’sdeathdoesnottypicallymakethemfamousandthevalueofworkonlytendstoincreaseafterdeathiftheartistwasknownorrecognizedpriortotheirdeath(Grant,1991).Thiscomeswithacaveat;forartiststhathavesomefamepriortotheirdeath,thereis,in fact, a positive death effect. Economic research has proposed that supply and demandfactors can explain price variances following an artist’s death, e.g., certain works of lesserknownMexicanpainters(Ekelund,Ressler,andWatson,2000),aswellaswell-knownpainterslike Picasso (Czujack, 1997). Ekelund et al. (2000) indicate that in the basic artist–patronrelationshipthereisanunwrittencontractthattheartistwillcontinuetoproducequantitiesofartinaconsistentmanner,sothatthesystemremainsinequilibrium.Theartistwillnotfloodthemarketwithwork, norwill they cease selling their paintings, thusmaintainingmarketequilibrium.

However,whentheartistdies, thisequilibriumis interruptedsincethere isno longeranyconceivable future supply. Therefore, the tendency is for the demand to increase for theremaining works as a reaction to the termination of supply. The increase in demand anddecreaseinsupplymeansthatthereisanimmediateandsuddenpriceincreaseforallworksby the artist. These increased prices will tend to entice collectors to sell their works. Thisserves the function of restoring supply to the prior level in turn lowering the price. So,following an artist’s death there is an immediate spike in the price. Shortly after, the

availabilityof theirworkincreasesandthemarketgraduallyreturnstoanequilibriumlevelthattendstobehigherthanthelevelpriortotheartist’sdeath.Thedeatheffectthoughisnotas drastic as many think. The immediate increase is quite short lived and the long termincreaseisnotparticularlylarge.Moreover,whiletheworkofartistsisheavilyinfluencedbythelimitedsupplyofproductscreatedbytheartist,worksassociatedwithacelebritydonothave the same limitations. There are no limits on thenumber of songs that iTunes can sellafteracelebritydeath,orthenumberofmemorialt-shirts,oreventhenumberofDVDcopiesofacelebrity’smovies.Therefore,withafewexceptions,mostoftheproductsassociatedwithacelebrityare reproducibleanddonot exhibit the same limitationsof supplyanddemand.Instead the attraction or desire for products to memorialize and remember the deceasedcannotsimplybeexplainedbythecessationofsupply.

Consumptionasaresponsetocelebritydeath

Whilecelebrityisoftenseenastrivial,formanytherearesignificantimplicationsforbothselfandgroup identity formation.Fansofcelebritiesexhibitvarying levelsof involvementwithcelebrities and they oftenuse products as ameans of constructing and supporting this self-identity.However,theendoftherelationshipcanbehardonfansandthegriefandmourningresponses they exhibit can be intense with implications for the individual and theirconstructionofidentity.Inthewakeofthisloss,productscanoftenbeenusedasameansofremembering or maintaining an attachment to the celebrity and providing stability ormeaningtoconsumerswhentheyareinaliminalstatearounddeath(Gentryetal.,1995b).

We now present a summary framework to further illuminate the nature of consumerresponsestoacelebritydeath(seeFigure7.1).Attheleftisthetriggeringevent,thedeathofacelebrity.Foragivenindividual,onlycertaincelebritieswillevokeanoticeableresponseupontheirdeaths.Thus, strongresponsesderive fromthedeathofacelebritywhere therewasastrong pre-existing attachment. In cases where the attachment was strong, the death willelevate the sacred status of both the celebrity and related products or relics. Attachmenttheory suggests that when people feel strong attachments to others a proximity-seekingsystem is engaged, which causes them to seek ways of being close to the relevant other(Bowlby,1978;Shaver,Hazan,andBradshaw,1988).Thisattachmenttoafamiliarordesirableotherisreallynodifferentwhenitisdirectedtowardsaface-to-facerelationshiporonethatisconsumed only through media (i.e. parasocial) (Stever, 2011). Once fans have formed anattachmentwithacelebrity,theywillseekproximityinanumberofwayssuchaslookingatphotographs,beingavidconsumersofthecreativework,andseekingvicariousproximitybycollecting memorabilia (Stever, 2011). When the celebrity dies, just as in a traditional

relationship,thegrievingfanmayengageininstrumentalandcognitiveeffortstomaintainasenseofcontinuingattachmentwith thecelebrityandcounteract thepain felt fromthe loss(Schuchter and Zisook, 1993). Fans will seek to both hold on to items to remember thecelebrityandseekoutnewitemstomemorializethecelebrity.Thepossessionsofthedeceasedcan servebothas ameansofmoving through thegrief process andmaintaininga senseofconnection to the lost loved one (Gentry etal., 1995), but can also be used as a device foravoidantcoping(Field,Nichols,Holen,andHorowitz,1999).

Figure7.1Responsestocelebritydeath.

Whenapersonlosesasignificantother,theytendtograspatpiecesofthatotherandtakethemintothemselves.Johnson(1997)notestwostagesofincorporatingtheotherintotheselfasapartofmourning:introjectionandincorporation.

In introjectivemodes, thesubject takes theOtherbyverbalmeans.TheOther isembodied in theself imaginarily, throughpracticeslikethewritingofpoems.Whileintrojectionisamoreorlessconsciousprocess,incorporationworkssecretlythroughunconsciousmeans. It involves ingestion of objects – literally things – rather than the embodiment of theOther throughwordsorimages.Theseformsof‘eatingtheother’aremoreorlesstransformedorverbalized,moreorlessmetaphorical.

(Johnson,1997,p.238)

Followingthedeathofa lovedone,anindividualalsomayfeela losstotheirextendedself(Belk, 1988) and consumers try to compensate with the acquisition of material goods(WicklundandGollwitzer,1982).Thus,asshowninthefigure,demandforcelebrityproductsandassociatedbuyingactivityincreases.Materialobjects,places,oractivitiesassociatedwith

thedeceasedbecomemeansofenhancingmemories(Johnson1997).Objectsareoftenusedasa means of preserving the memory of the deceased and they are incorporated into theperson’s life. In the case of race car driver Dale Earnhardt Sr., fans sought relief throughconsumptionand, justas theydidwhenhewasalive, theycontinued tomeasure their self-worthasafanbasedonthegearthattheyowned(RadfordandBloch,2012).Grievingpersonsmayretain the items thatbelong toa lovedoneasmeansofavoidantcopingandnot fullyaccepting the loss (Gorer,1965).Somefans refuse toaccept thedeathandcontinue toweartheirgearandlookforthedriveronthetrack(RadfordandBloch2012).However,productsmay be natural and positive tools that assist in the grieving process. Yet, as noted above,people in a liminal state of grief are often vulnerable and do not always make the mostrationaldecisions.While,manycelebritiesaresupportedbyanextensivemarketingprogramofmemorabilia,thereseemstobeacleardisdainforpersonswhoseeksolelytocompensatefrom the death of a celebrity. This creates an interesting dichotomy, as the demand forcelebritymemorabiliaisheightenedbythedeathofacelebrity,whileatthesametimethereare strong critiques of thosewho sell it. As noted by Radford and Bloch (2012) fanswerehighly interested inEarnhardtmerchandise,but itspurchaseorsale forprofitwascriticized.Considerthefollowingquote.

HestoppedatthistruckstoptogetgasandheoverheardacashiertellingthisladythatwastryingtopurchaseanEarnhardtcarthatshecouldn’tsellherthatuntilhermanagergotthere‘causetheyhadtoadjusttheprice–ofcoursehigher–manthatburnsmeup…

Hewasaperson,ahumanbeing–andhisdeathshouldnotbetreatedlikeitwasjustsomedamnTVshow–tomakemoneyoffof–peoplethatdostufflikethis–willhavetheirday–whatgoesaroundcomesaround.

(IFCLevi–ReportedinRadfordandBloch2012)

As fans sacralize a celebrity and associated goods, marketers become aware of thisphenomenonandrelatedincreasesindemand.Thisstimulatesmarketentryamongthosewithcelebritygoods.Intoday’sworldofonlinecommerce,suchentrycanoccuronlyminutesafteracelebritydies,unliketheweeksrequiredinearlierdecades.Whiletherehasalwaysbeenamarket formemorial items, suchasplates fromtheBradfordExchange,orcommemorativespoons, there has typically been a lag between the death of a celebrity and the ability ofmarketerstobringtheseobjectstomarket.Morerecently,however,ithasbecomeeasierforconsumerstoacquiregoodsonline,bothfromexistingmarketersandfromotherconsumersthroughconsumertoconsumerexchangessuchasebayorkijiji.Thismeansthatthereisnowamore readily availablemarketplace to fulfill the demand for celebrity-related goods thatoccursimmediatelyafterdeath.Thisspeedtomarketcreatesunprecedentedopportunitiesforsellers to profit and allows consumers to seek consumption-related relief when it is mostdesired (Radford and Bloch, 2013). The grief reaction and increased sacralization of thecelebrity isalsooftenassociatedwithadesire toacquire itemsassociatedwith thecelebrity(ZaidmanandLowengart,2001).Atthesametimesellerscananticipateincreasesindemand

forcelebrity-relatedgoodsandbringtheseitemstomarket.Memorabiliasellersaremotivatedtogettheirgoodstomarketassoonaspossibletoachievefirstmoveradvantagesandtotakeadvantage of the high emotion levels that immediately follow a celebrity’s death (Kerin,Varadarajan,andPeterson,1992).

Justlikethedeatheffectinart,empiricalevidencehasindicatedthatthereisanincreaseddemandandsupplyforcelebritymemorabiliaimmediatelyafterdeath,butthatthiseffectisnotlongterm.Themarketisenergizedbythedeathofacelebrityasbothbuyersandsellersrush to market. The response occurs quite suddenly, merely minutes after death, but it isrelativelyshortlivedanddemandbeginstorecedealmostasquicklyasitbegan(RadfordandBloch,2013).Whatisperhapsmostinteresting,though,isthatthereisverylittleevidenceofapriceincreasefollowingacelebritydeath.Whilemanybuyersareafraidthatpriceswillrise,andmanysellersarecountingonthis,therealityisthatthereislittlechangeinthepricepaidatauction(RadfordandBloch,2013).Thismayspeaktothefactthatcelebritydeathsdonotexertthesamekindofvulnerabilityfromgrievingashasbeenevidencedinmoretraditionalrelationships. It may also suggest that because marketers are so quick to respond to theincreaseddemandthattherearenottheperceptionsofshortagesthathavebeenevidencedbythedeatheffectinart.

Whatisinterestingthoughisthatthetypeofdeathandthetypeofmemorabiliabothhaveaneffecton thedemand forproducts.Whena celebritydies suddenly, fansaremuchmoredriventoseekmemorabiliaandexhibitpublicgrievingbehaviors(RadfordandBloch,2013).Forexample,thesuddendeathsofMichaelJackson,AmyWinehouse,andRobinWilliamsallledtoverypublicdisplaysofgriefandgrieving.WhilethedeathsofequallyfamousfiguressuchasFarahFawcettandRonaldReagan,whowerebothstrickenwithlong-termillnesses,ledtomuchfewerpublicdisplaysofmourning.Finally,thereisalsoevidencethatconsumersactively seek products that hold an indexical connection to the celebrity, that is directlycontaminated by contact, than items that are iconic, that is representative of the celebrity(GraysonandMartinec,2004;RadfordandBloch,2013).

Asshowninthefigure,grievingfanshaveanotherwaytoexpresstheiremotionsoutsidethe consumption of celebrity products. Today, fansmay take to various internet venues asplacestopubliclyexpress their feelingsof loss.Forumsdedicatedtothe lostcelebritythrivewithactivitywhilesocialmediatrendsfurthercapturethepostsofsaddenedfans.Thevoicingofsuchgriefonlineandgatheringresponsesmayfeedbacktofurtherenhancethesacredstatusof the celebrity inquestion.A similar feedbackmayoccur from theacquisitionof celebritygoods.Thefigurealsonotesthatthebuyingandonlinereactionsmayreinforceeachotheraswell.

Conclusion

Theprocessandpracticesofmourningareimportantinthemaintenanceandreconstructionofselffollowingthelossofanimportantfigureinone’slife.Thisisnolessimportantwhenthatfigurewasknownthroughaparasocialrelationship.Themeansofmourningmaybedifferentand,withtheabsenceofthecorporalgrievingritualsassociatedwiththedisposalofthebody,the rituals ofworking through grief aremore associatedwith customs associatedwith thecommunity(AverillandNunley,1993),thememorializationthroughproductconsumptionorsymbols(Cann,2014)andthemythologizingabouttheinteractionswiththecelebrity(RadfordandBloch,2012).

Thereareanumberofdifferentconceptualizationsofgriefandgrievingandtheprocessofmourning, includingKublerRoss’s stagesofgrief (Kubler-RossandKessler, 2005),Worden’sfourtasksofmourning(Worden,1982),andStreobeandSchutt’sdualprocessmodelofloss-andrestorative-orientedcoping(StroebeandSchut,2010),eachofwhichcanbelayeredontotheprocessofmourningforthelossofacelebrity(seeCourbetandFourquet-Courbet,2014;Radford andBloch, 2012).However,when considering the role of consumption and relatedproductsinthebereavementprocessforcelebrities,consumptionseemstoserveadualroleofsupportingtheritualsandconstructingthemythsthatareusedtoprogressthroughmourning.

The possession, consumption, display, and disposition of products are another importantpartoftheritualofmourningforfansastheycopewithloss.Thedeathofacelebrityservestocreate an intersection between public consumption with the private space of death andmourning. Particularly in Western cultures, where death is often a private family affairreservedforclosefriends,theoutpouringofgriefexhibitedinaverypublicmannerisblurringtheboundariesbetweentheprivateandpublicsphere(Klaassens,Groute,andVanclay,2013).Ritualsthatsurrounddeathareoftenprescribedbygroupmembershipandareevenconceivedof duties of belonging to the group (Averill and Nunley, 1993). In the past, this groupmembership was often religious in nature, but with celebrity the group membership isorientedaroundacommunityofconsumption.Asaresult,manyoftheritualsassociatedwiththedeathofacelebrityinvolvetheconsumptionofproductsassociatedwiththecelebrity.Thismay involve binge watching Robin Williams movies, reenacting Michael Jackson dancemoves, or depositing cigarettes and whiskey at a makeshift memorial outside of AmyWinehouse’shouse.

Deathcreatesamythologyaroundthecelebritythatisoftengreaterthanthatexperiencedduring life (Wang, 2007) and this mythology, like religious ritual, is often associated withspecialobjectsoritems.Indeath,mythologizinghelpstheconsumertoconstructtheidentityofthecelebritythattheywouldliketoremember.TroubledartistslikeAmyWinehouseandKurtCobainwererememberedastorturedgeniuses;JohnnyCashandDaleEarn-hardt,who

werebothvilifiedbyfansandmediaduringtheirlives,werecelebratedasrebelsafterdeath;andfollowingMichaelJackson’sdeaththerewereveryfewmentionsofthebizarrebehaviorand unhealthy relationships that were often discussed when he was alive. As a process ofcoping,myth-makinghelps the fanmove through the grieving process and incorporate theessenceofthesourceoffameintotheirownself-conceptionasfan.Itisnotnecessarythatthemythologywasalwayspositive though, just that itwas true to the identityof the celebritythatispossessedbythefan.Forexample,followingthedeathofMargaretThatcher,salesof‘DingDongtheWitchisDead’soaredoniTunes,whichlikelywouldhaveamusedthestrong-willed politician, and the death of Joan Rivers sparked snappy insulting tweets from LenaDunham that the star herselfwould likely have appreciated. Themyth constructed aroundidentityisusefultofansifithelpsthemtorestoretheirself-identitiesinthewakeofthelossbyreflectingonthepleasurederivedfromthecelebrityinlife.

Aninterestingoutcomeofthismergingoftheprivateandpublicintherealmofcelebrityisthe opportunity that it provides to bring private discussions into greater public focus.FollowingRobinWilliams’suicidetherewereanumberofdiscussionsofmentalillnessinthepopularpress.RobinWilliams’deathprovidedanopportunityfordiscussionsofmentalhealth,which is often stigmatized and private, in the public sphere. This positive outcome of acelebritydeathhasalsobeenevidencewithdiscussionsofsexuality (Wang,2007)andorgandonation(Baeetal.,2011).However,aswithmanyissuessurroundingcelebrity,thisattentionwasfleeting.ThemythofRobinWilliamsasstrugglingwithmentalillnessservedasatotemaroundwhichpeoplecouldmakesenseofhisdeath,butonce theprocessofmourningwascomplete,thediscussionsfadedfromconsciousness.

As fandom is oriented arounda communityof consumption, the loss of the focus of thisconsumptionwill likely trigger anumberof responses.Most of these responses arehealthyattemptstonavigatetheprocessofmourninganddealingwiththeloss.Thegroupalidentityofbelongingtoagroupwhichvaluesthecelebritywillinfluencethedegree,thetype,andthemagnitudeofmourningandtheassociatedritualsandmythsthatareenactedandcreatedtodealwiththisgrief.Consumerswillseekproductsasameansofrememberingthedeceased,demonstratingtheirdevotiontoothers,compensatingforthelossofself,andrebuildingtheirself-identitiesintheaftermathofthecelebritydeath.

References

Aries, P. (1985). Images of Man and Death (J. Lloyd, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversityPress.

Averill, J. A., and Nunley, E. P. (1993). Grief as an Emotion and as a Disease: A Social-

Constructionist Perspective. In W. Stroebe and R. O. Hanssson (Eds.), Handbook ofBereavement.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Bae,H.-S.,Brown,W. J.,andKang,S. (2011).Social InfluenceofaReligiousHero:TheLateCardinalStephenKimSou-hwan’sEffectonCorneaDonationandVolunteerism.JournalofHealthCommunication,16,62–78.

Belk, R.W. (1988). Possessions and theExtended Self. Journal ofConsumerResearch, 15(2),139–168.

Belk,R.W.,andCosta, J.A. (1998).TheMountainManMyth:AContemporaryConsumingFantasy.JournalofConsumerResearch,25(3),218–240.

Belk, R. W., Wallendorf, M., and Sherry, J. F., Jr. (1989). The Sacred and The Profane InConsumerBehavior:TheodicyOntheOdyssey.JournalofConsumerResearch,16(1),1–38.

Bonsu,S.K.,andBelk,R.W.(2003).DoNotGoCheaplyintothatGoodNight:Death-RitualConsumptioninAsante,Ghana.JournalofConsumerResearch,30(1),41–55.

Boorstin,D. J. (1962).The Image:WhatHappened to theAmericanDream (2ndedition ed.).NewYork:Atheneum.

Bowlby,J.(1978).AttachmentandLoss.Harmondsworth,UK;Markham,Ont.:PenguinBooks.Brown, W. J. (2010). Steve Irwin’s Influence on Wildlife Conservation. Journal of

Communication,60,73–93.Brown,W. J., Basil,M.D., and Bocarnea,M. C. (2003). Social Influence of an International

Celebrity: Responses to the Death of Princess Diana. Journal of Communication, 53(4),587–605.

Cann, C. K. (2014). Virtual Afterlives: Grieving the Dead in the Twenty-First Century.Lexington:UniversityPressofKentucky.

Caughey,J.L.(1984).ImaginarySocialWorlds:ACulturalApproach.Lincoln,NE:UniversityofNebraska.

Clark,J.,andFranzmann,M.(2006).AuthorityfromGrief,PresenceandPlaceintheMakingofRoadsideMemorials.DeathStudies,30(6),579–599.

CNN.com.(2011).Asouvenirmomentbecomestragedyatballgame.RetrievedNovember25,2014,fromhttp://edition.cnn.com/2011/SPORT/07/07/texas.rangers.game.death/.

Courbet, D., and Fourquet-Courbet,M.-P. (2014).When a Celebrity Dies… Social Identity,Uses of Social Media, and the Mourning Process Among Fans: The Case of MichaelJackson.CelebrityStudies,5(3),275–290.

Curasi,C. F., Price, L. L., andArnould, E. J. (2004).How Individuals’Cherished PossessionsBecomeFamilies’InalienableWealth.JournalofConsumerResearch,31(3),609–622.

Czujack, C. (1997). Picasso Paintings at Auction, 1963–1994. Journal of Cultural Economics,21(3),229–247.

Ekelund,R.B. J.,Ressler,R.W.,andWatson, J.K. (2000).The ‘Death-Effect’ inArtPrices:ADemand-SideExploration.JournalofCulturalEconomics,24(4),283–295.

Field, N. P., Nichols, C., Holen, A., andHorowitz,M. J. (1999). The Relation of ContinuingAttachmenttoAdjustmentinConjugalBereavement.JournalofConsultingandClinicalPsychology,67(2),212–218.

Franzmann,M.(1998).DianainDeath–ANeworGreaterGodness.AustralianFolklore,13,112–123.

Gabel, T.G.,Mansfield, P., andWestbrook,K. (1996, 1996).TheDisposal of Consumers: AnExploratoryAnalysisofDeath-RelatedConsumption.PaperpresentedattheAdvancesinConsumerResearch,Minneapolis,MN.

Gentry,J.W.,Kennedy,P.F.,Paul,C.,andHill,R.P.(1995).FamilyTransitionsDuringGrief:Discontinuities inHouseholdConsumptionPatterns. Journal of Business Research, 34(1),67–79.

Giles,D.C.(2002).ParasocialInteraction:AReviewoftheLiteratureandaModelforFutureResearch.MediaPsychology,4(3),279–305.

Gorer,G.(1965).Death,Grief,andMourning(1sted.).GardenCity,NY:Doubleday.Grant,D.(1991,Nov18,1991).NoDeathBenefits.Barron’sNationalBusinessandFinancial

Weekly,pp.17,31–32.Grayson,K.,andMartinec,R.(2004).ConsumerPerceptionsofIconicityandIndexicalityand

Their Influence on Assessments of Authentic Market Offerings. Journal of ConsumerResearch,31(2),296–312.

Grayson,K.,andShulman,D.(2000).IndexicalityandtheVerificationFunctionofIrreplaceablePossessions:ASemioticAnalysis.JournalofConsumerResearch,27(1),17–30.

Greenberg,A(2009).WhyCelebritiesTwitter.RetreivedApril23,2015,fromwww.forbes.com/2009/03/03/twitter-celebrities-privacy-technology-internet_twitter.html.

Haney,C.A.,Leimer,C.,andLowery,J.(1997).SpontaneousMemorialization:ViolentDeathandEmergingMourningRitual.OMEGA–JournalofDeathandDying,35(2),159–171.

Horton, D., and Wohl, R. R. (1956). Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction:ObservationsonIntimacyataDistance.Psychiatry,19,215–229.

James,C.(1993).Fameinthe20thCentury(1stU.S.ed.).NewYork,NY:RandomHouse.Jenkins,H.(2006).StarTrekRerun,Reread,Rewritten:FanWritingasTextualPoaching.InH.

Jenkins (Ed.), Fans Bloggers, andGamers (pp. 37–60). New York: New York UniversityPress.

Johnson,R.(1997).GrievousRecognitions2:TheGrievingProcessandSexualBoundaries.InD. L. Steinberg, D. Epstein and J. R. (Eds.), Border Patrols: Policing the Boundaries ofHeterosexuality(pp.232–252).London:Cassell.

Kerin, R. A., Varadarajan, P. R., and Peterson, R. A. (1992). First-Mover Advantage: ASynthesis,ConceptualFramework.JournalofMarketing,56(4),33.

Klaassens,M.,Groute, P.D., andVanclay, F.M. (2013). Expressions of PrivateMourning inPublicSpace:TheEvolvingStructureofSpontaneousandPermanentRoadsideMemorials

intheNetherlands.DeathStudies,37(2),145–171.Kozinets,R.V.(2001).UtopianEnterprise:ArticulatingtheMeaningsofStarTrek’sCultureof

Consumption.JournalofConsumerResearch,28(1),67–88.Kubler-Ross,E.,andKessler,D.(2005).OnGriefandGrieving.NewYork:Scribner.Maltby, J.,Dayb,L.,McCutcheon,L.E.,Hourand, J.,andAshe,D. (2006).ExtremeCelebrity

Worship, Fantasy Proneness and Dissociation: Developing the Measurement andUnderstandingofCelebrityWorshipwithinaClinicalPersonalityContext.PersonalityandIndividualDifferences,40(2),273–283.

McCane,B.R. (1991).Bones ofContention:Ossuaries andReliquaries inEarly JudaismandChristianity.SecondCentury:AJournalofEarlyChristianStudies,8(4),235–246.

McCracken, G. (1989). Who is the Celebrity Endorser? Cultural Foundations of theEndorsementProcess.JournalofConsumerResearch,16(3),310–321.

McCutcheon,L.E.,Lange,R., andHouran, J. (2002).ConceptualizationandMeasurementofCelebrityWorship.BritishJournalofPsychology,93(1),67–87.

McCutcheon,L.E.,Maltby,J.,Houran,J.,andAshe,D.D.(2004).CelebrityWorship:InsidetheMindsofStargazers(1sted.).Baltimore,MD:PublishAmerica.

Newman,G.E.,Diesendruck,G.,andBloom,P.(2011).CelebrityContagionandtheValueofObjects.JournalofConsumerResearch,38,215–228.

Nunn, H., and Biressi, A. (2010). ‘A Trust Betrayed’: Celebrity and the Work of Emotion.CelebrityStudies(1),49–64.

O’Guinn,T.C.(1991).TouchingGreatness:TheCentralMidwestBarryManilowFanClub.InR. W. Belk (Ed.), Highways and Buyways (pp. 102–111). Provo, UT: Association forConsumerResearch.

O’Guinn, T.C., andBelk, R.W. (1989).Heaven onEarth:Consumption atHeritageVillage,USA.JournalofConsumerResearch,16(2),227–238.

Radford,S.K.,andBloch,P.H.(2012).Grief,Commiseration,andConsumptionFollowingtheDeathofaCelebrity.JournalofConsumerCulture,12(2),137–155.

Radford,S.K.,andBloch,P.H.(2013).BuyerandSellerResponsestotheDeathofaCelebrity:The‘DeathEffect’online.MarketingLetters,24(1),43–55.

Rein, I., Kotler, P., and Stoller, M. (1997). High Visibility: The Making and Marketing orProfessionalsintoCelebrities.Lincolnwood:NTC/ContemporaryPublishingCompany.

Richins,M.L.(1994).ValuingThings:ThePublicandPrivateMeaningsofPossessions.JournalofConsumerResearch,21(3),503–521.

Rojek,C.(2001).Celebrity.London:Reaktion.Rojek,C. (2007).CelebrityandReligion. InS.RedmondandS.Holmes (Eds.),Stardom and

Celebrity:AReader.LosAngeles:SagePublications.Rollason,D.W.(1989).SaintsandRelicsinAnglo-SaxonEngland.Oxford:BasilBlackwell.Schuchter, S. R., and Zisook, S. (1993). The Course of Normal Grief. In M. S. Stroebe,W.

Stroebe and O. Hansson (Eds.), Handbook of Bereavement (pp. 23–43). New York:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Shaver,R.,Hazan,C.,andBradshaw,D.(1988).LoveasAttachment:TheIntegrationofThreeBehaviouralSystems.NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress.

Stever,G.S. (2011).FanBehaviorandLifespanDevelopmentTheory:ExplainingPara-socialandSocialAttachmenttoCelebrities.JournalofAdultDevelopment,18(1),1–7.

Stroebe,M., andSchut,H. (2010).TheDualProcessModelofCopingwithBereavement:ADecadeOn.Omega:JournalofDeathandDying,61(4),273–289.

Wang,Y. (2007).AStar isDead:ALegend isBorn:PracticingLeslieCheung’sPost-humousFandom.InS.RedmondandS.Holmes(Eds.),StardomandCelebrity:AReader(pp.326–340).London:Sage.

Wicklund, R. A., and Gollwitzer, P. M. (1982). Symbolic Self-Completion. Hillsdale, N.J.: L.ErlbaumAssociates.

Worden,J.W.(1982).GriefCounselingandGriefTherapy:AHandbookfortheMentalHealthPractitioner.NewYork:SpringerPub.Co.

Zaidman, N., and Lowengart, O. (2001). The Marketing of Sacred Goods: Interaction ofConsumersandRetailers.JournalofInternationalConsumerMarketing,13(4),5–14.

8Voluntarysimplicityinthefinalriteofpassage

Death

HakanCengizandDennisW.Rook

VoluntarySimplicityisavaluedrivenconsumerlifestylethatwasfirstobservedinthepost-modernerainthe1970s(ElginandMitchell1977),andwhichhasgrownsteadily(Shama1988;IyerandMuncy2009),andmaterializedinvariousways.Thecurrentsocietalfocusoncarbonfootprints,sustainability,greenlifestyles,foodsourcing,andproductsharingreflect,tovaryingdegrees, consumers’ desires to simplify their lives in socially responsibleways.This chapterpresents the results of an exploratory, discovery-oriented examination of the voluntarysimplicity lifestyle trend within the context of ritual consumption practices and purchasesassociatedwiththefinalriteofpassage:death.Weprovideevidenceoflifestylesimplificationand its underlying, motivating factors through examination of the basic ritual elementsproposedbyRook(1985):(1)ritualscripts,(2)ritualartifacts,(3)ritualactorsandroles,and(4)ritualaudiences.Dramaticandrecentchangesintheconsumptionofdeathhavematerializedfromindividuals’consciouschoicestosimplifytheirownendings,withsubsequentprofoundimpact on these four elements. However, like any complex consumption phenomenon, wehypothesizethatotherdemographicandpsychographicfactorsalsoimpacttheconsumptionofdeathtoday.

Voluntarysimplicity

Sinceitsinceptioninthe1970s(Wells1971;Plummer1974)lifestyleanalysishasproventobeauseful tool for better understanding consumers by layering psychographic “flesh” overdemographic “bones,” thereby humanizing and animating the “target,” and often providingmore in-depth and subtle consumer insights. Lifestyle analysis is quite dynamic, with newlifestyles emerging over time, with some achieving prominence in popular culture, forexample, yuppies, road warriors, soccer moms, couch potatoes, yoga mommas, goths, and

manyothers.Onedistinctivelifestylethatwasfirstobservedinthe1970sincludesindividualswhohavemadeconsciousdecisionstopursueVoluntarySimplicity(ElginandMitchell1977).Thislifestyletrendhasslowlybutsteadilyincreasedinprominenceamongconsumersandinthe consumer behavior literature (Leonard-Barton 1981; Shama 1988;Mitchell 1983; Craig-LeesandHill2002;Etzioni1998;Zavestoski2002;Huneke2005;Bekin,Carrigan,andSzmigin2005;

Cherrier2009;IyerandMuncy2009).Shama(1988)infactclaimedthattheconsumerswhohave voluntarily simplified their lives comprise one of the fastest growing segments inAmerica,althoughempiricalevidenceofthisislacking.

IntheirseminalworkElginandMitchell(1977)suggestedthatvoluntarylifestylesimplifiersadhere to five basic values: (1) material simplicity, (2) self-determination, (3) ecologicalawareness,(4)humanscale,and(5)personalgrowth.Shama(1988)similarlydefinedvoluntarysimplicityasalifestyleoflowconsumption,ecologicalresponsibility,andself-sufficiency.Wesuggest that limitingexpendituresonconsumergoodsandservices,ecologicalresponsibility,and self-sufficiency are the core concepts of simplicity lifestyles today. The lifestylesimplification trendcanbeexamined fromnumerous theoreticalandempiricalperspectives,andinavarietyofcontexts.Theapproachtakenherebelievesthatauniversalhumanriteofpassage,death,providesarichcontextforexploringsimplificationtrends.

TheAmericanwayofdeath

First, we provide a brief overview of traditional death practices in the United States thatcollectivelyconstitutethefuneralindustry.Wegeneralizewithcaution,asreligionandculturalfactors generate considerable variation in how death rituals are conducted. So, like JessicaMittford (1963;updatedposthumously in2000) inhergroundbreakingclassic,TheAmericanWayofDeath,ourfocuswillbeonthetypical,oraverage,funerarypractices.Formuchofthetwentieth century, death rituals commonly centered around the local undertaker and hisfuneralhome.Thedeceasedwouldberemovedfromhomeorahospitalanddeliveredtothefuneral home where the body would be embalmed, dressed and cosmetically enhanced.Sometimes the body would be returned to its home for a viewing and wake; often theviewingwas held in the funeral home.Next, a funeral servicewould be held, attended byfamilymembersandfriends,followedbyaprocessiontothecemeterywherethebodywouldbeburied.Thesequenceoftheseeventschangedlittle,however,increasingaffluenceandthemarketing efforts of the funeral industry raised the stakes considerably.As JessicaMittfordobservedover50yearsago:

gradually, almost imperceptibly, over the years the funeralmen have constructed their own grotesque cloud-cuckoo-land

wherethetrappingsofGraciousLivingaretransformed…intothetrappingsofGraciousDying.ThesamefamiliarMadisonAvenuelanguage,withitspeculiaradjectivalrangedesignedtoanesthetizesalesresistancetoallsortsofproducts,hadseepedintothefuneralindustryinanewandbizarreguise.

(pp.13–14)

Funerals received a big upgrade. Undertakers were rebranded as “funeral directors” whoencouraged the purchase of solid copper caskets, floral tributes, handmade fashion for thecorpse,amongnumerousotherproductsandservices.

Funeralsbecameanewvenueforconspicuousconsumption,whichlikeearlierexpressionsofit,elicitedcriticalcommentary.EvenaHollywoodfilm,TheLovedOne,waslargelybasedonEvelynWaugh’s1948satire,TheLovedOne:AnAnglo-AmericanTragedy,theimpetusforwhichwasWaugh’svisittoForestLawncemeteryinBurbank,California.The1965filmalsodrewfromMittford’smorerecentbook,andmockedtheupsellingoffunerealofferings,butwithlittleapparenteffectonconsumers’deathconsumptionchoices.

ValueLinedividesthefuneralservicesindustryintothreecategories:(1)cemeteryownersandoperators,(2)funeralhomesand(3)manufacturersofburialandmemorialproductsandservices(Spencer2014).Forbesmagazinerecentlyestimatedtheannualrevenueofthefuneralindustrytobeapproximately$20billion.Withroughly2.5milliondeathsperyearintheUS,this amounts to an average cost per funeral of slightly over $8,000 (Boring 2014). Abreakdown of the common funeral items and their costs is provided in Table 8.1. This is asubstantialsumfortheaveragehousehold,andanimpossibleamountforfamilieswithmorelimitedmeans.Thesefinancialrealitiesexplainthefrequencyofprintandbroadcastmessagesthat encourage individuals to purchase term death insurance policies thatwill protect theirsurvivorsfromfunerealfinancialburdens.

WhileTable8.1summarizesthemostbasicelementsofatraditionalfuneral’scoststructure,Table 8.2 enumerates myriad detail related to the medical and legal, ceremonial, bodydisposition, and memorial aspects of death consumption, regardless of whether it involvestraditional burial or cremation. Many of these items commonly require incrementalexpendituresabovethebasicfuneralpackage,whichcaneasilyresultinafuneralthatcostsfarmorethanthe$8,300average.

Table8.1Costofanadultfuneral–2012

Item Price

Non-declinablebasicservicesfee $1,975Removal/transferofremainstofuneralhome $285Embalming $695Otherpreparationofthebody $225

Useoffacilities/staffforviewing $400Useoffacilities/staffforfuneralceremony $495Useofahearse $295Useofaservicecar/van $130Basicmemorialprintedpackage $150Metalcasket $2,395MEDIANCOSTOFAFUNERAL $7,045Vault $1,298Totalcostofafuneralwithvault $8,343Source:Spencer(2014),“IndustryAnalysis:FuneralServices,”ValueLine,April28.

However, the revenue growth in the funeral industry has been flat for almost ten years.Oneanalystconcludesthatfourchangesareprofoundlyimpactingthefuneralindustrytoday:(1)lower-pricedproductsandservicespurchasedovertheinternet,(2)thegrowthofnationalfuneral home chains, (3) cultural diversity in the US that demands different funeral ritualpractice,and(4)therisingpopularityofcremation(Harrington2007:pp.201–216).Althoughdispositionofadeadbodythroughcremationhasbeenperformedthroughouttheworldforseveralthousandyears,itspopularityhasonlyrecentlyincreasedintheUS,anddonesowithamazing rapidity. As Table 8.3 summarizes, 50 years ago fewer than 4 percent of deathsresultedincremation;in2012thenumberhadrisentoover43percent.

Table8.2Death-relatedproductsandservices

Productsandservices1

Medicalandlegal Ceremonial Bodydisposition Memorial

•Embalming•Deathcertificates•Ritualbathing/dressing• Mortuary/refrigeration/packing

•Costumes• Cosmetic

enhancements•Flowers•Wreaths•Doveorballoon

release•Candles• Graveside

services• Tents or chairs

forgraveside

•Niche or cryptplate

• Cremationvault

•Burialvault•Burialplot•Burialclothing•Coffin/casket

•Memorialgifts•Memorialbooks• Acknowledgment

cards•Registerbook•Keepsakes/pendants•Obituaries•Jewelry

thebodyinice• Sanitary care of un-embalmed

remains•Printingservices

•Decoration•Scatteringatsea

byairplaneorboat

•Insidepiecesforcasket

• Body transferwithlimousine,hearseetc.

•Portraitcar

•Urns•Container•Gravemarkers• Digging the

grave• Other

cremationservices

•Printingservice•LifetributeDVD•Remembrancethrow•Blanket• Memorial reception

room•Thank-younotes•Funeralinvitations

Note

1Anysingleiteminthetablemayfallintomorethanonecategory.

Cremationchangeseverything

Suchadramaticandrelativelyswiftchangeinacorecomponentoflife’sfinalritedepassageisextraordinary,andbegsthequestion:why?OnthewebsiteoftheCremationAssociationofNorthAmerica (CANA) are the results of a 2006 survey that investigated the reasons thatAmericansareshiftingtheirpreferencesfromthetraditionalfuneralandburialtocremation.The number one factor thatwasmentionedwas cost savings. In 2013 theNational FuneralDirectors Association reported that the average cost for a cremation was approximately$1,600, which is roughly one fifth of the cost of a traditional funeral. The second mostfrequentlycitedfactorwasthedesiretosaveland,followedbyapreferenceforasimplerendofliferitual.Allthreeofthesefactorsarestronglycorrelatedwiththedefiningelementsofasimplicity lifestyle,whichsupports thebelief that thedramatic increase incremations in theUSisamanifestationofpreferencesforsimplicity,notonlyinlifebutalsoattheendofit.Atthe same time, it is likely that other factors also contribute to opting for cremation,particularly cost. The post-2008 recession and income stagnation likely havemade itmoredifficultformiddleclassindividualstoaffordatraditionalfuneral,andevenifaffordabilityisless of an issue for some, theymay have readjusted their economic priorities inways thatwouldprecludespendinglargesumsonatraditionalfuneral.

Table8.3CremationratesintheUnitedStates

Year Totalcremationrate(%)

2012 43.22005 32.131995 21.111985 13.861975 6.551965 3.87Source:NationalVitalStatisticsReport.

The previously mentioned survey by CANA yields similar findings. Lower cost andenvironmental impact are the top two cremationmotivators. In addition, theCANA studycitesthewiderrangeofdispositionoptionsthatcremationopensup,suchasscatteringoftheashesoveroneormorelocations,dividingtheashesamongfamilymembers,orincorporatingthemintokeepsakejewelryorotheritems.Theeaseoftransportingashesversusacorpsewasalsolistedasanadvantageofcremation.Finally,theacceptanceofcremationbyreligionsthathadpreviously frownedon it (e.g.,Catholicism)opensup theoption to a largernumberofindividuals.Also,thegrowingpresenceofimmigrantpopulationsforwhomcremationistheculturalnormhavelikelycontributedtoitsgrowth.

Cremation has had a profound effect on the ways in which individuals’ lives end, andsimplifies the experience in variousways.We belief that cremation’s impact on end-of-lifepracticescanbefurtherunderstoodinmorenuancedwaysbydeconstructingthecremation-drivenritual.Specifically,asmentionedearlier,ouranalyticframeworkreliesonRook’s(1985)specificationofconsumptionrituals’structureandcontent,which includefourkeyelements:(1)scriptedbehavior,activities,andevents;(2)actorsandtheirassignedroles;(3)consumptionartifactsandservices;and(4)ritualaudience,orobservers.Astheseelementsarediscusseditshould be useful to refer to Table 8.4, which illustrates the various products, people, andservicesthatmaybeconsumedwithineach.

Table8.4Deathritualsconsumptiondomain

Medical/legalproducts/services

Ceremonialproducts/servicesBodydispositionproducts/services

Memorialproducts/servicesormerchandise

•Embalming•Bodytransferwith

limousine,hearse,etc.

•Portraitcar•Deathcertificates

•Costumes•Cosmeticenhancements•Flowers•Wreaths•Doveorballoonrelease

• Niche or cryptplate

•Cremationvaults

•Memorialgifts•Memorialbooks• Acknowledgment

cards•Registerbook

Artifacts•Refrigeration• Ritual

bathing/dressing•Mortuary• Packing the body

inice• Sanitary care of

un-embalmedremains

•Candles•Gravesideservices• Tents or chairs for

graveside•Decoration• Scattering at sea by

airplaneorboat•Insidepiecesforcasket

•Burialvaults•Burialplots•Burialclothing•Coffins/caskets•Urns•Casketcontainer•Gravemarkers

•Keepsakes/pendants•Obituaries•Jewelry•Printingservice•LifetributeDVD•Remembrancethrow•Blanket• Memorial reception

room

Scripts

• Legal scriptedactivity

• Cultural andfamilialnormativescripts

•Visitation•Invocations•Parades/procession/pomp•Severaldays•Different funeral homes in

differentcountries

•Cremation• Burial

(traditional,green andhomeburial)

• Witnessedcremation

Roles

•Driversforhearse,limousine/utilitycar

•Clericalpersonnel•Cleaningstaff•Coroner•Cemeterydirector

•Funeraldirector•Securitystaff•Priest/clergy•Undertaker•Caterers•Mourners•Musicproviders• A lady attendant for

hairdressing andcosmetic(hairdresser)

•Ushers•Aftercareplanner•Receptionstaff•Escortsmotorcycleescort•Otherstaff1

• Casketbearer/pallbearer

• Attendant forcryptentombment

• Other intermentpersonnel

•Eulogists/speakers

Audiences

•Familymembers•Friends•Representativesof

companies andgovernmentinstitutions

•Funeralhomestaff•Colleagues•Neighbors•Community• Participation by

members ofclubs ororganizations

• Social mediaconnections2

Notes

1Includesservicesofstaffandclericalpersonnel,personneltoarrangeandcoordinateservices;funeralservicestaffatchurch

and place of interment; recordedmusic, church care andmaintenance; service personnel for ushering, care of f lowers and

accompanyingcardsfromdonors;committalserviceatcemetery.

2Socialmediaconnectionsrefertothepeopleororganizationsthatwereincontactwiththebereavedfamilymembersand

thedeceasedoneinsocialnetworkingsites.

ScriptElements.Traditionaldeathritualscommonlyextendedoverseveraldays,andwerehighly scripted. After a corpse was embalmed, dressed, and groomed it was typicallytransferred to a home or funeral parlor for viewing. At the same time family and friendswouldvisitthedeceased’shometooffertheircondolencesandbringacornucopiaofcomfortfood.Thisvisitationperiodwouldlastaslongasthreedays.Dependingontheindividualandthecircumstancesofhisorherdeath, thetoneof thescriptcouldvaryfromtragic (e.g., thesuddendeathofachild)todownrightbawdy(e.g.,theclassicIrishwake).Thingsculminatedin a funeral service followed by burial in a cemetery, and often concluded with a finalgatheringatthedeceased’shome.Todaytheprocessofdyingoftenstretchesoutoverseveralyearsduetomedicalprotocolsthatcanprolongtheinevitable,orasaresultofillnessesthatcan’t be staved off but have a long span, such as Alzheimer’s disease.When death finallyoccurs,ithasbeenanticipated,mourned,andplannedtovaryingdegreesforalongperiodoftime.Inthissituationtheritualscript’semphasisismorelikelytobeondignifieddispositionrather than elaborate ceremony and extensive consumption. The ritual script tends to beshorterandsimpler,withanattendantreductioninexpenditures.Onecanalsoobservetodaysomeshifts in thefuneralservicevenuefromthetraditional funeralhometo thedeceased’sown residence. Although it is difficult to determine themagnitude of this trend, it reflectsvoluntarysimplicityonboththereducedspendingandself-sufficiencydimensions.

The steady rise of eco-consciousness has produced green funeral options that provide anecologicallyresponsiblealternativetobothtraditionalburialandcremation.Themostsimplestripped down script would direct the transportation of the corpse to a cremation facility,followedbyadistributionoftheashes,andpossiblyamemorialserviceatalaterdate.AudienceElements.Peoplearelivinglongertoday,butthelongeronelives,thegreaterthe

declineinone’slivingcohorts.Forexample,attheageof65,80percentofone’sagecohortsare still alive; at age 85 the figure drops to only 30 percent. Thus, the longer one lives thesmallerthepoolofagecohortswhoareavailabletoattendone’sfuneral,andeventhosewho

arestilllivingmaybetooinfirmtoparticipate.Thesecondauthor’smotheris93,andthisyearthe number of her Christmas cards that were returned with “whereabouts unknown”designationwasthehighestever,illustratingtheaudiencediminishmentpoint.Anotherreasonforsmallerfuneralaudiencesisthegeographicdispersionoffamilymembersandfriendsduetoemployment,retirement,andothersituationalfactors.Evenifyoungerfamilymembersarearound,ifsomeonehasbeenseriouslyilland/orinstitutionalizedforyears,heorshehasbeensocially removed from the everyday lives of friends and family, so there is likely lessmotivationtoparticipateinfunerealritualsforsomeonewhohasbeen“gone”forsometime.When death ritual audiences are small, the events involved will likely be simpler andrelativelyinexpensive.

Artifact Elements. Cremation is likely to account for close to 50 percent of deathdispositions within the next 10 years. As noted earlier, this disposition alternative involvessignificantly reduced expenditures funereal on goods and services.With an average cost of$1,600 cremation is $6,700 less expensive than the average traditional funeral cost of $8,300(2010 NFDA General Price List Survey). Using the 2010 cremation rate of 41 percent,approximately 984,000 of the 2,400,000 individuals who died that year were cremated.Multiplying the number of cremations by the $6,700 average cost differential betweencremation and traditional funerals results in a loss to the funeral industry of roughly $6.59billion. Of course, traditional funeral providers are eager to provide cremation services forthosesoinclined.However,whenoneexaminesthefuneralartifactsinTable8.4,itiseasytoseewherethelossesarelikelylocated.EvenifsomeonewantstohaveForestLawn(ahighend traditional funeral service provider) conduct a cremation, this is still an end of lifesimplifying solution, and unlikely to require limousines, caskets, flowers, or a dove release.The role of flowers and floral displays at funerals was damaged some years agowith theemergenceof the “in lieuof flowers” request todirect one’s condolences towarda favoredcharity of the deceased. The increasing popularity of cremations has had an equally if notmoresevereimpactonthefloralindustry.

ActorsandRoles.Cremationhashadanegative impacton thesalesof traditional funeralproductsand services suchas funeralhomes, caskets, flowers,printing services, tombstones,limousines,caterers,banquethalls,musicproviders,religiousserviceproviders,amongothers.Consequently thecastofcharacters toperformthevarious rolesnoted inTable8.4 ismuchdiminished.Thesedeclinesreflectboththereducedexpenditureandecologicalresponsibilityaspects of lifestyle simplicity. While we have seen the decline of traditional funeralconsumption practices, products and services, we have also witnessed the emergence oftechnologythatenablesnewapproachestotheconsumptionofdeath.

Onlinememorialsites

The internet and its proliferating social media sites have provided new avenues for theconsumption of death. Online practices affect dying, memorialization, funerals, and otherdeath-related issues in different ways. Users pay their respects publicly by using onlinecommunication platforms to not only mourn the deceased person but also to establishrelationshipswithotherswhoarealsogrieving(Wright,2014).Onlinepracticescantaketheformofthetransformationofasocialmediaprofile(Facebook)intoamemorialprofileoranonlinememorial siteconstructedafterdeath.Socialmediaconnectionsplay importantritualrolesinspreadingnewsofthedeath,announcingfuneralarrangementsandcreatingasharedbiographyofthedeceased.Attheendof2012,itwasestimatedthatthreemillionFacebookuserprofileshadbecomememorialized (Kaleem, 2012). Socialmediausers express grief bysharing audio or video clips, making status updates and comments on photos (Brubaker,Hayes,andDourish,2013).Suchactivitiestaketheplaceofmemorialproductsorservicessuchasmemorialbooks,acknowledgementcards,registerbooks,andmanymorewhichhavebeenimportantpartsoftraditionalfunerals.However,intheonlineenvironment,memorialpagesandwebfuneralsaremostlycreatedandcontrolledbyvirtualfriendsandpeoplewhohardlyevenknewthedeceased(Walter,Hourizi,andMoncur,2011).Theemergenceofsocialmediasites affect rituals ofmourning on several levels: spreading news of the death, providing avirtual(ratherthanphysical)spaceinwhichtodisplaygrief,andchangingsocialprotocolsforrolesincollectivemourning(Lingel,2013).

Both social networking sites and online memorial sites allow users to embrace a do-it-yourself (DIY) mourning approach. DIY mourning can be seen as a kind of participatorymedia communication, where new forms of social interaction are taking place outside oftraditionalmanifestationsofmourning (Lingel, 2013:194).TheemergenceofDIYmourningsuggeststhatalthoughtraditionalfuneralritescontinuetobefollowed,thereisadevelopinginterest, or perhaps even need, to craft, organically and disparately, individual displays,practicesandritualsforexperiencingloss(Lingel,2013).Therearealsoonlinememorialsiteswhichenablepeoplewhoaregrieving tocelebrate, rememberorcommemorate thosewhodied. Suchmemorial sites are generally created to interactwith friends or familymembersandreceivemessagesofhopeandprayer.However,onlinepracticesmaybeseenasanothersimplificationtrendincontemporaryfunerals,althoughactualexpendituresondigitalwreaths,headstones, uploaded soundtracks and tablets suggest that the artifactual dimension isexpanding in new and differentways. In addition, onlinememorials and funerals lead to aspatialexpansionanddissolvephysicalbarrierstoparticipation(Brubakeretal.,2013).Internetallows mourners to participate in the grieving ceremony. This is a fact that affects ritualelements such as roles and audiences at a funeral. It can be also said that onlinemourning

practices show new forms of ritualized behavior related to death that extend beyondtraditionalfunerealpractices(Wright,2014).

In conclusion, this exploratory research began with a focus on the Voluntary SimplicityLifestyleanditsimpactontheAmericanwayofdeath.Clearly,itisasignificantcontributortothe scaling down of the ritual elements that are associatedwith the consumption of death.However, as we noted in the beginning, other factors are also involved: economics,demographics, cultural diversity, and secularism, among others.Whether this simplificationtrendwillbeadoptedinthenewlyaffluentdevelopingnationsisuncertain.Thenouveaurichemaybeinclinedtowanttogooutwithabigbang.Certainlyinculturesthattraditionallyviewfuneral services as the occasion for public ceremony and spectacle (e.g., India, Bali)simplificationseemslesslikely.Ironically,thesetwoculturescommonlyrelyoncremation,soperhapsincreasedincomewillallowformoreelaborateandhigherpyres.Also,thedesiretopersonalizeandcustomizeone’sdeathritualmaypullawayfromsimplicity.Nowintheirlatesixties,theoldestBabyBoomersareexhibitingtheirdesiresforself-determinationabouttheirends,whichhasgivenrisetoanewprofessionalservicecategory:funeralplanners.

References

Bekin, C., Carrigan,M., and Szmigin, I. (2005). “DefyingMarketing Sovereignty: VoluntarySimplicity at New Consumption Communities,” Qualitative Market Research: AnInternationalJournal,8(4),413–429.

Bonsu, S. and Belk, R. (2003). “Do Not Go Cheaply into that Good Night: Death-ritualConsumptioninAsante,Ghana,”JournalofConsumerResearch,30(1),41–55.

Boring,P.(2014).“DeathoftheDeathCareIndustryandEternalLifeOnline,”Forbes,April24.Brubaker,J.R.,Hayes,G.R.,andDourish,P.(2013).“BeyondtheGrave:Face-bookasaSite

fortheExpansionofDeathandMourning.”TheInformationSociety,29(3),152–163.Cherrier, H. (2009). “Anti-Consumption Discourses and Consumer-Resistant Identities,”

JournalofBusinessResearch,62,181–190.Cook,G.andWalter,T.(2005).“RewrittenRites:LanguageandSocialRelationsinTraditional

andContemporaryFunerals,”DiscourseandSociety,C.16,(3),365–391.Craig-Lees, M. and Hill, C. (2002). “Understanding Voluntary Simplifiers,” Psychology and

Marketing,19,187–210.DeWitte,M.(2003).“MoneyandDeath:FuneralBusinessinAsante,Ghana,”Africa-London-

InternationalAfricanInstitute,C.73,(4),531–559.Dubisch,J.(1989).“DeathandSocialChangeinGreece,”AnthropologicalQuarterly,C.62,(4),

189–200.

Elgin,D.andMitchell,A.(1977).“VoluntarySimplicity,”Co-EvolutionaryQuarterly,Summer,5–18.

Etzioni,A. (1998). “Voluntary Simplicity:Characterization, Select Psychological Implications,andSocietalConsequences,”JournalofEconomicPsychology,19,619–643.

Harrington,D.E.(2007).“Markets:PreservingFuneralMarketswithReady-to-EmbalmLaws,”TheJournalofEconomicPerspectives,C.21,(4),201–216.

Huneke, M.E. (2005). “The Face of The Un-Consumer: An Empirical Examination of ThePracticeofVoluntarySimplicityinTheUnitedStates,”PsychologyandMarketing,22,527–550.

Integrity Burial Boxes Ltd. (2011). “The ABC’s of Building andMarketing a ColumbariumWall,”AuthorHouse.

Iyer, R. and Muncy, J.A. (2009). “Purpose and Object of Anti-Consumption,” Journal ofBusinessResearch,62,160–168.

Kaleem,J.(2012).“DeathonFacebookNowCommonas‘DeadProfiles’CreateaVastVirtualCemetery,”HuffingtonPost(December7),atwww.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/07/death-facebook-dead-profiles_n_2245397.html,accessedApril12,2015.

Lingel, J. (2013). “The Digital Remains: Social Media and Practices of Online Grief,” TheInformationSociety,29(3),190–195.

Leonard-Barton,D.(1981).“VoluntarySimplicityLifestylesandEnergyConservation,”JournalofConsumerResearch,8,243–252.

Lieberman, P. (1993). Uniquely Human: The Evolution of Speech, Thought, and SelflessBehavior,HarvardUniversityPress.

NationalFuneralDirectorsAssociation(2013).www.nfda.org/media-center/statistics-reports.html,(AccessedonFebruary5,2013).

Mittford,J.(1963).TheAmericanWayofDeath,NewYork:AlfredA.Knopf.NationalFuneralDirectorsAssociation(2014).

http://nfda.org/component/content/article/7.html#trends,accessedonFebruary20,2014.Plummer, J.T. (1974). “TheConceptandApplicationofLifeStyleSegmentation,”Journalof

Marketing,38(1),33–37.Rook, D.W. (1985). “The Ritual Dimension of Consumer Behavior,” Journal of Consumer

Research,12(3),251–264.Shama,A.(1988).“TheVoluntarySimplicityConsumer:AComparativeStudy,”Psychological

Report,63,859–869.Sher, B. D. (1963). “Funeral Prearrangement: Mitigating the Undertaker’s Bargaining

Advantage,”StanfordLawReview,pp.415–479.Spencer,Mathew(2014).“IndustryAnalysis:FuneralServices,”ValueLine,April28.Trigg,A.B. (2001). “Veblen,Bourdieu,andConspicuousConsumption,”JournalofEconomic

Issues,pp.99–115.

Wells,W. and Tigert, D. (1971). “Activities, Interests, andOpinions,” Journal of AdvertisingResearch,11(August),27–35.

Walter,T.,Hourizi,R.,Moncur,W.,andPitsillides,S. (2011).“DoestheInternetChangeHowWeDieandMourn?OverviewandAnalysis.”OMEGA–JournalofDeathandDying, 64(4),275–302.

Waugh,Evelyn(1948),TheLovedOne:AnAnglo-AmericanTragedy,London:ChapmanandHall.

Wright, N. (2014). “Death and the Internet: The Implications of the Digital Afterlife,” FirstMonday,19(6).

Zavestoski, S. (2002), “The Social-Psychological Bases of Anticonsumption Attitudes,”PsychologyandMarketing,19,149–165.

PartIIIConsumptionofdeath

9Cheatingdeathviasocialselfimmortalization

Thepotentialofconsumption-ladenonlinememorializationtoextendandlinkselvesbeyond(physical)death

TerranceG.Gabel

Itwasaveryspecialfeeling.IfeltasifIwasenteringasanctuary…Ifeelaffinitytoagroupofpeoplescatteredallovertheworld,linkedbythecommonhumanexperienceofthelossofsomeonerelatedtothemwithbondsstrongerthandeath.

(BoJonsson,fatherofarecentlydeceasedyoungman,discussinghisexperiencewiththefirstonlinememorializationwebsite(Golden2006,paragraph7))

Thepriorpossessionsofthedeceasedcanbepowerfulremainsofthedeadperson’sextendedself.

(Belk1988,p.144)

…thememoriesofGary…willremainwithmeforever.SomeofmymemoriesincludeourlatenightstockingshelvesatHy-Vee. His cream-colored Javelin … His Kawasaki motorcycle … His blue jean jacket that he wore in the winter and hissignaturebigbrightsmile…

(Ken,friendofrecentlydeceasedGary,inthelatter’sonlinememorial)

The notion of “cheating death” summons visions of avoiding certain demise. “Cheating ofdeath”is,though,ultimatelyseenastemporaryinthatallhumansmustonedaydie.However,as suggested in the firstof thequotesabove,onlinememorialization’suniqueability to linkthe living to deceased loved onesmay facilitate at least a partial “cheating of death.” Thesecondandthirdquotessuggestthatproductsandtheirconsumption–andmemoriesthereof–canpossiblybeintimatelyinvolvedinchallengingthecertaintyofdeath.

Thispossibilityof“cheatingdeath”hasemergedfromresearchonbotha“NewModelofGrief”(Walter1997,1996)andonlinememorialization(Lim2013;Walteretal.2011–12).Thisresearchcollectively suggests (1) thatdeathhasbeendecoupled into “physical”and “social”components,and(2)that“socialimmortality”–i.e.,eternallifeforthesocialself–maynowbepossible.

Centralto“socialselfimmortalization”isonlinememorializationinvolvingtheinteractive,

communal process of post-mortem identity construction wherein mourners co-author thebiography of the deceased – with themselves (autobiographically) in it – as part of thegrievingprocess(Walteretal.2011–12;CarrollandLandry2010;Roberts2006;Walter1996).The role of products and their consumption in this process has not been meaningfullyexamined.

Thepurposeofthepresentexploratoryinquiryistoextendunderstandingofmourningandsocial self immortality from a consumption perspective. Particularly useful in this regard isBelk’s(2013,1988)conceptualizationoftheextendedself,whichholdsthatourpossessionsaresignificant contributors to and reflections of who and what we are. I extend thisconceptualization beyond the physical lifespan of the consumer via introspectively-aidedparticipatorynetnographicanalysisofanonlinememorial.Overall,insightisprovidedintothepotentialpowerofproductsandconsumptionto(1)enhancetheidentitiesandselvesofbothdeceased persons and mourners, (2) perhaps forever link the living to the dead, and, perKozinets’(2002)conceptualizationof“emancipatorycommunalconsumption”beingironicallyused to“escape themarket,” (3)helpmournerscatharticallyandat least temporarilyescapefromwhatWalter(1997,1996)referstoas“theolddeath”(i.e.,theunpleasantmarket-drivenexperience of deathwhereinmourners are to quickly “get over” death and “moveonwithlife”withoutthedeceasedinit).

I begin, below, with a review of relevant literature. This is followed by a discussion ofmethodologicalapproach.Finally,researchfindingsandtheirimplicationsareaddressed.

Literaturereview

Three areas of research are of prime relevance to this inquiry; postmortem identityconstruction,onlinememorialization,andtheextendedself.Reviewofpertinent literature ineachtopicaldomain,withaviewtowardunderstandingeach in thecontextof thepotentialroleofproductsandconsumption inonlinememorializationandsocial self immortalization,follows.

Postmortemidentityconstruction

Mourning-related sociological and psychological research dating back to the early 1900ssuggeststhattheprocessofconstructing,reconstructing,andpreservingrepresentationsoftheselves of others continues, in earnest, after death (Neimeyer, Prigerson, and Davies 2002;Volkan 1981). Insight into how and why postmortem identity construction projects areundertaken can be gained via consideration of psychological research on mourning. One

reasonwhysuchprojectsareundertakeninvolves“grievingindividuals…strugglingtoaffirmor reconstruct a personal world of meaning that has been challenged by loss” (Neimeyer,Prigerson, and Davies 2002, p. 239). One way in which postmortem identity constructiontranspiresentailsanchoringmemoriesofthedeceasedaroundtheirbelongings;referredto,inthiscontext,aslinkingobjects(Neimeyer,Prigerson,andDavies2002;Volkan1981,1974).

AccordingtoVolkan,linkingobjectsareinanimateobjectsemployedasa“symbolicbridge(orlink)totherepresentationofthedeadperson”(1981,p.20).Linkingobjectscanbebrokeninto five not necessarily mutually exclusive categories: (1) personal possessions of – mostcommonlyobjectsactuallywornby–thedeceased(e.g.,clothing,jewelry,andeyeglasses),(2)objectsthatweregiventothemournerbythedeceasedasagift,(3)“somethingthedeceasedusedtoextendhissensesorbodilyfunctions,suchasacamera(anextensionofseeing),”(4)objects realistically or symbolically representing the deceased (e.g., photographs oridentificationbracelets,respectively),and(5)“last-minuteobjects,” things“athandwhenthemournerfirstlearnedofthedeathorsawthedeadbody”(Volkan1981,p.104).

Memories associatedwith grief linking the dead to the livingmaybe basednot only onobjects.TheymaybesimilarlyfoundedaboutwhatVolkantermslinkingphenomena.

IhavealsoobservedinmypatientswhatIcalllinkingphenomena–fantasies,sensations,andbehaviorpatternsthatperpetuatethepossibilityofcontactbetweenthemournerandtheonehemournswithoutreferencetoanytangibleobject(Volkan1981,p.106).

Examplesoflinkingphenomenaincludereligiousbeliefsandotherintangiblethings“withsensoryimpact”suchasmusic/songs(Volkan1981,p.106).Theseintangible“thingsofsensoryimpact” provide the mourner the opportunity to have his or her representation of thephenomenon in question “meet externally the representation of the one hemourns and tokeepthecircumstancesofthismeetingunderhisabsolutecontrol”(Volkan1981,p.106).

Withbothlinkingobjectsandphenomena,thefociofthememorylinkingthelivingtothedead belongs to both parties.According toVolkan: “The linking object belongs to both thedeceasedandtothepatienthimself,asiftherepresentationsofthetwomeetandmergeinanexternalized way” (1974, p. 190). Most research in this area concerns family membersmourningthelossofchildrenwhereinwhatismutuallypossessedbythelivingandthedeadare physically existing tangible things of, or otherwise related to, the deceased; mostcommonly clothing and mementos. Whatever form they take, these linking objects are“something actually present in the environment that is psychologically contaminated withvariousaspectsofthedeadandtheself”(Volkan1981,p.101).

From the perspective of the present inquiry, it should be noted that while research onlinkingobjectsandlinkingphenomenahasfocusedonphysicallypresenttangiblepossessionsor mementos of the deceased, a host of other products and various aspects of theirconsumptioncommonlyexaminedbyconsumerresearcherscouldjustaseasilybepositedtoserve as the objects or non-tangible phenomena around which mourning, memories, and

postmortemidentityconstruction/social self immortalizationareanchored.Also,notablynotaccounted for inVolkan’s (1981, 1974) linkingobjects and linking phenomena aremournermemoriesconcerning(1)possessionsofthedeceasedthatareeithernotphysicallyaccessibleand/ornolongerinexistence,and(2)consumptionexperiencesandotherconsumption-relatedactivitiesofthedeceasedinvolvingpossessionsofeitherthedeceasedormourners.

Onlinememorialization

Thefirstinteractivegriefwebpage–www.Webhealing.com–waslaunchedin1995(Golden2006). Although its usage was not exclusively for online memorialization, it was the firstinteractivesocialnetworksite(SNS)tofacilitatethepractice(Sofka1997).Today,avarietyoftypes of SNSs allow mourners to memorialize deceased persons online. Such sites can becategorizedonthebasisofwhetherornot(1)thesiteisgrief-specific,and(2)memorializationtranspires intentionally (Walteretal. 2011–12).Asa result, fourpossible–albeitonly threepractical – types of online memorialization SNSs exist. The first type involves intentionalmemorializing in grief-specific sites (i.e., cyber-cemeteries)wherein the SNS is dedicated toonlinememorialization.Examplesincludememorializationpagessponsoredbyfuneralhomesas well as webpages such as My Death Space (www.mydeathspace.com/), Online Funeral(www.online-funeral.com), the Eternal Portal (www.theeternalportal.com/), and Legacy.com(www.legacy.com). The second category consists of SNSs where the memorializing isintentionalbutthesiteisnotdedicatedtogriefandmourning(e.g.,Facebook,mostspecificallymemorialpagescreatedwithinit).Athirdforminvolvesanyofawidevarietyofnon-grief-specificsiteswhereunintentionalmemorializationoccursasaresultofthe“digitalremains”ofpersonsbeingdownloadedandpreservedbyothers(Walteretal.2011–12).Thefourthtype–unintentionalmemorializationongrief-specificsites–isnotpracticallypossible.

Regardless of SNS form, onlinememorialization offersmourners unique andmeaningfulbenefits relative to traditional means of mourning (e.g., physically visiting cemeteries orfuneralhomesorattendingfuneralservicesinotherlocations).Thesebenefitsinclude:

1. Immortalization of the social self facilitating continuation of bonds with the dead(Lim2013;Walteretal.2011–12;CarrollandLandry2010;Roberts2006),

2. Greater freedom of emotional expression during grieving (e.g., celebration andexpressingadmirationofthedeceasedand/ortheirvalues)(CarrollandLandry2010;Roberts2006),

3. Personalization of the grieving process via creation of personal tributes to thedeceasedinwhateverformthemournerchooses(Roberts2006),

4. Enfranchisement of disenfranchised mourners (Walter et al. 2011–12; Carroll and

Landry2010;Roberts2006;Sofka1997),5. Providingmournersanacceptablemeansofcommunicatingwiththedead(e.g.,asa

formof ongoingdialogue or to realize closure) (Walter etal. 2011–12; Carroll andLandry2010),

6. Managementofthedigitized“objectsofthedead”(e.g.,photosandmusic,whichcanbeuploadedandshared,facilitatingbetterrepresentationofthedeceasedthancanbeachievedviawordsalone)(Walteretal.2011–12),

7. Rendering death and grieving both more public and communal; thus offeringmournersahigherlevelofemotionalsupportandofteninvolvingshared,interactiveconstruction of the biography of the deceased over extended periods of time andrepeatedvisitationtothememorial(Walteretal.2011–12;CarrollandLandry2010;Ryan2008;Roberts2006;Sofka1997),

8. Possible initiation of further – or rekindling of ceased – online or off-linecommunications between perhaps geographically distant mourners (Roberts 2006),and

9. Greaterconvenienceinthatthemournercanvisitthememorialwhenevertheylikefromthecomfortoftheirownhomeandwithouthavingtophysicallyinteractwithothermourners(CarrollandLandry2010;Sofka1997).

Two of these benefits warrant special consideration; one contained in the list above andanother,moregeneralone,not.Perbenefit#7above,CarrollandLandry(2010),echoingthesentimentsofotherresearchers,placespecialimportanceonthepublic,communal,interactiveconstruction of the biography of the deceased (with mourners autobiographically insertingthemselvesintothedeceased’sbiography).

…insomewaysthemostinterestingthemeconcernsthewaymanyposterscontributetoandthereforeauthororcoauthorbiographiesornarrativesofthedeceased’slife,biographiesthatevolveovertimeandthatinimportantwaysarecontestedornegotiated by the post writers. These posts include memories and stories the posters shared with the deceased and arerecordingorwritinginapublicspace.Itisimportantthatinthesememoriesthesurvivorusuallyhasplayedacentralrole.Assuch,thesecontributionsrevealatensionbetweentheneedtoprominentlyanduniquelyincludeoneselfinthenarrativeofthe life being remembered and the shared goal among posters of uniting in communal grief, or of finding or creating acommontheme.

(CarrollandLandry,2010,p.345)

Although not explicitly contained in any of the benefits addressed above, Sofka (1997)suggests amore general benefit superordinate to and encompassing of the nine listed. Thisinvolves online memorialization’s unique ability to “provide cathartic outlets for theexpressionofgriefthatarenotavailablethroughtraditionalmeans”(p.563).AlthoughSofkaprovides no further explanation of the nature of this catharsis, her allusion to inadequate“traditional means” of grieving bears great similarity to both Walter’s (1997, 1996) “NewModelofGrief”andWoodandWilliamson’s(2003)“NewAcceptanceofDeath”whereinitis

positedthat,startinginthemid-1990s,growingnumbersofpersonsinWesternnationsbeganactivelylookingtoescapetheunpleasant,secular,private,market-drivenexperienceofdeathandmourningthathadbeendominantsinceatleastshortlyafterWorldWarII.AccordingtoWalter(1996):

Thedominantmodelfoundincontemporarybereavementliteratureseesgriefasaworkingthroughofemotion,theeventualgoalbeingtomoveonandlivewithoutthedeceased.Thisarticlechallengesthismodel…Survivorstypicallywanttotalkaboutthedeceasedandtotalkwithotherswhoknewhimorher.Togethertheyconstructastorythatplacesthedeadwithintheirlives,astorycapableofenduringthroughtime.Thepurposeofgriefisthereforetheconstructionofadurablebiographythatenablesthelivingtointegratethememoryofthedeadintotheirongoinglives;theprocessbywhichthisisachievedisprincipallyconversationwithotherswhoknewthedeceased.Theprocesshingesontalkmorethanfeeling;andthepurposeentailsmovingonwith,aswellaswithout,thedeceased.

(Walter1996,p.7)

The advent of communal, interactive onlinememorialization –within the samemid-1990stimeframe – appears to have providedWesternmourners themuch-desired opportunity toeffectively escape from and purge the various unpleasantries of the then ubiquitous “olddeath.”

From the perspective of the present inquiry, while the unique benefits of onlinememorializationsuggestnumerouspossibilitiesforunderstandingsocialselfimmortalization,ofequalinteresttowhatisfoundinextantresearchiswhatisnotfound.Mostnotableistheconspicuousscarcityofmentionsofproductsandconsumptioninthememoriesofmourners.For instance, in the lone consideration of the topic from a consumption perspective, Lim(2013),inherdiscussionof“materiality”(i.e.,“waysinwhichindividualsandgroupsenactandperformtheirrelationshiptothedeceased”[p.397]),providesonlyoneexplicitconsumption-relatedexample;amournercommunicatingwiththedeceasedbypostingaboutthebakingofcakes together in the past.When products and their consumption arementioned, they areoftendiscussedinderogatoryfashion.Thisisparticularlytrueinthecontextofmemorialpostsinwhichmournersexpressconcernoverwhattheyinterprettobeothermournersalludingtothe“materialisticvalues”ofthedeceased(Walteretal.2011–12;Ryan2008).

What makes this lack of attention to products and their consumption in onlinememorializationresearchsoconspicuousistheimportantrolethatproductsandconsumptionareknowntoplayinthelivesofconsumers.ArguablyunrivaledinitsexemplificationofthisimportanceisBelk’sconceptualizationoftheextendedself.Attentionnowturnstoareviewofthiskeyconceptinthecontextofsocialselfimmortalizationviaonlinememorialization.

Theextendedself

Thenotionof theextendedselfholds that“weregardourpossessionsaspartsofourselves”(Belk1988,p.139).Ouridentitiesarethuslydefined,inpart,bywhatwepresentlypossessand

whatwehavepossessedinthepast(Belk1988).Theextendedselfis,however,comprisednotonly of our physical selves and tangible products possessed. It also includes one’s “internalprocesses, ideas, and experiences, and those persons, places, and things to which one feelsattached(Belk1988,p.141).

Theinclusionof“persons”asacomponentoftheextendedselfhasspecialrelevanceinthecontextofthepresentinquiry.Thisisduetothefactthatonlinememorializationisprimarilyengagedinbypersons–friendsandfamilymembersofthedeceased–whoarelikelytohavebeenbothconstituentofand/orpartofthedeceased’sextendedselfwhileliving.Thequestionarisesastohowtheinvolvementofthesepersonsintheextendedselfofthelivingcarriesoverto the process of online social self immortalization. In this regard,while discussions of theextendedselfaretypicallyconfinedtofocal,livingconsumers,Belkdoeshintatthepossibilityofan“immortalextendedself ”whencontending thatourpossessions,broadlydefined,areusedto“seekhappiness,remindourselvesofexperiences,accomplishments,andotherpeoplein our lives, and even create a sense of immortality after death” (Belk 1988, p. 160). Thissuggests that social self immortalization may involve mourner expression of memories ofproductsandconsumption-relatedexperiencesassociatedwiththedeceased.

Perhapsmostimportantlywithrespecttothepresentinquiry,Belk,inaccordwithVolkan’s(1981, 1974) linking objects, but not limiting consideration of them to physically presenttangiblepossessionsormementosofthedeceased,contendsthat“Thepriorpossessionsofthedeceased canbe powerful remains of the deadperson’s extended self ” (Belk 1988, p. 144).Thusexemplifiedisthenotionthatpossessions–andmemoriesthereof–mayservetohelp(1)definewhoandwhatthepersonpossessingthembothis–whileliving–andwas–afterdeath–and(2)linkthelivingtothedead.Recall,however,thatitisnotjustpossessionspersewhichmayfunctioninthismanner.Thisisduetothefactthat,aspreviouslyalludedto,itisnotonlyproductsandgoodspresentlyoroncepossessedthatconstitutetheextendedself.Alsoincluded are “ideas, and experiences” andpersons andplaces “towhich one feels attached”(Belk1988,p.141).Thus,itcanbereasonedthatperhapsalsoservingtodefinewhoandwhatapersonisorwas,aswellasservingtolinkthelivingtothedead,arememoriesbasedon(1)ideas and experiences related to products and their consumption, and (2) the personswithwhichandtheplacesinwhichconsumptionexperiencesandbehaviorshavetranspired.

Lastly, the original conceptualization of the extended self has recently been updated toaccount for emergent realities of the “digitalworld” (Belk 2013). Several suggested “digitalmodifications”arebasedonchangesinselfconstructionandpresentationdrivenbyadvancesinonlinetechnology.Forpurposesofthepresentinquiry,themostrelevantoftheseupdatesaresharing (i.e., it isnowfareasiertosharedigitizedpossessionsandself-presentationwithothers),andco-constructionofself (i.e., identityconstruction isnow jointlyengaged inwiththose one interacts with online) (Belk 2013).With regard to the enhanced ability to shareaspects of one’s selfwithothersonline, one suggested “neededupdate” involves thenotion

that when possessions are shared and “jointly owned” – as they are in cases of both theextended self and linking objects and phenomena – they “enhance the sense of imaginedcommunity and … create feelings of group identity” (Belk 2013, p. 486). Building on this,updatespertheco-constructionofselfincludethenotionthattheprocessofcreatingthissenseofcommunityandgroupidentitybased,inpart,aroundsharedpossessions,isa“jointprojectresultinginanaggregateselfthatbelongsasmuchtotheotherswhohavehelpedtoformitasitdoestooneself”(Belk2013,p.488).

Collectively suggested by these two “digital modifications” to the extended self is thepossibilitythatthisjointprojectofconstructingcommunityandgroupidentityaroundjointlyownedpossessionsmaynotonlycontinuebutalsoescalateinmagnitudeafterdeath.Thismaybe due, for instance, to once close group members having grown apart over time due togeographic relocation or careers and family obligations being “brought back together” viaremembranceoftheextendedself–andtheirrolesandplacesinit–ofthedeceased.Furthersuggested is the possibility that one of the things now jointly owned by the group is theextendedselfofthedeceased(whichmayserveasinputintotheprocessofinteractivelyco-constructing the biography of the deceased during online memorialization and social selfimmortalization).

Researchmethodology

Thisexploratoryinquiryinvolvesanintrospectively-aidedparticipatorynetnographicanalysisofthe“cyber-cemetery”-basedmemorializationof“Gary,”awhitemalewhodiedattheageof45.1Participantnetnography,theprimarymethodologicaltechniqueemployed,isdiscussedfirstbelow.Thelimited,supplementalroleofintrospectionisthenaddressed.

Participantnetnography

A netnography is an ethnography conducted in the context of understanding onlinecommunities of various form via humanistic research techniques (Kozinets 2010).Netnographiescanbeperformedinparticipant-observationalornon-participant-observationalfashiondependingonwhetherornottheresearcheractivelyparticipatesinonlinecommunityactivities.

Thepresentresearchinvolvesparticipant-observationalnetnographyduetothefactthatI,the researcher, amoneof themournersparticipating inGary’s onlinememorialization.Theonline community being researched in the present inquiry is the group of 38 mournersparticipatinginthememorialization.Thiscommunityiswidelygeographicallydispersedabout

theUnitedStates–from15differentstates–withalmostallmembershavinggrownupwithGaryinoraroundhishometowninIowainthe1960s,1970s,or1980s.Sevenparticipantsarerecognizableasfamilymembers.Mostnon-familymembersappeartohaveseenGaryatmostseveral times– ifatall– inthe20–25yearspriortohisdeath(due largelytoGaryandhisimmediatefamilymovingfromIowatosouthernCaliforniainthemid-late1980s).TheSNS-basedcommunicationsanalyzedarethe53postsinteractivelymadetoGary’s14-page,7,156-word,455-lineonlinememorial;commencingtwodaysafterhisdeathandspanningaperiodof three years and three months thereafter. Finally, the communal phenomenon to beunderstood is the interactive online immortalization of Gary’s social self; including hisextendedselfwithinit.

Introspection

Introspectioninvolvestheincorporationoftheresearcher’sownpersonalexperienceintotheresearchproject.Thispracticehasalonghistoryofcontroversialusageinthesocialsciencesbasedon the ironicnotion thatalthoughresearcher introspection isnecessarilyunavoidable,thedesireamongmanysocialsciencescholarsandpublicationgatekeeperstoattainhonorificobjectivityandscientificstatusfortheirresearchanddisciplinesleadsthemtoviewtheuseofintrospection as inappropriate (Levy 1996; Clandinin and Connelly 1994). Introspection hasbeen effectively employed in bereavement research (Walter 1996) and can be seen asparticularlyapplicabletoonlinememorializationresearchgiventheautobiographicalmannerinwhichmourners“writethemselves intothebiography”ofthedeceased(see:Walteretal.2011–12;CarrollandLandry2010;Roberts2006).

Inthepresentinquiry,introspectionisemployedinwhatWallendorfandBrucks(1993)refertoasreflectivefashioninthattheresearcherisnotthecentralfocusoftheresearchbutrathermerelyacknowledgeshisroleinthecommunalorculturalcontextbeingstudied.Introspectionhereassistswithdevelopmentofakeenunderstandingofthecommunalcontextinwhichthefocalphenomenonoccursasaresultof thefact that IamanoldfriendandhighschoolandcollegeclassmatenotonlyofGary’sbutalsoofmanyofthemournerspostingtohisonlinememorial.Asaresult,Ihavepersonalknowledgeof(1)manyoftheeventsinGary’slifethatarediscussedinthememorial,and(2)manyoftheinterpersonalrelationshipsbetweenGaryandthemourners.ThisoftenintimatepersonalknowledgeofthecommunalcontextinwhichGary’smemorialization transpires allowsme to interpret and report data and findingswithgreatervalidityandveracitythancouldsomeonelackingsuchknowledge.

Researchfindings

Slightly less than half of the 53messages inGary’smemorial are relatively short (i.e., 2–5sentences)andcontainsimpleandgenerallyupbeatcondolencesandstatementsofconcernforthe deceased and his surviving family members and/or brief statements describing themourner’s fondestmemories ofGary. Themajority of these “simple condolencemessages”were posted to thememorialwebsite very early in its existence; shortly afterGary’s deathand,itisassumed,priortomournersgivinghighlevelsofreflexivethoughttothematterofGaryandhispassing.

Slightlymorethanhalfofthe53messagesarelonger–upto75linesoftext–andmoredetailed.Manyoftheselongerpostingscontainoftenvividreferencetotemporallydistant(1)products that Gary owned – often ones that he was known for possessing – and/or (2)individual or jointly enacted consumption of these or other products. As a result, thesepostings–specificallytheinteractivelysharedmemoriesconstitutingthem–canbeviewedasexemplary of “powerful remains of the dead person’s extended self ” (Belk 1988, p. 144)and/or linking objects and phenomena (Volkan 1981, 1974). The content of these“consumption-relatedmemories”ofGaryarelistedinTable9.1anddiscussedbelow.

Consumption-relatedmemoriesofGary

The53posts toGary’sonlinememorialcontainatotalof67consumption-relatedmemories;eachindicativeofaninstancewhereinamournerclearlydemonstratesthattheirmemoriesofGaryconsistofproducts,consumptionacts,orconsumptionexperiences.Mostsuchreferencesdateback25–40yearstoGary’schildhoodandhighschoolorcollegeyears.Thesememoriesfall into seven emergent categories and, upon reflective interpretation, one additionalsuperordinatecategoryencompassingmanyoftheothers.Eachcategoryisdiscussedbelow.

Retail Stores. Four mourners recounted memories of working with Gary at the Hy-Veegrocery store in theirmutual hometownduring their high school years.Mourners typicallystatedsimplythattheyhadworkedwithGaryorthathehadmadeworkingthereenjoyable.Exemplaryofthelatteristhefollowingexcerptfromonememorialposting.

Garywassuchafunnyperson;alwaysajokefollowedbyhiswonderfulsmile.WehadmanyfunnightsatHy-Vee,singingtotheradioandjokingaround.Youwillbemissed.

(Randy)

Products/Possessions the Deceased Is Remembered By. Twelve data instances suggest thatprominentinmournermemoriesofGaryareproductsthatheusedorpossessed–aspartofhisextendedself–inthedistantpast.Adiverse

Table9.1Consumption-relatedmemoriesofGary

1 Retailstores(4instances):–Hy-Veegrocerystore(4)

2 Products/possessionsofthedeceasedheisrememberedby(12instances):–Cars(6)–Homestereosystem(1)–Motorcycle(1)–“Italy”t-shirt(1)–Towelovershoulderatpool(1)–Blacklightposters(1)–Bluejeanjacket(1)

3 Currentproducts/possessionsofmourners(3instances):–AphotoofGary(3)

4 Consumptionactsorexperiencesofthedeceased(9instances):–Surfing(1)–Musicloverorfavoritesong(3)–Loaningmoney(withinterest)(1)–Wearingofcowboybootsandpersonalitychange(1)–Swimming(1)–Shootingbottlerockets(1)–Storiesof“Cruising”(1)

5 Consumptionactsorexperiencesjointlyengagedinwithdeceased(35instances):–Listeningtoorsingingmusic(6)–Partyingordrinkingbeer(3)–Prom(1)–“Cruising”/ridingincar(4)–Shopping(1)–Playingwithtoysaschild(1)–Snowmobileriding(1)–Takingaboatride(1)–Eatingpizza(2)–Garagedemolition(1)–Ridingmotorcycles(2)–Playingsports(7)–Sledriding(1)–Hiking(1)–Tradingbaseballcardsandcoins(2)–Waterballoonraid(1)

6 Deceasedteachingorinspiringotherstoengageinconsumptionacts(2instances):–Teachingmournertosurf(1)–Inspiringmournertogotocollegeandgetspecificdegree(1)

7 Consumption-relateddiscussionswiththedeceased(2instances):–Discussionofproductcostorvalue(1)–Discussionofhungerandneedtoeat(1)

rangeofthesephysicallyextinctyetsociallyimmortallinkingobjectsisnoted,includingblacklight posters, a towel one mourner remembers him having draped over his shoulder at aswimming pool, his Kawasaki motorcycle, his Levis blue jean jacket, and his home stereosystem. The latter is vividly remembered by brand name andwith reference to howGaryused to talk about it as “The self proclaimed ground pounding thunder of his Sansui homestereosystem”(Craig).

Most notable, however, with regard to these socially immortal linking object-basedmemoriesofGary,arefivemournersdiscussingtheirfondrecollectionsofoneofGary’scars,anAMCJavelin;commonlyreferredtoas“TheJavelin.”Exemplaryarethefollowingquotes.

TheJavelinwasaclassicthatinspiredafewunforgettablenights,somethatmightstillgetafewofusintotrouble.

(Nate)

MymemoriesandimpressionsofGary…aremanyandvaried…UnspeakableactsofmayhemintheJavelin…

(Craig)

Someofmymemoriesinclude…Hiscream-coloredJavelin,notthemostglamorouscarintheworldbutcertainlyacarthatmadeastatementwithlotsofpersonalitywhichfithimsowell.

(Ken)

Products Presently Possessed by the Mourner. Data also indicate that current products andpossessions of mourners serve as reminders of and strong links to Gary (i.e., as linkingobjects). All three such data instances concern pictures/photos of Gary. One mourner, forexample, states thathemayput a “cherishedphotoofmanyofus (withGary)” from theirsharedhighschooldaysinanewspaperadthemournerwasthinkingofplacinginthelocalnewspaper in Gary’s home-town (wheremany of theirmutual friends from that time stillresidetoday).

ConsumptionActsorExperiencesoftheDeceased.ThisemergentcategoryinvolvescasesinwhichmournersrecallGaryengaginginspecificconsumptionacts.Thesememoriesappeartoinvolve linking phenomena in that they are founded upon intangible “things of sensoryimpact”(Volkan1981,p.106).Ninesuchinstancesarefoundinthedataandincludememoriesof Gary’s music consumption (and discussions thereof), various sporting activities, loaningmoneytomourners(withinterest),andshootingbottlerocketsoutofacollegedormwindow.Also included is Gary’smother’s vivid recollection ofwhat transpiredwhen her son – theyoungestoffoursiblings–putonapairofnewcowboybootsasachild.

Iwas thinkingofa funny storywhich Ihave retoldover theyears.WhenGarywas5yrsoldwegothimapairof little

cowboybootswithpointedtoes.Hewentthroughacompletepersonalitychangebecomingaggressivetowardhissisterandbrother and kicking themwith the pointed toes. I guess he finally got the chance to not feel like the little one, but thecowboybootsdidhavetodisappear!

(Susan)

ConsumptionActsorExperiencesJointlyEngagedinwiththeDeceased.Themostcommonform of “consumption-related memory” of Gary involves jointly engaged in acts ofconsumptionand/or the sharingofmemorable consumptionexperiences.This category, likethelast,exemplifiesconsumption-ladenlinkingphenomenaconnectingthedeadtotheliving.Such memories were recounted a total of 35 times. Most prominently mentioned co-constructedconsumptionactsorexperiencesincludeplayingsports(seveninstances),listeningtoorsingingmusic(sixinstances),ridinginacar(fourinstances),“partying”ordrinkingbeer(three instances), ridingmotorcycles (two instances), collecting or trading baseball cards orcoins(twoinstances),andeatingpizza(twoinstances).Severaldiscussionsofthesememoriesare quite lengthy and detailed and/or include reference to multiple consumption acts orexperiences. Consider, as exemplary, the following verbatim memorial excerpt posted byGary’scousin,Tina.

…IamthankfulthatIwasabletospendalotoftimewithcousinGaryoverthepastcoupleofyears,itisagoodfeeling…Ofcourse,asmostpeopleknow,GarywasamusicFanatic.JustONEofhisfavoritesongswas“ThroughtheFire”byChakaKahnandwhenIfinallylearnedhowtodownloadmusicontomyMP3player,thatwasoneofthesongsIadded.So,oneofthemostmemorablenightswithGary…IbroughtmyMP3player.Wewerelayingdown,sidebyside(afterconsumingawholelargepizza,uuggg…)andIgotmyplayeroutsoIcouldhavehimlistentoit.WeputourheadstogethersoIwasabletohaveoneearplugandhecouldhavetheother.Weweresupposedtosingthesongtogether likeweactuallyWEREthesingersandwhenitcameon,neitheroneofuscouldgetanyofitout.Thatmomenthadtouchedusbothtoapointwherewe couldn’tmove or hardly breath andwe just layed there and cried together. It felt so good andwhen itwas over,welookedateachotherandstartedlaughingandlaughingandlaughing,itwasgreat!Iknow,somethingonlyhimandIcouldrelateto,butitwaspriceless!!!

(Tina[mourner’soriginalemphases,spelling,andparentheticalstatement])

DeceasedTeachingor InspiringOthers toEngage inConsumptionActs.Twodata instancesinvolvemournermemories ofGary either teaching them or inspiring them to engage in aspecified consumption act. One such instance, in a message posted by Gary’s cousin Dan,indicatesrememberingGaryhavinggivenhim“…thecouragetogoandpursuegettingmyengineering degree.” In the other instance, another mourner fondly recalls Gary’s “failedeffortsinteachingmetosurfinadayorlessduringavisittoCali(fornia)”(Craig).Consumption-Related Discussions with the Deceased. Two participants in Gary’s online

memorialization recall memories of at times intense consumption-related discussions. Onemourner remembers Gary as having “A curious nature with the propensity to continuallyinquireastothecostorvalueofaparticularitem”(Craig).TheothermournerdiscusseshowGaryhadahabitofjokinglytellinghim,whentheywould“runintoeachother”duringtheirdays together at college, thathe “hadn’thadadecentmeal indays” as anapparent excuse

(and cue) to go “to the nearest convenience store” and ride around (rather than study)(Randy).

In summary, consideration of the seven categories of onlinememorialization-based datailluminatetheheretoforeneglectedpotentialofproductsandconsumptionexperiencestoactaslinkingobjectsorlinkingphenomenathatformthebasisofhigh-resonancememoriesthat(1) enhance the identities and selves– and extendedselves – of both deceased persons andmourners,and(2)perhapsforeverlinkthelivingtothedead(viasocialselfimmortalization).However, reflective interpretation of data suggests the existence of an additionalsuperordinate category encompassing the seven discussed above. This “final category” isdiscussedbelow.

Emancipatorycommunalconsumptionandcatharticescapeviaconsumption-ladenonlinememorialization

Aspreviouslyalludedto,Sofka(1997)contendsthatakeybenefitofonlinememorializationisitsuniqueabilityto“providecatharticoutletsfortheexpressionofgriefthatarenotavailablethrough traditionalmeans” (p.563).This, coupledwithconsiderationofbothWalter’s (1997,1996)“NewModelofGrief”andWoodandWilliamson’s(2003)“NewAcceptanceofDeath,”suggests that online memorialization has provided mourners in Western nations a highlycommunal, interactive, emotional, andpersonalizedmeansof escaping theoftenunpleasant,market-drivenexperienceofdeath,dominantsinceatleasttheendofWorldWarII.

AkintothisnotionintheconsumerresearchliteratureisKozinets’(2002)discussionofhowemancipatory communal consumption is employed at the Burning Man Festival tocatharticallyescapeunpleasantmarket-drivenphenomena.AccordingtoKozinets:

… [BurningMan’s] emancipatory drive is… directed at an exploitative ethos thatweakens social ties and dampens self-expressivepractices.Asacomplexconsumptionphenomenon,BurningManprovidespeoplewiththeexperienceoflivinginasharing,caringcommunity,exemplifyingthecommunalethossaidtobeunderminedbydominantmarketlogics.

(Kozinets2002,p.33)

Inthepresentinquiry,theabilitytointeractivelyandcommunallypost“consumption-relatedmemories” of Gary to his onlinememorial appears to be similarly providingmourners anopportunity to cathartically escape unpleasant death-related phenomena. Specifically, datasuggestthatthecommunityofmournershereimmortalizingGary’ssocialself–includinghisextendedself–areusingmemorializationtoescapetheunpleasantmarket-drivenexperienceofdeathandmourningthatwasdominantandpervasive–perhapseven“largelyinescapable”– prior to the advent of online memorialization. Borrowing from Walter (1996), online

memorializationhasprovidedthesemournersameansofboth(1)findingaplaceforGaryintheir lives, and (2) interactively co-constructing a representation of Gary; one significantlybasedonvividremembranceofproductsandconsumptionexperiencesfrom25to40yearsinthepast.

Further, a host of temporal and geographic factors collectively render onlinememorialization perhaps the only possible means of non-privately mourning andmemorializing Gary for the vast majority of the 38 mourners participating in thememorialization. These factors include (1) Gary’s sudden and traumatic death occurring insouthernCaliforniaonaMonday, (2)hismemorialservicesbeing insouthernCalifornia thefollowingSaturday(asannouncedinalocalCApaperthesameday),(3)onlyfiveofthe38participating onlinemourners residing in California or adjoining states, (4) themajority ofmourners living in Iowa and other Mid-Western states, and (5) no mourners mentioninghavingattendedhismemorialservices.Inaddition,itappearsthatthevastmajorityofonlinemournersdidnotbecomeawareofGary’sdeathuntilweeksormonthsafterhismemorialservices. Thus, consistent withWalter et al. (2011–12), Carroll and Landry (2010), Roberts(2006), andSofka (1997), onlinememorializationhashere facilitated the enfranchisementofotherwisedisenfranchisedmourners.

ButtheparticipantsinGary’sonlinememorializationappeartobeescapingfarmorethanan unpleasant model of death and mourning. They are, in an important way, at leasttemporarilyescapinganunpleasant,market-drivenmodelofliving.Exemplaryisthefactthatseveralmournersexpressedpleasure inat leastbrieflybeingemancipated fromtheirwork-and career-dominated lives. Consistentwith and perhaps adding to Roberts (2006), presentfindings indicate that theactof–what ishereconsumption-laden–onlinememorializationholds the potential to initiate further – and rekindle ceased – communications betweengeographicallydistantmourners.Multiplemournersexpressedthisemancipatorydesiretothepoint where they vowed to change their lives and stay in closer contact with the socialnetwork that Gary’s death and online memorialization had reconnected; with this vowseemingly lessening the guilt associatedwith not staying in contactwith once close friendsover theyears.Consider in this regard the following threeverbatimexcerpts frompostingsinteractivelyauthoredandsharedoverafive-dayperiodbytwosuccessfulentrepreneurs.

Garywas an integral player in a closeknit group of friends called the “Brotherhood” in high school…There is a framedphotoof theBrotherhoodnext tomydesk fromthe10threunion. I stopandpondermyfriends livesnowand then– it’sbeenhere since 1998.Hewas among themost brilliant, fun, intense, and interesting people I have ever known. I hope herememberedmeassincereandloyalfriend.Untilourpathscrossagain…Iwillrememberyouwithasmile.

(Tony)

Thisismysecondentry,asIamfindingthatGary’sdeath(throughthememoriesofhislife)havetrulymovedme.Theclassof1980(plusthoseof1981)wasaverycloseclass,andIknowthattherearemanyofusthatwishwecouldhavebeeninCAtosaygoodbyetoGary…So,hereismythought.ForthosethathavebeenimpactedbyGary’spassing,andarecloseenough…perhapsweshouldgettogetherasagroupandsayourIowagoodbyes…AllthebesttoallofyouwhoIthinkofoften,but

doapoorjobofstayingintouchwith.Whatagreatthingtheinternethasbecome.

(Bob)

Ihavebeen reading theentriesandclearly see thatGaryhada similar charismatic spell and friendshipwithusall.Bob’sgestureiswellconsideredandIwouldliketomeetamongfriendsinIowaforamemorial…Iamnotsurewhenorhowwecanpullthisoff.Thecoregroupoffriends(onandoffthismemorial)whoIknowthatweretightwithGaryarescatteredaround the country.We should definitely all get together as a broader collective sometime over our 30th reunion for amemorial toGary (andperhapsotherclassmateswhohavepassedaway)…SeemsthatGaryandothers thatwehave lostdeservesomethingmorethanareadingoftheirnamesandabriefmomentofsilence…I’mnotsureifothersfeelthesame…but itmay help us come to termswith thosewe have lost. I certainly find it consoling to read how ourmutual friendtouchedusall.Ithinkweall,inourhearts,hopethatwehaveleftgoodmemoriesforeachothertodrawupon.

(Tony)

Conclusion

The findings of this exploratory research demonstrate that memories expressed via onlinememorialization of deceased persons can be based heavily upon often vivid sharedremembrance of temporally distant product possession and consumption experience. Alsoexhibitedisthepotentialofproductsandconsumptionto(1)enhancetheidentitiesandselves–includingextendedselves–ofbothdeceasedpersonsandmourners,(2)perhapsforeverlinkthelivingtothedead(asformsofsociallyimmortallinkingobjectsandlinkingphenomena), and (3) reconnect members of social networks disconnected by time and

geographical dispersion (and assuage guilt associated with this disconnection). Furthersuggestedistheironicpotentialofproductsandconsumptionexperiencesto–perKozinets’(2002) conceptualization of “emancipatory communal consumption” – help mournerscathartically escape the unpleasant, dehumanizing, market-driven experience of death andmourning(and,perhaps,atleasttemporarilyescapework-andcareer-dominatedlifeaswell).

This chapterbeganwith allusion to thenotionof “cheatingdeath” andaquote from thefatherofarecentlydeceasedyoungmandiscussinghisexhilaratingexperiencewiththeveryfirst online memorialization website. It shall end, in introspective fashion, with summarydiscussionofmyfirstexperiencewithonlinememorialization.LikeBoJonsson,I–andIthinkIspeakforall38mournersinteractivelyco-constructingGary’smemorial–alsofoundtheactofmemorializingadeceasedfriendor lovedoneonlinetobe“veryspecial.” I toofelt that Iwas“enteringasanctuary”whereinIfeltarenewedandenhancedaffinitytoageographicallydispersedgroupofpeople thatarenowandperhaps forever linkedby thecommonhumanexperienceofthelossofsomeoneconnectedtothemwithbondsstrongerthandeath.Thesebonds are significantly based on vivid fond remembrance of products – Gary’s childhoodcowboyboots,hisKawasakimotorcycle,hisLevisblue jean jackets,hisSansuihomestereosystem,andmostnotably,hisAMCJavelin–andtheirconsumptiondatingbacktwotofour

decadesintime.Last,Iamconfidentthatdeathhasatleastsomewhatbeen“cheated”viaourinteractiveonlineimmortalizationofGary’ssocial–andextended–self;heandhisproductsandhowhe–andwe–experiencedthemmaywellliveforever.

Note

1PerKozinets (2010[chapter8]),pseudonymsareemployedforthedeceasedandallresearchparticipants inaneffort to

minimizeriskandanypossibleharm.Towardthissameend,thenameofthe“cyber-cemetery”inwhichthememorialis

located is not disclosed. The voluntary consent of surviving family members of the deceased to publish the online

memorial-basedfindingsofthisresearchwasobtained.

References

Belk,Russell,W.(1988)“PossessionsandtheExtendedSelf,”JournalofConsumerResearch,15(September),pp.139–168.

Belk,Russell,W.(2013)“ExtendedSelfinaDigitalWorld,”JournalofConsumerResearch,40(October),pp.477–500.

Carroll,BrianandKatieLandry(2010)“LoggingOnandLettingOut:UsingOnlineSocialNetworkstoGrieveandtoMourn,”BulletinofScience,TechnologyandSociety,30(5),pp.341–349.Availableat:http://bst.sagepub.com/content/30/5/341(Accessed:14October2010).

Clandinin, D. Jean, and F. Michael Connelly (1994) “Narrative, Content, and SemioticAnalysis.”InN.DenzinandY.Lincoln(eds.)HandbookofQualitativeResearch.ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications,pp.463–477.

Golden,Tom(2006)“HealingandtheInternet,”TheForum,32(4),p.8.Availableat:www.adec.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=The_Forum&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=1554(Accessed:2February2012).

Kozinets,RobertV. (2002) “CanConsumersEscape theMarket?Emancipatory IlluminationsfromBurningMan,”JournalofConsumerResearch,29(June),pp.20–38.

Kozinets, Robert V. (2010) Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications.

Levy, Sidney J. (1996) “Stalking the Amphisbaena,” Journal of Consumer Research, 23(December),pp.163–176.

Lim, Ming (2013) “The Digital Consumption of Death: Reflections on Virtual Mourning

Practices on Social Networking Sites.” In R. Belk and R. Llamas (eds.) The RoutledgeCompaniontoDigitalConsumption.London:Routledge,pp.396–403.

Neimeyer,RobertA.,HollyG.Prigerson,andBettyDavies(2002)“MourningandMeaning,”TheAmericanBehavioralScientist,46(Oct.),pp.235–251.

Roberts,Pamela(2006),“FromMySpacetoOurSpace:TheFunctionsofWebMemorialsinBereavement,”TheForum,32(4),pp.1–4.Availableat:www.adec.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=The_Forum&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=1554(Accessed:2February2012).

Ryan,JenniferAnne(2008)TheVirtualCampfire:AnEthnographyofOnlineSocialNetworking.MastersThesis.WesleyanUniversity.Availableat:http://wesscholar.wesleyan.edu/etd_mas_theses/9(Accessed:17February2012).

Sofka,CarlaJ.(1997)“SocialSupport‘Internetworks,’CasketsforSaleandMore:ThanatologyandtheInformationSuperhighway,”DeathStudies,21(6),pp.553–574.

Volkan, Vamik D. (1974) “The Linking Objects of Pathological Mourners,” in J. Ellard, V.D.Volkan, and N.L. Paul (eds.) Normal and Pathological Responses to Bereavement. NewYork:MSSInformationCorporation,pp.186–202.

Volkan,VamikD. (1981)LinkingObjectsandLinkingPhenomena.NewYork: InternationalUniversitiesPress,Inc.

Wallendorf, Melanie and Merrie Brucks (1993) “Introspection in Consumer Research:ImplementationandImplications,”JournalofConsumerResearch,20(December),pp.339–359.

Walter,Tony(1996)“ANewModelofGrief:BereavementandBiography,”Mortality,1(1),pp.7–25.

Walter,Tony(1997)“LettingGoandKeepingHold:AReplytoStroebe,”Mortality,2(3),pp.263–266.

Walter,Tony,RachidHourizi,WendyMoncur,andStaceyPitsillides(2011)“DoestheInternetChangeHowWeDieandMourn?OverviewandAnalysis,”Omega:JournalofDeathandDying,64(4),pp.275–302.

Wood,WilliamR.andJohnB.Williamson(2003),“HistoricalChangesintheMeaningofDeathin theWestern Tradition.” InC.D. Bryant (ed.)Handbook of Death andDying (Vol 1).ThousandOaks,CA:Sage,pp.14–23.

10Extendingthemourning,funeral,andmemorializationconsumptionpracticestothehuman–petrelationship

PhylisM.Mansfield

Weshowourdevotioninhowwespend.ThisyearAmericanswillforkoutanestimated$53billionincaringfortheirpets.

(Pierce2012)

Thischapterwillbrieflyfocusonthehuman–petbondwhenelevatedtotheleveloffamilymember status, and focus on the ways in which humans engage in psychological andconsumptionpracticesnormallyheldforhumanfamilymembersafteradeath.PrimarilyfromanAmericanperspective,thepracticesofmourning,funeralrites,andmemorialization,bothassocialeventsandthroughconsuminggoods,willbeexploredastheyrelatetothe lossofone’spet.

Thehuman–petrelationship

Oneof the canine’s first functionswas as a food source.NativeAmericans, theAztecs, andotherpeople inSouthandCentralAmerica,aswellas theCaribbean,reliedheavilyondogmeatfortheiranimalproteinforcenturies.IncertainareasofAsiaandcentralEurope,bothdogsandcatsremainafoodstapleandarehighlydesirableasasourceofmeat (Derr1997,Phillips2014).However,animalshavealsocoexistedwithhumansandhaveplayedsignificantrolesinsociety.Anthropologistsandarcheologistssupportthislatternotionwiththeirfindings(Salkind2005).

Asearlyas10000bcinwhatisnowIsrael,apuppywasfoundburied,cradledinthehandofa human, and in 7500 bc a domesticated cat was found buried with a human on theMediterranean islandofCyprus (GlennandLarsen2012). Insomeancientcivilizations,dogsheldculturalsignificancewithregardtodeathpractices,whereitwasbelievedthatdogscould

prevent the death of humans. In Greece, dogs were employed in healing temples as “co-therapists”due to theirperceivedability to cure illnesses (Mars2014).According toSalkind(2005),theGreekspurchasedtoysfortheirpetsandembalmedtheirdeadcatssotheycouldburythemwiththeownerwhenheorshelaterdied.TheChineseEmperorLingestablishedhisdogsasseniorofficersofthecourt.Perhapsmorebizarreforsociety’smorestoday,itwascommon during the Manchurian LCh’ing dynasty and also in the West Indies and otherindigenous cultures, for women to breast-feed puppies along with their children (Salkind2005).

Historically,animalsweredomesticatedsotheycouldservetheirhumanowners.Animalshave been used as protectors and guardians (Derr 1997) and asworking partners in rodentcontrol,hunting,herding,andtransportation(Grier2006).Dogshavebeenusedforassistancetothephysicallychallenged, includingthosewhoareblind,andinpsychologicaltherapyfortheelderly,andthosewhoarementallychallenged(PendergastandPendergast2000).Whileanimalandhumanrelationshipshavelongbeencharacterizedinsocietyasutilitarian,thereisevidence that they held far greater significance to the hierarchy in the familiar unit andinterpersonalrelationships(Grier2006;Hirschman1994).

Photographic artifacts from America in the 1800s provide a glimpse of how pets wereesteemed in the familial unit. While society at that time was largely one of an agrarianeconomy,thereremainedadistinctionbetweenthoseanimalsthatwereutilitarianandthosethatwerecompanions.Itwasnotuncommonforfamiliesatthattimetokeepwildanimalsaspets,eveninsidethehouse(Grier2006).Squirrelswerethemostpopularofthese,andwerekeptincagesthatincludedexercisewheelsmuchlikethehamstercagestoday.Thesquirrelaspetwassocommonthattinsmithswereemployedtomakemetalcagessotheanimalcouldnotchewthroughthewoodenbars,andguidelineswerepublished“urgingreaders tomakethecageat leastsix feetbyfour feet,withperches like thebranches ina tree” (Grier,2006,fromtheBookofHouseholdPets,1866,p.82).Thesquirrelswereallowedoutoftheircagestoexerciseandwereoccasionallyevenallowedtoplayontheirowner’sbed(Grier2006).Eventhoughsquirrelswereverypopularwildanimalstokeepaspets,dogswerethemostwritten-aboutpetsofthetimeandwereoftendocumentedinthefamilydiary.

Inthelate1800sitwasnotunusualforfamiliestoincludetheirpets(especiallydogs)inthefamily photographs. As early as the 1840s, pets were carried to photographic studios toparticipate in a social ritual thatwas very important to people, and by the late 1860s, petswere found in photographs bothwith their owners and by themselves, even if the pet haddied.One study of photographs from that time period showed that dogswere often posedbeside, or at the footof theowner.However, perhapsmore evidentof the closenessof therelationshipbetweenthehumanownerandthepetwasthatmanywerephotographedwiththeirheadsclosetogether,acompositionusedforhumanportraitstoimplyfriendshiporlove(Grier 2006). The archives of family photographs reveal that the practice of including pets

crossed socio-economic levels.One photograph taken in 1887 by an itinerant photographer,Solomon Butcher, depicts anAmerican family in front of their sod house. The photographincludesfiveadultfamilymembers,oneinfant,andasmalldog.Itisevidentthatthisfamily,whowerefarmers,giventheteamofhorsesstandinginthebackground,consideredtheirdogaclosecompanion.Fourofthefamilymembers,twomalesandtwofemales,areseated.Thefifthfamilymember,amale,stands,andsteadiesthedoginthechairinfrontofhim,perhapssothatitwouldstaystillwhilethephotographwastaken(Grier2006).

Viewsfrompsychologyandsociology

Thedisciplinesofpsychologyandsociologyprovideanextensive look into therelationshipsbetweenanimalsaspets,andtheirhumanowners.Domesticatedanimalshavebeenregardedas both possessions and companions, with referencemade to them by the human perhapsindicatingthelevelofcloseness,aseither“dogowner”or“dog’shuman,”oreven“dogMomor Dad.” Researchers have investigated the relationship of pets and humans as part of theextension of the human’s self-identity to the point that another’s treatment of the pet isconsideredtobetreatmentoftheperson(Belk1988).Therelationshipbetweenpetandownercanaffectnotonlythesocial interactionsof thepet/ownerasasingularsocialunit,butalsoaffect the owner’s individual social identity and self-perception as well (Sanders 1990).Psychological studies have addressed the individual’s relationship with a pet through theframeworksofpersonalitydevelopmentandattachmenttheory(CameronandMattson1972;Voith 1981; Zilcha-Mano, Mikulincer, and Shaver 2011). The unconditional love from petsoftenservesasaboosttotheindividual’slevelofconfidenceandselfworth,sometimestothedegree that the relationship is unhealthy (Cameron and Matson 1972; Zilcha-Mano,Mikulincer,andShaver2011).

Attachment theory, originally designed to study the sociological relationship betweenparent and child throughout the life cycle, has been utilized in the study of human–petrelationships.

Attachmentisconceptualizedasanaffectiveoremotivestateofproximitytosomeoneorsomething,thatcausesanxietyordiscomfortwhenseparated(Ainsworth,Blehar,WatersandWall; Voith 1981; Zilcha-Mano, Mikulincer, and Shaver 2011). In the human context ofattachment,childrenrepresenttheroleofneedy,dependentrelationshippartner,andparentsrepresentthestrongerandwisercaregiver(Bowlby1982).Thisparticularformofattachmentcanbetransferredtothedomesticatedanimal,wherepetsbecomethechildrentothehumanowners. Several studies have addressed the child-surrogate relationship of pets,where theyare emotionally and psychologically used prior to a couple’s actual addition of human

children, or as empty nesters when the children have left the family home (Belk 1988;Cameron andMattson 1972;Cordaro 2012;Hirschman 1994;Kennedy 2005). The pet and achild–parentbondcanworkineitherdirection,ascollegestudentsinonestudyrevealedcloseattachmentstotheirpetdogsthatequaledtheemotionalbondtotheirmothers,bestfriends,siblings,andsignificantothers(Kurdek2008).Theconceptualizationofpetsaschildrenisnotanewphenomenon.Asearlyasthe1800spetswereoftendescribedwithaffectivemetaphors,suchasbelovedchildren,implyingthatthepetwastreatedwithcareandattentionsimilarasthefamily’shumanoffspring.Thiscomparisonofpetstochildrenwasreinforcedthroughananalysisofpopularprintsandphotographsofthetime(Grier2006).

One interesting phenomenon is the report of rising numbers of pet ownership in U.S.households, while at the same time the number of children per household is declining.According to theAmericanCommunitySurvey in2011,37percentofhouseholdscontainedrelated children, through biological, legal, or other relationship (U.S.CensusBureau 2012a).Betweentheyearsof1970and2012,theshareofhouseholdsthatweremarriedcoupleswithchildren under the age of 18 declined from 40 to 20 percent (U.S. Census Bureau 2012b).Alternatively, according to the American Pet Products Association (APPA), the number ofhouseholdsintheU.S.owningatleastonepetwas68percentin2013.Amongastudyofdogowners,22percentwerenot,norhadeverbeen,parents(PewResearch2010).

This informationmayreinforce the idea thatpetsareservingassurrogatechildren in theU.S.;however,additionaldataisrequiredtosupportthatnotion.

Whetherthepetisservingtheroleofchild,sibling,orsimplyasacompanion,manyviewtheir relationshipwith a pet as familymember (Aylesworth, Chapman, and Dobscha 1999;Belk1988;Cordaro2012;Hirschman1994).Recentstudieshavereportedthatbetween70and87percentofpetownersviewedtheirpetsasfamilymembers(BeckandKatcher2003;PewResearch2010).Abreakdownbythetypeofpetindicatesthat85percentofdogownersthinkoftheirdogsasfamilymembers,while78percentofcatownersfeelsimilarly(PewResearch2010).Petownersalsoreportedthattheytendtoholdcloserrelationshipstotheirdogsorcatsthan they do to their mothers or fathers. When asked, “Which word best describes yourrelationshipwithyourdogorcat?”94percentofdogownersand84percentofcatownersfelt“close”ratherthan“distant.”Whenaskedthissamequestionoftheirrelationshipswiththeirmomsordads,thesamerespondentsreportedthat87percentfelt“close”totheirmothersand74 percent felt “close” to their fathers (Pew Research 2010). Significance testing was notreported.

The role of familymember elevates the pet to a level of care similar to that of humanchildren;petsneedfood,healthcare,andareshoweredwithgifts.Theseneedshaveanimpacton the consumer aspect of the human–pet relationship. In 1994, Hirschman identified thehuman–pet relationship as an area to be considered by consumer behavior scientists.Followingherarticle,acollectionofseveralarticlespublishedinaspecialissueofSocietyand

Animals(1996)wasdevotedtothe“animalasconsumerexperience”(Aylesworth,Chapman,andDobscha1999).

Today, the study of the human–pet relationship has continued to increase in scope toaddress the psychological aspects of pet ownership, the health benefits of pet ownership,therapyapplications,entertainment forand includinganimals,andvariousnewproductandserviceindustries.

Thesizeofthepet-relatedindustry

Theconsumerimplicationsofthehuman–petrelationshiparevast.IntheU.S.today,thereareestimated to be 83.3 million dogs owned (not in shelters) and 95.6 million cats (HumaneSociety 2014). According to The American Pet Products Association (APPA), over half (57percent)ofAmericanhouseholdsownat leastonedogand45percentowna cat (2013). In2013,68percentofhouseholdsincludedatleastonepet,representing83millionhomes(APPA2013).

Thissignifiesanincreasefrom56percentofhouseholdsin1988,thefirstyearthestudywasconducted(APPA2013).

ThedollarsspentonpetsintheU.S.isestimatedtobecloseto$58billion,andrepresentsanincrease of 344 percent in the last two decades (APPA 2013). Pet owners spent billions ofdollars on food ($22.6), supplies and over-the-counter medicines ($13.7), veterinary care($15.3), purchases of live animals ($2.2), and pet services ($4.7) (APPA 2013). Basic annualexpenses fordogsandcats totaledapproximately$500 foreachpet in2011 (U.S.BureauofLaborStatistics2013).

Theexpensesforfood,shelter,andhealthcareareexpectedintheeverydaycareofanypet;however,thereareincreasinglymoreunconventionaltypesofconsumerpurchasesthathavebeen showered on pets in the past fewyears. These are primarily in service industries andinclude pet insurance, birthday parties,weddings, day care, doggie camp, and funerals. Theorganization, CouponCabin.com, reports that 9 percent of pet owners currently have petinsurance,andanother19percentare interestedinmakingthepurchase.Thisrepresentsa2percentincreaseinjustoneyear(APPA2013).

AccordingtoastudybyHarrisInteractive,morethan20percentofadultsintheU.S.haveheldorattendedabirthdaycelebrationforapet(PRNewswire2013).Dogownersaremorelikelytopurchaseabirthdaycakefortheirpetthanarecatowners,32percentand25percentrespectively, and just under half of the participants at these celebrations reported spendingbetween 1 and 19dollars in gifts (PRNewswire 2013).The recent study also found that 62percent of pet owners spent up to $50 permonth on their pets, and 15 percent spendover

$100.Dogownersarelikelytospendmorepermonththanarecatowners;47percentofdogowners spend about $50 per month, while only 37 percent of cat owners spend a similaramount(PRNewswire2013).

Thereactiontopetloss

Thedisciplinesofpsychology,sociology,andveterinarymedicinehavestudiedtherelationshipbetween humans and their companion animals, and provide considerable insight to thehuman’s reaction to the lossofone’spet.Thestudyof thehuman–animal relationshipafterthelossofapetwasconsideredtohavebeenundervaluedinthefieldofpsychologyformanyyears(Henry2008;SharkinandKnox2003);however,duringthe1980sand1990stheliteraturebegantoseeanincreaseinattentiontothephenomenonofpost-petlossanditsaffectonthehuman’smentalhealth(QuackenbushandGlickman1984;GerwolsandLabott1994;SharkinandKnox2003;Sife2005).Studieshave found that thegrief felt at the lossofapet canbesimilartothatexperiencedbythelossofahuman,andinsomecases,evengreater(Gerwollsand Labott 1994; Planchon, Templer, Stokes, and Keller 2002; Yonan 2013). One therapistreportedthatclientsoftenaresurprisedwhentheyfeelgrieffortheirpetstrongerthanthatfeltwhenaparentorsiblingdied(Yonan2013).Thecurrenttradeliteratureinthesubjectofbooks on pet loss is expansive, signifying an increased attention to the subject matter byauthors,andademandbypetownersforsomeinsightintotheirgrief.Giventhenumberofpublications,thisareaofgriefcounselingwillnotbeaddressedinthischapter.

Specificnumbersregardingthedeathsofpetsarenotreadilyavailable;however,giventhenumberofpets inU.S.households,andtheaveragelifespanofthecompanionanimals,onecanextrapolateanestimate.Anexampleofoneestimateisthatinasingleyear,aminimumof13.8millionhomeswillbeaffectedbyapet’sdeath(Henry2008).Thereisalsothelikelihoodthatpetownerswillexperiencemultipledeathsofpetsduringtheirlifetime,duetotheshorterlife spans of companion animals (Sharkin andKnox 2003). The bond between humans andtheirpetscanbesostrongthatgriefreactionstothelossofapetcanbesimilartoreactionsassociatedwiththedeathofahuman(GerwollsandLabott1994).Symptomsofgriefreactionsatapet’sdeathhaveincludedlossofappetite,difficultysleeping,visualhallucinationsofthepet, loss of control, withdrawal from the rest of the world, preoccupation with the death,depression,andanxiety(Henry2008;Pierce2012;Sife2005).

Thereactiontothelossofone’spetisdependentuponseveralcharacteristics.Theseincludetheageandgenderoftheowner,thenumberofpreviouspetdeathsexperienced,whetherthepet’sdeathwasduetoaccidentorillness,guilt,thelevelofanthropomorphism,andthedegreeofattachment.Theageofthepetownerisrelatedtoboththedegreeofattachmenttothepet,

andthereactiontothepet’sloss,whereelderlyownersandchildrenarethetwogroupsmostaffected(Carmack1991).Withregardtogender,femalestendtoexperiencehigher levelsofgriefsymptomswhencomparedtomales(GerwollsandLabbot1994).Petownersarelikelytoexperiencemoreseriouslevelsofgriefwhentheyfeelasenseofguiltforthedeath,suchaswaitingtoolongtotakethemtotheveterinarian,orleavingthegateopenandthenthepetescapes(Sife2005).Griefmaybetemperedbytimelinessofthedeath,suchasanaccidentorsuddendeath.FormerpresidentBillClintonacknowledgedthatthedeathofhisdog,Buddy,whowaskilledwhenrunoverbyacar,was“byfartheworstthing”hehadexperiencedafterleaving the White House (Yonan 2013). Additionally, when there is a greater degree ofanthropomorphism,i.e.,thetendencytoattributehumanlikequalitiesorbehaviorto thepet,there is likely to be more intense and tangible reaction to the pet’s death (Aylesworth,Chapman,andDobscha1999;Henry2008).Finally,thelevelofattachment,ortheemotionalstate of proximity to someone or some thing that causes anxiety or discomfort whenseparated,hasbeenshowntobeapredictoroftheseverityofgriefsymptomsatapet’sdeath(Field,Orsini,GavishandPackman2009;Zilcha-Mano,Mikulincer,andShaver2011).Aswithhumanbonds,theattachmenttoapetcanserveasabuffertostress,anxiety,anddepression(Cordaro 2012), and the loss of that buffer would likely result in increased levels of griefsymptoms.

Pet loss is beginning to be considered as a normative bereavement process; however, itcarriesanincreasedlayerofcomplexitywhencomparedtothatofgrievingforahuman.Thebasis for this complexity is the lack of established norms for pet loss grief, and societalattitudes toward the death of a pet (Cordaro 2012).When the grief from a pet loss is leftinvalidated, or even ostracized by society, the griever experiences an increase in suffering(Doka2008).Thereareseveralformsofunsanctionedlossesinsociety:anextramaritalaffair,adeathbysuicide,amiscarriage,orthelossofapet,andthesearetypicallymetwithlackofsocial supportandsocietalnorms formourning (Doka2008;Worden2008).When lossesarenotsupportedorendorsedbysociety,thisleadstoapsychologicalphenomenonidentifiedasdisenfranchised grief (Attig 2004). Disenfranchised grief occurs for three reasons: (1) therelationship is not recognized by society, (2) the griever, such as a child, is not sociallyrecognizedasapersoncapableofgrieving,or(3)thedeathisnotrecognizedasagenuineloss(Humphrey 2009). The loss of a pet occurs within each of the three aspects. In Americansociety, pet-related bereavement has typically been considered as unacceptable (Cordaro2012).Onecanexpectforexample,tocallanemployerandrequestaminimumofafewdaysoff if a close familymember dies as part of the grieving process; however, it is difficult toimaginemakingthesamerequestforthedeathofapetandbeingmetwithanythingoutsideof disbelief or even, laughter. Societymay also consider the pet owner to be incapable ofgrieving, and that he or she should get over it and move on, perhaps even replacing thebelovedpet(Cordaro2012).Third,disenfranchisedgriefcanoccurbecausethedeathofapetis

notacceptedinsocietyasagenuineloss(Attig2004).Whenthelossofapetisnotviewedbysocietyaslegitimate,theowner’sgriefisunsupported,andperhapsevensanctioned,resultingincomplicatedorunresolvedgrief(Worden2008).Anextensionofthisgriefoccurswhentheownerfindsitdifficulttotalkaboutthelossduetostigmatization,andfurtheralienatesthemfromspeakinguptoobtainsocialsupportfromfamilyorfriends.Consequently,bereavedpetownersmay find themselves sinking further into depression or anxiety, and perceive theirgriefaninsignificantorinappropriate(Attig2004).Aninitialsteptowardgrievingthelossofapet istoacknowledgetheloss(Cordaro2012),andtofindoutletsthatbringmeaningtotheownerintheabsenceofsociallysupportedbereavementnorms.Theseoutletsmaybeintheformofpsychologicaltherapy,rituals,orothermemorializationprocesses.

Thebenefitofrituals:extendingthefuneralandmemorializationprocess

Often, the grief of losing a pet is complicated by the lack of support one receives frompersonal friendships and society at large, yet the pet’s death can affect the owner bothpsychologically and physically (Henry 2008; Quackenbush and Glickman 1984). The ritualsafforded to thosewho lose human loved ones provide outlets for grief andmourning, butthere is a lack of socially sanctioned rituals for themourning of the owner/pet relationship(Gerwols and Labott 1994; Sharkin and Knox 2003). Historically, there have been ritualsacceptabletosocietyforthehonorandmourningofanimals.AncientEgyptiansreveredtheircats anddogs, and ritualized theirdeaths.Whenabelovedpetdogdied, theownerswouldshaveofftheireyebrows,smearmudintheirhair,andmournaloudfordays(Brewer2001).Inthe early Roman Empire, tombswere built to honor their dead pets (Salkind 2006). In thenineteenth century in America, funerary rituals routinely marked the passing of belovedanimals, incorporating some of the same symbols as those in the funerals of people (Grier2006). “When their dogCarlowas ‘murdered’ in 1885, the family atCherryHill inAlbany,NewYork,wentinto‘official’mourning,withbothanimalsandpeoplewearingcrape”(Grier2006,p.107).Often,petswereburiedunderaweepingwillowtree,asymbolofmourning.

Theritualsconductedafterapet’sdeathwerenotdoneonlybywomenandchildren.Thereisawrittenrecordfromonebachelorfarmerin1851,ofthedetailsofaprivatefuneralforhispetdog,Byron.

MyfaithfulDogByronDiedthismorning,Aged18years.Iburiedhimthisafternoon,betweenthehoursofthreeandfouro’clockonMountLebanonHill–nearaweepingwillow.WhenIhadplacedhisbodyinthegrave,Ifiredthreevolliesoveritandbadehimfarewellforever!

Tearsrolleddownmycheekslikerain.IwasaloneandIfeltasthoughIhadlostoneofmybestfriends.Theaffectionsofadoghasmadethestoutestheartsmelt.EvenNapoleonwhocoulddictatetheorderofbattle,whereitwouldcostthelives

oftenthousandmen,withadryeye–wasoncemovedtotears,bytheaffectionsofadog!

(Grier2006,p.107)

AnotherritualduringtheVictorianerawashavingposthumousportraitsofthedeceasedpetstaken,mostly of pet dogs. Itwasnot uncommon for families tohaveposthumousportraitstaken of their human familymembers during that era, asmanywho could not afford theexpenseofaportraitduringtheperson’slifetimerealizedthatthiswasalastchanceathavingaphysicalrepresentationintheformofaphotographinordertorememberthelikenessoftheperson (Gabel, Mansfield, and Westbrook 1994). The majority of the animal portraitsmimickedtheformatofthoseofthehumanfamilymembers,tryingbesttopresenttheanimalas he or she was in real life; however, many of the photographs also included pictures ofangels,clouds,oropengatesinthebackground(Grier2006,p.108).

Poetryandobituarieswerealsooftenwrittentocommemoratethepassingofapet.Intherural areas, pets were often buried on the family’s property, but by the mid-nineteenthcentury,formalpetgraveyardswerefoundinthegardensofmanyhomes.OnesuchinstancewasfoundattheformerhomeoftheauthorHarrietBeecherStowe.Anardentanimallover,herfamilymarkedthedeathofeachfamilydogwitha“caninefuneralwithalltherequisitepomp and circumstance” (Grier 2006, p. 108). When one of her homes was sold, the newowner found several smallmounds thatwerepuzzling;however, after further investigation,theywerefoundtobedoggraves(Grier2006).

While these rituals appear to have been common during the eighteenth and nineteenthcentury,many pet owners inmore recent years have felt a sense of embarrassmentwhenconductingfuneralsormemorialsfortheirdeadpets.Onereportfromawomanwholeadsamonthlypet-losssupportgroupintheeasternUnitedStates,suggeststhatthistrendmaybechanging,butsomeownersarestillfeelingostracized.

It’seasiersaidthandone.AfewweeksafterReddied,somefriendsfromthedogparksuggestedwehaveaget-togetherinhismemory.Iwasgratefulforthesuggestion,butasIcameinandexchangedhugs,IfeltabitsheepishwhenIpulledouttheboxofRed’sashesandarecentphotoandsetthemuponthetable.Maybeitwasmyimagination,butIgotthefeelingthatevenfriendswhohadgatheredforjustthispurposewouldrathersayjustaquick“I’msorry;howareyoudoing?”thantrulyacknowledgetheelephant–ortheDoberman–intheroom.Itwasn’tuntilacoupleofhoursanddrinkslaterthatwefinallytoldafewstoriesabouthim.

(Yonan2012)

In the absence of funeral home options, some owners are creating their own memorialservices,suchastheonedescribedbelow.

ThewakeforMico,aterrier-schnauzermix,waswellattended.Micohadbeenasmallbutstrong-willedanimal,andevenindeathseemedtocommandtheattentionofhumans.AlmostfortypeopleattendedMico’swake,filingthroughtheowners’livingroomandgazingatMico’sbodyinanopencasket,completewithablanket,squeakingsnowman,andgerbiltoy.Thegroupsharedmemories,laughs,andtears.

(Jamison2013)

Petownersarealsocreatinguniquememorialsfortheirpets.Insomecases,thememorialsarecreated by friends, such as one that was conducted at the burial of a beloved dog namedChica.

Whilenomemorialservicewasconductedatafuneralchapel,therewasashortserviceconductedatthecemeterypriortotheburialofthedog.Theownershadinvitedaclosefriend,andhadbroughttheirsurvivingdogwiththem.Ashortpoemwasread,andthesong“IDiditMyWay,”sungbyElvisPresley,wasplayedviaasmartphonetocommemoratethedog’sfrisky,andsometimesstubborn,personality.Afterthesong,theirclosefriendaskedthemtolookupintothesky,andasmallprivateplanef lewoverjustatthattime.Thefriend’sson,whowasaprivatepilot,hadtoldherthathewouldf lyovertheservicewhilehewastakingashort trip thatdayasamemorial to the lovetheownershadfor theirdog.Later, thefriendplantedaforget-me-notf lowerasatributetoChica.

(Privateinterview2013)

Memorialanddeath-relatedconsumption

Aylesworth, Chapman, and Dobscha (1999) examined the human and animal companionrelationshipwithin a consumerbehavior context, providing a frameworkof the acquisition,consumption,anddisposition“lifecycle”tothestudyofthisbond.Theypositedthatafterthelossofapet(dispositionstage)anowner’sparticularlydifficultgrievingprocesscouldresultinhislikelihoodtoavoidafuturerelationship(acquisition)withpetsaltogether,oravoidformingcloserelationshipswithfuturepets (consumptionstage).Theconsumerbehaviorperspectivecanbeutilizedtofurtherexaminetheattitudesandbehaviorsofanindividualafterapetdies,especially those activities that result in monetary exchanges. The purchase of memorialobjects, such as headstones, monuments, and jewelry, or the purchase of services such asfunerary rites or cremation, and the ancillary products that accompany those services, havecreatedaboomingconsumermarket(Choi2008).

Lateinthe1800s,twoformalpetcemeterieswereestablishedondifferentcontinentswithinapproximatelythreeyears’ofeachothersignifyinganincreaseintheelevationofthehuman–petbondandneedforclosureatdeath.TheHartsdalePetCemeterywasestablishedin1896inHartsdale, New York, and the Cimetière des Chiens et Autres Animaux Domestiquesestablishedin1899inParis.TheHartsdalePetCemeteryistheoldestoperatingpetcemeteryintheworld(HartsdalePetCemetery2014).BegunbyaManhattanveterinarianwhoofferedagrievingpetowner toburyherdogathisupstate farm, ithasnowgrown to contain theremainsofover80,000animals,andtheremainsofsomeoftheirhumanowners.Ithasservedasamodel forpet cemeteriesaround theworld, and is theonlypet cemetery listedon theNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces.ThenumberofpetcemeteriesisgrowingrapidlyintheUnitedStates,anditisestimatedthatthereareover600inthecountrytoday(HornelAnimalShelter2014).

Many funeral businesses are now beginning to recognize the need for humans to

memorialize the deaths of their animal companions and the potential for business. At PetPassages, the Purdy Funeral Service’s newest business in New Hampshire, they offercremationandmemorial services foranimals.One suchservice foranine-year-oldGermanshepherdisdescribedbelow.

After taking their seats in a small, welcoming room,which resembles a common family room, the funeral service ownerstartedashortvideo.Musicquietlyplayedalongtophotosofthebeloveddog.Holdinghandsandwhisperingtooneanother,laughingat somephotosandsharingshort storiesaboutothers, the familymembers said the servicebrought themclosureandmadethegriefprocesseasier.

(Kingston2013,p.1)

The funeral industry iseyeing theafter-deathcareofpetsasapotentially lucrativemarket,andhasbeenexperiencingaconsiderablegrowthinrecentyears.Anderson-McQueenisoneofFlorida’slargestfamily-ownedchainoffuneralservices,andin2012,ithandledmorepetsthanhumans(Jamison2013).Ofapproximately5,700funeralsforbothhumansandpets,3,500were for animals.Themajorityofpet serviceswere for cremation, a trend thatmimics thenational statistics. According to the trade association, Pet Loss Professionals Alliance,approximately1.9millionpetswereprovidedprofessionaldeathservicesin2012nationwide.Themajoritywerecremated,withonly21,000buried in traditionalcemeterystyle (Jamison2013).

Reportsofstaggeringgrowthhavesurfacedinthepet-funeralindustry.IntheU.S.lessthanadecadeago,thereweresofewpetaftercarefacilitiesthattherewasn’tevenalistorcount;today, thereareabout700nationwide, includingfuneralhomes,crematories,andcemeteries(Spitznagel2012).Therecentgrowthintheindustryiscurrentlyuntracked,andthus,therearenoaggregatedfinancialstatisticsavailable.However,thenumberoftraditionalfuneralhomes(forhumans) thatare turning to theadditionofpetaftercare to supplement their income isexpected tobegrowingexponentially,given thevarious reportsof singularbusinesses.Onefamily-operated funeralhome in thebusiness forover fortyyears,decided todoapet-onlyoffshootafterconductingmarketingresearchonthetopic.SincelaunchingForeverFriendsin2003,theownerclaimsthatsaleshaverisenby524percent(Spitznagel2012).

Another business in southern Indiana reported similar growth. In 2003, the Scott FuneralHomeinJeffersonville,Indiana,openedFaithfulCompanions,apetcrematory,wheretheydidabout30cremationsinthefirstyear.In2013,thecompanydidabout100permonth,withanaveragecostof$130each(WLKY2014).Thebusinessesoffercomforttoclientsinadditiontothephysicalservices.A72-yearoldwidowintheareaburiedherbestfriendandcompanion,aborder collie namedBuddy, a fewyears ago. Since she can’t drive, she takes a taxi once amonthabout60mileseachway,tospendacoupleofhoursatthecemetery.“I’ddoitagain,”shesaid.“I’llneverfindanotherbuddylikehim.”(WLKY2014).

Consumerbehaviorandthepetfuneralindustry

Itisdifficultatthistimetodeterminetheprofileoftheconsumerwhoisresponsiblefortheboomintheindustry.Theincreaseintheagingofthebabyboomerswhomayhavepetsaftertheirspousesdiecouldbeonereason;however,petfuneralsinrecentyearsarereportedtobepurchased by people in their twenties and thirties, aswell as thosewhohave opted not tobecomeparentsandtreattheirpetsassurrogatechildren(Spitznagel2012).Itispossiblethatthe consumerprofile crossesdemographic lines, and is lifestyle- andpersonality-orientedaswell.Consumersdonotseemtobeprice-sensitivewhenpurchasingpetfuneralservices(Brus2010).Whilethepricesforcremationtypicallyrunfrom$300to$500,includingabasicurnandmemorialvideo,thepricesforcemeteryburialcancostasmuchas$1,000toburyalargedog(Macario2012).Therearehigh-ticketproductsrelatedtoburialsuchasbronzegravemarkers($1,765)andvelvet-linedcaskets($1,136).Peternity,anonlinesuperstore,sellsproductssuchasheadstones($80to$425),urns(asmuchas$1,500forahandstainedversion),andstainedglassportraits($200).Thesitewascreatedin2003,andaccordingtotheowner,saleswereup14,043percentin2011,andexpectedtotopcloseto30,000percentby2012(Spitznagel2012).

There are several other more unorthodox memorials that can be purchased to honor adeceased pet. One of these is LifeGem, an organization in Illinois that uses the carbonizedashesfromthepet’scremationtocreatesyntheticdiamonds(costfrom$2,490to$25,000).Theservicewasinitiallyintendedtousetheashesfromhumancremationstomakethediamondsasa remembrance.However, customersbegan toask for the service tobedone forpetsaswell. Even though the company does not market its services to pet owners, the segmentcurrentlyrepresentsfor25percentofLifeGem’sannualbusiness(Spitznagel2012).

Thisinvestigationintotheextensionoffuneralandmemorializationservicestothedeathofa pet has uncovered many issues for future research. Since the investigation was from anAmericanperspective, future studiescouldexploreperspectivesofpetdeathandpost-deathconsumptionbehaviorinothercultures.Additionally,severalareasofstudycouldbedirectedtoward the differences in how humansmemorialize their pets depending on their level ofattachment to the pet, their perception of the pet as a family member, the level ofdisenfranchisementfeltatthepet’sdeath,theowner’sstageinthefamilylifecycle,andtypicaldemographicsofage,gender,income,andeducationallevels.Fromthefuneral,cremation,andburialperspective, there isaneed tomeasure the financial impactof thisbooming industry,and how individuals make their way through the consumer buying decision process,particularlyintheAmericanconsumerculture.

References

Ainsworth,Mary,MaryBlehar,EverettWaters,andSallyWall(1978),PatternsofAttachment:APsychologicalStudyoftheStrangeSituation,HillsdaleNJ:ErlbaumAssociates,p.416.

AmericanPetProductsAssociation(2013),“PetIndustryMarketSizeandFutureOutlook,”retrievedfromwww.Americanpetproducts.org/press_industrytrends.asponNovember3,2014.

Attig,Thomas(2004),“DisenfranchisedGriefRevisited:DiscountingHopeandLove,”Omega,49(3),197–215.

Aylesworth, Andrew, Ken Chapman, and Susan Dobscha, “Animal Companions andMarketing: Dogs Are More Than Just a Cell in the BCGMatrix!” inNA Advances inConsumerResearchVolume26,eds.EricArnouldandLindaScott,Provo,UT:AssociationforConsumerResearch,pp.385–391.

Beck, Alan M., and Aaron H. Katcher (2003), “Future Directions in Human-Animal BondResearch,”AmericanBehavioralScientist,47(1),79–93.

Belk,Russell (1988), “Possessionsand theExtendedSelf,”Journal ofConsumerResearch, 15,September,139–168.

Bowlby,J(1982),AttachmentandLoss:Attachment,Vol.1,2nded.,NewYork:BasicBooks.Brewer, Douglas, Terence Clark, and Adrian Phillips (2001).Dogs in Antiquity: Anubis to

Cerebrus,TheOriginsoftheDomesticDog.Warminster,UK:ArisandPhillips.Brus,Brian(2010),“It’saLiving:Oklahoma-basedPetCemeteryOwner,”JournalRecord,

OklahomaCity,OK,October12,2010,retrievedfromhttp://search.proquest.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.eduonOctober30,2014.

Cameron, Paul and Michael Matson (1972), “Psychological Correlates of Pet Ownership,”PsychologicalReports,30(February),286.

Carmack,Betty.(1991),“PetLossandtheElderly,”HolisticNursingPractice,5(2),80.Choi,Amy(2008),“EntrepreneursReinventtheFuneralIndustry,”BloombergBusinessweek,

June19,retrievedfromwww.businessweek.com/printer/articles/219146,November25,2014.

Cordaro,Millie (2012), “Pet Loss andDisenfranchisedGrief: Implications forMentalHealthCounselingPractice,”JournalofMentalHealthCounseling,34(4),October,283–294.

Derr,Mark (1997),Dog’s Best Friends: Annals of the Dog-Human Relationship, New York:HenryHolt.

Doka,Kenneth (2002),DisenfranchisedGrief:NewChallenges,Directions,andStrategies forPractice.Champaign,IL:ResearchPress,p.451.

Field,Nigel, LisaOrsini,RoniGavish, andWendyPackman, (2009), “Role ofAttachment inResponsetoPetLoss,”DeathStudies,33(4),334–355.

Gabel,Terrance,PhylisMansfield,andKevinWestbrook(1994),“TheDisposalofConsumers:AnExplortoryAnalysisofDeath-RelatedConsumption,”inNA–AdvancesinConsumerResearchVolume23, ed.KimP.Corfmanand JohnLynch, Jr., Provo,UT:Associationof

ConsumerResearch,pp.361–367.Gerwols, Marilynn and Susan Labott (1994), “Adjustment to the Death of a Companion

Animal,” Anthrozoos: A Multidisciplinary Journal of The Interactions of People andAnimals,7(3),172–187.

Glenn,JoshuaandElizabethFoyLarsen(2012),Unbored:TheEssentialFieldGuidetoSeriousFun,NewYork:BloomsburyUSA,p.352.

Grier, Katherine C. (2006), Pets in America: A History, Chapel Hill, NC: The University ofNorthCarolinaPress,p.376.

HarrisInteractive(2013),“DogOwnersSpendMoreonTheirPetsThanCatOwners,”PRNewswire,NewYork,22May2013,retrievedfromhttp://search.proquest.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/abicompleteonNovember3,2014.

HartsdalePetCemetery(2014),informationretrievedatwww.petcem.com,September24,2014.

Henry, Christine (2008) Risk Indicators for Grief Symptoms After the Death of a Pet: DoesQualityofAttachmentMakeaDifference?Unpublisheddissertation,PurdueUniversity.

Hirschman, Elizabeth (1994), “Consumers and Their Animal Companions,” Journal ofConsumerResearch,20,March,616–632.

HornelAnimalShelter(2014),websitewww.hornellanimalshelter.org,retrievedNovember19,2014.

Humphrey,Keren(2009),CounselingStrategiesforLossandGrief,Alexandria,VA:AmericanCounselingAssociation,p.244.

Jamison,Peter(2013),“It’saDog’sAfterlife:PetDeathCareIndustryBooms,”TampaBayTimes,May2,2013,retrievedfromwww.tampabay.com/features/pets/funeral-homesonNovember20,2014.

Kennedy,Samantha (2005), “More thanMan’sBestFriend:ALookatAttachmentBetweenHumans and their Canine Companions.” Unpublished dissertation, the Department ofSociology,UniversityofSouthFlorida,pp.16–24.

Kingston,Michelle (2013) “SpecialSendoff forThor:GermanShepherdTreatedLikeOneoftheFamily,”McClatchy-TribuneBusinessNews,February22,2013.

Kurdek,Lawrence (2008), “PetDogsasAttachmentFigures,”JournalofSocialandPersonalRelationships,25(2),247–266.

Marcario,Dana(2012),“PetFuneralBusinessBeginningtoBoom,”TODAYMoney.com,retrievedfromwww.today.com/money/pet-funeral-business-beginning-boom-998633onNovember12,2014.

Mars,Inc.(2014),“TheEvolutionofPetOwnership,”retrievedfromhttp://pedigree.com/all-things-dog/article-library,November24,2014.

Pendergast,SaraandTomPendergast(2000),St.JamesEncyclopediaofPopularCulture,Vol.4,Detroit,MI:St.JamesPress,GaleGroup,CengageLearning.

PewResearchCenter(2010),“GaugingFamilyIntimacy,”PewResearchSocialandDemographicTrends,retrievedfromwww.pewsocialtrends.org/2006/03/07/gauging-family-intimacyonNovember5,2014.

Phillips,Catherine(2014),“NotJustforChristmas:SwissUrgedtoStopEatingCatsandDogs,”Newsweek,retrievedfromwww.newsweek.com/not-just-christmas-swiss-urged-stop-eating-cats-and-dogs-287378,November26,2014.

Pierce,Jessica(2012),“It’sJustaDog.GetOverIt.TheDeathofaPetisOftenDismissed.”WallStreetJournal(Online),NewYork,December1,2012.

Planchon, Lynn, Donald Templer, Shelley Stokes, and Jacqueline Keller (2002), “Death of aCompanionCatorDogandHumanBereavement,”SocietyandAnimals,10(1),93–105.

Quackenbush,JamesandLawrenceGlickman(1984),“HelpingPeopleAdjusttotheDeathofaPet,”HealthandSocialWork,9(1),42–48.

Salkind, Neil J. (2006), Encyclopedia of Human Development, Thousand Oaks, CA: SageReferencePublications,990–992.

Sanders,Clinton(1990),“TheAnimal‘Other’:Self-Definition,SocialIdentityandCompanionAnimals,”inAdvancesinConsumerResearch,MarvinE.Goldbergetal. (eds.)Provo,UT:AssociationforConsumerResearch,17,662–668.

Sharkin, Bruce and Donna Knox (2003), “Pet Loss: Issues and Implications for thePsychologist,”ProfessionalPsychology:ResearchandPractice,34(4),414–421.

Sife,Wallace(2005),TheLossofaPet:AGuidetoCopingWiththeGrievingProcessWhenaPetDies,Hoboken,NJ:WileyPublishingCompany,p.260.

Spitznagel,Eric(2012),“There’sNeverBeenaBetterTimetobeaDeadPet,”BloombergBusinessweek,September7,2012,retrievedfrom222.businessweek.com/printer/articles/70592onNovember3,2014.

UnitedStatesBureauofLaborStatistics(2013),“AverageAnnualExpendituresforPets,2007–2011,”HouseholdSpendingonPets,retrievedfromwww.bls.gov/opub/ted/2013/ted_20130529.htmonNovember25,2014.

UnitedStatesCensusBureau(2012a),“America’sFamiliesandLivingArrangements2012,”U.S.CensusBureau,retrievedfromwww.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p20-570.pdfonNovember1,2014.

UnitedStatesCensusBureau(2012b),“HouseholdsbyTypeandSelectedCharacteristics:ACS2011,”U.S.CensusBureau,AmericanCommunitySurvey2011,retrievedfromwww.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/acsbr11-03.pdfonNovember1,2014.

Voith,Victoria(1981),“AttachmentBetweenPeopleandtheirPets:BehaviorProblemsofPetsthatAriseFromtheRelationshipBetweenPetsandPeople,”inInterrelationshipsBetweenPeopleandAnimals,BruceFogle(ed.),Springfield,IL:Thomas,pp.271–294.

WLKY.com(2014),“PetCareIndustrySeesRiseinFunerals,RelatedItems,”WLKY.com,retrievedfromwww.wlky.com/news/pet-care-industry-sees-rise-in-funeralsonNovember

22,2014.Worden, J.William(2008),GriefCounselingandGriefTherapy:AHandbookfor theMental

HealthPractitioner,4thed.,NewYork,NY:SpringerPublishingCompany,p.314.Yonan,Joe(2012),“TheDeathofaPetCanHurtasMuchastheLossofaRelative,”The

WashingtonPost,retrievedatwww.washingtonpost.com/national/health-scienceonMarch26,2014.

Zilcha-Mano,Sigal,MarioMikulincer,andPhillipShaver(2011),“AnAttachmentPerspectiveon Human–Pet Relationships: Conceptualization and Assessment of Pet AttachmentOrientations,”JournalofResearchinPersonality,45,345–357.

11Greatgrannyliveson

Pursuingimmortalitythroughfamilyhistoryresearch

LeighannC.NeilsonandDelphinA.Muise

Itisawfulwhentryingtofindsomeone’sfootprintandtheyappeartohavenotleftone.

Introduction

Sincethe1990s,researchundertakenbyhistoriansintheUnitedStates,Australia,andCanada,has revealed that many consumers rate knowing about the past of their family as moreimportantthanknowingaboutthepastoftheirnation,ethnicgroup,orcommunity(AshtonandHamilton,2009). IntheUnitedStates,one-thirdofrespondentstoanationalsurveyhadworkedon theirown familyhistory in thepreceding twelvemonths; inCanada,57percentwereengagedinpreparingafamilyscrapbookand/orwritingafamilyhistory(Conradetal.,2013; Rosenzweig and Thelen, 1998). Consumption associated with the pursuit of familyhistory includes subscription to online databases,1 fees paid to access official documents,purchaseof computer equipmentand internetaccess, tripsabroad to search for informationand visit family, purchase of DNA testing and acquisition of consumer products to reflectancestry,e.g.,ScottishtartansorIrishwhiskey.

Theexpandedplaceofgenealogyand familyhistory in thepublicconsciousnesswith theadventoftelevisionshowslikeWhoDoYouThinkYouAre?hasgivenarenewedimpetustotheindividualpursuitoffamilyhistory(Kramer,2011).Demographictrends,suchastheagingandretirementofthebabyboomgeneration,indicatethatthepopularityoffamilyhistoryislikely to increase (Schau, Gilly and Wolfinbarger, 2009; Wilson 2003). Other social andeconomic indicators, including the convergence of trends associated with globalization –information technology innovations, improveddigital access to information resourcesacrossnational boundaries, increased international travel, and the growing number of individualswhoconsider themselves tobe ‘worldcitizens’ (i.e.,whomaintainattachment tomore than

onenation)(McAuley,2004;CannonandYaprak,2002)–alsosupportitsgrowth,makingitanimportantresearchtopicformarketersandconsumerresearchersalike.

Wewereinterestedinlearningmoreaboutthisconsumptionphenomenon.Inparticular,wewanted to examine consumers’motivations for conducting familyhistory research and alsobegintotheorizeabouttheoutcomes–whatdoesitallmeanforconsumers?Inthischapter,we discuss the death-defying aspects of family history research, interpreting our results interms of terrormanagement theory and philosopher StevenCave’s immortality narratives.The chapter is organized as follows: first we briefly review previous research, then weexplicate our theoretical frameworks and outline our researchmethods. Following this,wepresentourresultsandinterpretationandclosewithsuggestionsforfurtherresearch.

Literaturereview

Across the social sciences, a fair amount of attention has been paid to the topic of familyhistory research. Sociologists and historians have identified several possiblemotivations forpursuing familyhistory, including: the search for illustriousancestorsand the correspondingendowment effect (Lambert, 1996, 2002; Andrews, 1982; Hareven, 1978); self-identityformation, that is, developing a deeper understanding of oneself by getting to know one’sroots,creatingcoherenceinone’sownlifebyconnectingpastwithpresent,andself-discoverythroughadoptingtheroleoffamilyhistorian(Lambert,1996,2002,2006;Yakel,2004);familyidentityformation,orgettingtoknowone’sancestorsaspeopleandrestoring‘lost’ancestorstothefamily(Lambert,1996;2006);securingone’splaceinthenationinthefaceofincreasingimmigrationlevels(Lambert,2002;Redman,1992);nostalgiaandyearningfora(fictional)past(Lowenthal, 1985; Taylor, 1982; Hareven, 1978); dissatisfaction with consumerist culture(Quinn,1991);andthecreationofagiftforfuturegenerations(Lambert,1996).

Previousconsumerresearchhasalsoengagedwiththemesrelatedtothepursuitoffamilyhistory.Belk’s(1990,1988)seminalworkonhowconsumers’senseofselfisextendedinspaceandtimeadvancesthe ideathatpeopleandplacestowhichonefeelsasenseofattachmentformpartoftheextendedself,andthattheseaspectsoftheextendedselfdonothavetobecontemporaneous with the consumer in order to exert an influence. Other research hasconfirmed that one’s sense of self can include various levels of affiliation, such as family,community, and ethnic group (Ahuvia, 2005; Peñaloza, 1994; Hirschman, 1981). Recently,Hirschman’sworkwith Panther-Yates (2007a, 2007b, 2006) onDNA testing has establishedhowreconstructionofone’s identitynarrativemaybecomenecessary in lightof test resultswhichrevealunexpectedgeneticancestries.

The importance of family as a central nexus of identity construction has also beenwell-

established(Curasi,PriceandArnould,2004;Price,ArnouldandCurasi,2000),andLindridge(2012)hasidentifiedtheinformationcollatedaspartoffamilyhistoryresearchasoneformofa family’s inalienable wealth. Other consumer researchers, including many in this volume,haveinvestigatedritualsandotherconsumptionpracticesassociatedwiththedeathoffamilymembers(TurleyandO’Donohoe,2012;ZhaoandBelk,2007;BonsuandBelk,2003;Gentryetal.,1995).

Although previous research provided some interesting insights and contributed to ourthoughtprocess,thereappearedtobemuchmoretotheproductive-consumptionworkbeingdone by consumers.Wewanted to knowmore about themotivations for and outcomes ofconductingfamilyhistoryresearch.

Theoreticalperspectives

Acoreactivityof familyhistoryresearch is theaccumulationof information;developinganawareness of cultural and historical context is essential to the practice, second only to thediscovery and recording of birth,marriage and death dates. Psychologists have argued thatreminders of the ‘problem of death’, such as may occur in person when experiencing thereality of a family member’s death, or importantly for this research, at a distance whendownloadinga copyof anancestor’sdeath registration fromanonlinedatabase, can createanxiety.Terrormanagement theory, as developedbyGreenberg, Pyszczynski, Solomonandcolleagues (e.g., Greenberg, Pyszczynski and Solomon, 1986; Greenberg and Arndt, 2011),suggests that individuals dealwith this anxiety through both proximal and distal cognitivedefensestrategies.

Proximaldefensesserveasafirst lineofdefenseagainstconsciousdeath-relatedthoughts(Pyszczynski,GreenbergandSolomon, 1999), and can include suppressing thoughtsof one’sowndeath, seekingdistractions tobanish thoughtsofdeath, rationalization strategieswhichdeny one’s current vulnerability (e.g., recalling that one is a non-smoker whomaintains aregular work-out schedule) and cognitive distortions such as relocating one’s death into adistantfuturetime.

Distal defenses occur when death-related thoughts are accessible but not in currentconsciousness or of focal attention. Theywork at amore symbolic level by reassuring theindividualthats/heis‘avaluablecontributortoameaningful,eternaluniverse’(Pyszczynski,GreenbergandSolomon,1999,

p. 839). By making one’s life seem meaningful, valuable, and enduring, distal defensesprovideasenseofsecurity.Thistypeofdefenseoperatesinamoresubtlefashion;anexampleprovided by Pyszczynski and colleagues (1999) is forming more favorable evaluations of

otherswhopraiseone’scultureandmorenegativeevaluationsofthosewhocriticizeit.Importantly, these researchers relate that although mortality salience has been

operationalizedinavarietyofwaysovermultiplestudies,thefocusofresearchunderterrormanagementtheoryhasbeenontheeffectsofthoughtsabouttheresearchparticipant’sowndeath. ‘These effects are specific to thoughts of one’s own death; parallel effects are notproduced by other aversive or anxiety-producing stimuli’ (Pyszczynski, Greenberg andSolomon, 1999, p. 836). To the extent that family historians identify motivations closelyassociated with their own lives or identities, terror management theory may provideadditionalinsightintotheirconsumptionbehaviors.

PhilosopherStephenCave’sworkon‘thewill toimmortality’(2012),overlapswithterrormanagementtheoryintermsofidentifyingbehaviorsthatservetoextendone’sphysicallifeandbeliefsregardingone’sspiritual immortality.Cavehasdistilledthestoriesofhumanity’sefforts to deal with the inevitability of death into four ‘immortality narratives’. The firstnarrative, ‘Staying Alive’, is focused on keeping the body going. Consumption practicesassociatedwiththisnarrativehavebeendiscussedinpreviousresearch,includingtheingestionof ‘magic elixirs’ produced by the pharmaceutical and natural health industries (ThompsonandTroester,2002),thepursuitofphysicalfitness(Lehmann,1987)orchasingphysicalbeautyviaplasticsurgery(Sayre,1999).

Facedwith evidence that eventually all humans die, the second narrative, ‘Resurrection’,focusesontherebirthofthephysicalbody.Traditionally,manyreligionshaveembracedtheideaofthedeadrisingagainonjudgmentday,andmorerecentlyscientificadvancessuchascryogenics, offer the hope of preserving the physical body until it can live again. A thirdnarrative, ‘Soul’, espouses living on spiritually, without the body. Across cultures, manyreligionsholdoutthehopeofeternallifeviaasoulwhichisimpervioustodeath.

Thefourthnarrative, ‘Legacy’, istheonewithwhichwearemostinterestedandthepathwhichCaveprofessesholdsout theonlyrealhopefor immortality.Livingonthroughone’slegacyrequiresneitheraphysicalbodynoranimmortalsoul.Cave(2012,p.205)distinguishesbetweentwoformsoftheLegacynarrative–theculturalandthebiological.Thebiologicallegacy narrative depends not only on the passing along of one’s genes but also on tracingone’sgeneticlineagebackintime.WhiletheuseofDNAtestingiscertainlyagrowingpartoffamilyhistorypractice (Harmon,2007),given the spaceconstraintswe focuson theculturalformofthelegacynarrative.

Culturalimmortalityisbasedontheideathatwhiletheindividualeventuallypassesaway,thecultureof thegrouptowhichonebelonged liveson.Achievingfame,celebrityorgloryduring one’s lifetime such that one becomes part of cultural narratives is one path toimmortality.Thecreationofculturalworks–paintings,poetry,music,literature–alsoresultsfrom the efforts of the individual to claim spacewithin the undying cultural realm.Cave’sconceptualization of cultural immortality seems to closely parallel the distal defense

mechanismof‘embeddingoneselfinameaningfulenduringculturalreality’thatispostulatedunder terror management theory (Pyszczynski, Greenberg and Solomon, 1999, p. 838).However, Cave’swork has particular import for this research in that he acknowledges theessentialroleofthescribeorhistorianincapturingthedeedsoftheonebeingimmortalized;evenifonefailstoleavebehindacarefullycraftedautobiographyorphotographicimage,onecanbeimmortalizedthroughtheeffortsofothers.

Tofurtherhisargument,Cave(2012,p.219)makesuseofwhathetermsthe‘bundletheory’oftheself:

Youarejustacollectionofdisparatethoughts,memories,senseimpressionsandthelike,allbundleduptogetherinapackageweconvenientlylabelaperson…[W]hatdoesitmeanfor‘you’tosurvive?Oneanswermightbethatyousurviveifenoughofthesedisparatepartssurvive…[I]fenoughofthebitsofthebundleliveon,thenthepersonliveson–evenifentirelyintheworldofsymbols.

Cave’s logic opens the door to thinking about a consumption practice like family history,which seeks topull together thedisparatepartsof a life (birth certificates,weddingphotos,locksofhair)intoasemblanceofthe‘whole’person,asameansbywhichone’sdescendantsmightrenderoneimmortal.

Method

Weemployedmultiple data collectionmethods including participant observation and depthinterviewsfollowedbyanation-widesurvey.SinceDecember2006,theleadauthorhasbeeninvolvedinaparticipantobservationstudywhichhasincludedbecomingamemberofalocalfamilyhistorysociety,attendingregularmeetings,trainingworkshopsandconferencesaswellasacourseinwritinglifehistory,readingfamilyhistoryjournalsandundertakingthecreationof her own familyhistory. ‘Cultural immersion’ allowed the researcher to develop an emicunderstandingofthecultureunderstudy,acquirefluencyinthegenealogicalvernacular,andbetterunderstanddiscoursesassociatedwiththepursuitoffamilyhistory,benefitshighlightedinpreviousresearch(ThompsonandTroester,2002;Kozinets,1997).Further, itfacilitatedthedevelopmentofdeeperinsightsintothevaluesystemoftheculture,allowedtheresearchertoestablish herself as a knowledgeable and trusted member of the community, facilitatedrecruitmentofinterviewandsurveyrespondentsandprovidedtheopportunityformember-checkingouremerginginterpretation.

Thesecondauthorwasaco-investigator inaCanadianstudyofattitudestowardthepast(Conradetal.,2013)andfacilitatedanearlyroundofdatacollectionthroughinterviewswithgenealogists in the context of a graduate seminar in PublicHistory.During the summer of2007, a series of interviews with family historians was conducted by a graduate student

research assistant under the supervision of both authors. An important outcome was thedetermination that family historians, regardless of age, had ready access to computingequipment,internetconnectionsandacomfortleveloperatinginanonlineenvironment;thismadetheuseofaweb-basedsurveyinstrumentpossible.

Duringthesummerandearlyfallof2011,aweb-basedsurvey–theCanadianGenealogySurvey2 (CGS) – collected data from over 2,700 people.Although responseswere receivedfrom27countries,mostrespondentslistedCanadaastheircountryofresidence(72percent),followed by theUnited States (21 percent).3 The use of both closed-ended and open-endedquestionsallowedrespondentstoexpandontheirreasonsfordoinggenealogyanditsimpacton their lives. The survey built on the foundation laid by sociologist Ron Lambert’s (1996)studyoffamilyhistoriansinOntario,Canada,butwasextendedtoincludequestionscoveringnewinternet-basedtechnologiesandconstructsofinteresttothisresearch.

Sincepreviousresearchershadidentifiedlowresponseratesandconfidentialityconcernsaspossible disadvantages to web-based surveys (Healey, Macpherson and Kuijten, 2005;Grandcolas, Rettie andMarusenko, 2003), special efforts were made to drive traffic to thesurveywebsite. Participantswere recruited through announcements in family history blogsand websites, and by soliciting the cooperation of genealogical societies to announce thesurveyatmeetingsandintheirnewsletters.Postersadvertisingthesurveyweremailedouttoarchives across the country andpersonal visitsweremade to archives andmuseums inourprovincesofresidence(OntarioandNovaScotia)todepositpostersandflyersandsolicittheassistanceofstafftonotifytheirsummervisitorsofoursurvey.Becausepotentialrespondentsmayhaveconsideredsomeofthedatawesoughttocollecttobeofasensitivenature(e.g.,country of origin, immigration date, last visit to country of origin),we took extra effort toreinforce the confidential nature of the survey and the security of their responses in ourcommunications.4

Responses to the open-ended questions were analyzed following accepted methods forinterpretingqualitativedata(Spiggle,1994).Anundergraduateresearchassistantandtheleadauthor worked through the 2,000 Canadian responses question by question, iterativelygeneratinga coding structure.As eachnewcoding categorywas created, adescriptionwasgeneratedalongwithexamplesofwhatresponseswouldandwhatwouldnotbeconsideredto fall within the meaning of the category. The coding structure typically firmed up afterapproximatelyone-quarteroftheresponsestoaquestionhadbeenanalyzed(e.g.,350–500outof2,000).Uptothispoint,wereturnedtore-codeearlierresponsesinlightofthecreationoflatercodingcategories.Inthesectionwhichfollows,wereportonthemostfrequentlystatedresponses. This does notmean that infrequent responseswere not theoretically interesting,simply that given space limitations, we chose to discuss what might be considered more‘typical’responsesfortheconsumersandphenomenonbeingresearched.

Findingsanddiscussion

We report, first, a description of our Canadian-resident respondents in order to provide aprofileofthetypicalfamilyhistorian.Thelargestproportionofrespondentswasinthe50–65year agegroup (48.4percentof thosewhoanswered thequestion), followedby thoseaged66–76(35.3percent)andthoseaged30–49(9.1percent).Womenoutnumberedmenbyalmosttwotoone(65.3percentto34.7percent).Overall,respondentswerehighlyeducated,with77.5percenthavingcollege,undergraduateorpostgraduatedegreesorprofessionalqualifications.This compares with the Canadian average of 35.42 percent (Statistics Canada, 2009). Onaverage,bothmaleandfemalerespondentshadbeeninterestedinfamilyhistoryforthesamelength of time, about 27 years, although the men described themselves as being ‘actively’engagedforaslightlylongerperiodoftime(18.47years),thandidthewomen(16.88years).

AlthoughoursamplewasnotrepresentativeoftheCanadianpopulationoverall,itdidalignwithprevious surveysof familyhistorians conducted inCanada. For example, inLambert’s1996studyofOntarioGenealogySocietymembers,63percentofrespondentswerefemale,54percentwere60yearsofageorolder,50percenthadauniversitydegree,andthemediantimeof involvement in family history researchwas 14 years. The demographic profile of familyhistoriansappearstohaveremainedrelativelyconsistentovertime.

Wenowfocusonthereasonsgivenforsettingouttodogenealogywork.Whenweaskedpeople to identify theprimary reason that they started researching their familyhistory, thepredominantresponsewasadesiretolearnabouttheirroots.‘Tolearnaboutmyfamily,myancestors,myself’wastheresponseprovidedby22percentofpeoplecompletingthesurvey.Thefollowingquotefroma53yearoldmanwith25yearsofexperienceistypical,‘Iwantedtoknowmoreaboutwheremyancestorscamefromandwhotheywere.’Thesecondmostcommon reason was the influence of a family member. Thirteen percent of respondentsprovidedthisresponse,with5percentidentifyingtheirparentsastheprimaryinfluence.A75-year-oldwoman,activelyresearchingfor8years,commented,

Motherwasapproaching90yrs.oldandshehadabriefcasefullofdata.Whenshewasinherdecliningyears,shetalkedalot about her family. It stirredmy interest. I inherited the briefcasewhen she died at 93 yrs. of age. Our roots are veryexciting.Inowhaveapassion(addiction)toresearchingourfamilies.

Similartopreviousresearch,informantsspokeof‘personaltraumas’suchasthedeathofaparent (Lindridge, 2012) or ‘trigger events’, like planning for a family reunion (Schau,GillyandWolfinbarger,2009)asthestimulusfortheirinterestinfamilyhistory.Onewomanstated,‘AfterthedeathofmyparentsIfoundscatterednotesandbitsofinfoonmygrandparentsandtheirsiblingsanddecidedtosortthemoutsoastoleavethemformychildren,iftheywereinterested.’Motivationsstemmingfromintergenerational trauma,suchasdeath inchildbirthand adoption (Lindridge, 2012) were present in our data. However, other forms of

intergenerational trauma reflected theCanadian context; for example families rent asunderand cultural continuity disrupted through the experience of attending residential schools byaboriginalpeoples.

Othermotivationsreflectedbroadersocietalchanges;storytellersfrompreviousgenerationsarenolongerlivinginthesamehomeastheirchildrenandgrandchildren.Accordingly,a58-year-oldwomanidentifiedherreasonforstartingfamilyhistoryresearchas,‘Toresearchandrecord our family history for posterity. Elders in the familywere dying andwith them thestories and knowledge of the history of our family.’ Another mechanism for keeping thefamily’sstoryaliveisneeded.Thefamilyhistory,organizedandrecorded,providesabridgefrompasttofuturefamilymembers.

Someofthereasonsthatscholarshadidentifiedinpreviousresearchalsoappearedinourdata,butwithmuchlessfrequency.Forexample,only2percentofrespondentsreportedthatqualifying for ancestral society membership stimulated their research, while tracing theexistenceofamedicalcondition,orlearningwhethersuchaconditionexisted,wasimportantto only 1 percent of respondents. A comparatively small proportion of respondents (0.6percent)identifiedreligiousrequirementsasamotivatingfactor,whilefindinglinkstorichorfamouspeopleinspiredonly0.3percentofthefamilyhistorianswhotookpartinoursurvey.RecognizingthattheCanadianGenealogicalSurveywasconductedintheleaduptothe200thanniversary of thewar of 1812,we probably hadmore responses dealingwith establishingUnitedEmpireLoyalistancestrythanwewouldhavereceivedhadthesurveybeenconductedat another time. But it is interesting to note that the motivations commonly attributed tofamily historians were some of the least mentioned reasons provided by family historiansthemselves.

Given the time and financial investment many family historians were making, it wasinteresting to explore the role that family history played in their lives. For some, it wasdescribedasa‘nicehobby’(5.3percentofrespondents),oranactivitythat‘filledupthetime’,ofteninretirement(2.2percent).Simplyknowingmoreaboutfamily,intermsofthetypicalbirth,marriageanddeathinformationrecordedinfamilytrees,wastheoutcomerecordedby5.3percentofrespondents.Butforothers,researchingtheirfamilyhistoryhadbecomecentralto their identity, both as individuals andmembers of larger family networks.Developing abettersenseof‘whoIam’,withtheemphasisonthefocalindividual,wasnotedby6.7percentof respondents,whilea ‘senseof connectionandbelonging’withinanextendednetworkofkinwasthemostcommonoutcomeidentified(9.6percentofrespondents).

Thesecondmostcommonoutcomeexpressedwasafeelingofgratitudeanddeeprespectfor the life experiencesof their ancestors,mentionedby8.3percentof respondents.Typicalcomments include, ‘It has givenme a great deal of pleasure in knowingwho I am, [and]where I came from. And an appreciation of my ancestors whose hard work and personalsacrifices made it possible for me to be here!!’ (62-year-old man). Learning about the

hardships enduredby their immigrant ancestors inorder toprovide themwithabetter lifehadaprofoundimpactonmanyinformants.Whenpairedwithinformants’prideinhowtheirfamilies had contributed to their new country, we can see evidence of the distal defensemechanisms theorized by terror management theorists. For example, a 52-year-old femaleinformant stated that working on her family history, ‘… has helped me to understand ourhistoryandhowmyfamilyplayedapartinthebuildingofourCanada.’Theideathatone’sfamilyhascontributedinameaningfulwaytosomethingvaluableandenduring,isonewaythat family history researchmay lend symbolic reassurance in the face of one’s inevitablemortality(Pyszczynski,GreenbergandSolomon,1999).

However, anothermajor theme emerging from our analysis of the data is the idea thatwhile researching and recording ancestors’ names and tombstonedata (typically consideredthe ‘genealogy’ component) plus learning about the social context inwhich ancestors lived(the‘familyhistory’part)isawayofgettingtoknowone’sextendedfamily(inotherwords,communingwith the dead), it can also serve tomake those ancestors immortal. It does sothroughpracticeswhich reflectCave’s (2012) ‘bundle theory’ of the self: by recording their‘dates’(birth,marriageanddeath),gatheringphotographs,storiesandothermementoes,andusingthemtowritetheirlifehistories.

The‘legacy’routetoimmortalityworksbecausetheconnectionthatfamilyhistoriansfeeloften extends back several generations, in spite of the lack of a living, emotional linkage(Lindridge, 2012). A 41-year-old woman said, ‘[It] makes me feel more connected to myfamilywhich is spreadaround thecountryandalso tomy family that Inevergot toknowbecausetheyweregonebeforeIwasborn.’Anotherwomandiscussedhowthepeopleshehasresearchedarepresentinherthoughts,‘Itputsrealpeopleintothebiggerstoriesandtrendofhistory, sowhen I readahistorybook, I amalways thinkingabout “wherewas thispersonwhenthatwashappening?”or“howdidthatimpactonthatperson?”’Finally,a64-year-oldwomancommented thatdoing familyhistory, ‘keeps livelya communitywhichhas largelydisappearednow’.

Family historians aren’t just concernedwith the past but alsowith the future.Whenweinvited informants to tell us about any steps they were taking to preserve special familyobjects, an overwhelming number of respondents indicated that they had adopted digitaltechnologiestoensurethefamily’sinalienablewealthisprotected.Typicaloftheircommentswasthisonefroma55-year-oldwoman,‘Iammakingsurethatmanyfamilymembershavedigital images of things that I have found. Share the wealth.’ A 67-year-old woman hascompiledascrapbook,forarelativewhowasamissionaryinJapanfor30years.Shesaid,‘IhavemanyarticlesandphotosfromJapanallretainedforfuturegenerations.’Inthismanner,ancestorsliveonthroughthelegaciesfamilyhistoriansproduceforthem.

In our research, 42 percent of informants had recorded their own reminiscences forposterity, but an equal proportion (41 percent) had not and a further 17 percent said they

didn’tplantodoso.TheseresultsaccordwithLambert’s(1996)findingthatthefocusofmostfamilyhistoriansislessonperpetuatingtheirownselfandtheirownlegacythroughtimethanonensuringthefamilyunit’snarrativeorthestoryofa‘special’other(e.g.,anunclewhowentofftowar)continuestobetold,althoughtheroleoffamilyhistorianisstillimportanttoself-image.Henceouropeningquotewhichhighlightsthesadnessfamilyhistoriansfeelwhentheycan’tfind,muchlessbundletogether,thepiecesofanancestor’slegacy.

WewouldberemissifwedidnotdiscusshowthebeliefsystemofadherentstotheChurchofJesusChristofLatter-daySaints(LDS,commonlyreferredtoastheMormons)alsoworkstoimmortalizeancestors.CentraltoLDSdoctrineistheideaofrecoveringfamilymemberstothefaiththroughproxybaptism.InthewordsofLDSprophet,JosephSmith,membersofthefaith,‘…havetheprivilegeofbeingbaptizedforthoseoftheirrelativeswhoaredead,whomtheybelievewouldhaveembracedtheGospel,iftheyhadbeenprivilegedwithhearingit…’(quotedinAkenson,2007,p.51).Thuscanthefaithful‘overcomenotonlytheirowndeath,butthatof their children,andof theirancestors’ (Akenson,2007,p. 53), resulting ineternal life.Centraltotheprojectisestablishingthefamily’slineage.Thishasresultedinthecreationofanenormousdatabaseoftheessentialstuffoffamilyhistory(seefamilysearch.org);thoughmostusersofthedataarenotadherentstotheMormonfaith(Akenson,2007).

Limitationsandconclusion

Terror management theory has been used effectively in past research to understandconsumption behavior after the death of a family member (Bonsu and Belk, 2003). Ourresearchextendsitsapplicationintoamorebroadlypracticedconsumptionpractice–familyhistory. Using Cave’s (2012) ‘cultural legacy’ immortality narrative as an interpretive lenshelpsustobetterunderstandthemeaningattheheartoffamilyhistorypractice.

Although our study was national in scope, it was offered only in the English language,resultinginunder-representationoftheFrench-speakingpopulation.Further,ourrecruitmentefforts resulted in over-representation from our two home provinces. However, ourimmersionintheculture,thelargenumberofrespondents,andthefactthattheaveragetimetakentocompletethesurveywasalmost63minutes,allowsustofeelconfidentthatwehavefaithfullycapturedtheessenceoftheexperienceofAnglophoneCanadianfamilyhistorians.

Whilepastresearchhasfocusedonthepossessionofconsumergoods(e.g.,motorcyclesinSchouten and McAlexander, 1995), or membership in consumption communities (e.g., StarTrekfansinKozinets,2001)asthematerialsfromwhichconsumerssymbolicallyconstructandreconstruct their identities, this research has examined how information resources are also‘marketer-generated materials’ from which consumers construct personal and familial

identitieswithinthestructurallimitationsofthemarketplace(ArnouldandThompson,2005).In doing so, it challenges consumer culture theory to move away from an emphasis onmaterial culture (Epp and Price, 2010; Bradford, 2009;Curasi, Price andArnould, 2004) andembracean important,and timely,consumptiondomainoftenmissing fromour literature–information(cf.,Lindridge,2012).

Notes

1Thelargestonlinedatabase,Ancestry.com,hasseenthenumberofitssubscribersgrowfromalmostonemillioninJune,

2009to2,125,000asofSeptember30,2014anditsrevenuesgrowfrom$122.6millionin2004to$540.4millionin2013.

2ThesurveyresearchwassupportedbyagrantfromtheSocialSciencesandHumanitiesResearchCouncilofCanada.

3ManyAmericanrespondentsreportedCanadianancestryandextensiveconnectionswithfamilystillresidentinCanada.

4Our university’s research ethics committee required us to engage a survey firm that could guarantee the datawould

resideonaCanadianserver,outsidethereachoftheUSHomelandSecurityAct.Usingaservicelocatedwithinanother

branchof theuniversity lent credibility and reassurance– theboth the surveyURLand the landingpage carried the

university’sname.

References

Ahuvia, A. (2005) ‘Beyond the Extended Self: Loved Objects and Consumers’ IdentityNarratives’,JournalofConsumerResearch,32(June),pp.171–184.

Akenson,D.H. (2007)SomeFamily:TheMormonsandHowHumanityKeepsTrackof Itself.MontrealandKingston:McGill-Queen’sUniversityPress.

Andrews,P.(1982)‘Genealogy:TheSearchforaPersonalPast’,AmericanHeritage,33(5),pp.10–16.

Arnould,E.J. andThompson,C.J. (2005) ‘ConsumerCultureTheory (CCT):TwentyYearsofResearch’,JournalofConsumerResearch,31(4),pp.868–882.

Ashton,P.andHamilton,P.(2010)HistoryattheCrossroads:AustraliansandthePast.Ultimo,NewSouthWales,Australia:HalsteadPress.

Belk,R.W.(1990)‘TheRoleofPossessionsinConstructingandMaintainingaSenseofPast’,inGoldberg,M.E.,Gorn,G.andPollay,R.W. (ed.)Advances inConsumerResearch,vol.17.Provo,UT:AssociationforConsumerResearch,pp.669–676.

Belk,R.W.(1988)‘PossessionsandtheExtendedSelf’,JournalofConsumerResearch,15(Sept),pp.139–168.

Bonsu, S.K. andBelk,R.W. (2003) ‘DoNotGoCheaply intoThatGoodNight:Death-RitualConsumptioninAsante,Ghana’,JournalofConsumerResearch,30(1),pp.41–55.

Bradford, T.W. (2009) ‘Intergenerationally Gifted Asset Dispositions’, Journal of ConsumerResearch,36(June),pp.93–111.

Cannon,H.M.andYaprak,A.(2002)‘WilltheReal-WorldCitizenPleaseStandUp!TheManyFacesofCosmopolitanConsumerBehavior’,JournalofInternationalMarketing,10(4),pp.30–52.

Cave, S. (2012) Immortality: TheQuest to Live Forever andHow itDrivesCivilization. NY:CrownPublishers.

Conrad, M., Ercikan, K., Friesen, G., Letourneau, J., Muise, D., Northrup, D. and Seixas, P.(2013)CanadiansandTheirPasts.Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress.

Curasi, C.F., Price, L.L. and Arnould, E.J. (2004) ‘How Individuals’ Cherished PossessionsBecomeFamilies’ InalienableWealth’,Journal ofConsumerResearch, 31(December), pp.609–622.

Epp,A.M.andPrice,L.L. (2010) ‘TheStoriedLifeofSingularizedObjects:ForcesofAgencyandNetworkTransformation’,JournalofConsumerResearch,36(February),pp.820–837.

Gentry, J.W., Kennedy, P.F., Paul, C. and Hill, R.P. (1995) ‘Family Transitions During Grief:Discontinuities inHouseholdConsumptionPatterns’,Journal ofBusinessResearch, 34(1),pp.67–79.

Grandcolas, U., Rettie, R. and Marusenko, K. (2003) ‘Web Survey Bias: Sample or ModeEffect?’JournalofMarketingManagement,19,pp.541–561.

Greenberg, J. and Arndt, J. (2011) ‘Terror Management Theory’, in Van Lange, P.A.M.,Kruglanski,A.W.andHigginsE.T(eds.)HandbookofTheoriesofSocialPsychology,Vol.2.LosAngeles:Sage,pp.398–415.

Greenberg,J.,Pyszczynski,T.andSolomon,S.(1986)‘TheCausesandConsequencesofaNeedforSelf-Esteem:ATerrorManagementTheory,’inBaumeister,R.F.(ed.)PublicSelfandPrivateSelf.NewYork:Springer-Verlag,pp.189–221.

Hareven,T.K.(1978)‘TheSearchforGenerationalMemory:TribalRitesinIndustrialSociety’,Daedalus,107(Fall),pp.137–149.

Harmon,A.(2007)‘StalkingStrangers’DNAtoFillintheFamilyTree’,TheNewYorkTimes,2April.Availableat:www.nytimes.com/2007/04/02/us/02dna.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&(Accessed:December13,2014).

Healey,B.,Macpherson,T.andKuijten,B.(2005)‘AnEmpiricalEvaluationofThreeWebSurveyDesignPrinciples’,MarketingBulletin,16,ResearchNote2.Availableat:http://marketing-bulletin.massey.ac.nz/V16/MB_V16_N2_Healey.pdf(Accessed:December13,2014.)

Hirschman,E.C.(1981)‘AmericanJewishEthnicity:ItsRelationshiptoSomeSelectedAspectsofConsumerBehavior’,JournalofMarketing,45(3),pp.102–110.

Hirschman, E.C. and Panther-Yates, D. (2007a) ‘Designer Genes: DNA Testing Services andConsumer Identity’,Paperpresentedat2ndConsumerCultureTheoryConference,YorkUniversity,Toronto,Ontario,May25–27.

Hirschman, E.C. and Panther-Yates, D. (2007b) ‘Suddenly Melungeon! ReconstructingConsumerIdentityAcrosstheColorLine’,InBelk,R.W.andSherry,J.F.,Jr.(ed.)ResearchinConsumerBehavior:ConsumerCultureTheory,vol.11.Oxford:Elsevier,pp.241–259.

Hirschman,E.C.andPanther-Yates,D.(2006)‘RomancingtheGene:MakingMythfrom“HardScience” ’, in Belk, R.W. (ed.)Handbook ofQualitative ResearchMethods inMarketing.Cheltenham,UK:EdwardElgar,pp.419–429.

Kozinets,R.V.(2001)‘UtopianEnterprise:ArticulatingtheMeaningsofStarTrek’sCultureofConsumption’,JournalofConsumerResearch,28(June),pp.67–88.

Kozinets, R.V. (1997) ‘ “I Want to Believe”: A Netnography of the X-Files Subculture ofConsumption’,inBrucks,M.andMacInnis,D.J.(ed.)AdvancesinConsumerResearch,vol.24.Provo,UT:AssociationforConsumerResearch,pp.470–475.

Kramer,A.M.(2011)‘MediatizingMemory:History,AffectandIdentityinWhoDoYouThinkYouAre?’EuropeanJournalofCulturalStudies,14(4),pp.428–445.

Lambert, R.D. (2006) ‘Descriptive, Narrative, and Experiential Pathways to SymbolicAncestors’,Mortality,11(4),pp.317–335.

Lambert, R.D. (2002) ‘Reclaiming the Ancestral Past: Narrative, Rhetoric and the “ConvictStain”’,JournalofSociology,38(2),pp.111–127.

Lambert,R.D.(1996)‘TheFamilyHistorianandTemporalOrientationsTowardstheAncestralPast’,TimeandSociety,5(2),pp.115–143.

Lehmann, D.R. (1987) ‘Pumping Iron III: An Examination of Compulsive Lifting’, InWallendorf,M.andAnderson,P.(ed.)AdvancesinConsumerResearch,vol.14.Provo,UT:AssociationforConsumerResearch,pp.129–131.

Lindridge,A.(2012)‘InalienableWealthandTraumaResolution:AnExplanationofGenealogyConsumption’, InDahl,D.W, Johar,G.V.,andvanOsselaer,S.M.J.Advances inConsumerResearch,vol.38.Duluth,MN:AssociationforConsumerResearch,pp.641–642.

Lowenthal,D.(1985)ThePastisaForeignCountry.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.McAuley, A. (2004) ‘Seeking (Marketing) Virtue inGlobalisation’,Marketing Review, 4, pp.

253–266.Peñaloza,L.(1994)‘AtravesandoFronteras/BorderCrossings:ACriticalEthnographicStudyof

the Acculturation ofMexican Immigrants’, Journal of Consumer Research, 21(June), pp.32–53.

Price, L.L., Arnould, E.J. and Curasi, C.F. (2000) ‘Older Consumers’ Disposition of SpecialPossessions’,JournalofConsumerResearch,27(September),pp.179–201.

Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg J. and Solomon, S. (1999) ‘A Dual-Process Model of DefenseAgainst Conscious and Unconscious Death-Related Thoughts An Extension of Terror

ManagementTheory’,PsychologicalReview,106(4),pp.835–845.Quinn,P.M.(1991) ‘TheSurgeofInterest inGenealogyReflectsaPopulistStrandofSociety

withImportantImplicationsforOurCulture’,ChronicleofHigherEducation,37(36),p.B2.Redman,G.R. (1992) ‘Archivists andGenealogists:TheTrendTowardPeacefulCoexistence’,

ArchivalIssues,18(2),pp.121–132.Rosenzweig, R. and Thelen, D. (1998) The Presence of the Past: Popular Uses of History in

AmericanLife.NY:ColumbiaUniversityPress.Sayre, S. (1999) ‘Using Introspective Self-Narrative to Analyze Consumption: Experiencing

PlasticSurgery’,Consumption,MarketsandCulture,3(2),pp.99–127.Schau, H.J., Gilly, M.C. and Wolfinbarger, M. (2009) ‘Consumer Identity Renaissance: The

Resurgence of Identity-Inspired Consumption in Retirement’, Journal of ConsumerResearch,36(August),pp.255–276.

Schouten,J.W.andMcAlexander,J.H.(1995)‘SubculturesofConsumption:AnEthnographyoftheNewBikers’,JournalofConsumerResearch,22(June),pp.43–61.

Spiggle, S. (1994) ‘Analysis and Interpretation of Qualitative Data in Consumer Research’,JournalofConsumerResearch,21(December),pp.491–503.

StatisticsCanada(2009)Population15yearsandOverbyHighestDegree,CertificateorDiploma,byProvinceandTerritory(2006Census).Availableat:www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/educ41a-eng.htm(Accessed:April7,2012).

Taylor,R.M.,Jr.(1982)‘SummoningtheWanderingTribes:GenealogyandFamilyReunionsinAmericanHistory’,JournalofSocialHistory,16(1),pp.21–37.

Thompson,C.J.andTroester,M. (2002) ‘ConsumerValueSystemsintheAgeofPostmodernFragmentation: The Case of the Natural Health Microculture’, Journal of ConsumerResearch,28(4),pp.550–571.

Turley,D.andO’Donohoe,S.(2012)‘TheSadnessofLivesandtheComfortofThings:GoodsasEvocativeObjects inBereavement’,JournalofMarketingManagement,28(11/12),pp.1331–1353.

Wilson,I,(2003)‘FirstPerson,Singular…FirstPerson,Plural:MakingCanada’sPastAccessible’,CanadianIssues,October.Availableat:www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/about-us/012-213-e.html(Accessed:December13,2014).

Yakel,E.(2004)‘SeekingInformation,SeekingConnections,SeekingMeaning:GenealogistsandFamilyHistorians’,InformationResearch,10(1),paper205.Availableat:www.informationr.net/ir/10-1/paper205.html.

Zhao,X.andBelk,R.W.(2007)‘DesireonFire:ANaturalisticInquiryofChineseDeathRitualConsumption’,InBorghini,S.,McGrath,M.A.andOtnes,C.(ed.)Advances inConsumerResearch – European Conference Proceedings, vol. 8. Duluth, MN: Association forConsumerResearch,pp.245.

12Physician-assistedsuicideatthecrossroadsofvulnerabilityandsocialtaboo

Isdeathbecomingaconsumptiongood?

FrançoisePasserardandXavierMenaud

Thoughscienceandmedicinehavemadetheideaofdeathmoreandmoreremote,tosomeitremainsterrorizing.Toothersimmortalityhasbecomemorefascinatingsinceitseemstobereachable–theyperceivedeathasavoluntarychoice,denyingtheultimateandtraditionallysacredfrontier.

In developed countries, the question of the end of life remains a sensitive topic withvirulentlyopposingviewpoints.Thestudyofphysician-assistedsuicide(PAS)isnotonlyacaseinpointbutitraisesaquestionofrights,specificallyinFrance,whichhashistoricallybeenthecountry of human rights. The intellectual debate that pits partisans against detractors of achosen deathmust consider this statistic: French people are the third largest nationality tocommitPASinSwitzerland(Gauthieretal.,2014,p.3).

The objective of the research herein is to examine PAS from the perspectives of threeprofiles of participants who have a stake in its aftermath: the medical expert, patient andrelative.Theresearchquestionathandaskswhetherornotdeathisaconsumptiongood;theauthorspositthatPASstandsatthecrossroadofvulnerabilityandsocialtaboowhenitcomestothestreamofendofliferesearch.Endoflifehasbeencommunicatedinthefollowingway:

Theissueofend-of-lifecannotbereducedtothesoletimeofthe“veryendoflife”.Endoflifestrikesassoonastheseverediseaseisannounced.Itprogressivelyremainspresentallalongthedurationofthediseaseortheaging.Itisfeltduringthevery lastmoments, and it goesonafterdeathwithin theprocessof funerals andmourning.The issue if end-of-lifehas aglobaldimensionand,tobeunderstood,itmustbeseenasamoreorlesslongprocess,punctuatedwithbreaks,duringwhichindividualstry,moreorlesseasily,tofacedeath.

(FrenchNationalObservatoryonEndofLifeCare,2011,p.14)

To better understand the dilemma posed by PAS requires an understanding of thedifferences between certain words that are frequently misunderstood: suicide, physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. Suicide is a major concern that has been extensively

researched by the Sociology of Health and Illness. Durkheim’s (1952) seminal works, forexample, are still fundamental referencesdue to their timeless topicality.Durkheimdefinedsuicideas“allcasesofdeathresultingdirectlyorindirectlyfromapositiveornegativeactofthe victim himself, which he knowswill produce this result” (Durkheim, 1952, p. 44). Thisdefinitionunderscoresthefactthatcommittingsuicideisthepersonalchoiceoftheparticipant.Suicide is classified intooneof fourcategoriesdependinguponwhether it isanexcessoradefectofintegrationorregulation.Durkheimconsidersintegrationthesocialinteractionofaperson and integration describes whether the person is integrated into the community orlivingmarginally.

Thedegreeofintegrationleadstotwospecificformsofsuicide.Selfishsuicideistheresultofindividuationthatistoostrong.Theparticipanthasnotintegratedintothecommunityverywellanddeath isnotperceivedas lacking in thegroup.Altruistic suicide is causedby littleindividuation. The victim perceives her death as a necessary sacrifice to protect thecommunity:thegeneralinterestprevailsovertheindividualinterest.

Contrary to integration, regulation refers to the social context within which the personevolves. Here, it is suitable to regard the person as evolving in a society that holds itsmemberstocertainstandards,standardswhoselevelofvividnesshaveadirectimpactonthenatureofthesuicidebeingperformed.Thesesuicidescantakeoneoftwoforms:

Anomicsuicideiscausedbecauseofadefectofregulation.Inthiscase,societyallowsextensivefreedomthatleadstoalossofreference.Fatalisticsuicideistheresultofexcessregulation.Inthiscase,societycreatesexcessivestandardsthatmustberespectedatthecostofexpressinganyformofpassion.

According to itsGreek etymology,euthanasiameansgooddeath. Amore contemporaryapproachtothewordregardslegitimizingeuthanasiaasaformofkillingintheparticipant’sown interest. The main difference between euthanasia and PAS depends on whether thepersoncomprehendstheactleadingtodeath.InthecaseofPAS,thepatientself-administersthelethaldrink;inthecaseofeuthanasia,itisthedoctorwhocarriesouttheacteventhoughthe decision is motivated by the same factors as PAS, to reduce the suffering of a patientfightinganincurablepathology.

Table12.1SynthesisofDurkheim’sclassificationofsuicide

Defect Excess

Integration Selfishsuicide AltruisticsuicideRegulation Anomicsuicide Fatalisticsuicide

ThisresearchisdedicatedtotheconceptofPASthatisdefinedinthisway:“Inphysician-assistedsuicidethepatientself-administersmedicationthatwasprescribedintentionallybyaphysician.”(Onwuteaka-Philipsen,2012,p.908).

PASintegratesfourcomponents:

Thecontextoftheendoflife:physicalsufferingordecliningstatewithoutanyhopeofimprovement.Thepersonmakingthedecisionisthepatient.Themeanstoendinglifearelethalproductsprovidedbythemedicalprofession.Thepersonwhocausestheactleadingtodeathisthepatient.

Veryfewcountriessanctionassistedsuicideand/oreuthanasia:“Euthanasiaandassistedsuicidehave been legal in the Netherlands and Belgium since 2002; assisted suicide has beenpermittedinSwitzerlandsince1948;Oregonsince1997;MontanaandWashingtonsince2009;and Vermont since 2013” (Gamondia et al., 2014, p. 127). Still, several specifications for itsimplementation exist. For instance, in 2014, Belgium extended the right to self-requestedeuthanasiatoterminallyillminorpatientswithoutaminimumagelimitation.Thetermswerereinforced,andinsistedthat“theissueofcapacityfordiscernment,whichshouldbeassessedcarefullybyamultidisciplinarypediatric team, includingaclinicalpsychologist.Theparentsmustagreetotherequest.”(Danetal.,2014,p.672).InSwitzerland,euthanasiaisnotlegalbut,since1942,theHelveticpenalcodeallowsfortheprovisionofPAS,butonlyiftherequestisnot for a selfish suicide. In the U.S., physician-assisted suicides are mainly organized byassociations thatgiveminorroles to themedicalprofession. InOregonandWashington, theDeathwithDignityActisdedicatedtoterminallyillpatientswhohavelessthansixmonthstolive.Theyareallowedtoendtheirownlivesinsteadofsuccumbingtotheirillnesses.Theycandosobytakingphysician-prescribedlethaldrugs.WhileanactdoesnotexistinMontanathatlegalizes PAS, in 2009 the state officially allowed patients to requestmedical aid in dying.Morerecently,in2013,thegovernmentofVermontadoptedthePatientChoiceandControlatEndof LifeAct.Oregon,Washington andVermont legalizedPASbut demand twomedicalopinionsbeforeallowingittobecarriedout.

Thesecountriesrepresentapioneeringapproachtowhatiswidelyregardedasasensitiveethical issue. Indeed,whilePAS isviewedbymanyasmedicine supporting the right todiewithdignity,theroleofthedoctorremainscomplex.Becausephysicianstakeoathstocarefortheir patients and cure them, it is difficult to assimilate the idea that providing themwithlethalproductsinanefforttoaidtheirsuicidesispartoftheirmedicalethicsingeneral,anddeontologyinparticular.Still,PASiscommonlyassociatedwiththehopeofagooddeath.

Death remains taboo inFrance.Anoverviewof the lawsconcerningendof life issues inFranceshowshowtheyhaveevolvedandrevealsPASasatimelyissuedespiteitsstatusasa

societaltaboo.In2002,apivotallawwaspassedthatintegratedthenotionofPatients’Rights.Itsimpactremainsparamountbecauseitallowspatientstoaccesstheirowncompletemedicalrecords and aims to reduce the informational gap between patient and doctor. In 2005, aspecific legal framework was designed that prohibits clandestine euthanasia. It integratespointsthatimprovepatients’rightsinmanagingtheirendoflife.Theynowhavetherighttoask for the cessation of treatment once they are made aware of the consequences of thisdecision,andtowriteadvancedirectivesthatarevalidforthreeyearsbutarerevocableatanytime. In 2012, the Sicard report contended that the 2005 act ismisunderstood anddoes notadequately resolve theproblem. Indeed,patients regard this act as away to legallyprotectdoctorsduringpalliativecare.Further,FrenchphysicianscanrejectadvancedirectivesbecauseoftheirdeepattachmenttotheHippocraticOath,whichistheircommitmenttocarefortheirpatients regardless of their health. They refuse to consider that prescribing life-endingmedicationisamedicalact,claimingthattheyhavenotbeentrainedtokill.

In 2015, the French government launched a project to restructure the 2005 law,with thegoalofmaintaining the illegalityofeuthanasiaandPAS.However,medical staffsnowhavetherighttodeeplyandcontinuouslysedatepatientsinphasesofterminalillnessuntiltheydie.Further,advancedirectivesarenowvalidindefinitelybutarerevisableandrevocableatanytime,andphysiciansareobligatedtorespectthem.

Thisstudyreliesontwomaintheoreticalstreams.First,theapproachtothisverysensitivetopicrelieduponPaulRicœur’sphilosophyof“littleethics”(Ricoeur,1992),whichelaboratesonethicalintention,orseekingagoodlife,asathree-folddesignthatisbuiltuponself-esteem,dialogicalstructureandfairinstitutions.Selfhoodisrelatedtobeingfaithfultooneself,willingtosticktoone’sinvolvementsorkeepingapromise.Thenotionofanendisseenasthewayitis articulated, whether each action owns an end or happiness is the ultimate end. Ricœuridentifiedaneedtodialectalizefundamentalquestionsinanefforttoseekcoalitionbetweenwhatappearstobethebestchoiceandtheonethatgoverns.Here,adimensionisreachedthatis both ethical and dialogical. Ricœur considered the concept of solicitude to be thefundamentalheartofethics.Seenasspontaneousbenevolence,solicitudeis“anintimateunionwith the flesh of feelings” (Ricœur, 1992). The suffering being is the one whose ability isdiminished. Solicitude comprises pity, compassion and sympathy. According to Ricœur,solicitude is thereasonwe forbid– it is therefusalofanothers’ indignity.Casuistryshouldthereforebeusedtomakeindividualizeddecisions.

Second, this study is based on Jean-Pierre Boutinet’s anthropology of projects (Boutinet,2005). The notion of project means to contemplate a goal, an intention, a prevision, ananticipation,anagenda,theends,aprogramme,aprevention,aprospective…projectisalsosynonymouswith theability to createandmanagechange. It is essentiallyaparadigm thatsymbolizesapre-existingandfugitivereality.Itislinkedtoanticipationbehavioursthatmakesomething happen. Time is central; it is the prospective to control, the potential time to

dominate,thefuturetimetoexploreanddomesticate.Thenotionofprojectfocusesonthewayindividuals,groupsandculturesexperiencetime.

Theconceptofprojectonlyrevealsitselfthroughrealizedintention.Yet,bybeingrealized,itstopsexistingassuch.Sotheconceptofprojectisdedicatedtolivinginadiscontinuouswaysinceitdestroysitselfbythefactthatithappens.PASispartofwhatBoutinetcalls“existentialsituationswith a project”which appear at different stages of life. If we consider PAS as aproject,thenitcorrespondstoanykindofprojectwithinitsspecificcontext:

Itsearchesalostmeaningandtriestobemeaningful.Itcoincideswiththegrowingindividualisationofculture.Itrepresentsthemythfortransparency.Itstandsforthecontributingsymptomoftheindividualorthegroup.Itisawayofexpressingadefenceagainstfundamentalanxietieslinkedtononsense.Itaimstocreateanew“sociallink.”(Boutinet,2005,pp.364–365)

PASistwofold.Ontheonehanditisstilltaboo.Itisalsodifficulttofindpeopletointerviewaboutthetopic.Ontheotherhand,mostpeoplewhoadmittotheirdesireforPASbelongtomediatizedassociations.Thisbiasestheselectionofinformants.Toovercometheseobstacles,an exploratory and qualitative study was conducted using a convenience sample ofinformants. One of the co-authors of this chapter previously worked as a communicationsmanager inaFrenchpublichospital,whichaffordedaccess to threeprofilesof respondents:experts,sickpeopleandrelatives.

Thedecisionwasmadetoconduct interviewswithintheseprofilesbecause theyechothecoreparticipantsinthedoctor/patientrelationship.Wethereforeconducted12semi-structuredinterviewsduringthefirstfourmonthsof2015:

The first group of respondents consisted of four French medical experts: twophysicians, a nurse and a sociologist. They were U.S. trained in Clinical Ethicsmethodology in the early 2000s but all currently belong to different Frenchmedicalethicscommittees.The second group of respondentswas composed of four sick peoplewho had beendiagnosedwithincurablediseases.Thethirdgroupofrespondentswascomprisedoffourpeoplewhohadrecentlylostasickrelativetoasevereillness.

Oneinterviewguideperintervieweeprofilewaselaborated(seeTable12.2).Thegoalwastoobtain insights into the self-perceived value of life, the dis-symmetry in the patient/doctorrelationship,thepatients’families’livedexperiences,andtheimpactPAShasonthemourningprocess.Questionsarose that required theexplorationof individuals’ownethics in termsof

healthandcare.Howaretheyexperiencedindifferentsituations?Whatdotheyexpressaboutthem?

Whenbioethicsexpertswereinterviewed,theyrevealedtheirdeeptrust inpalliativecarewhenitisprogressivelyimplementedandisinagreementwithbothpatientandrelative.

Thenurseexplainedhowdeeplyshebelievesinthevalueofpalliativecareasitislinkedtodeontology:

ThepalliativecarereliesonthehumanistvaluesofMedicinesuchassupportingandaccompanyingourpatients.Thegoalistorelievephysicalandmoralpain.Whenpalliativecareiswellimplemented,theneuthanasiaandmedicallyassistedsuicidearenolongerrelevant.Acuringhandcannotbeakillinghand!

The collegial thinking around clinical ethics helps these professionals experience decisionmaking that is better aligned than before with their professional deontology. Sharing thedeliberation process as well as the resulting decision appeases the situation. The generalpractitioner expounded on the collegial committee as a regular help in the face of difficultmomentsinhispractice:

It helps us think about the clinical casewith different points of view, and itmakes us feel as good as possiblewith thedecisionswemake.Beforejoiningthiscommittee,IwascontinuouslywonderingifIhadtakentherightdecisionandwherewas the frontier between the care, the cure, the relief and the death. And I had nobody to share these thoughts with.Whereas,now,Ifeelpeaceful.

Similarly,thesociologistrelayedthefactthateachexpertcansharedifferentargumentsandstatetheirpositionsonagloballevel:“Wearetogethertodefendthepatient’svoiceandmakeitheardthroughthelensesofourmultidisciplinarystatements,infullrespectofthelaw.”

Interviewswiththesickilluminatedtheirfearofagony…withoutactuallynamingit.Whattheydescribedwasthefearofalong,slow,sufferingdeathlastingseveraldays,severalweeksor even several months. Surprisingly, they did not express strong wills to maintain theirdignity;what theymainlyexpressedwas their fearofbeing inagony, especially thosewhohadwitnessedatleastoncethelossofrelativesorfriends.Thesickaredeeplytraumatizedbythe narratives they have heard in the past or during their illnesses. Theway the dying areportrayed in the media these days does nothing to provide reassurance. All told, the sickcannothelpimaginingtheendoftheirlivesassimilartothosetestimonies.

Ophelia constantly referred to her familial experiences when projecting herself into herownendoflife:

IhopeIwillbeabletodecidebymyselfwhentheendgetscloser.Iremembermymotherwhenshewasdying…Itookthedecision towelcomeherathomeand Iwas theonewhotookcareofher.Andourdoctorhelpedher…He lethergo…Idon’tknowhow,butweallagreedthatshewasenduringunbearablepain.Shewassoweak.Soitwasverysad,butitwasfine.Itisimportanttoplanone’sveryend.Idon’twanttoseemyselfgetweakerandweaker.IamconvincedthatpalliativecareshouldbethebestsolutionbutIhopeitwon’tlasttoolong.Longpainisatorture.I’veheardaboutassistedsuicide…Forreligiousreasons,Ishouldbeagainstsuchpractices.Yet,inreality,IthinkIamcapabletodoitformyself.Iwouldregrettohavereachedthatextremedecision,butIthinkIcouldchooseit.Forethicalreasons,I’magainstitbecauseIseeitasaveryexpensivebusiness.

Adeath planhelps eliminate the uncertainty of theway inwhich a personmight die. Ithelpsthedyinggainconfidencethattheyhavecontrolofthisprocess,andessentiallyallowsapersonultimatecontroloverwhatisnormallyanunpredictablenaturalphenomenon.Still,itwasobservedthatthedyingintendedtolettheirrelativeschoosetobepresentonthedayoftheirdeaths–ornot.Allof themexpressed that theywould ratherbe surroundedby theirrelatives, but none of themwanted to impose their own choices on their loved ones. Zackexplained that having a death plan inmind, such as PAS, reinforced his sensation of beingaliveandinbettercontrolofthepotentialevolutionofhisillness.

Sandraexpressedherawarenessofherownmortality:

I’verealisedthatI’vebeenclosetodeathseveraltimes,andIknowthatmyrelativesareawareofmyownvulnerability.Butwehavenevertalkedaboutmydeath,aboutthewayIwanttodie.Theydon’tknow.Yet,Ifearloneliness,Iamscaredtodiealoneandtosuffer.WhatIwouldlikeisapeacefulpathtowarddeath.IplantochoosemedicallyassistedsuicidebecauseIwanttobefreetodecidehowandwhenIamgoingtodie.IfIcananticipate,thenIcancontrolthemomentofmydeath.IalreadyknowhowtoaccessmedicallyassistedsuicideinSwitzerland…Itcostsaround8000euros,butIcansavemoneyforit.IalsofoundouthowtogetlethalmedicinesinotherEuropeancountriesandhowtoself-administratethemwheneverIfeelready.ButIhopeitwillbelegalizedinFrancebeforeIneeditbecauseIdon’twanttofeelstressedorguiltybecauseofclandestinepractices.

Indeed, “the phenomenon of suicide tourism unique to Switzerland can result inamendment or supplementary guidelines to existing regulations in foreign countries.”(Gauthieretal.,2014,p.6).

The notion of vulnerability raised in the latter paragraph by Sandra echoes Mary’sexperience:

I feel vulnerablebecause I feel fragile…My fragilitymakesmevulnerable! I believe inGod, I’mcatholic, and I believe ineternity.Tome,deathisnotanendbutapassagetowardanotherformoflife.IwasbornaftertheSecondWorldWarandmydadusedtotelluswhathehadbeenthroughasaprisonerinGermany.AndsinceIwasalittlegirlIassociatethenotionofdeathtothenotionofcourage.IthinkitsoundsunusualbutIcan’thelpwonderingifIwillbecourageousenoughtofaceit.ThisiswhyI’mdividedaboutassistedsuicide.Iexperiencedseveralweeksofcomatwentyyearsago,andIrememberthat,whenIwokeup,thepainwassounbearablethatIkeptaskingtodie.AndIknow,forsure,thatIwouldhavetakenlethaldrugsmyselfifithadbeenpossiblethen.ButIfeelperturbedbecauseitisattheoppositeofmyreligiousfaith…!

Interviewswithrelativesrevealedtheirambivalencetowardthedeathsofothers.Theyallexpressedastrongambiguitywhenitcametotheirexpectationsabouttheexperience.Ononehand they understood and shared the fear of agony expressed by their sick relatives andexpressed their beliefs that PAS is a peaceful solution to preparing for one’s death.On theotherhand,asrelatives,theytendedtoconsiderPAStobearatherviolentalternativetoturntothemselves.Itwashardforthemtoimaginethecontext,themomentofthePAS.Theideaof it sounded so strange and improbable that they felt perplexedby it.They allmentionedtheirfearsthattheymaynotbecourageousenoughtocarefortheirdyingrelativesuntiltheveryend.Whatisstrikingisthattheyallfocusedonthe“suicide”partofPASandnotatallonthe “assisted” part. Faustina referred first to her sister’s suicide attempt when they wereyounger and then to her uncle’s long and impressive agony. Violence occurred in different

forms in both cases, and both were traumatising on several levels – to the individualparticipants,totheaffectedfamilyandtothesurroundinggroupofrelativesandfriends.Pastexperiencesstillinfluencedherattitudeandexplainedherambivalence.Oliviaadmittedthat,inhereyes,“Assistedsuicide isasuicidehardtosupportforthecaretakers.Theykeeptheirhandsclean,buttheirconsciousissurelyheavierasyearsgoby.”

Relativesweretheoneswhoexpressedthemostabouttheconsumptionaspectsofdeathingeneral, andabout assisted suicide inparticular.Emily explained that shewent to a funeralhometogetanideaoftheprices:

All in all, funerals cost around 8000 euros if you don’t want to take the bottom-of-the-range … Funerals are a terriblebusiness, themarket iswide!And if you travel to Switzerland todieof assisted suicide, thenyou canat leastdouble theprice.

The fieldwork undertaken for this study shed light on the interpersonal relationshipsbetweendoctors andpatients, andhighlighted themajor roles playedbypatients’ relatives:“wheretrustandconsciousnessmeet.”Twoconsciousstatesexisthere:oneispersonalandtheotherisprofessional.Bothareatthecrossroadsofmedicalandsocialethicsandbothfeatureaform of vulnerability. Though it is less mediatized, it is clear that professionals can alsoexperiencevulnerability.Patientsoftensee theirdoctorsassuperhumanandexpectmiraclesfromthem.Yetdoctorsarestillvulnerableandtheparadoxbetweenvulnerabilityandpowerremainsthecentralreflexion,addingtoitthenotionsoftaboo,identity,authorityandtrust.AsRicœursaid,“tobelievethatIcanisalreadytobecapable”(Ricoeur,2001,p.90).

Recognizing that each individual is important reduces the initial dissymmetry in therelationship,hencesupportingthecare.

AllrespondentssawthreeadvantagestoPAScomparedtotraditionaleuthanasia:

Thelethalactionisthepatient’sdeliberatechoiceandgesture.Thephysicalpresenceofthedoctorguarantiestherequiredprofessionalassistance.Theactionofputtinganendtoone’slifeistakenfromapurelyethicalpointofview,so is thusmuch less constraining andmore similar to the decision to give up futiletreatments.

These results also show the importance of parenthood in the PAS project. The informantsclearlystated theirvisionsof theirdeaths tobedifferentdependingonwhetherornot theyhad children. PAS was seen as a way to remain autonomous until the very end; therebyprohibiting the alternate possibility of children and relatives being present but powerlessduringone’slongandslowdeath.However,thenaggingquestionremained:“Howdoesoneknowwhenitistherightmoment,neithertooearlynorlatetocommitassistedsuicide?”

Another striking result of this processwas the patients’ fear of agony. Because being inagonyisseenastheworstwaytodie,peopleconsiderPASastheoneandonlyalternativeto

dyingaslowdeath.Thisistrueforpeoplewhohaveseenandaccompaniedrelativesthroughagonybeforedeath,butitisalsotrueforpeoplewhohaveneverwitnesseditbutareawareofitduetosocialrepresentations.Forallrespondents,deathwasnotsofrighteningastheendoflifeitself–itsduration,thequalityoflifeduringthatperiodoftime,thedegreeofsuffering,theharshnessoftreatmentsandcare,thedignityorthelossofit,andtheloneliness.

Allinall,somerespondentsdidindeedanticipatetheirdeathsusingPASasprojects.Theyexplained that they consider death to be part of life. Life plans and death plans are thenintrinsically linked. And this link occurs when the feeling of social taboo is the weakest.Indeed,deathisthenseenasapartoflife,anditseemsnormal,oratleastdoesnotseemsoshocking,toanticipateitwhenitisstillwellintothefuture.However,partofourrespondentscouldnotmentallyassociatedeathwithlife.Forthem,theassociatedtaboowasreallystronganddeeplyrootedintheirpastexperiences.

ThequalitativestudyrevealedthatPAShasthreecomponents:

Deathappearstobethepatient’schoice;sheknowsthatthepatientisinformedabouttheirreversibilityofhersituationandwillnotonlyrefusefutiletreatments,butwilldosountiltheveryend.The doctor’s role should first be limited to informing the patient and providing herwiththemeans toendher lifeandsecondtoassistingher in thesteps leadinguptodeathsoithappenswithcertaintyandwithoutpain.Themainmotivationthatmakesthedoctor’sinterventionlegitimateandcompulsoryisarigorousandpitilesssenseofdutytorespectthepatient’swillandautonomy.

Contemporaneousdebatehasfocusedonthe issueofPASas it isrelates toeuthanasia.Twomajor arguments in favour of these issues supports their legislation. The first demands thepatient’sautonomyandjudgesthatanyindividualhastherighttocontrol,asmuchaspossible,thecourseofhis/herowndeath.Theotherreliesonwhatiscalledpityornonmaleficence.Itstatesthatanyindividualhastherighttoproceedtoone’sowndeathwhennosolutionexiststhatcanavoidorweakenone’sfatalsufferings.

TwocounterargumentsopposethelegislationofPAS.Thefirstargumentstatesthattheactofkillingsomeoneismorallywrong.Hence,itiswrongfordoctorstofacilitateorcarryitout.Thesecondstatesthat legislatingPASmakestheactofkillingtooeasy,andleadssocietytoinvoluntary murder. The perceived peril is that doctors may prescribe suicide for biasedreasons, avidity, or impatience or frustration when a patient has reached a medicallyunresponsivestate.AllowingPASaffordsadangerousmodelforpeoplewhofeelvulnerablebutnotyet concerned that theirdisease is incurable. In societieswhereelders, thedisabled,racialminorities andmanyothersgroupsare still strongly stigma-tizedandwhere financialconcernsaregreatinhealthcaresystemsthatdonotguarantyequityinaccesstocare,death

may be imposed upon these vulnerable individuals, ostensibly by choice but not trulyvoluntary. In such circumstances, suicide would become a social expectation or even animperative.

Arguments in favour of the PAS/euthanasia debate ask for more comprehensiveexamination of suicide as a way to reduce psychopathologies and provide enhancedinformation about these kinds of situations. By unveiling ancient and clandestine practices,legislationcouldguarantyauthenticityinpatients’choicesandrigorouscontrolintheprocess.

SomesaythatmedicalinnovationprovideshopeforpainmanagementandthatPASwillnolonger be relevant. Others say that modern societies are experiencing a transition fromChristian values regarding death to more stoic attitudes that enable individuals to wiselycontroltheirlivesuntiltheveryend.

Studying PAS as a project corresponds to studying its structure. Results show that thisproject is actually a quest for an inaccessible ideal. In concertwithBoutinet’swork, itwasfoundthatPAScontainsthreedimensions:vital,psychologicalandexistential.PASappearstobeasolutiontothesearchforone’sownexistenceasananswertoavertingfate.Itisawaytocopewithsocialtabooandvulnerability.

The generalizeduse ofClinical Ethicsmethodology is recommended. It originated in theUS, and is now applied in several hospitals around the world via Clinical Ethics Centers(Chicago, Paris, Toronto, etc.) Thismethodology is used as a tool to helpmedical decision-makingwhen the solution to a sensitive situation cannot gain consensus among a team ofpractitioners, or when practitioners’ and patients’ points of view differ. Amultidisciplinaryteamof experts in the field of health practiceClinical Ethics by giving consultative advice.Practitionersand/orpatientsand/orrelativescanaskforthisguidancewhentherelationshipbetween doctor and patient reaches an impasse. The goal is to then craft arguments thatrequireconsiderationbasedonthecircumstancesandtheindividualcontext,andtoultimatelyreunitedoctors,patientsandrelatives:

The context of a case is determined bymultiple social factors, including (among others) the dynamics of the family, thelivingsituationofthepatient,andculturalandreligiousbeliefsofthepatientandthefamily.Inaddition,itisimportanttobe aware ofwho themajor caregivers are for the patient and how the variousmedical choiceswill affect the caregivers’abilitytoprovidecare.

(Schumann,2008,p.40)

ClinicalEthicspresentpioneering thoughtregarding thepracticeofmedicine. Itsetymologycomes from theGreekklinikos,at the sickbed,which dictates thatmedical care shouldnotonlybepracticedusingthedoctor’stheoreticalknowledgebutalsobyobservingone’spatient.ButClinicalEthicsisnotjustaquestionofwords.Itchallengestheneedtojudgeeachuniquecase on its own basis. According to Jonsen, Siegler and Winslade (2002), this casuisticmethodologyshouldbeemployedwhenaconflictoccursbetween twoormoreof the fourintermediary principles of respect: Beneficence andNonmaleficence,Autonomy and Justice.

The teamofexpertshas toanswera setofprecisequestions through the lensesof the fourethicalprinciples.First, theprincipleofnonmaleficenceexplores themedical indicationsandasks how the patient can benefit from medical and nursing care, and how harm can beavoided in balance with the benefits of treatment. Second, the principle of respect forautonomy is linked to the patient’s ability to make reasoned and informed choices, andinvestigateswhether the patient’s right to choose is being respected to the greatest extentpossiblewithinethicsandthelaw.Third,theprincipleofbeneficenceconsidersqualityoflifebyaskingwhetherthepatient’spresentor futurecondition issuchthathisorhercontinuedlifemightbejudgedundesirable.Last,contextualfeaturesareexaminedthroughtheprincipleof justice inorder to fairlydistributebenefits, risksandcosts, and toensure thatpatients insimilarpositionsbetreatedinsimilarmanners.

The limitations of this study are linked to thedifficulty of the field and the fact that thesubjectisinherentlytaboo.Conversely,exploratoryandqualitativestudieswouldgainmuchinsight if extended into several different cultures and countries and contained a mix ofqualitativeandquantitativeinvestigations.

Methodologicalcontributionsshowhowimportant it is tocross threedifferentprofilesofparticipantswhoare linkedby the same challenges.Here the fieldworkdemanded that theopinionsof theparticipants in each categorywhowere concernedwithPASbe considered,regardless of the stage of the process they were in. In a way, the choice of informantsreplicated the trio that constitutes the heart of the relationship between health and care:doctors,patientsandtheirrelatives.

Methodological contributions aid Social Marketing in understanding the need forpedagogical information that concerns health practitioners and the general public. Everycitizen needs to know what PAS is and what it is not. All voices deserve to be heard.Practitioners need to sayhowdifficult it is for them froma deontological point of view tohavepatientsaskthemfordeath.Thesickneedtoexpresstheiranxieties,fearsofagony,andneedtobeinformedandreassuredthattheiranguishandpainwillbeconsideredandrelievedinthecareprocess.

Fromatheoreticalstandpoint,itisapparentthatDurkheim’sclassificationofsuicideisbothmodern and eternal; revealing that mixing theories from different eras to approach thetimelessandeternaltopicofdeathcanberichandenlightening.

New insightsmight be gained by longitudinally and interculturally extending this study.Light might further be shed on this topic by extending it to studies that compare it withresearchfromotherfundamentalmomentsinlife likebirth.Indeed,birthisrelatedtomanybioethicalfeatures:abortion,medicallyassistedprocreation,etc.Recentinnovationsinmedicalresearchpromisenewinroadsintothisfieldthatwillsurelyposefurtherethicaldebatesandquestions. For example, deciphering the human genome can inform physicians aboutwhattheyarelookingforinthemoment,butalsoaboutfuturelatentchronic,degenerativeorfatal

diseases.Thisinnovationinthefieldofmedicalresearchleadstoanethicalstandoffthatbegsananswertothequestionofwhattodo:totellornottotell?WhatkindoflifeisliveableonceanindividualknowsthespecificswordofDamoclesthatrestsinhishand?

Table12.2Informationoninformants

References

Baude-Heymans, C., Hannicq, M., Hélin, V.,Wouters, B. (2001) L’avis des consommateurs?[Consumers’opinion?].Revue internationale de soins palliatifs [InternationalReview ofPalliativeCare]16(3).pp.31–36.

Boutinet, J. P. (2005) Anthropologie du projet [Anthropology of projects]. Paris: PressesUniversitairesdeFrance.

Dan,B., Fonteyne,C.,ClémentDeCléty, S. (2014)Self-requestedeuthanasia for children inBelgium,TheLancet.383(9918).pp.671–672.

Durkheim,E.(1897)[1952]Suicide:astudyinsociology.London:RoutledgeandKeganPaul.FrenchNationalAssembly(2015)Société:nouveauxdroitsenfaveurdespersonnesenfinde

vie[Society:newrightsinfavorofthepeopleattheendoflife].Availablefrom:www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/dossiers/nouveaux_droits_personnes_fin_vie.asp.

[Accessed:20thMay2015].FrenchNationalObservatoryOnendoflifecare(2011)Findevie:unpremierétatdeslieux

[Endoflife:afirstreport].Availablefrom:www.onfv.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Rapport_ONFV_2011.pdf.

Gamondi,C.,Borasio,G.D.,Limoni,C.,Preston,N.,Payne,S. (2014)Legalisationofassistedsuicide:asafeguardtoeuthanasia?TheLancet.384(9938).p.127.

Gauthier,S.,Mausbach, J.,Reisch,T.,Bartsch,C. (2014)Suicide tourism:apilot studyon theSwiss phenomenon, Journal of Medical Ethics. Published online August 20, 2014, doi:10.1136/medethics-2014-102091.

Jonsen, A.R., Siegler,M. andWinslade,W. J. (2002)Clinical ethics: a practical approach toethicaldecisionsinclinicalmedicine.5thEd.NewYork:McGraw-Hill.

Mallet,D.andJacquemin,D.(2013)LerapportSicard:uneétapeaumilieudugué[TheSicardreport:amidstreamstage],Revued’éthiqueetde théologiemorale [JournalofEhicsandMoralTheology].(274).pp.53–90.

Marchesini,S.M. (2012)Lesuicideassisté: lanouvelle ‘peinedemort’ induitepar la sociétécontemporaine?Une analyse à la frontière entredroit et psychanalyse [Assisted suicide:the new ‘death penalty’ induced by the contemporaneous society? An analysis at thefrontierbetweenlawandpsychoanalysis],Étudessurlamort[DeathStudies](141).pp.37–53.

Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B., Brinkman-Stoppelenburg, A., Penning, C., de Jong-krul, G., vanDelden, J., van derHeide,A. (2012) Trends in end-of-life practices before and after theenactmentoftheeuthanasialawintheNetherlandsfrom1990to2010:arepeatedcross-sectionalsurvey.TheLancet.380(9845).pp.908–915.

Ricoeur,P.(1992)Oneselfasanother.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.Ricoeur,P.(2001)LejusteII[TheJustII].Paris:Éd.Esprit.Schumann, J. H. and Alfandre, D. (2008) Clinical ethical decision making: the four topics

approach.SeminarsinMedicalPractice.(11).pp.36–42.Sicard,D.(2012)Pensersolidairementlafindevie[Thinkingoftheend-of-lifeintermsof

solidarity].ReporttoFrançoisHolland,PresidentoftheFrenchRepublic,bytheCommissiononreflectionontheEnd-of-LifeinFrance.Availablefrom:www.elysee.fr/assets/pdf/Rapport-de-la-commission-de-reflexion-sur-la-fin-devie-en-France.pdf.

Steck, N., Egger, M., Maesen, M., Reisch, T., Zwahlen, M. (2013) Euthanasia and AssistedSuicide in Selected European Countries and US States: Systematic Literature Review.MedicalCare.51(10).pp.938–944.

World Health Organization. Preamble to the Constitution of the WHO as adopted by theInternationalHealthConference,NewYork,June19–22,1946;signedonJuly22,1946bytherepresentativesof61States.OfficialRecordsoftheWorldHealthOrganization,no.2,

p.100andenteredintoforceonApril7,1948.

13Dispatchesfromthedying

Pathographiesasalensonconsumptioninextremis

DarachTurleyandStephanieO’Donohoe

Introduction

For Bury (2001:264), ‘universal, cultural and individual levels of human existence are tiedtogetherwithnarrativethreads’.Consumerresearchershavelongacknowledgedthis,drawingconsumption stories from interviews, comics and novels, and personal introspection (Belk1987;Brown1995;Gould1991).

Foralltheirsalienceineverydaylife,storiesacquireparticularurgencyinextremis.Seriousillnessandimpendingdeatharecommonyetextraordinarycircumstancesthatcausephysicaland emotional havoc, trailing ‘narrative wreckage’ (Frank 1995) in their wake. Individualsexperiencing such adversity ‘often feel a pressing need to re-examine and re-fashion theirpersonalnarratives’(Bury2001:264).Tellingstoriesofillnessandloss,Franksuggests,isawayof reclaiming agency, transforming fate into experience, and crystal-lising or rebuildingdisruptedidentityprojects.

Many such stories are crafted in conversation, and the consumer research literature hasbeen enriched by studies drawing on interview accounts with people facing serious, life-limiting or life-threatening illness (Kates 2001; Pavia and Mason 2005; Botti et al. 2009;Dunnettetal.2011;Tianetal.2014).Priortoundertakinginterviewswithwomenaboutbreastcancer,PaviaandMason(2004)readpublishedmemoirsastheysoughttoorientthemselvestothissensitive topic. In thischapter,memoirsof illnessanddyingmovefromthissupportive,orienting,roletocentrestage,justastheyappeartohavedoneinthepublishingindustry.

Pathographies are a form of popular culture, a genre of autobiographical literaturedescribing an author’s experiences in facing or witnessing serious or terminal illness, orgrieving for the loss of a lovedone (Hawkins 1999). For all thedebate about the extent towhich modern society is death-denying (Aries 1981; Walter 1991), there appears to beconsiderableconsumerdemandformusingsonmortality;Lane(2000)notesthat‘[t]hedeath

memoirwas theculturalandpublishingsensationof thepastdecade’.ChallengingviewsofdeathastabooinWesternculture,O’Neill(2012)asks‘…howmanytimesdoesataboohaveto be broken beforewe stop calling it a taboo? Becausewriting about one’s ownmalady,especially if it’s cancer, is actuallypretty commonplace thesedays’.O’Neill (2012)attributesthe contemporary popularity of pathographies to amorbid, disease-obsessed and titillation-seekingculture;othersattributeittomoreprofoundreaderconcernsandpointtohundredsoflettersthankingauthorsfortheconsolationorinspirationoftheirwordsandforsharingtheirownstoriesofillness,dyingandloss(Small1998;Armstrong-Coster2012;Berman2012).

Illnessnarrativesnotonlyofferaccountsofhowdiseaseaffects individual lives; theymayalso offer important insights into ‘the links between identity, experience and “latemodern”cultures’(Bury2001).Suchlinksarecentraltotheconsumerculturetheoryagenda(Arnouldand Thompson 2005). Clearly, the authors of pathographies do not set out to foregroundconsumption issues. Nonetheless, we suggest that deep and detailed accounts of serious orterminalillness,particularlywhenfurnishedbyaccomplishedwriters,offerapowerfullensforexamining the role of consumption and consumer culture in extremis – how consumers indistressingcircumstancesuseanarrayofgoodsandservicesintheirstruggletomakesenseofillness and loss.As extended, uninterrupted, narratives of illness trajectories, these accountsalsominimisetheriskofresearcher-ledfragmentation(Gilbert2002).

In this chapter, we highlight the contribution of pathographies to understandings ofconsumption in extremis, using as exemplars two influential cancer memoirs written byBritish journalists. We suggest that these authors’ journalistic training, coupled with theheightened sensitivity bestowedon themby illness anddecline, suffuse theirmemoirswithdeepinsightsintotheinterplaybetweenmarketsandmortality.

Apathographicallensonmortalityandthemarketplace

1998sawthepublicationoftwobooksthatbeganasnewspapercolumnsbywell-established,popular, British journalists documenting their responses to progressively more pessimisticcancer diagnoses. Offering insights into lives lived in the knowledge of possible and thencertainimpendingdeath,theirdevastatingaccountsareleavenedwithwitandgallowshumor.RuthPicardie’sBeforeISayGoodbye (1998),publishedposthumously,incorporatesherseveneponymousnewspapercolumnsdocumenting the tenmonthsbeforeshediedatage33;herbreastcancer,initiallymisdiagnosed(Boseley2011),spreadtoherliver,lungsandbraindespiteseveralroundsofchemotherapy.ItalsoincludesemailcorrespondencebetweenPicardieandasmallgroupoffriends,postscriptsfromherhusbandandsister,andaselectionoflettersfromreaders of her column. John Diamond’s C: Because Cowards Get Cancer Too (1998) bears

witnesstoathroatcancerdiagnosisinhismid-forties,leadingtochemotherapy,radiotherapyand surgery that cost him his tongue, his voice-box, and his broadcasting career as hisprognosisplummetedfroma92percentchanceofsurvivaltoimminentdeath.Occasionallyincorporating extracts from his newspaper columns, Diamond offers amore detailed, sole-authoredaccountofdeclininghealththandoesPicardie.

Thepublicationofthesetwobookswasthepointwhere‘cancercommentarytookoff’ inBritain(O’Neill2012).Indeed,journalismprofessor,formernewspapereditorandcolleagueofDiamond,RoyGreenslade(2011),arguesthat‘[t]heirwork,andtheresultingpublicitythatitgenerated,waspraisedbydoctorsandresultedinenormous,andpositive,feedbackfromthepublic’. As discussed below, many of the experiences recounted by Picardie and Diamondwere inextricably linked to themarketplace. Some of their stories resonatewith Pavia andMason’s (2005) accountof consumerswith cancer, but otherswerewritten as consumersofcancertreatment.

Consumingtreatment:contrastingpathsthroughthehealthcaresystem

BothPicardieandDiamondfoundthemselvesnavigatingtheUKhealthcaresystem,four-fifthsof which is run under the auspices of the NHS, the world’s largest publicly funded healthservice(NuffieldFoundation2014).NHStreatmentis,withfewexceptions,offeredfreeatthepointofusetoallpermanentUKresidents (NHS2013). Itcoexistswithaprivatehealthcaresystemwhichisgenerallyaccessedbyindividualsthroughprivatehealth insuranceschemes,although individualsmaypaydirectly forparticular consultationsor treatments. Inpractice,the relationship between public and private health provision is complex, with personnel,equipmentandbuildingsoftensharedbetweenthetwosystems.

AlthoughbothPicardieandDiamondwerewritingaroundthesametimeandinthesamemetropolis (London), they present us with contrasting health-consumption profiles as eachauthortookadifferentpaththroughtheUKhealthcaresystem.Inmarketpositioningterms,the profiles of our two authors could be plotted on the twin axes of public versus privatehealthcare,andorthodoxversusalternativemedicalregimes.

JohnDiamond remains resolutely in theorthodox/privatequadrant formost ofhis book.Hisdistasteforallthingscomplementarywasdueprimarilytohisconvictionthat,inscientificterms,theysimplydonotstandup,aconvictionreinforcedbyabriefandfutiledalliancewithan alternative practitioner as a 30-something bon-vivant suffering the effects of excessivetobaccoandjunkfoodintake.Electricity-disruptingallergenswereprescribedonthebasisoftestswhichDiamondidentifiedasfundamentallyflawed.Bythetimehecomestowritehis

memoir, he is in his mid-forties, diagnosed with throat cancer and pinning his hoped-forbodilysurvivalunapologeticallytothemastoforthodoxmedicine.Hisstanceonalternativemedicineatthispointis‘roughlywherethePopestandsongettingdrunkonthecommunionwineandpullingacoupleofnuns’(p.98).

Diamond’schoiceofprivateoverpublichealthcaresystemseemstohavebeenamatterofpragmatism over principle. He recounts that his father’s ‘political puritanism didn’t quiteapproveofindividualhomeownership’,soregardlessofhisparents’professionaloccupations,‘I and both my brothers were born on council estates1 and lived in them until we wereteenagers’(p.47).Despiteenjoyingasuccessfulmediacareerandmarryingintoawealthyandwell-connected family, Diamond retained a sense of solidarity with working classcommunities. He had seen his father wait two years for an angiogram with the NationalHealthServicebeforepayingforitprivately.Onthedayhisfatherpaidup,DiamondtookoutBUPA(privatehealth)insuranceforhimself.Thetrajectoryofhisbookisoneofanambivalentprivatepatientdealingwithanarrayofconsultants,surgeons,therapistsandnursesasapaid-upBUPAmember.This isaworldwheredroppingconsultants’names is the stuffofhealthconsumptionentréesandsocialcapital.Oneofthenotablefeaturesof‘goingprivate’forhimis that this system shrouds the whole process of disease and dying with the architectural,sartorialanddecorativeveneerofnon-medicalisedeverydaylife.Consultantssportpin-stripedsuits,medicswear ‘CalvinKlein labcoats’andnursespose inair-hostessuniforms.Hospitalroom fittings and ersatz framed posters remind him of a hotel chain. Specialists show apracticedabilitytodissemble,mollifyingclientsbypasteurisingtheir‘rooms’ofanydistastefulordisturbingcontaminants.Surgeriesmorphintosittingroomsorstudies:

GodforbidthataHarleyStreetconsultingroomshouldlooklikeadoctor’soffice;theyarelaidoutasold-fashioneddrawingrooms or studies: a leather-topped oak desk, a couple of button-back chairs, some anodyne reproduction paintings…Andthereinthecorner,hidingaway,willbeatrayfullofstainless-steelspeculaoradiscreetX-raylightboxoratastefullittleultrasoundmachine,asoftenornotstoredbehinddoorsinthewaytheystoreTVsetsintheHomeCounties.

(p.20)

Thesuppressionandshroudingofmedicalcuesmaybeinterpretedasmaterialsupportforthedeath denial thesis, but theremaybe a simpler,market-driven explanation:many surgeonsandconsultantsworkinbothprivateandpublicclinics,sothefeeschargedtoprivatepatientscannotbejustifiedbyexpertisealone.Framingprivatemedicaltreatmentasanelite,discreetprofessionalservicerecastspatientsasdiscerningclientswho‘getwhattheypayfor’.

Inanycase,Diamondsubmitstothisdissemblinganddomesticatedmise-en-scèneinreturnfor prompt access to the world of ‘I need it now’ medical ministration. He admits toharbouring lingering reservations about it, especially ‘if anythingwentwrong’, since in hisviewprivateinstitutionscome‘secondbestinextremis’.Occasionally,hefindshimselfbackinthe public health domain, highlighting the tensions involved for patients who straddle orindeedcross thedelicate fault linesbetweenbothhealthprovisionsectors.Oneevening, for

example, he found himself – a private patient – in a publicward in St. George’s hospital,having waited all day to be admitted for the removal of a cyst. Reflecting on his irateinteractionwithastaffnurse,henotes:

…Ifeelsocrassdoingthe‘WhatthehelldoIpayBUPAallthatmoneyforifIcan’thavearoomtomyself ’shtickinfrontofarowofpatientswhohaveprobablybeenhangingaroundformonthsonwaiting listshopingtogetabed in theNHSlottery.Butangerovercamecrassness…

(Diamond1998:30)

In contrast to the studied argumentation ofDiamond’s discourses onmedics andmedicine,Picardie’sallusionstoherillnessandsymptomstendtobebriefandoftenbrutal.Bythetimeshe came to write the first e-mail reproduced in her book, she was already receivingchemotherapy for breast cancer, misdiag-nosed two years previously (Boseley 2011). So, asomewhat jaundiced view of orthodoxmedicine is hardly surprising, as is her openness tocomplementaryalternatives.Fromtheoutsetsheleavesbothfriendsandreadersinnodoubtthatsheis‘goingpublic’.Overtime,however,asizeableportionofthesavingsaccruingfromthis principled stand is spent on alternative therapies. Far from being an unquestioningevangelicaldevotee,Picardieacknowledges thatheterodox regimesboast their fair shareofquackery, snake-oilpeddlers,and ‘moneygrabbingwankers’.Herdescriptionsofencounterswith alternative practitioners and their adherents are shot through with humour, wryscepticism,irreverence,andfulsomeadmissionsthatshe’s‘clutchingatstraws’,admissionsthatbegthequestionofwhysheengagedwiththiscollectionofcomplementarypurveyorsforsolong. Patronage of particular complementary therapies is fickle and promiscuous,with newoptions shared by word of mouth among her circle of friends. Her investment in thesealternative alternatives seemspredicatedprimarily on thebelief that she owes it toherself,andthosesheloves(includinghertoddlertwins)toatleastgivethematry.

IstartedinOctoberbyvisitingaso-calledcomplementaryguruwhomI’msurewon’tmindbeingcalledDrCharlatan(hisswishLondoncliniccloseddownovernight;hehasnowdisappeared).First,hegotmeontheaforementionedsupplements…plusa£275drinkcalledYeastonewhichfilleduphalfthefridge.ThenhegotmybloodanalysedbyaGermanprofessorwhoadvisedmethatrefinedsugarwaspoisonandurgedmetogoonacomplicateddiet(vinegarbad,troutgood,three-day-oldeggsbestofall).Finally,hegotmehookedupwithacomputerexpert-cum-homeopathforacourseof‘Bicom’therapywhichmeantbeingwireduptoalaptopwhichpositivelyrechargedmycells.Allthismaysoundridiculous;butwhenthehospitalbaldies have told you, aridly, that such-and-such treatment only has a ‘50:50 survival benefit’, you desperately want tolengthentheodds…thedesperatehopeofagirlwithcancerknowsnobounds.

(p.76)

HerePicardieridesarollercoasterofcomplementarytherapies,reflexivelyawarehowabsurditallsoundsandyetaskingherreaderstounderstandwhy,giventheshoddytreatmentandsober prognosis she had received from oncologists, she could hardly have done otherwise.Indeed,asdeMelloandMacInnis(2005)note,havinghopecanbeagoalinitselfandevenacoping mechanism, since it uplifts and energises. Furthermore, ‘the marketplace affords

customers myriad ways to buy and have hope’ (p. 49). In Picardie’s case, when particularmarketplace offerings failed her, the possibility that the next one might not sustained herthroughbleaktimes.Ultimatelyhowevershewasleftwiththebittersensethatherdesperateneedtohopehadbeenexploited.

Theambivalenceofpatientempowerment

Althoughbothauthorsdifferontheoptimalhealth-provisionandtherapeuticapproachesforcancer,theyhavemuchincommon.Bothareunashameddenizensoftherisksociety(Giddens1999; Lupton 1997; Giesler and Veresiu 2014), refusing to be cowedwhen confrontedwithprofessionalpomposityor the foiblesand fallibilitiesofmedics.Theyseek toexertpersonalagency in the diagnosis, understanding, and management of their respective conditions. InDiamond’s case this goes as far as acknowledging quite openly that his smoking had beentantamounttoplayingRussianroulettewithhis immunesystem.Sharingapassiontoknowexactlywhatwasgoingon,bothauthorssawtheinternetasawellspringofinformationandempowermentforthoselivingwithcancer.

A relatedmotif for both authors is a studied reliance on self-diagnosis and a resolve toensure that they listenedas carefully to their ownbodies as theydid to themedics.This isparticularlypronouncedinPicardie’scase,assherecountsnumerous‘Itoldyouso’incidents.Indeed,herhusband,Mattdescribes‘apatterninwhichshealwaysknewthebadnewsbeforethehospitaltestsconfirmedit’(p.105).AtonestageDiamondreceivesanofficialall-clear,but,wheneverheisaskedifhestillhascanceradmitspresciently:‘IfeelasifIoughttosaythatIhaven’t because the truth is that there is no cancer anyone can find.Butwhen it comes tosayingthewords,Ican’tdoit.Ihedge,andfudge,andbluster’(p.238).

AsLupton(1997:374)notes,theincreasinglypopularnotionof‘thepatientquaconsumer’,like that of the reflexive actor, assumes an individualwho is ‘actively calculating, assessingand, if necessary, countering expert knowledge and autonomy with the objective ofmaximizingthevalueofservicessuchashealthcare’.Dunnettetal. (2011)documenthowamultiple myeloma support group enabled its members to reclaim a degree of agency andbecome skilled healthcare consumers. Indeed, Giesler and Veresiu (2014: 841–2) refer to aprocessof ‘consumerresponsibilization’throughwhichconsumers ‘arereconstructedasfree,autonomous,rational,andentrepreneurialsubjectswhodrawonindividualmarketchoicestoinvest in their own human capital …’ in contexts including healthcare decisions. Varioussociologicalstudieshighlighttheinterpersonalcomplexitiesofhealthencountersaswellasthe‘tensions, ambivalences and contradictions’ that are often involved (Lupton 1997). Indeed,when parents confronted tragic end-of-life decisions in neonatal intensive care units, those

whowere ‘empowered’ tomake thechoice themselvesappeared to suffermore than thosewho sawmedical staff decide towithdraw life support (Botti et al. 2009). These issues areforegroundedinourtwopathographies.

The internet’s democratic and egalitarian ethos lends itself to untrammelled expression,leading Diamond to view it as the site where the battle lines between traditional andheterodoxtreatmentsaremostvividlyevidenced.Themorehebrowsed,themorehebecameawareofavastcorpusofscientificresearchstudiesoncanceroutcomesand,althoughhewasunabletoadjudgetheirrelativemerit,theircollectiveimportforhissurvivaloddswassomberand‘reallyscaring’.

Thetensionsandambivalenceofa‘consumerist’stance(Lupton1997)areevidentinotherpartsofDiamond’saccount.Havingmaderationalchoicesaboutorthodox,privatemedicine,he acknowledges that this requireshim to compromiseonboth comprehensionand controlover his condition, in contrast to the sense of empowerment afforded the alternativeaficionado:

HowmuchbetteritwouldbeifIcoulddosomethingformyself…whichwouldallowmetotakecontrolofmycancer.Howwonderfulitwouldbetodecideformyselfwhichofthedozensofequallyvalidremediesfromaroundtheworldwasmostsuitableformypersonality,mycancer,mybirthsign.

(p.104)

Picardiealsoalludes to the ‘dark sideof empowerment’ inmedical contexts (Dunnettet al.2011).Forthosewholacktherequisitephysicalandemotionalstamina,empoweredconsumerhealth choice can prove a burden rather than a bonus.At the outset of her treatment, sheemailsafriendwhoisalsoseriouslyill:

Likeyousay,thefactthatyouhavedonesomuchresearchandaremakingtreatmentdecisionsmustmakeyoufeelgood.Haveyettogetawebbrowserandfindbreastcancersite.PartofmeissoexhaustedbyalltheappointmentsandX-raysandtearsthatIwanttoswitchofffromthesubjectcompletely.

(p.7)

Nonetheless,shefindsherselfhavingtobeonguard,alerttotheoptionsandobtainingsecondopinions.Comparingwhatsheknowsaboutchemotherapyregimesattwohospitals,shenotestheMarsdenreviewstreatmentafterfourcycles,‘whereasGuy’sseemtoletyousufferforthewholewhack,regardlessofefficacy,unlessyoutakecontrol’(p.7).Concernsaboutsecondarybonecancerleadherto‘shoparound’,but‘TheMarsdenprettymuchsaidwhatGuy’ssaid,soIwon’tbetransferringthere’(p.9).

Confrontingcancer:contestedcontrol

Bothauthorsareatpainstoconfronttheirconditionbyputtingatolerabledistancebetweenthemandtheircancer.Theveryprocessofpenningapathographycanbeviewedassuchanenterprise(Hawkins1999).Bothtextsarerepletewithaccountsdocumentingthesize,locationandprogressionoftheauthors’respectivetumoursandcancercells.Thatthesewell-informedaccountsarecouched inconversational termsunderscoreshownormalisationcanserveasameans of control and empowerment. Diamond’s narrative includes particularly vividexamples of exerting control through objectification and externalisation. In one instance heasks his radiotherapist for a slide of sections of his cancer and brings a radiotherapymaskhome as a souvenir. Later, in an equally fetishistic vein, he uploads as a screen-saver aphotograph of a squamous cell cancer of the neck. Finally, given his experience inbroadcasting,heagreestomakingadocumentaryfortheBBCfeaturinghisundergoingandrecuperatingfrommajorsurgery–allinthehope‘thatbyrenderingthecanceranobjectivespectacleIcoulddistancemyselffromit’(p.214).

Thecontestationforcontrolbetweencancerandpatientisplayedoutinseveraladditionalarenas in both books. On some occasions the pendulum swings in cancer’s favor as whenDiamondfindshimselfinahospitalwaitingroomandcomesfacetofacewithaplethoraofmomentomori:leafletsonhowtoregisteradeath,contactdetailsforreligiousministerswhendeath is imminent. These sober reminders were disconcerting enough without his beingfurtherambushedbyabarrageofglossymagazineheadlines:anarticleonweekendbreakstitled‘Whenyou’vegottogoGO’.Otherheadlinesleapoutofpiecesonthemundanitiesoftravel,cookingandwine:‘AGRAVESOLUTION,NOHOPEOFRETURN,HEAVENCAN’TWAIT’(31).Whenitcametodoubleentendres,thedarkersideseemedtowinouteverytime.

Ifcancercommandsattentionandcoloursperceptioninthiswayitcanalsoimposeitselfonthe individual inmore tangibleandexplicitways.Daily routine inbothnarrativesbecomesdominatedbyrostersofconsultationswithmedics,dosageregimesformedication,anddatesofhospital appointments anddischarges. ‘Mywhole life seems tohavebeen takenoverbyillness’,complainsPicardiebeforedetailingherdiaryforthefollowingweek;Thursdayisheronlydayoff.Canceralsoexercisescontrolby imposing itselfon theirphysical surroundingsandbothauthorsproffermultiple listsofpharmaceuticalprescriptions,patientparaphernaliaand cancer accoutrements, goods that are increasingly populating and dominating theirpersonallivingspace.Diamondhammershomethispointbydevotingoverthreepagesofhisbook to rattlingoffa litanyofhis ‘latestcollectionofcancervictimtakeawaygear’.Atonelevel such exhaustive inventories betoken consumers essaying to manage their illness byauditing what exactly is going on, at another they mirror in external matter the physicalprogressionofthecancerwithin.

Keepingcanceratbay?

Onenotable featureof bothbooks is the juxtapositionofharrowingdetail andwhatmightappearbanalconsumption-relatedstories.Thismayreflecttheroleofeverydayconsumptioninkeepingthosefacingseriousillnesswovenintothefabricofeverydaylife(MasonandPavia2005). Indeed, when a friend worries that she should purge her messages of such things,Picardieemails‘PLEASEkeeptheso-calledtriviacoming:thelastthingIwanttodoisspend23(insteadof22)hoursadaythinkingaboutcancer’(p.17).Picardies’entreatyepitomisestheresolveonthepartofbothauthorstoresistanydiminutionintheirrolesasparents,partners,andfriendsandtorestatetheirenfranchisementandempowermentasconsumers.

Overthecourseofherbook,Picardielosesmuchofherhair;initiallysheasksherfriendstosend her hats, and makes multiple hairdresser appointments, first to cut her hair into amanageablebob,andthen,onceclumpsstartfallingout,tohaveherheadshaved.WeightgainfromtreatmentandherresponsetothattreatmentareconstantthemesinPicardie’sbook;sheimpishlyascribestheextraweighttoeatingopportunitiessuchasthechocolatebiscuitsatthecancer support group and the sandwiches consumed to kill time in hospital. Sheaccommodatestoherexpandinggirthbyenteringinto‘fashionbimbo’mode:

…yesterdayboughtpairoflinentrousers(elasticatedwaist)andlinenshirtfromHobbs(mynewfavouriteshop,thoughsize16 jacketwas too tight) andnewpairof (brown, three strap)Birkenstocks.What ishappening tome?But it is suchgoodtherapy.

(p.26)

Diamond,ontheotherhand, losesaconsiderableamountofweight.Hetoodecidestotakeaction.On finding thatmostofhisclotheswerenowtwosizes too large,hechoosesnot tobehaveasmenaresupposedlywonttobehave;hepurchasesa£299leatherjacketonimpulseonhiswayhomefromahospitalappointment.

Whatsortofworldwasthiswhereamanwithcancercouldn’tbuyhimselfaleatherjacket?…ItwasbadenoughthatIhadcancerwithouthavingtohavecancerandbedressedinclothestwosizestoobig.And,whatthehell,wecouldpaytheAmexbillnextmonth.

(p.118)

BothrefertobeingcheeredbywhatPicardielabels‘retailtherapy’;indeedbothreportsomedelightinmakingvariouspurchaseswhichintheir‘normal’livestheywouldhaveconsideredextravagantorexcessive.Theremayhavebeenmorethanamomentarypsychologicalfillipatplayhere,however.Accommodatingtophysicalincrementsordecrementsbychangingone’swardrobe,bynotthrowinginthetowel,canbeseenasaninstanceofturningaphysicallossintoapsychologicalandmoralegain.Refusingtocontinuewearingill-fittingclothescanthusrepresent an attempt to neutralise at a sartorial level what cancer was doing to their

appearanceataphysical level. Itmayalsobereadasanactofdefiance, followingthepoetDylanThomas’scommandto‘[r]age,rage,atthedyingofthelight’.

Other consumption accounts suggested however a more measured, gentle going intoThomas’sdarknight.PaviaandMason(2004)referto‘greenbanana’syndromeamongcancersufferers, reflecting a degree of anxiety about tempting fate by investing in products thatpresumealongerlifespanthantheymightbegranted.Towardstheendofboththesebooks,however,theauthorsknowtheirfateissealedandgoodshavemoretodowiththedurationandtoneoftimeremainingthananyhopeofrecovery.Picardiemuseswhetherherjaroffacecream will see her through to the end and Diamond’s last words in his book refer toacceptanceofimpendingdeathrenderedthroughanactofconsumption:

AsIwritethiswehavejustreturnedfrombuyingabasketforthespanielweareduetocollectinacoupleofdaystime.Afriende-mailedmewhensheheardthistotellmeabouthowit’sadenialofwhat’shappeningandwhat’sabouttohappen.Itisn’tatall:Iknowwhat’shappening.Butadogisahappything,anditwillbehappyformeforwhatevertimeI’vegotleftandashappyasthingscanbeforthefamilywhenI’vegone.

(p.256)

Conclusion

AccountsofdyingdatebacktothemedievalandRenaissanceeras,whentheChurchsoughttoinstruct the faithful into the ways of a good death, drawing on examples of those whodepartedthisworldinastateofgrace(Hawkins1999).Thetwopathographiesfeaturedherearedevoidofspiritualsearchingormetaphysicalmusing.Nonetheless,theysupportBerman’s(2012: 295) argument that in our contemporary consumer culture, end-of-life memoirsconstitute‘asecularexampleofthelongtraditionofarsmoriendi,theartofdying’,offeringreaders opportunities to learn from others’ experiences so that they feel less isolated andafraid.Clearly,inacrowdedmarketnotallpathographieswillbewritteninsuchawayastostrikearesponsivechordwithreadersconfrontingillness,mortalityorbereavement,butmanydoreachheadyheightsinbothliteraryandhumaneterms.

Perhaps one of themost striking insights offered byDiamond and Picardie is that dyingwellentailssustainingasgoodalifeaspossible,foraslongaspossible,andthatconsumptionis intimately interwoven into the fabric of that life. Their accounts show two people goingabout their business, engaging with the marketplace as consumers of cancer care andconsumerswithcancer,andtheyilluminateforreadersthelight,shadeandeventheroutineinvolvedinperformingbothroles,themanytensionsinvolved,andtheambivalenceofagencyinmedicalextremis.

Thedetailed,granularaccountsprovidedinpathographiesmaybeparticularlyvaluableforfuturecross-culturalstudiesofhealthcareconsumption.Thisliterarygenremayalsolenditself

well to analyses of consumer experiences in the course of particular illnesses or traumaticevents,orofhowillnessorbereavementhavebeenexperiencedwithinconsumercultureindifferenterasorfordifferentgroupsofconsumers.Overall,thereseemstobeagreatdealofanalyticalliferemaininginthisliterarygenredevotedtoillness,dyinganddeath.

Note

1Astenantsinpublichousingschemes.

References

Aries,P.(1981)TheHourofourDeath,NewYork,OxfordUniversityPress,trans.H.Weaver.Arnould, E. and Thompson, C. (2005) Consumer culture theory (CCT): twenty years of

research,JournalofConsumerResearch,31:4,868–882.Armstrong-Coster, A. (2005) In morte media jubilante [2]: a study of cancer-related

pathographies,Mortality,10:2,97–112.Belk, R. (1987) Material values in the comics: a content analysis of comic books featuring

themesofwealth,JournalofConsumerResearch,14:1,26–42.Berman,J.(2012)DyinginCharacter:MemoirsontheEndofLife,Amherst,MA,andBoston,

MA:UniversityofMassachusettsPress.Boseley,S.(2011)SurgeonwhomissedRuthPicardiebreastcancerstruckoffbyGMC,The

Guardian,December30,www.theguardian.com/society/2011/dec/30/ruth-picardie-cancer-doctor-struck-off.

Botti,S.,Orfali,K.andIyengar,S.(2009),Tragicchoices:autonomyandemotionalresponsestomedicaldecisions,JournalofConsumerResearch,36,337–353.

Brown, S. Sex ‘n’ shopping: a ‘novel’ approach to consumer research (1995). Journal ofMarketingManagement,11,769–783.

Bury,M.(2001)Illnessnarratives:factorfiction?SociologyofHealthandIllness,23:3,263–285.deMello,G.andMacInnis,D.(2005)Whyandhowconsumershope:motivatedreasoningand

themarketplace, in S. Ratneshwar andD.G.Mick (eds), Inside Consumption: ConsumerMotives,GoalsandDesires,LondonandNewYork:Routledge,44–66.

Diamond,J.(1998)C:BecauseCowardsGetCancerToo,London:Vermillion.Dunnett,S.,Brownlie,D.andHewer,P.(2011)Frompatienttoagent:collectivepracticesand

identityworkinanemotionalcommunity,inD.Dahl,G.Johar,andS.vanOsselaer(eds),Advances in Consumer Research, Volume 38, Duluth, MN: Association for Consumer

Research,26–27.Frank, A. (1995) The Wounded Storyteller: Body, Illness and Ethics, Chicago: University of

ChicagoPress.Giddens,Anthony(1999)Riskandresponsibility,ModernLawReview,62:1,1–10.Giesler,M. andVeresiu,E. (2014)Creating the responsible consumer:moralistic governance

regimesandconsumersubjectivity,JournalofConsumerResearch,41:3,840–857.Gilbert,KathleenR.(2002)Takinganarrativeapproachtogriefresearch:findingmeaningin

stories,DeathStudies,26:223–239.Gould, S.J. (1991) The self-manipulation of my pervasive, perceived vital energy through

productuse:anintrospective-praxisperspective,JournalofConsumerResearch18:2,194–207.DOI:10.1086/209252.

Hawkins, A. (1999) Reconstructing Illness: Studies in Pathography, West Lafayette, IN:UniversityofPurduePress.

Kates, S. (2001) The disposition of possessions among the ‘chosen’ families of people livingwithAIDS,PsychologyandMarketing,18:4,365–387.

Lane,H.(2000)Twofuneralsandabookdeal,TheObserver,February13,www.theguardian.com/books/2000/feb/13/biography.harrietlane.

Lupton, D. (1997) Consumerism, reflexivity, and themedical encounter, Social Science andMedicine,45:3,373–381.

NHS(2013)AbouttheNationalHealthService(NHS),www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/thenhs/about/Pages/overview.aspx.

NuffieldTrust(2014)UKspendingonpublicandprivatehealthcare,www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/data-and-charts/uk-spending-public-and-private-health-care.

O’Neill,B.(2012)Cancermemoirsaregrowinglike,well,tumours,VICE,13September2012http://brendanoneill.co.uk/post/31449632613/cancer-memoirs-are-growing-like-well-tumours.

Pavia, T. andMason,M. (2004) The reflexive relationship between consumer behavior andadaptivecoping,JournalofConsumerResearch,31,441–454.

Picardie,R.(1998)BeforeISayGoodbye,London:PenguinBooks.Small,N.(1998)Deathoftheauthors,Mortality,3:3,215–228.Tian,K.,Sautter,D.,Fisher,D.,Fischbach,S.,Luna-Nevarez,C.,Boberg,K.,Kroger,J.andVann,

R. (2014) Transforming health care: empowering therapeutic communities throughtechnology-enhancednarratives,JournalofConsumerResearch,41:2,237–260.

Thomas,D. (1952) ‘Donot go gentle into that goodnight’, inThePoems ofDylanThomas,NewDirections.

Walter,T.(1991)Moderndeath:tabooornottaboo?,Sociology,25:2,293–310.

PartIVDeathandthebody

14Theroleofbodydispositioninmakingsenseoflifeanddeath

CourtneyNationsBaker,StaceyMenzelBakerandJamesW.Gentry

Upon the lossofa lovedone, individualandsocial sentimentsoften focus toward thebody,ritual ceremoniesmay revolve around the body and decisionmaking related to death-careconsumptionisaffectedbybiologicalaspectsofthebody.Beyondmakinglogisticaldecisionsabouttheremains,bereavedlovedonesmustalsosomehowmakesenseofwhatitmeanstonolongerhavethephysicalpresenceofthedeceasedaspartoftheirlives.Evenafterdeath,thebodyof thedeceasedpassivelyexperiencesmanyadditionalsentiments.People touch it,talktoit,dressit,styleit,displayit,carryit,honouritandusesymbolicitemstorepresentit.Despite its passive contribution toward the observances, the body of the deceased oftenbecomesthecenterpieceofattention.

Thebereavedmustmakepragmaticdecisionsabouthow tohandle thephysical remains.This has both practical and emotional aspects. Practically, the decomposition process beginsrapidly, and a reality of death is that the body cannot be maintained permanently.Emotionally,thedispositionmaybeimbuedwithmeaningssomehowrelatedtothedeceasedindividual.Whetherpracticaloremotional,decisionsaboutbodydispositionaffecthowthoseimpactedbythedeathmakesenseoflifeanddeath.

Thepresentresearchseekstounderstandhowindividualsmakesenseof lifeanddeathinthecontextofdispositionofthephysicalbody.Thechapterfirstreviewsrelevantliteratureondisposition and liminality. Next, the study context and methods are described. After wepresentfouremergentthemesfromthedata,weconcludewithadiscussiononthetheoreticalandpracticalimplicationsofsense-makinginthecontextofbodydisposition.

Theoreticalbackground

Disposition

Dispositionresearchfocusesontangiblematerialobjectsthathaveoutlivedtheirfunctionalorsymbolic usefulness and that are voluntarily relinquished (Jacoby, Berning and Dietvorst,1977);onobjectsthathavebeeninvoluntarilysurrendered,as inthecaseoftheftordisaster(Sayre, 1994); on how objects impede or facilitate role transitions (McAlexander, 1991;Schouten, 1991); oronhow families andgroupsofpeoplemake senseofpossessions in thefaceofmortality(Bradford,2009;Price,ArnouldandCurasi,2000).Weknowthatineverydaylife possessions have implications for self-definition and self-continuity/change (Kleine andBaker, 2004; Belk, 1988). We also know that possessions serve as a semiotic link betweenpossessionsandthememoriesoftheirowners,thuslegitimizingconsumers’pastexperiences(Grayson and Shulman, 2000). Therefore, because possessions may hold deep meanings,dispositionofthemcanbedifficult,orevenimpossible.

Adistincttypeofspecialpossessions,thoseobjectsthatpeopleshouldnotgiveawayorsellbutpassdownthroughgenerationsandkeepwithinthegroup,isdeemedinalienablewealth(Curasi,PriceandArnould,2004).Specificqualitiesrelatedtopossessionsconsideredaspartofafamily’sinalienablewealthincludethegroup’scommitmenttopreservingthem,theitems’ability to affirm social order and reality, the creation and affirmation of inalienablewealthacrossgenerations,thedevelopmentofmythssurroundingheirlooms,theroleofaguardiantoprotectandmaintaintheobjects,thenecessitythatinalienablewealthremainsinthefamily,andthefragilityofthesepossessions(Curasi,PriceandArnould,2004).Otherimportanttraitsofinalienablewealthincludepossessions’influenceonkinkeeping,themaintenanceoftheseassets,theabilityofobjectstotransitionfromalienabletoinalienable,andthecoexistenceofinalienableandalienablewealth(Bradford,2009).

Tothispoint,dispositionliteraturehasremainedlargelysilentonthedisposalofdeceasedpersons. Yet, the literature on disposition and special possessions provides a theoreticalfoundationfromwhichtoexplorehowpeoplemakesenseofthebodyafterdeath.Thebodybecomes a tangible vessel, no longer full of life and,metaphorically, a special objectwhichrequiresdisposition.Atheoreticalvantagepointfromwhichtoviewhowpeoplemakesenseof the body as it transitions from full-of-life to lifeless also is needed. This perspective isaffordedthroughsociologicaltheoryonroletransitionsandliminality,reviewednext.

Roletransitions,liminalityandidentitynegotiation

The transition from life to death can be described as a rite of passage (Turner, 1969; VanGennep,1909),inwhichanindividualorgroupexperiencesaprogressionthroughthestagesofseparation,liminalityandreintegration(VanGennep,1909).Separation,aresponsetocrisis,

is the distancing of the individual or group from usual activities, relations and conditions.Crisisoccurswithachangeinplace,state,socialpositionorage.Liminalityisthesuspensionofnotionsregardingidentity,time,andspace,andoftenisdescribedas‘betwixtandbetween.’Finally, reintegration occurswhen the individual or group is somehow reincorporated backintosocialparticipation(VanGennep,1909).

In the present case, death is the crisis. Because the deceased can no longer participateactively in the social interactions associated with life, a tangible separation occurs. Thedeceasedexperiencesachangeinstatusbytransitioningfromlifetodeath,andthebereavedmust separate froma life inwhich the lost lovedonehadaphysicalpresence.Liminality ispresentforthebereavedastheytrytomakesenseofthepastidentityandthepresentstateofthe deceased, as well as what death means for all their lives (Gentry et al., 1995a). Thebereavedmustconstructandunderstandwhatrolethedeceasedplaysintheirnewlivesvoidofthedeceased’sphysicalpresence,whicheventuallyleadstoareintegrationofthedeceasedintothecurrentsocialworldofthoseleftbehind.

Crises,lifetransitions,andritesofpassagedemandthereconstitutionofidentitiesandroles.During a life transition, individuals may engage in identity play or reconstruction of self-concepts(Schouten,1991).Inthischapter,weexplorethevalueoftangible,physicalremainsinhelpingpeoplemakesenseofthedeceased’slifeanddeath.Wenowturntothemethodweusetounderstandhowpeoplemakesenseofbodydisposition,beginningwithadescriptionofthestudycontext.

Method

Studycontext

Thestudycontextisdeath-careservicesintheU.S.,where,inrecentyears,newproductsandservicesrelatedtobodydispositionhaveemerged.Currenttrendsinfuneralservicesincludethe rising popularity of cremation, personalization, advanced funeral planning, newtechnologies enabling new services, and green funerals (National Funeral DirectorsAssociation,2013).Beyondthis,thenationalcremationratewasat9.7percentin1980,24percentin1998,42percentin2011,andisprojectedtohit50percentby2017(Sanburn,2013).ThesefiguressuggestamomentousshiftinthewayAmericansunderstandandhandlebodydisposition.

Datacollection

To gain insights into how consumers make sense of body disposition, phenomenologicalinterviews and projective techniques (Belk, Fischer and Kozinets, 2013) were employed.Twenty-threeinterviewswith24individualswereconducted,including12consumerswhohadplanned funeral and burial services for their own future needs and 12 consumerswho hadplanned these services for a deceased loved one. These individuals hailed from 16 differentstatesandrangedfrom37to78inage.Twentyparticipantswerefemale,andfourweremale.Participantsidentifiedwith12differentreligiousornon-religiousorganizationsorsentiments,including referencing themselves as spiritual, Catholic, non-practicing Catholic, Jewish,Buddhist,Unitarian,non-religiousandavarietyofProtestantfaiths.

Twoalternativeburialserviceproviders,EternalReefsandMemorialEcosystems,assistedintherecruitmentofparticipants.Thefirstprovider,EternalReefs,allowsconsumerstohavetheircrematedremainsmixedwithPH-neutralconcreteinordertoformreefballsthatmimicnatural reef formations andbecomepart of the ecosystemat the bottomof the ocean.Thesecondprovider,MemorialEcosystems,providesconsumerstheoptiontobeburiednaturallyintoahand-duggravewithnoembalmingfluids,nosyntheticcasketsorvaults,noartificialflowers,andnounnatural tombstones.These twobodydispositionalternativeswerechosenbecause they provided contrasts to more traditional funeral service providers, and weredifferent from each other in significantways (e.g. bodydisposition, ritual processes).Often,valuable insights can be gleaned from exploring extreme cases (Price, Arnould andMoisio2006).

Participantswerechosenbecauseoftheirvaluableinsightsintoboththetraditionalandthenewer alternative types of dispositionmethods. Due to the sensitive nature of the subject,potential informantswereprovidedwith the contact informationof the first author so theycould initiate communication to participate if desired. Contact information was given topotential participants via a provider Facebook page, a provider newsletter, and personalcontactbytheproviderwithitscustomers.Forthosewhohadlostalovedone,atleastthreemonths’timehadpassedbetweenthedeathandtheinterview(Gentryetal.,1995a,b).

Eachinterviewlastedbetween60and90minutes.Interviewsincludedquestionsrelatedtopersonal funerary experiences, end-of-life preferences, decision-making processes, funeraryexpenses and personal values. An interview guide was employed, but a conversation-styleapproach allowed participants to share their stories and approach subjects as they feltcomfortable doing so (Schouten, 1991). The first author developed rapport via emailconversationsandduringinitialinterviewquestionsrelatedtopersonalbackground.Thiswasa crucial step, especially since interviews were conducted via Skype or telephone. Allinterviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim for analysis purposes. In addition tocompletinganinterview,someinterviewparticipantssharedphotos,memorialwebpages,andotherresources,whichhavebeenretainedbytheresearchteam.Interviewparticipationwasvoluntary,andnoinformantsreceivedpaymentfortheirparticipation.

Dataanalysis

Dataanalysistookplacethroughoutdatacollectionwithiterationsbetweenthedataandtherelevant literature streams (Belk,FischerandKozinets, 2013). Interview fileswere reviewedand a close reading of transcripts took place. Themes within interviews were identifiedthroughout the process, relationships between the themes were identified, and theseconnectionswereabstracted torelate to theoryandpractice.A listof ideasaboutemergingthemes was maintained and updated after each interview. Handwritten notes during eachinterview allowed for insights into thematic relationships between interviews asmore datawere collected. The findings below seek to offer insights into how the physical body of adeceasedpersonmayinfluencetheprocessofsense-makingrelatedtolifeanddeathfortheliving.

Makingsenseofthebodyinthecontextofdeath

Ourinterpretationofthedataisstructuredaroundfourmajorthemes:inseparablenotionsoflife anddeath, type of disposal as an expression of identity, physical remains as inalienablewealth,andviewingthebody.Wediscusseachinturn.

Inseparablenotionsoflifeanddeath

Informants have difficulty separating notions of life from notions of death. This applied toboth consumers whowere discussing deceased loved ones and those whowere projectingthemselvesintoafuturedeceasedstate.Inparticular,manyinformantsexpressedaversiontobeing buried upon their deaths. These people could not seem to separate their ideas aboutphysicaloccurrences thatmayhappentoadeadbodyfromtheirunderstandingsabouthowthosesameoccurrencesmightmakethemfeel in life.One informant,whochosecremation,expressedconcernsabouthiscurrentclaustrophobia:

IguessapartofitisI’mclaustrophobic,slightlyclaustrophobic.Thethoughtofbeingeightfeetunderwithallthatearthontopofmeisstressful.Andtheattractiontohavingashesspreadorhavingashesinterredinareef,that’saverycomfortingthought.

(Lloyd[male,61])

Thisinformanthasexperiencedwhatitisliketofeelasensationofclaustrophobiawhenheisinsmallspaces,soheisprojectinghislivingideasofclaustrophobiaontohisfuturedeceasedself.

Anotherfacetofhowindividualsmaybeunabletoseparatelifefromdeathcanbefoundintheir continued interactions with their loved ones, even after they have passed. Manyinformantswhohad losta lovedone,discussedoccasionsonwhichtheytalkedto thedead,wrotetothedead,andcelebratedthebirthdayofthedead.Theseindividualsknowthattheycannolongerhavephysicalinteractionswiththeirlovedones,buttheyfeeltheycancontinueto interact with them in more transcendental ways. These interactions facilitate therelationshipbetweenthebereavedandthedeceased,despitethefactthatphysicalinteractionsareno longer a part of their communicationprocesses.Oneparticipant,whosemotherwascremated,heldontoherremainswhiletryingtodecidehowbesttodisposeofthem.Inthemeantime,shewouldtalktotheremains:

Mother’sasheswereinmybackclosetthat’sinmyoffice,andI’dwalkbythereeveryday,‘Heygirl!I’lltakecareofyouthisyear[laughter].Therightplaceisgoingtoshowup.Iknowtherightthingisgoingtoshowup.’Well,thiswentonforever.

(Rita[female,75])

It tookawhile for the rightdispositionoption to comealong, so this informantheldon totheseremainsfor10years.Duringthattimeshewouldspeaktotheboxofremainsasifhermotherweresittinginthatclosetjustwaitingforinteraction.

Finally,someparticipantsfeltthatthedeceasedcontinuetohavetangibleinfluenceintheirlives.Thisseemstoexistonacontinuum.Ononeend,itcouldbeparticipantshavinguniquegut-feelingsaboutthedeceasedsomehowguidingthembyshowingthemsomething.Ontheotherend,informantshaveevenexpressedbeliefsaboutthepossibilitiesofspiritsandghosts.

Whenthathappened,Isaidtomyhusband,‘Youknow,[ourson]saidhewantedtobeburiedatsea.That’snotpossible,sowhatwe’lldoisjusthavehimcremated,andwe’llspreadhisashesoutintheocean.’Sothat’swhatwedecidedtodo.AndthenIwentonlinetolookforacremationurn,likeadolphinorsomethingbecausehelovedthewatersomuch.AndItypedincremationurn,andtheveryfirstwebsitethatcameupwasEternalReefs.AndIlookedatit,andI’mlike,‘EternalReefs?Whatisthat?Itdoesn’tsoundlikeanurncompany.’AndIclickedonit,andassoonasIsawit,Iknewitwas[ourson].Ievensaidoutlike,‘Ohmygosh,[son],Iknowyou’relettingmeknowthisiswhatyouwantbecauseyoucan’tbeburiedatsea.’

(Olivia[female,56])

Thisparticipantwasunabletogivehersonthefull-bodyburialatseathathedesired,butshebelievedhersonledhertoanotheroptionthatwouldallowhertobetterfulfillhiswishes.

Withoutaphysicalbody,itseemsthatbereavedindividualsmustfindwaystoredirecttheirfeelingstowardthedeceased.Whenpeopledie,theycannotsimplybedetachedfromthelivesof the bereaved in one fatal swoop. The deceased are only tangibly removed, and theirmemories,identities,andrelationshipswithothersliveon.Thelivingindividualswhocontinuetointeractwiththedeceasedorfeelspecificinfluencesfromthedeceasedarefindingwaystocontinue their relationships with the deceased in meaningful, intangible ways. Thiscontinuanceoftherelationshipplaysacriticalroleinthesense-makingprocess.

Typeofdisposalasanexpressionofidentity

As informants explained their disposition choices, they revealed that the type of disposaloptiontheychoseallowsthemtoextendtheiridentitiesbeyondlife.Forexample,thedecisiontousecremation,eitherfortheselforforalovedone,allowedforuniqueexpressionsofselfthat might be impossible with a decision to have full-body burial. First, with cremation,remainscanbedividedsothatitisnotnecessaryforallremainstoendupinthesamelocationasafinalrestingplace.Thebereavedcansharetheremainsbygivingeachfamilymemberaportionoftheashes.Crematedremainsmaybescatteredinasinglelocationordispersedtonumerous locations. Remains in this form can also be retained by loved ones within theirhomes,housedinadecorativeurnorsimplecardboardbox.Oneinformantsharedhowshewas able to memorialize her husband in a special way, through scattering his remains inmultiplemeaningfullocations:

He died inOctober of 2010 andwe did the Eternal Reefs ceremonies in January of 2012.Now in between that,we hadscatteredhisashesatseveralotherplaces.Intheweekorsobeforehedied,heandItalkedaboutitquiteabit,andtherewereplaceswhere he knew hewanted to have his ashes…We agreed that theywould be scattered on our favorite beach inHawaii.Andso,afterhisdeath, I tookmysonand twoofourgrandsons,andwewent toHawaii, andwescatteredhimthere.Andthenanotherbunchof thekidsandgrandkidscametoourplace inVirginia,andwescatteredhiminVirginia.But the third place that we talked about that he wanted his ashes scattered was with Eternal Reefs … It was near Ft.Lauderdale, Florida…The fourthplace is actually inWisconsin, and that’sgoing tohappen in threeweeks.Almost threeyearslater,we’refinallygettingtogetherinWisconsintoscatterhisashesupthere…HejustlovedGreenLake,Wisconsin.

(Ulyssa[female,66])

Thisquotedemonstrateshowmuchpeople relate to specificplacesandhowpowerful theirconnections to thoseplaces canbe.Ulyssa scatteredherhusband’s remains in fourdifferentlocations,allofwhichhadspecificpersonalmeaningsinhislife.

Theoptionofcremationalsohasallowedforthedevelopmentofcreativenewalternativesindisposition,suchastheuseofremainstocreatediamonds,fireworks,ammunition,syntheticreefs,hourglasses,andvinyl records.Ofcourse,noneof thesearequite feasiblewitha fullyintactbody.Cremationalsograntstheabilitytomixthecrematedremainswithotherentities.Withcremation,anindividualmayhavetheirremainsmixedwiththeremainsofalovedoneorpetsothattheymayspendeternitytrulytogether.

Themixingofremainsisnotlimitedtopeopleandpets,butitalsoextendstopossessions.Meaningful objectsmaybeplacedwithin remains in their final container, or special objectsmayactuallybeusedasthefinalcontainer.Again,onemightarguethatlovedonesmayspendeternitytogetherwithside-by-sideburialorthatmeaningfulpossessionsmaybeplacedinacasketwiththefullbody,butthephysicalblendingoftheseremainsindicatesself-extension(Belk, 1988), evenafterdeath.Oneparticipantdescribeshowshewasgivenaphotobyherpartner’smothertobeplacedwithhisremains:

Butifyoutalkedtohim,hewouldhavenothingbutcomplaintsabouthismother,andhe’dsayshewasn’tverynicetohim…andyethecalledhereverysingleweek…Buthissistertoldme[hismother]waslikewrackedwithguilt, thatshewasupset,andthatshewascrying.WhenIwenttoseeher,shegavemeaphotoofhimasalittleboyandsaid,“Canyoufindawaytoputthisinwithhisashes?”Shesaid,“ThisishowIthinkofhimwhenIthinkofhimasmyson.”

(Shirley[female,62])

Inthiscase,cremationallowedforplacingasymbolicphotointotheman’sremainsinordertohelphismother inhersense-makingprocess.Somenotionsthatmayhavebeentiedtothatphotoforhismotherincludeguilt,memories,andasenseofcontribution.Whileshemaynothavebeenasinvolvedwithhislifeorend-of-lifeceremoniesasshemayhavelikedtohavebeen,shewasstillabletocontributethisoldphotoasameansofreachingsomeclosure.

Finally, the act of choosing cremation may, in itself, have implications for expressingsomething about the individual. Some examples of this idea could be how the choice ofalternative disposition relates to the frugality, spiritual beliefs or environmentalconscientiousness of the deceased person. One participant shared how her choice to becrematedexpressesherbeliefsandgivesinsightsintoherfaith:

Well,[myhusband]andIaredevoutCatholics,andthechurchnowhasnoobjectionforpeoplebeingcremated,buttheydonotwantpeoplescatteringtheirashes.Myplanhadbeentobetakenoutonafishingboatandbedumped,butI’mnotgoingtogoagainstthechurch.SoIfoundthisEternalReefs,andthatisthesolution….LikeIsaid,Idon’twanttogoagainsttheChurch’s teachings, if they don’t want your ashes scattered. And I think that’s just disrespectful is how they figure it.Because,Imean,ifI’mdumpedintheGulfandGodwantedtoputmebacktogetheragain,I’msureHecould.

(Hanna[female,64])

On one hand,Hannawants to closely follow the teachings of the church, but on the otherhand, she has faith that her God is capable of doing what He wants. So she opted for acompromisethatallowedhertobecrematedbutalsokeepallofherremainstogetherinonelocation.

Inregardstobodydisposition,theseinformantsareconcernedwithleavinglifeinamorepersonalandexpressivewaythantraditionaldeathservicesallow.Cremation,becauseof itsuniquecharacteristics,allowedtheinformantsthedesiredfreedomtodisposeoftheirbodiesinways that aremore representativeofwho theywere in life andmore consistentwith theirself-definitionsanddesire forcontinuity (KleineandBaker,2004).Becausecremationallowsremains to be divided, shared, scattered, retained andmixed with other entities, it affordsinformants more freedoms in their disposition methods and expressions. Cremation alsoallows people to become part of tangible objects. An avid hunter can be turned intoammunitionthatfriendsusefortheirnexthunt,alifelongmusiciancanbecomeavinylrecordthathischildrenplay to rememberhim,andapassionate scubadivercanbecomepartofareef that supports the marine life she loved. Cremation has created an opportunity forconsumerstosymbolically,orevenliterally,gooutwithabang.

Physicalremainsasinalienablewealth

The physical remains, the final resting place, and others’ lingeringmemories of a deceasedpersonallhave thepotential tobecomeapartof the family’s inalienablewealth.For thosewho hold viewing and funeral services before the deceased is cremated or interred, thephysicalbodyisapartofthe‘beautifulmemorypicture’(SlocumandCarlson,2011).Itisthefamily’slastimageofthedeceasedperson,sodeath-careserviceprovidersworktomakethisa beautiful, or at least acceptable, image. Further, cremated remains may be retained in acontainer to be passed down from generation to generation, so that the deceased personcontinues to be part of their descendants’ lives.This container,whichwouldmost likely beconsidered sacred, placed in a safe location, and maintained by the family, is a pricelessheirloomthatbecomespartofthefamily’sheritage.Remainsinterredintothegroundcouldalso be considered part of a family’s inalienable wealth, despite the fact that they are notphysicallyretainedbythefamily.Occasionallyanindividualwillbeburiedonfamilyland,butmoretypicalisanintermentinacemetery.Still,becausethefamilyhasaccesstovisitthesite,andthephysicalgravehasbecomepartofthestoryofthefamily’shistory,thesebecomepartofthefamily’sinalienablewealth.

Thememories,storiesandevidencesofsomeone’sexistence inthepasthaveimplicationsfor familyand individual identity,meaningand legacy.Because remains, restingplaces,andmemoriesplaysuchcriticalrolesintellingthestoryofafamilyanditshistory,thesemaybevaluedaspriceless.Infact, intheU.S.,theonlymailservicethatwillshipcrematedremainsfrom one location to another is theUnited States Postal Service (CremationAssociation ofNorth America, 2013). The fact that most providers of mail services will not even acceptcremated remains for shipment speaks to the fact that people find it difficult or evenimpossibletoputapriceonhumanremainsforinsurancepurposes.

Thelocationatwhichphysicalremainsareplacedisalsoofvalueforsome:

Whenwescatteredmydad’sashes,whereverwewere in theocean,his sister,myaunt,wasverydistressed.She’sninety-somethingnowandadifferentgeneration,butshesaid,‘Ijusthatethefactthatthere’snograveformetogoandvisit.’AndIfeltbadforherbecauseshehadnotreallysaidthatuntil itwaswaytoolate,andI feltbadforherbecause itmeantsomuch to her to have a place to go and put f lowers on the grave onMemorial Day orwhatever. And that didn’tmeananythingtome.

(Ulyssa[female,66])

WhileasiteorlocationdidnotprovidevalueforUlyssa,shedescribedhowadditionalstresswas added to her aunt’s grieving process because of her inability to visit a physical site tomemorialize her brother. Ulyssa believes the differences in burial site preference reflectgenerational differences; however, another participant,whowas even younger thanUlyssa,seemedtoalsofindvalueinasiteorlocation,asUlyssa’saunthad:

Ihavebeentheonewhovisitsthegraveyards,pulledtheweeds,andbroughtf lowersalltheseyears.Iwantedtorespectmy

husband’s wishes but in the same time give myself something to hold onto. That is my GPS coordinates. I have thesatisfactionthathehasaneternalrestingplacebutnottraditionalintheground.Ihavesincethenlearnedhowtoscubadivetovisithisfinalrestingplace.Iamscheduledtodiveitthissummer.

(Gertrude[female,55])

Thisrespondent’shusbandreallywantedtobereturnedtotheseabecauseofhislovefortheoceanandhisbackground in theNavy,which theyboth thoughtwouldmeanscatteringhiscrematedremainsintheocean.Still,Ritalongedforaspecificlocationtovisitherhusbandifshesodesired.Shedecidedonacompromisebyselectingareefburialforhim,whichwouldallowhimtoreturntotheseaandgiveherasitetovisit.

For some, a sitemaybemore than just a place for them tovisit. Itmaymeanhaving alocationforfuturegenerationstovisit,especiallythoseinterestedinfamilyhistory:

I thought, ‘You know something?What’s the number one thing that helps genealogists? Tombstones!’ I found one ofmyrelativestheotherdaythatlivedin1774,andhistombstoneisstilloutthere…Well,it’spriceless.It’sjustpriceless.

(Rita[female,75])

For this participant, whowas interested in genealogy, it was important to have a physicalgravesite for her mother that was beside her father’s grave. Shirley selected to place hermother’s cremated remains in a specific,marked location in addition to an alternative reefburial, despite theadditional costs andefforts associatedwithhaving twodifferent typesofdispositions.Havingatombstoneandsiteforherparentsmeantfuturegenerationswouldbeabletotracethefamilystoryandseeevidencethatthesepeopleexisted.

It isnotuncommon for individuals towant to leave some sort of legacy toprove to theworldthattheyexisted.Infact,howdispositionoccursmaybeatoolto‘liveon’insomeway:

Shewasanindomitablewoman,andgiventhekindofexistenceshelived,hertenacityforlifewasincredible…Shewasupagainstsometerribleodds,andyet,sheclung,clung,clungtolife…Butmymotherneverthrewupherhands,despitelivingin this sensorydeprivedworld that shewas in. Shehad this stubbornwill… I think it’swhatmakesme sohappy aboutEternalReefs,becausesheis inaplaceanddoingsomethingthatkindoftakescareofthatproblemofhernotwantingtoleavethisworldnomatterwhat.

(Natalie[female,78])

Nataliefoundvalueingivinghermomawayto‘liveon’intheworldthroughareefburial.Themother,wholovedlifeandneverwantedto leave, isnowapartofacoralreefhabitatthatwillliveonthroughthecreationofnewmarinegrowth.

Finally, for someparticipants, the stories, legaciesandsymbolicallycontinued livesof thedeceasedaredisplayedandmemorializedoncertaindaysimbuedwithsymbolicmeanings.

Thisisjustagraveyard,andtheyhaveballoonreleasesandstufflikethatatChristmas,andIhaveparticipatedinthat.Yougostandbytheirgrave.Sometimesthey’llhavecandlelightandyou’lllightthecandleforhimoneyear.Andseveralyearsthey’ve had the balloons and where you, at a certain time, everybody’s on the grave, you release the balloons … ThecandlelightI likedmore.Ireallydidn’tcareaboutreleasingballoons.Tome,that’smorepollutionintheenvironment,butoutofrespectforhim,Ididit.

(Wanda[female,61])

Significant dates of remembrance are an important part of the family’s story because theysignify individual lives and collective beliefs that revolve around special days. Days likeMemorialDayandVeteran’sDayhelpthebereavedlegitimizethelivesofthedeceased.

Thephysicalbodyofadeceasedpersonimpactstheinalienablewealthofafamilyinmanyways.Theremainsorthefinalrestingplacebecomepartoftheoverarchingstoryandheritageofafamily.Markingwherethebodyrestsprovidesevidenceforgenerationstocomethataperson’s life was lived and that they played a role in setting up the family for the future.Physical indicationsthatapersonlivedprovidesotherswithaclear ‘memorypicture’ofthedeceased, a basis for genealogical research, and reinforced ideas about collective identities,memories,andmeanings.Forthedeceased,theabilitytoleavealegacyormaintainsymbolicimmortalitygivesthemthefreedomtodieatpeace,knowingtheirlivingwasnotinvain.Thephysicaltracesremainingfromaperson’slifeprovidebenefitsforthedeceased,fortheliving,andforfuturegenerations.

Viewingthebody

Amajor debate related to body disposition relates towhether or not the corpse should beviewedbeforecremationorinterment.Manyfuneraldirectorsassertthatviewingthebodyisacriticalaspectofhealingduringthegrievingprocess(SlocumandCarlson,2011).Asof1998,over68percentofAmericanfuneralsfeaturedanopencasket(Mitford1998).Ofcourse,therateofcremationhasincreasedsincethattime,andunderthatcircumstance,justover15percentofconsumersassociateatraditionalfuneralceremonywithoccurringpriortocremation(National Funeral Directors Association 2014). Still, if you ask a group of individuals, youwouldmostlikelyreceiveaplethoraofdifferentopinions,includingsomewhowantorneedtoseethebodyandotherswhowishtorememberthepersonastheywereinlife.

For one informant, who had also experienced a traumatic loss early in life, the intenseyearningtostandandstareatthebodywasalmostcaptivating:

CertainlythefirstfuneralIeverwenttowasverymemorable.Andthat’sbecauseIwasaround12or13yearsold.Anditwasafriendofminewhodiedofleukemia.Andso,itwasaverytraumaticthingtohavesomeonewhowasyourfriend…Ihadknownhimeversincekindergarten…Andhegotleukemiaanddied.AndIwentwithmyparentstothefuneral,andIremembergoinguptothecoffintolookathimwithmyfather.AndIkindofjustwantedtostandthereandstare.Andtothis day, I can picturewhat he looked like… Butwhat I remember ismy father takingmy arm and pullingme away,becauseIguessIwasstandingtheretoolongstaring…AndheneversaidawordtomebutIgotthisverystrongmessagelike,‘You’renotsupposedtostandthereandstaresolong.’

(Shirley[female,62])

Onecanalmostenvisionthisparticipantasayounggirl,frozeninplacewitheyesaffixedon

herdeceased friend.Somethingmadeher feel thisneed to stare intentlyat thebodyofheryoung, lifeless friend, and yet, something else pulled her away from her fixation. On thesurface, one might say that her father guided her away from this fixation as he certainlyenacted the physical act of leading her away from the casket. On a deeper level, culturalnormsprescribingappropriatebehaviourdirectedherfathertopullheraway.Thisnorm,andthe way it contradicted her innate urge to look, created a lasting memory, imbued withmeaningsaboutappropriateinteractionswiththedead.

One informant reiterated the idea that funeral attendees should act in a certain way ininteractingwithphysicalremains:

Ican’tseedoingthesuitsandtiesandeverybodyuncomfortable,stiffandsittinginchairs,chatting,tryingnottotalkaboutthefactthere’sadeadbodyintheroom.There’sawhiteelephantcalledadeadbodysittingrightthere,butwe’resupposedtobechattingandhavingagreattime.

(Francis[female,52])

Theseindividualsattemptedtoactnaturallyandcarryoncasualconversationbecausetheyfeltitwastheappropriatewaytocommence.Yet,Francisexposesthembyhighlightinghowtrulyunnaturalandawkwardthisis.Byexposingtheirrationalityoftheiractions,Francisisreallycallingintoquestiontheculturalnormsofcontinuingaseeminglyridiculousritual.Also,the‘elephantintheroom’metaphorwasemployedheretodescribethegroup’swillfuldisregardofthecorpseintheroom.

Thecorpseiscertainlyacriticalpartofsense-makingforindividuals,butitdoessoinmanydifferentways.Earlyexperiencescanbecaptivatingordistressing,butmostofall,theyleaveamemorytrace.Anotherissuethatarosewastheinfluenceofculturalnormsonappropriateinteractions with the body. Prescriptions about how to behave are based on culturalunderstandingsandagreements related to the ritualathand,but therewasalsoevidence intheseinterviewsthatconsumersmaybecallingintoquestionthenormsthatholdnomeaningforthem.Finally,theurgetovieworavoidthebodyisoftenbasedonpersonalpreferences.For some, it is comforting to see that the person is actually deceased, to obtain a sense ofclosure,or tohavethat finalglimpseofa lovedone.Forothers, itmaybediscomfortingtohavethecorpseasthefinalmemory,toseeothersinteractwiththebody,orsimplytobeintheroomwithadeadperson.Inanycase,thedeceased’sbodyplaysamajorroleinhumanunderstandingofthemeaningoflife,deathandthephysicalbody.

Discussion

This study explores how people make sense of life and death in the context of bodydisposition.Ourwork has several implications for theory and practice. First, it extends our

understandingofdisposition.Physicalbodiesthatwereoncefullof lifearerendered lifeless;theirvalue-in-usehasexpired.Asthevalueoftangiblebodiesdiminishesorexpires,people,whohave claims tophysical remains,mustmakedecisions aboutdisposition.Yet, survivorsmustaddressbodydispositionata timewhendecision-making is impairedbecauseofgrief(Gentryetal.,1995b).Inaddition,muchlikethedispositionofaspecialpossession,dispositionof the body requires both spatial and emotional detachment (Kleine and Baker, 2004).Attachment to thebody canbe transferred to attachment to aburial site or avirtual spacewhere communicationwith the deceased continues to occur. The transference allows for acontinued relationship between the living and the deceased. In addition, attachment to thebodycanbeshared.Remainscanbecomepartoftheinalienablewealthofthefamily,aswhenashesaredividedamongtheliving.Dispositionisaprocessthatoccursinstagesandrequiresdetachment (Kleine and Baker, 2004), and, in the case of the body, transference from onevesseltoanother.

Second, the study extends our understanding about transitions, in this case the transitionbetweenlifeanddeathforboththedeceasedandthebereaved.Thebodytransitionsbetweenstates,leavingmemorytracesthatarecentralasthelivingmakesenseofthelifeanddeathofloved ones, as well as their future selves.Memory traces can be found in places, materialobjectsandevenotherpeople,asinthecaseoforgandonation.Thesetracesbecomepartofthe inalienable, and therefore priceless, wealth of families, and symbolically allow thedeceasedtoliveon.

Third,dispositionchoicesimpactidentity,whichisfluidevenafterdeath(BonsuandBelk2003). Some alternatives to body disposition allow for a unique form of psychologicalappropriation and self-extension (Belk, 1988). For example, by ‘becoming one’ with otherpeople,pets,objectsorplaces, the identityof thedeceased is symbolically intermingledandextended into other entities. Here, the individual identity of the deceased crosses a porousboundaryandbecomespartof the collective (LastovickaandFernandez, 2005). In thisway,places and objects serve to tangibilize the deceased’s identity and thereby facilitatereconstitutionandfluidityofthedeceased’sselfintothefuture.

Acknowledgements

Theauthorsappreciate thedeath-careserviceprovidersatEternalReefsandRamseyCreekPreservesforhelpingtorecruitparticipantsandforallowingthefirstauthortheopportunitytoobservetheirservices.Wealsoareindebtedtotheinformantsforsharingtheirstories.ThisresearchwasfundedinpartbyagrantfromtheAssociationforConsumerResearchandtheShethFoundationinsupportofTransformativeConsumerResearch(TCR).

References

Belk,R.W.(1988)‘Possessionsandtheextendedself,’JournalofConsumerResearch,15(2),pp.139–168.

Belk,R.W.,Fischer,E.andKozinets,R.V.(2013)QualitativeConsumerandMarketingResearch.ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications.

Bonsu, S.K. and Belk, R.W. (2003) ‘Do not go cheaply into that good night: death-ritualconsumptioninAsante,Ghana,’JournalofConsumerResearch,30(1),pp.41–55.

Bradford, T.W. (2009) ‘Intergenerationally gifted asset dispositions,’ Journal of ConsumerResearch,36(1),pp.93–111.

CremationAssociationofNorthAmerica(2013)TransportofCrematedRemains.Availableat:www.cremationassociation.org/?page=Transport(Accessed:8September2013).

Curasi, C.F., Price, L.L. and Eric J. Arnould (2004) ‘How individuals’ cherished possessionsbecomefamilies’inalienablewealth,’JournalofConsumerResearch,31(3),pp.609–622.

Gentry, J.W., Kennedy, P.F., Paul, C. and Hill, R.P. (1995a) ‘Family transitions during grief:discontinuitiesinhouseholdconsumptionpatterns,’JournalofBusinessResearch,34(1),pp.67–79.

Gentry,J.W.,Kennedy,P.F.,Paul,C.andHill,R.P.(1995b)‘Thevulnerabilityofthosegrievingthe death of a loved one: implications for public policy,’ Journal of Public Policy andMarketing,14(Spring),128–142.

Grayson,K.andShulman,D.(2000)‘Indexicalityandtheverificationfunctionofirreplaceablepossessions:asemioticanalysis,’JournalofConsumerResearch,27(1),pp.17–30.

Jacoby, J., Berning, C.K. and Dietvorst, T.F. (1977) ‘What about disposition?’ Journal ofMarketing,41(2),pp.22–28.

Kleine,S.S.andBaker,S.M.(2004)‘Anintegrativereviewofmaterialpossessionattachment,’AcademyofMarketingScienceReview,2004(1),pp.1–35.

Lastovicka, J.L. and Fernandez, K.V. (2005) ‘Three paths to disposition: the movement ofmeaningfulpossessionstostrangers,’JournalofConsumerResearch,31(4),pp.813–823.

McAlexander, J.H. (1991) ‘Divorce, the disposition of the relationship, and everything,’AdvancesinConsumerResearch,18,pp.43–48.

Mitford,J.(1998)TheAmericanWayofDeathRevisited,NewYork:Knopf.NationalFuneralDirectorsAssociation(2013)TrendsinFuneralService.Availableat:

http://nfda.org/media-center/trends-in-funeral-service.html(Accessed:28August2013).NationalFuneralDirectorsAssociation(2014)ConsumerPreferenceforCremationExpectedto

SurpassBurialin2015.Availableat:http://nfda.org/news-a-events/all-press-releases/4046-consumer-preference-for-cremation-expected-to-surpass-burial-in-2015.html(Accessed:9April2014).

Price, L.L., Arnould, E.J. and Curasi, C.F. (2000) ‘Older consumers’ disposition of specialpossessions,’JournalofConsumerResearch,27(2),pp.179–201.

Price, L.L., Arnould, E.J. andMoisio, R. (2006), ‘Making contextsmatter: selecting researchcontexts for theoretical insights,’ In Belk, R.W. (ed.)Handbook of Qualitative ResearchMethodsinMarketing.Northampton:EdwardElgarPublishing,pp.106–125.

Sanburn,J.(2013)‘ThenewAmericanwayofdeath,’TimeMagazine,June2013,pp.30–37.Sayre, S. (1994) ‘Possessions and identity in crisis: meaning and change for victims of the

Oaklandfirestorm,’AdvancesinConsumerResearch,11,pp.109–114.Schouten,J.W.(1991) ‘Selvesintransition:symbolicconsumptioninpersonalritesofpassage

andidentityreconstruction,’JournalofConsumerResearch,17(4),pp.412–425.Slocum, J. and Carlson, L. (2011) Final Rights: Reclaiming the American Way of Death.

Hinesburg,VT:UpperAccess,Inc.Turner,V.W.(1969)TheRitualProcess:StructureandAnti-Structure.Chicago:Aldine.VanGennep,A.(1909)TheRitesofPassage.London:RoutledgeandKeganPaul.

15Consumeracceptanceofradicalalternativestohumandisposal

AnexaminationoftheBelgianmarketplace*

LouiseCanning,IsabelleSzmiginandCathyVaessen

Theenvironmentalchallenge

With the growing recognition of the consequences ofman’s negative impact on the earth’sfinelybalancedecosystem,peopleareencouragedtoadoptbehaviouralpatternstominimisetheuseofnaturalresources.Inamovetowardsmoremindfulconsumption(Sheth,SethiaandSrinivas, 2011) we might be asked to eschew excess consumption, relinquish productownership, or at the very least engage in recycling activities. Such actions are intended tolimit,ifnoteliminate,demandforproductsthatdrawfromfinitenaturalresources.However,insomemarkets,demandisunlikelytodropandthenotionsofreuseandrecyclingbringwithit particular challenges. One such sector is the funeral market place. In 2010 the worldpopulation stood at 6.9 billion and is expected to reach at least 9.7 billion by 2100(Anonymous,2014).Astheworldbecomesincreasinglypopulated,sotheremovalofhumanremains becomes a fundamental environmental issue with regards land use, material andresource consumption, waste and emissions (Canning and Szmigin, 2010). There is asubstantial body of literature on death and dying within sociology and anthropology (e.g.HockeyandHallam,2001),butmuchofthisdrawsfrompracticesinBritain,NorthAmericaand Australia to comment specifically on Anglo-Saxon death rituals (Vandenporpe, 2000).Addedtothisisthefactthatthereisapaucityofconsumerresearchwhichexaminesdisposalof thedead (Gentry,Hill andKennedy, 1994;Gabel,Mansfield andWestbrook, 1996;Bonsuand Belk, 2003). Our chapter addresses these gaps by considering consumer response tocremation alternatives, focusing specifically on the Belgian marketplace and in doing so,drawing from selected literature on identity, sequestration (Mellor and Schilling, 1993) anddisposal(Rumbleetal.,2014)inrelationtodeath.Belgiumrepresentsaparticularlyinteresting

settingbecauseoftheinstitutionalandculturaldifferencesbetweentheFlemishandFrench-speakingregionsofthecountry.Westartbyintroducingtheinstitutionalsettingofmortuarypractice in Belgium, factors driving interest in disposal alternatives and we give a briefdescription of two processes that might substitute existing cremation technology.We thenconsider French-speaking consumer responses to these alternatives and the implications forthoseinthefuneralindustrywishingtopresentcremationsubstitutesinBelgium.

Institutionalsetting

Theinstitutionalsettinginwhichfuneralritesareenactedissignificantbecauseitdeterminesconsumeraccess tobodydisposal. InBelgium,ahybridmodelof serviceprovisionexists inwhich a mixture of commercial organisations and public bodies (at the level of regionalcommunes)operatecemeteryandcrematoria,whilefuneraldirectingisundertakenbyprofit-makingentities.Withregardscrematoriainparticular,thereare12cremationsitesinBelgiummanagedby4societies(Anonymous,2011a).Irrespectiveofthenatureofthedisposalservice,cemetery and crematoria operators must comply with legislative requirements, which inBelgium(comparedtootherEuropeancountries)isuniqueinthatthiscanvary.Atthestartofthe twenty-first century, and particularly in relation to cremation for example, strictenvironmental regulations were in place in the northern region of Flanders, while in theBrusselscommune,emissionsfilteringsystemswereadvised(butnotobligatory)andWalloniaencouraged continuous improvement in emissions reductions, but did not mandate targetreductionsorsystemsinstallation(DaviesandMates,2005).

Howbodydisposal isdealtwith in termsof thestructureofserviceprovisionandwithinspecifiedlegislativerequirementsobviouslyhassomebearingonfuneralconsumption,butitiscultural and religious norms that are significant given the influence of these in shapingconsumer disposal practices and the likely acceptance of alternatives. Historically, BelgianmortuarytraditionhasbeendominatedbytheCatholicChurch(DaviesandMates,2005),andburialtheonlydisposaloptionuntilthelatterhalfofthetwentiethcentury.Asanalternativetothis,cremationwaspromotedfromthelatenineteenthcenturybynon-Catholicindividualsmotivated in part to create funeral rites adapted to the requirements of atheists. However,Belgiumwasarelative latecomercomparedtootherpartsofWesternEurope,as itwasnotuntiltheCatholicChurchrecognisedcremationasanapproveddisposalmethodin1966,anditenteredtheBelgianlegalsystemin1971,thattheBelgianpopulationwerefreetoconsideritas a suitable alternative to burial. Cremation was initially associated with the rejection ofreligionandwhile thishistorical connection is important, itdoesnotnecessarilyhold,giventhat practicing Catholics might opt for cremation and atheists burial. Indeed, the growing

acceptanceofcremationasasuitabledisposalmethod(inacountrywhere80percentofthepopulationarebaptisedaccordingtotheCatholicritualandthemajorityofsocialgroupswantapriestas thecelebrant in the funeral ritual–Vandenporpe,2000) is evidencedbydisposalstatisticsthatrecorded383cremationsin1969(DaviesandMates,2005),comparedto49,201by2009,thisrepresenting47percentofalldeathsinBelgiumthatyear(Anonymous,2011a).Suchgrowingpopularitymightbeexplainedbyanumberoffactors:forexamplethecapacityforthebereavedtomaintainthememoryofthedeceased(avoidingthoughtsassociatedwiththematerialdecompositionofthecorpse),theremovalofobligationstovisitandtendaburialplot(infavourofmorepersonalisedandprivatememorialisationalternatives)andlowercostsfor cremation compared to those that burial incurs such as plot purchase and extendedmaintenancefees(Vandenporpe,2000).

Mortuaryritualisperformedaccordingtothecustomsandtraditionsofaparticularculturalcontext.Asaremotepracticeinmostpeoples’livesitisnotonewherethemantraofreduce,reuseorrecycleiseasilyapplicableevenifthebereavedendeavourtomakefuneraldecisionsbased on their perceptions of the deceased’s values and environmental consciousness. Formany, bereavement presents the individual with a situation in which distress purchasedecisions are made regarding rites prior to actual body disposal, for example bodypreparation, sending of funeral invitations and the farewell ceremony itself. Funeralconsumptionpresentsthebereavedwithdecisionsofconsiderablepsychologicalandfinancialconsequence,buttheconditionsofurgencyandemotionalvulnerabilityunderwhichdecisionsare frequentlymademeans that suchpurchases canbe impulsiveand irrational (Baumeiser,2002; Gentry, Hill and Kennedy, 1994). This is different where the deceased (and/or closefamilymembers)engageinanexplicitanddeliberatefuneralplanningprocessaheadofdeathand in which conscious efforts to minimise environmental consequences of disposalconsumptioncouldbemade.Suchattemptsaresignificantgiventhatpre-disposalrites(suchas body preparation or farewell ceremonies) are thought to be more environmentallydamaging than thedisposalact itself (typicallyburialorcremation) (KrijzerandKok,2011).However reluctant individuals might be to participate in funeral ritual decisions,consumerising of market provision is well-established and now includes choices that arepresentedinthemarketplacebyfuneraldirectingbusinessesasbeingmoreenvironmentallybenign; for example, coffins made from alternative materials such as banana leaves,cardboard,wickerorwool.

Bodydisposal:theenvironmentalchallenge

Inmovingtowardamoresustainableformofexistence,eachoftheelementsinaparticular

consumption system need to be examined in order to identify and encourage behaviouralpatterns that are of reduced environmental consequence. This is critical for three reasons–firstitisembeddedintheculturalcontextandpracticesofasocialgroup;second,themeansby which a corpse is physically transformed is something with which individuals do notreadilyengage(Vandenporpe,2000);andthird, thedisposalactbringswith itenvironmentalconsequences both in terms of resource consumption and pollution.Our intention is not toargue the environmental benefits of one disposal method over another. Nevertheless, it isimportanttoconsidersomeofthechallengesposedbytraditionalmortuarypracticesofburialandcremationtounderstandbetterhowalternativesmightreducetheenvironmentalimpact.

Startingwithburial,asthedominantdisposalmethodinBelgium(representing53percentofdeathsin2009(Anonymous,2011a),itsprincipalnegativeenvironmentalimpactscentreonland-useandhumantoxicity(KrijzerandKok,2011).Regardingland-use,evenifplotswithinacemeteryarekeptforafiniteperiodoftime,areasreservedforburialretainthatpurposeasotherlanduseschangeordevelop;andthisiscertainlythecaseindenselypopulatedareasinBelgium. InBrussels, for example, expansionof the city alongwith its population since the1800smeans that the cemeteryof Ixellesnow stands in theheart of the studentquarter. InGrez,intheregionofWallonia,thecemeteryhasbeenexpandedbytakingoveragriculturallandnearby,whileinDoiceau,apublicparkhasbeenconvertedintoacemetery.Besideslanduse,environmentalconsequencesofburialareassociatedwithhumantoxicity,centringarounddecompositionandthepotentialcontaminationofnearbysoilandwatersuppliesbyviruses,bacteria and toxic substances such as dental fillings as well as nitrogen and phosphorousreleases(KrijzerandKok,2011).

While burial might still be the predominant disposal method, the shift to cremation isexpectedtocontinueinBelgiumandalongwithittheneedtoincreasecapacitybybuildingnew crematoria facilities (Anonymous, 2009a; Anonymous, 2011b). The impacts normallyassociated with cremation centre on energy consumption (used to reach temperatures inexcessof800°Cduringthetwo-hourincinerationprocess),andemissions.Accordingtoa2002studyundertaken inFlanders,healthcarecosts resulting fromatmosphericpollutionstoodat2.3billionEuros(Anonymous,2009b)anditmightbeexpectedthatcremationcontributestothis, given, for example, thathydrofluoric acidand sulphurdioxidewouldbepumpedbackinto the atmosphere, and cremation is estimated to account for 8 per cent of mercuryemissions inBelgium (Anonymous, 2011c).With regards disposal of ashes,Belgians arenotpermitted to retain the urn, and instead have two options, to either scatter ashes (over acemetery lawn or at sea) or bury them in a grave or columbarium.While, themajority ofashesarescatteredoncemeterylawns(Vandenporpe,2000),withcommemorativeplaquesoncemeterywallstheonlyvisibletraceofthedeceased,ashifttoplacingashesincolumbariumshas started to emerge in recentdecades (Coenegrachts, 1999).This trendalsobringswith itnegative environmental consequences of land-use associated with crematoria (Krijzer and

Kok,2011).

Cremationalternatives

Twosubstitutesfortheexistingcremationprocessconsistoftechnologybasedoncryogenicsand alkaline hydrolysis. Cryomation (the patented process based on cryogenic technology)involvesfreezingthebodyto–196°Cusingliquidnitrogen.Subjectingthebodytocontrolledpressure then reduces it to smallerpieces fromwhichnon-organicmaterials (e.g.metalandplastic prostheses) can be removed. The remaining organic materials undergo a furtherfragmentationprocess,followedbyfreeze-drying,andthefinaltreatmenttoreducepathogensresultsinasterile,odourlessmixoffragmentsequivalenttoonethirdoftheoriginalweightofthe body and coffin (Krizjer and Kok, 2011). Resomation (the patented process involvingalkalinehydrolysis)comprisessubmergingthebodyinastrongalkalinesolution(amixtureofpotassiumhydroxideandwater)–thesolutionisheatedto180°Candcirculatedcontinuously,afterwhichtheliquidiscooledanddrained.Theskeletalremainsareremovedanddried,andmaterials(suchasplasticandmetals)separated,leavingthebonestobecrushedintoawhitepowderinaprocessor(similartocremulatorsusedattheendoftheincinerationprocess).

These alternative processes and cremation are similar in that each provides rapidtransformation and reduction of the corpse. However, the cremation substitutes representfundamentalshifts(awayfromcombustion)inthenatureofthetransformationprocessesandtheir developers suggest that they offer improved environmental performance throughreduced energy consumption and emissions. Independent evaluation of different disposaltechnologies does in fact suggest they are more environmentally benign compared tocremationandburial(KrizjerandKok,2011).

Changes in legislative provision to accommodate these cremation alternatives (currentlybeing pursued in Flanders as well as in Holland, Banks, 2014) and acceptance by religiousbodies are important to allow their introduction. This latter point is significant given thesymbolicconnectionofthebodyandsoulforRomanCatholicsandthebreakingofthislinkwhenthebodyisdestroyed.DeliberationbytheCatholicChurchoverthedestructionofthecorpse would be necessary just as it reflected on cremation before its acceptance as anappropriate disposal method (Walter, 2005). Besides legal and religious factors, of criticalimportance to any eventual launch of either cryomation or resomation is consumerrecognitionofthesetechnologiesassuitablesubstitutesforcremationtechnology,anditistothisthatwenowdirectourattention.

Belgianconsumeracceptanceofcremationalternatives

The exploratorynature of our investigation intoBelgian consumer funeral decision-makingregarding disposalmethod and responses to the cremation alternatives led us to use focusgroupstodevelopdescriptivedata.Theinherentlysensitivenatureoffuneralpracticesmightleadresearcherstousein-depthinterviews.However,whileallparticipantshadpriorfuneralinvolvement,wedidnotseektoproberespondentfuneralexperiencesinsuchawaythatthelossofalovedonemightbringhighlyemotionalresponsestothefore.Ratherourintentionwas to specifically examine the action of disposal and in using focus groups, to provide asetting in which participants could share experiences and discuss their responses to theproposedcremationalternatives.Three focusgroupdiscussionswereconducted,with the23participants being drawn from the predominantly French-speaking regions of Brussels andWallonia, these representing approximately 40 per cent of the Belgian population (Sketch,2005).An inductive exploratoryapproachwasused (Miles andHubermann, 1994), inwhichthematicanalyseswereundertakenoftheverbatimtranscriptscreatedfromtherecordingofeachfocusgroupdiscussion.Wenowdirectourattentiontotheexaminationofthesefindings.

Choiceofdisposalmethod:burialorcremation

Lookingfirstatexistingdisposalpractices,selectionofburialorcremationcanbeconsideredboth in terms of choice regarding the decisionmade on behalf of the deceased (at time ofneed) or one’s own disposal (and which might therefore be expressed in advance). Withregardsburial,besidesreligiousbeliefs,factorscontributingtorespondentpreferenceforthisdisposalriteincludedthedesireforindividualstohaveasiteinmemoryofthedeceasedandforsome,asawayofdealingwiththesuddenandunexpectedlossofalovedone.

Ididn’twanttohavemyhusbandcremated,andI’mnotsurethatIcanexplainwhy…butitwasverydifficult,andverysuddenandyousaytoyourselfthat(ifhewascremated)…hewoulddisappearcompletely…soIwantedsomehowtokeepalittlepartofhim.

(Anna)

Anna’sexplanationsurroundingthechoiceofburialforherhusbandexemplifiestheanxietyandemotionalinstabilityfeltatthissuddenloss.Itmightalsosuggestthatwhilecremationforherwouldhavemeantafinalandbrutal‘rupture’inthisrelationship,burialontheotherhandenabledhertomaintainaconnectiontoherhusbandandthussustaininsomewayherownself-identity(MellorandSchilling,1993).

ThefinalitytoarelationshipandtothephysicalpresenceofthedeceasedwhichAnnafeltcremation imposed,wasmirrored by those respondentswhohad experienced cremation aspartofthefuneralritual.Respondentreflectionsontheirexperiencesofcremationexemplifyperhaps the tension between the emotional connection with the deceased and the bodilyremainsofthatindividualwhichrequiredisposal(Rumbleetal.,2014).Atthepointwherethe

farewellceremonyendsandthecorpseisgivenoverforincineration,respondentsfeltasenseofabruptnessinthisearlystageofthebereavementprocess.

Incineration,orcremation,let’ssay,isdifficultpsychologically…thefactthatyou’rethereandyouseethecoffindisappear.

(Beatrice)

WhenmyMumdied,itwasdifficult…havingchosen(shedecidedbeforehand),themomentwhenyou’refacedwithit,myGod,itmakesyoushiver.

(Sandrine)

There is a distinction however, between the experience during the grieving processimmediatelyfollowingbereavementandoncesometimehaspassed.Thisisevidencedbythefactthat,notwithstandingtheemotionaldifficultywiththeperceivedabruptnessofcremation,it offered seemingly practical benefits. A number of factors led respondents to prefercremation,ourfindingsreflectingpreviousstudiesconductedinothercountries.Thisincludes,forexample,discomfortwiththeimageofputrefactionconnectedwithnaturaldecompositionof the body (Davies and Shaw 1995; Kellaher et al., 2005). Besides such imaginings, moreseemingly practical motivations were apparent, including physical, financial and emotionalburdenassociatedwithburialandmemorialisation,suchasengaginginplotmaintenanceormarkingdeathanniversarieswithcemeteryvisits.

(Thethingwithburial)ishavingtogoeveryyearandtorelivethedeathtwiceayear–theanniversaryofthedeathandon1stNovember,onAllSaintsday.

(Sandrine)

Animportantpointinrelationtothispreferenceisthatwhilstcremationmightofferpracticalbenefitsforbodydisposal, itdoesnotmeanthatrespondentsdissociatethemselvesfromthedeceased.Infact,asobservedbyVandenporpe(2000),individualsopttodirectfeelingsofgriefandmemorialisationactsinalternativepersonalisedandperhapsmoreprivateways.

Me,Ithinkthatthepersonwhohasdiedisstillaliveinyourheartandhead,notanywhereelse…andIthinkthat’sthebesthomageyoucanpaysomeone…youkeeptheirmemoryalivethroughothers…ashesdon’tserveanypurpose…thereisn’tanybodythere.

(Virginie)

Despite factors being identified favouring either of the established disposal methods, thedominantpreferenceamongstrespondentswasforcremationoverburial.Thisissignificantinthatitisconsistentwithpriorresearch(HiernauxandVandendorpe,2000),reflectsthemoveaway from burial, which in turn could theoretically lessen the environmental burdensassociated with burial. Moreover, the historical and predicted future growth in cremationopensupopportunitiesforcomparabledisposalmethodswhereasocietyhasalreadyacceptedtechnologiesthatinvolvetherapidtransformationandreductionofacorpse.

Interpretationofcryomationandresomationprocessdescriptions

Infocusgroupsessions,descriptionsofthetwocremationalternativeswerecloselyalignedtotheinformationpresentedintherespectivecompanywebsites,inwhichwordsthatmightbedeemedassensitiveor inappropriateforassociationwithfuneralrites (suchas ‘basin’ inthecaseofalkalinehydrolysisor‘compost’forcryogenics)wereeithercontainedorabsentfromthosecompanies’materialcontent.

Themostcommonresponsesexpressedbyfocusgroupparticipantsrelatingtothealkalinehydrolysistechniquewere

discomfortwiththenotionofacorpsebeingdissolved,

‘Idon’twanttoenduplikeasoup’.

(Eric)

‘ohitdisgustsme…remindsmeofhorrorfilms’.

(Jean-Paul)

the associationwith the Pastor PandyCase (in 1997, Pastor Pandy and his daughterAgnès were arrested in the Belgian capital for having killed six members of theirfamilyandplacingtheminanacidbathtodissolvethecorpses),dislikeoftheideathatthesolutionusedintheprocesscanbedisposedofvianormalwatertreatmentsystems,

‘…couldn’tweendupdrinkingthisifitgoesintothewatersystemandthenormaltreatmentprocess?’.

(Edith)

Regardingpointsoneandtwo,associationsweremadewithaciddespiteexplicitexplanationsbeinggiventhattheprocessisalkalinebased.Suchaninterpretationisnotuncommonandissomething which the technology suppliers seek to counter via, for example, their onlineexplanationsoftheprocess.ConsumeracceptanceandcommercialoperationofresomationinNorthAmericasince2011clearlyindicatesthatinitialinterpretationscaninfactbecountered.However, in this investigation, references made to the Pastor Pandy criminal case areobviously specific to the cultural context of French-speaking parts of Belgium and mightarguablyprovemorechallengingtoovercome.Besidesthisculturallyspecificreference,thereisanapparentdifficultyindisassociatingthebodilyrepresentationofanindividual’sidentity(MellorandShilling,1993)fromtheremainsorwastethatacadaverrepresents(Rumbleetal.,2014).Furthermore, leavingasidefurtherexplanationsnecessarytocorrectmisinterpretationofthisprocess,responsesmightalsoimplylessinclinationtowardsdispersalofhumanremainswithinenvironmentsinhabitedbythelivinginBelgiumcomparedtoothercountries(Rumbleetal.,2014).

Compared to alkalinehydrolysis, the cryogenicprocessdrewanoverallmore favourableresponse,namelythat

itwasperceivedasbeingmorenatural

‘it’samorenaturalwayofpreservingthings…mmm…insomeway,coldseemsmorelogical’.(Alicia)‘it’snatural…fireexistselsewhere,andsodoesice…’.

(Virginie)

itwasconsideredcleaner

‘itseemslesspolluting,cleaner…somaybeit’sanOKalternativetocremation’.

(Jean-Paul)

itwould fit better from a cultural perspective (there being no negative associationswithcriminalcases).

‘itseemstofitbetterwithourtraditions…withwhatwealreadyknow’.

(Sarah)

Factors thatmight explain the response and interpretationof theprocessdescriptions couldincludeunderstandingoftheprocessesusedforbodydisposalaswellasclosenessoffitwiththe incumbentcombustionmethod.Focusgroupobservations indicated thatparticipantsdidnot have difficulty in understanding the principles of the alternative technologies althoughtechnicalknowledgeofthechemicalandengineeringprocessesaswellastheirenvironmentalimpactwaslimited.Soforexample,prominentquestionsinfocusgroupdiscussionsrelatedto

the nature of the treatment of the alkaline hydrolysis solution before this mixturereturnstothenaturalwatercycle

‘can this really be better for the environment… the liquidmust have to be treated before going into thewatercycle,sothatrequiresenergy…’.

(Philippe)

thecarbonfootprintofliquidnitrogenproduction

‘whathappenstothegasesemittedintheprocess…don’ttheythemselvescausepollution?’

(Robert)

thetextureandappearanceofashesresultingfromeachoftheseprocesses.

‘withnormalcremation,weknowwhatwe’regetting–ashes…butwhatwouldwegetattheendofthis(alkalinehydrolysis)?’

(Guilllaume)

‘sowhatyou’dgetattheendthis(cryomation)wouldbebiggerthanashesfromcremation?’

(Maude)

‘howmuch would we be left with after Cryomation compared to ashes from cremation? … because we knowwherewearewhenitcomestoashes…’

(Anna)

With regards ‘closeness of fit’ with the current incineration technology, clearly all threeprocesses involverapidtransformationofthecorpse.Whileeachinvolvesdifferentchemicaland engineering systems, common to all three is the fact that treatment of the corpse isundertaken in units in which the process is not readily visible. This reflects the overallsequestration of death in modern society (Mellor and Schilling, 1993) including the act ofdisposalinwhichthereisanelementofremovalordistancefromthetransformationprocess(Vandenporpe, 2000). Yet in being introduced to cremation alternatives, respondents arerequiredtoconsiderwhatactuallyhappenstothebody,anditisarguablytheexposuretothispart of the funeral rite that creates discomfort (irrespective of the method used). Suchconsideration isseemingly lessproblematicwhenrespondentsreflectonthetechnologyandprocesswithoutassociatingthesewiththeidentityorindeedthedeathofsomeonetowhomtheyarecloselyconnected.

For me the crematorium is the house of disappearing …Whether it is in a basin, via freezing or incineration … you’repreparedinthesamewayasforcremationandyoucomeoutthesame.Whatisgoingoninbetween…ittakesabouttwohours…wellwedon’tactuallycare.

(Robert)

Ifyouaren’tthefamilymemberwhohastomakethechoice,youwouldn’tknowwhichtechniquewasused,ifforexample,thethreetechniqueswerehousedinthesamebuilding.SoIdon’tseewheretheproblemis.

(Jan)

Here,bothRobertandJanappeartobeabletoconsiderthebodyasseparatefromtheidentityofthedeceased,asmatterwhichrequirestreatment.Thefactthatthetransformationprocessis hidden allows respondents to distance themselves from the physical destruction of thecorpseanditsrenderingintosubstancesthatenabledisposal.

From considering disposal preferences and respondent interpretations of resomation andcryomation,wenowexaminehow these cremationalternativesmightbe introduced in themarketplace, focusing specifically on communication activities and pricing. The logic intouching on only these two aspects is that the disposalmethods involve fixed technologies(butwhichwouldbepartofservicesofferedbyafuneraldirectororcrematorium)andcouldonlybeaccessedthroughlegallyrecognisedcrematoriumsites.

Presentingcremationalternativesinthemarketplace

To consider either resomation or cryomation as cremation alternatives requires thatindividuals be aware of and understand these technologies. There is consequently both aneducational and informational aspect to communication activitieswhichhas to precede anypromotionalwork thatmight be used to guide body disposal decisions. Thismight includepublic relations and journalistic items featured in, for example, news and current affairsprogrammes or printed publications in which the reasons for the alternatives and theprinciples of the technologies can be presented. Such presentations could feature around 1November, All Saints day, which as an annual event commemorating the dead, triggersextensivemediacoverageandmuchmoreopendiscussionsurroundingdeathanddying.Animportantfactorismessagecontentanditspresentation.Consistentwiththesequestrationofdeath(MellorandSchilling,1993)anddissociationfromcorpsetransformation(Vandenporpe,2000) respondents expressed preference for communications that explained the broadprinciples of the processes and the associated benefits rather than providing technical orgraphicdetailsofthesystems.

I suppose the fact that no one here knew that (after cremation) bones are ground to reduce them to powder shows ourignoranceonthesubject,andwedon’treallytrytofindoutmore.Anditwouldthesamehere,knowingthat theprocessinvolvesfreeze-dryingordissolutionandthatit’smoreecological,that’sallthat’sneeded.

(Robert)

Communicationactivitiescontainingrationalmessagesatpre-timeneed,andaccess(viasocialmediasites)tovideocontentfeaturingtheenvironmentalbenefitsoftheprocessesaspartofnews items, discussions or documentaries would at least go some way to generatingawarenessandplacingcremationalternativesinthepossiblechoicesetofindividualsaspartofadvancedandexplicitfuneralplanning.

Aspartoffuneralplanningundertakenbythebereavedfacedwithattime-needdecisions,funeral directors would be essential both in presenting cremation alternatives as disposaloptions and explaining the processes. This however presumes that the bereaved wish toconsiderdisposalalternativeswhenmakingdistresspurchasedecisions,ratherthanrevertingtodisposalmethodspracticedwithintheirsocialgroup.Nevertheless,funeralparloursmightlistresomationandcryomationaspossibledisposalchoiceswithintheirserviceprovisionsandprovideverybriefdescriptionsofthemethods.Thecontentandtoneofcommunicationinthissituation requires the balancing between the provision of some factual content but morecriticallyamessagethatempathiseswiththebereavedduringaperiodofextremeemotionalvulnerability.InNorthAmericawheretheresomationprocessisincommercialoperation,thisisofferedbyonefuneralparlouraspartofitscremationserviceandpresentedas‘FlamelessCremation’, with the operator providing a very short description of the process andenvironmentalbenefitsalongsidecoastal,waterandsky-basedphotographicimages.

Suchsummativeintroductionsandevocationsofthiscremationalternativeareimportantto

bring this into an individual’s choice set. However, as with other aspects of the funeralbusiness,informationprovision,explanationandevenguidanceiscentredverymuchonone-to-onediscussionsbetweenundertakerrepresentativesandthebereavedwhomusteitherputinplacethedecisionspreviouslyexpressedbythedeceasedormakechoicesthemselves.

It’s very similar to selling funeral cover… because these are subjectswhere really the discussion is between the companyrepresentativeandum,thepersonconcerned…ifyou’vegotsomebodytheretoansweryourquestions,thenit’smucheasier.Youcouldn’treallydoabigcommunicationscampaign.Thatwouldbeabitstrange.WellinBelgiumatleast.

(Robert)

Intermsofpricingofalternativetechnologies,respondentsbelievedthatproductspositionedasmoreenvironmentallybenignaretypicallysetathigherprices.However,withregardsthecremation alternatives, respondents felt that prices for these should be comparable to thosechargedforcremation,giventhereducedenergyconsumptionassociatedwithboth.ThisisthestrategyadoptedinNorthAmericabythefuneralparlourAnderson-McQueen,wherethefirstcommercialinstallationofresomationtechnology(underthenameFlamelessCremation)hasbeeninoperationsince2011.

Conclusion

Thischapterhasaddedtounderstandingofdeathritualsbyexaminingconsumeracceptanceof cremation alternatives in French-speaking parts of Belgium. The chapter introduces thereadertotheprocessinvolvedinbodydisposalandpossiblefuturepractices.Resultsfromtheempirical investigation suggested that cryomation might be more readily accepted thanresomationespecially in termsofculturalsensitivities inBrusselsandWallonia. Interestinglyhowever, as amethod of disposal, resomation is already in commercial operation in somestates in North America and this presents other countries and the funeral industry withevidenceofrecognitionbyreligiousbodies (Mirkes,2008)andconsumeracceptance.Addtothis the environmental impact analysis commissioned by the Dutch funeral group Yarden(KrizjerandKok,2011) inwhichresomationwasconcludedtobethemostenvironmentallybenign and one can understand the recent drive by the Flemish Funeral Council to seekchanges in legislative provision in Flanders and the Netherlands to allow for resomation(under the brand name Bio-Cremation – Banks, 2014). Even if legislative changes areintroduced in Flanders, regulatory differences in Brussels and Wallonia, and consumerinterpretationsoftheresomationprocessandassociationswiththePastorPandycriminalcase,present particular challenges for the funeral industry in these two French-speaking parts ofBelgium. Perhaps more time must elapse and a more extensive process of informationexchangeandcommunicationmustbeplayedoutbeforeconsumersinBrusselsandWallonia

considerresomationasasuitablecremationalternativeandinpreferencetocryomation.

Note

*ThischapterdrawsfrompostgraduateresearchundertakenbyCathyVaessen.

References

Anonymous, (2009a) ‘Projet création d’un crematorium au sein de la région du centre’, LaLouvière:EspaceEnvironnement.

Anonymous, (2009b) ‘Pollution de l’air: quels impacts sur la santé’, Réseau Intersyndical deSensibilisationàl’Environnement.

Anonymous,(2011a)‘Internationalcremationstatistics2010’,PharosInternational,76(4),pp.26–38.

Anonymous, (2011b) ‘Un crematorium pour les provinces de Namur et du Luxembourg’,Namur:BureauEconomicdelaProvincedeNamur.

Anonymous,(2011c)‘ArrêtédugouvernementWallondéterminantlesconditionssectoriellesrelativesauxcrématoriumsetmodifiantl’arrêtédugouvernementWallondu30juin1994rélatifauxdéchetsd’activitéshospitalièresetdesoinsdesanté’.Availableathttp://environnement.wallonie.be/legis/pe/pesect062(Accessed:24July2011).

Anonymous,(2014)‘WorldPopulationProspects:the2010RevisionPopulationDatabase’,UnitedNationsDepartmentofEconomicandSocialAffairs,14September.Availableat:http://esa.un.org/unpd/ppp/Documentation/highlights.htm(Accessed:19April2015).

Banks,M.(2014)‘BelgiumandNetherlandsplantoapprove“bio-cremations”’,TheTelegraph,5October,Availableatwww.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/belgium/11141960/Belgium-and-Netherlands-plan-to-approve-bio-cremations.(Accessed:21November2014).

Baumeiser,R.F (2002) ‘Yielding to temptation: self-control failure, impulsivepurchasing,andconsumerbehaviour’,JournalofConsumerResearch,28(4),pp.670–676.

Bonsu, S. K. and Belk, R. W. (2003) ‘Don’t go cheaply into that good night: death-ritualconsumptioninAsante,Ghana’,JournalofConsumerBehaviour,30(1),pp.41–55.

Coenegrachts,K.(1999)‘CremationinBelgium’,PharosInternational,65(1),pp.32–37.Davies,D.J.andMates,L.H.(2005),EncyclopaediaofCremation.Aldershot:Ashgate.Gabel,T.Mansfield,P.andWestbrook,K.(1996), ‘Thedisposalofconsumers:anexploratory

analysisofdeath-relatedconsumption’,Advances inConsumerResearch,23 (1),pp.361–

367.Gentry,J.W.Hill,R.P.andKennedy,P.F.(1994)‘Thevulnerabilityofthosegrievingthedeathof

alovedone’,JournalofPublicPolicyandMarketing,13(2),pp.128–142.Hiernaux, J.P. and Vandenorpe, F. (2000) ‘Deux générations face à la mort: acteurs de

recompositionssymboliquescontemporaines’,RecherchesSociologiques,1,pp.111–122.Kellaher, L. Prendergast, D. and Hockey, J. (2005) ‘In the shadow of the traditional grave’,

Mortality,10(4),pp.237–250.Keizjer,E.E.Kok,H.J.G.(2011)‘Environmentalimpactofdifferentfuneraltechnologies’,TNO

reportTNO-060-UT-2011-004142.Mellor, P. A. Schilling, C. (1993) ‘Modernity, self-identity and the sequestration of death’,

Sociology,27(3),pp.411–431.MilesMB, andHubermanMA (1994)QualitativeDataAnalysis:AnExpanded Sourcebook.

ThousandOaks:Sage.Mirkes, R. (2008), ‘Themortuary science of alkaline hydrolysis: is it ethical?’The National

CatholicBioEthicsQuarterly,8(4)pp.683–696.Rumble, H. Troyer, J. Walter, T. and Woodethorpe, K. (2014) ‘Disposal or dispersal?

EnvironmentalismandfinaltreatmentoftheBritishDead’,Mortality,19(3),pp.243–260.Sheth, J.N., Sethia, N.K., and Srinivas, S. (2011) ‘Mindful consumption: a customer-centric

approachtosustainability’,JournaloftheAcademyofMarketingScience,39(1),pp.21–39.Sketch,M.(2005),EncyclopaediaoftheWorld’sMinorities.Abingdon:Routledge,pp.202–204.Vandenporpe, F. (2000) ‘Funerals in Belgium: the hidden complexity of contemporary

practices’,Mortality,5(1),pp.18–33.Vandenporpe,F.(2003),‘PracticessurroundingthedeadinFrench-speakingBelgium:ritualsin

kitlike form’, in Bryant, C.F. Edgley, C.K. Leming,M.R. Peck,D.L. and Sandstrom,K.L.(Eds.).TheHandbookofDeathandDying,Vol.2,ThousandOaks:SagePublications,pp.619–630.

16Theatreoftheabject

BodyWorldsandthetransformationofthecadaver

KentDrummondandEricKrszjzaniek

Introduction

No,asintruetheater,withoutmakeupormasks,refuseandcorpsesshowmewhatIpermanentlythrustasideinordertolive.Thesebodilyf luids,thisdefilement,thisshitarewhatlifewithstands,hardlyandwithdifficulty,onthepartofdeath.

There,Iamattheborderofmyconditionasalivingbeing.Mybodyextricatesitself,asbeingalive,fromthatborder.SuchwastesdropsothatImightliveuntil,fromlosstoloss,nothingremainsinmeandmyentirebodyfallsbeyondthelimit–cadere,cadaver.

(Kristeva,1997:3)

In her landmark essay, Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection, renowned post-moderntheorist Julia Kristeva ruminates on what repulses humans most: blood, pus, excrement,decayingfood.Theseareitemsthatdisgustthesensesandnauseatethebody.Wethrowthemaway–and sometimes throwupaswedo so.While thewordabject is usuallyusedas anadjectivemeaningutterlyhopelessormiserable (e.g., ‘abjectpoverty’),Kristevauses it as anoun(‘theabject’)toobjectifytheutterlyrepulsive.

Andamongthelitanyoftherepulsive,Kristevasaveshergreatestrevulsionforthecadaver.Why?Because, at itsdeepest level, the cadaver transcends representation. It shows all ofuswhatwearenotyet,butwilleventuallybecome.Inthepresenceofthecadaver,wepressupagainsttheborderofourhumanity.There,weknowourselvesbywhatwearenot,bywhatwemustrelentlesslythrowout.

And yet, living bodies often place themselves in close proximity to dead ones. Thoseworkinginthemedicalprofessiondosooutofobligation.Butmillionsofusdosobychoice.WereadPatriciaCornwellnovels,binge-watch ‘TheWalkingDead,’blogaboutwherewe’llhidewhentheZombieApocalypsehits,andlistentoThriller30yearson.LikeKristeva,wemayberepulsedbydeadbodies,butwe’reobsessedwiththemaswell.

Thegreatconundrum

Into this imbroglio of impulses walks the museum blockbuster Body Worlds. Now in itstwentiethyear,BodyWorlds,theexhibitfeaturing‘realhumanbodies,’hasbecomethemostsuccessful touring show in the history of theworld. It has appeared inmore than 90 citiesglobally, attracted more than 40 million visitors, and made its creator, Dr. Gunther vonHagens,verywealthy.Intwodecades,BodyWorldshasbecometheworld’smostpopularsitefortheconsumptionofdeadbodies.Tounderstandhow–andwhy–thishashappenedistounderstandmuchaboutthecontemporaryconsumptionofdeath.

Inthischapter,weapplyKristeva’stheoryoftheabjecttothecaseofBodyWorlds.Weask:What is it aboutBodyWorlds that transcends the abject? How have the producers of thisexhibitpersuadedmillionsofconsumerstostandinthepresenceofdeadbodies,andpayfortheprivilege?

Toanswerthisquestion,weofferaninterpretive,impression-basedanalysisoftheexhibit.We visited six BW exhibits in four cities in five years, closely observed the behavior ofhundreds of visitors to these exhibits, interviewed curators, security guards, and museum-goers,collectedartifactsfrommuseumgiftshops,andcollectednotes,quotes,andinformationon thepersonaof the inventorofBodyWorlds.Ourdata basemeets the requirements of amarket-basedethnography(ArnouldandWallendorf,1994).Here,weofferprimarilycultural-basedexplanations,asseenthroughKristeva’slensoftheabject.FollowingthecallissuedbyFiratandVenkatesh(1995)20yearsago,wefocusasmuchonwhatproducersdisplayaswhatconsumers apprehend. We begin by taking the reader on a typical tour of Body Worlds,describingthesights,sounds,andinteractionsthattendtotakeplacethere.

Welcometotheblackparade

Immediatelyupon entering aBodyWorlds exhibit, the visitor is greeted bywaves of blackvelvet drapes. Stretching from the floor to the ceiling, theymuffle sounds and block light.Voicesarehushedaccordingly.

In the center of the first gallery sit three giant light boxes, projecting human faces thatmorph swiftly and silently from young to old, male to female, black to white. Spectatorswitness the passing of time in these unrecognizable faces, yet they are powerless to doanything about it. There’s something sad and elegiac about this tableau. Themessage on anearby placard does little to lighten the mood. ‘The exhibit focuses on the nature of ourphysical being, not on providing personal information on private tragedies.’ The tone here,possibly translated from the German, is oddly foreboding.What private tragedies?Whose

personalinformation?Bystatingwhatitwon’tbefocusingon,theexhibitcallsourattentiontothatverything.Arethecadavers,soontobeencountered,somehowlinkedtothefacesonthelightboxes?Ahigh-spiritedyoungcouplegigglesandwalkspasttheboxeswithoutpause.

Afterashort,darkpassage, thepathopens intoaroomfocusedonconception,entitled ItStartsWithaSingleCell.Linesof text, arranged into stanzasof free-formpoetry,greet thevisitor.

Theyexplainhowcellscombinetoformauniquehumanwhohasneverexistedandwhowill never be recreated.An endless-loop video narrates the story of conception, backed bypianoandfluteaccompaniment.Sixfetusesindifferentstagesofdevelopmentlinethewalls.Theylooklikeplasticbabiesachildmightplaywith,becausetheyhaveundergonetheprocessof plastination, the preservation procedure invented by Dr. Gunther von Hagens. But, thespectatorcannothelpbutrecall,theywereoncedeadbabies.Theobjectificationoflife,atitsmostnascent, is especially striking.Usually, this exhibit isplacedoff to the sidewitha signwarningvisitorsthattheymayfindthesubjectmatterandcontentsoffensive.

Despitethesomberambiance,thereismoregigglingfromotherspectators.Amantellshisdate (mostBodyWorlds showsareopenonFridaynights for thatverypurpose) thatat thetreatmentcenter,helearnedalotaboutfetalalcoholsyndrome.Awomaninaseparategroupapproaches theplasticplacentas, saying, ‘Ewww.What is this?’Afterapause, ‘Lovely.Let’skeepwalking.’Shegigglesherwayintothenextgallery.

There,shaftsoftracklightingpiercethedark,exposingwhitebones;theskeletalsystemisfeaturednext.Variouscasementsdisplaydifferentarrangementsofbones.Somearearthritic,andmany visitors grimace as they view them. Short personal narratives pierce the silence,accompaniedbysmallgestures.Onespectatormovesclosetotheshoulderjoint,explainingtofriendsthathisshoulderpopsalotandwantstoseewhat’sgoingon.Anotherstraightenshisspine as he encounters a casement containing a healthy spine. Another says, ‘I have aherniateddiskinmyback.Ihaven’ttalkedtomydoctoraboutitsinceIwasnine,mycousincaused it.’ Still another worries to a companion that the exhibit will leave him with theimpressionthatyouthisfleeting,andthatbytheend,he’llbesaying,‘No,youth!Comeback!’Thisiscertainlytheimpressiongivenbythelightboxesattheexhibit’sbeginning.

In fact, the themeof tempus fugit– and thepersonal choiceswemakeas time flies– isdevelopedearlyandrepeatedoften.Postersandplacardswithvarioustitles–someominous,othersreassuring–persuadeusthat‘Goodhealthisahighlyfragilecondition.’Skinages,weareshown,butwhatagestheskinislargelydeterminedbythechoiceswemake.Ultravioletrays,smoking,stresslevels,andamountofsleepareallwithinourcontrol,oneposterremindsus. Another poster contains a less didactic, more poetic message. Featuring an Asian boycaughtinacontemplativemoment,thequoteisfromLebanesepoetKhalilGibran:

Yourbodyistheharpofyoursoul.Anditisyourstobringforthsweetmusicfromitorconfusedsounds.

Otherquotesfollowfromphilosopher-kingssuchasAbrahamLincoln,Gandhi,theDaliLama,andAlbertEinstein. Incontrast to the informationalposters, thesemessages serve to softenthe grit of the exhibits and take the spectator to a higher plane. Great thinkers and greathumanitarians elevate the discourse, in sharp contrast to the finely detailed anatomicaldisplays.

As visitors move through the galleries, bodily systems complexify. Sinew, muscle,ligaments, and tendon are added to the skeletal system. It is at this moment that visitorsencountertheirfirstwhole-bodyplastinate,TheBaseballPlayer.

Powertotheplastinates

Whole-bodyplastinatesarethestarsofBodyWorlds shows.Althoughalmostevery itemondisplay is plastinated – such as body parts, organs, and tissue – only a dozen full-bodyplastinateswillpopulateamedium-sizedshow.Thisisbecausetheyareextremelyexpensivetomake(eachonecostsaboutasmuchasaRollsRoyce)aswellastime-consuming(atleastone year). At some point in the show, a cursory and inconspicuous explanation of theplastinationprocessisoffered.Itusuallyconsistsofthesefivesteps:

In Phase One, the cadaver is embalmed with formalin to prevent decay. Then the skin, fat, and connective tissues areremoved.

InPhaseTwo,bodywaterandsolublefatsarefurtherdissolvedwhenthecadaverisplacedinanacetonebath.InPhaseThree,thecentralstepofplastinationtakesplace.Thebodyisfilledwithareactivepolymer(siliconerubber)then

placedinavacuumchamber.Thevacuumremovestheacetoneandreplacesitwiththepolymer,whichpenetrateseverylastcellwithinthespecimen.ThisishowvonHagensisabletorenderhisplastinatesinsuchhighdetail.Italsogivesthecadaver–ifitcanstillbecalledthat–aplasticqualitythatallowsittobeformedinwhateverwayvonHagenschooses.

InPhase Four, the plastinate (no longer a cadaver) is positioned.Running, standing, sitting, reclining– all positions arepossiblefortheplastinatetoassume,butonlywiththehelpofamyriadofwires,needles,clamps,andfoamblocks.Andalloftheseareeventuallyhiddenfromview.

Finally,inPhaseFive,theplastinateiscuredbytheapplicationoflight,gas,orheat.Onlythenisitreadyforanexhibit.

Starstuds

AsTheBaseballPlayer illustrates, full-bodyplastinatesareoddlycaptivating.Visitorscrowdaround the figure isolated in a large acrylic casement. Bat swung far to his left, torsodynamicallytwisted,TheBaseballPlayerhasjusthitwhatlookslikeahomerun.(Plastinatesare invariablywinners.)Withmusclesofbright redandconnective tissueofpale cream,hestrideslikeafat-freegod,daringspectatorstoignorehim.Theycan’t.Afterall,hismouthisagape as his glass eyes follow the arc of an imaginary ball. Body bent back and feet

improbably balanced, he is frozen, like most plastinates, in a moment of great physicalexertion.Atanymoment,itseemsasthoughhecouldtoppleover,buthedoesn’t.Thedozensofwires,clamps,andblocksneededtosustainhisprecariouspositionareallhiddenfromview.WhatthespectatorseesisaparagonofMan.

Andwhataman!HangingbetweenTheBaseballPlayer’slegsisagenerousendowmentofgenitalia, drawing fleeting, embarrassed glances from the spectators pressed up against hiscasement.Whatevertheirstatusinreallife,intheafter-lifeallplastinates(withtheexceptionof the effete FlamencoDancer) are awarded perfectly-formed breasts, taut buttocks, largepenises,andfulsomevaginasthatdrawgigglesfromsome,admiringglancesfromothers.Andasonlookerspressupagainstthecasements,acuriousthinghappens.Sinceallcasementsarehighly reflective in the track lighting set against the black drapery, spectators see theirreflections overlaid onto the plastinates. They can literally see themselves in vonHagens’screations.ThissubtlebutprofoundactofwhatBurkewouldcallidentification(1945)takesonanask-not-for-whom-the-bell-tollsquality.Thatcadaverwasonceamanorwoman,ands/hewasprobablya lot likeyou.Butnow,something’shappenedto themandnotyou.Andyetyoucouldbe–willbe,ifyouwish–thistransformedbeing,thiscyborg.Butgivenhowoddlypoised, powerful, and popular the plastinates are,would that be such a bad thing? It couldprove to be theultimatemakeover. It is here that postmodern consumer researchersmightsense thatKristeva’s theory is verymuch in play.What is usuallymost revolting has beenstylized into something strangely appealing.The proof is in the behavior of the consumers:they’renotpullingback;they’rebeingdrawnin.

And in fact, until recently, Body Worlds allowed visitors to donate their bodies forplastinationsimplybycompletingaformattheendoftheirtour.Thismomentintheexhibitwasaccompaniedbyitsownplastinate,TheSupplicant.Posedononeknee,headbowedasifin prayer,The Supplicant was bathed in a shaft of light. Salvation? Enlightenment? It wasdifficulttotell.ButonethingwasmadeclearbyaplacardaccompanyingTheSupplicant:theshowcouldnotgoonwithoutthegenerosityoflivingsubjectswhohadwilledtheirbodiestotheexhibit.BodyWorldsusedtodependonsomeofitsconsumersinaverydemandingway.Now,however,thesupplyofbodiesexceedsdemand.TheSupplicantandthepermissionformarenolongerpartoftheshow.

Hisdarkmaterials

Andsotheshowcontinues,fromonegallerytoanother,onesystemtoanother,oneplastinateto another. Although length and focus of BodyWorlds exhibits vary, visitors must alwaysfollowapre-determinedpaththroughtheexhibit,andback-trackingisnotencouraged.Nor

arevisitorslikelytotarrylong,asthetemperatureisrelativelycool.Theplastinatescannotgetover-heated,ortheymightdisintegrate.

AfterTheBaseballPlayercomesTheRunner.Heisposedmid-stride,withallofhismusclespeeled back to reveal key junctures of the skeleton beneath. Next is Nerve Leonardo, aplastinatereferencingdaVinci’sfamousdrawing,VitruvianMan.OtherprominentplastinatesincludeBody of OpenDoors (revealing how all internal organs are packed tightly into thebody by displaying them outside it), The Hockey Players (wielding hockey sticks, twoplastinates contend for a puck), and The Winged Man (wearing a hat, this plastinate isaccompaniedbyaquotefromvonHagens’s:‘Iputthehatonthisplastinatetomakeitlookmorelivelyandhumorous.Beautyandhumormotivatelearning,whilehorrorhindersit.’).

Infact,Dr.vonHagensisneverfarfromtheexhibit;hispresenceisfeltfromstarttofinish.Beginningwithbannersannouncingtheexhibit’stitle(officially,‘GunthervonHagens’BodyWorlds’), and ending with a benedictory photograph of the inventor backlit by the sun,spectatorscannotescapeknowingthatasinglemanisresponsibleforthissingulardisplay.VonHagens’flamboyantpersonaisenactedboldly,bothwithintheshowandbeyondit.

Variously described as concentration camp survivor, prison escapee, precocious medicalstudent, savvy entrepreneur, and diabolical provocateur, von Hagens embraces whateverdescriptors are leveled at him, for it gives him the chance to further fan the flames ofcontroversy.HebearsmorethanapassingresemblancetoDr.VictorFrankenstein,deckedinanomnipresenthatand,occasionally,awhitesmock.Hewearsafedora,heexplains,becauseallthegreatanatomistsdo.Quitedeliberately,heseemsthelivingembodimentofoneofthefiguresinhisfavoritepainting,Rembrandt’sTheAnatomyLessonofDr.NicolaesTulp.

Operating rooms were originally surgical theaters, and von Hagens is nothing if nottheatrical.

Yet none of von Hagens’ adventures or opinions would matter if he weren’t, first andforemost, a brilliant anatomist.Here is howonemuseumcurator, a biochemist by training,describeshim:

I’vebeentohisworkplaceinGermany,andIcantellyou,he’sbrilliant.Hisknowledgeofbiochemistryisremarkable.That’s howhewas able to develop plastination.Rather than infusing the bodywith a preservative substance,which is

whatembalmingdoes,hediscoveredawaytodrawthef luidin.Noonehadeverdonethatbefore.

Once von Hagens’ perfected this process, he decided to take his show on the road. Theimpetus,accordingtothesamecurator,waspoliticalratherthanfinancial.

Mostpeopledon’trealizethis,butvonHagensreferstohimselfasamedicalsocialist.Hewantstoputtheinformationinthehandsofthepeopleandletthemdecide.That’swhysomanyofthepreservedpartsshowpathologies.Youseethis,andyoumakethechoice.Isthishowyouwanttoendup?

Many religious leaders, outraged bywhat von Hagens has donewith human bodies, haveprotestedthepresenceofBodyWorldswithintheircommunities.Their inclination is tobury

theplastinatesoutofrespectforthedead.AndthisconcernraisesthequestionofvonHagens’ownperspectiveonreligionandspirituality.Thefinalplacard in theexhibit,writtenbyvonHagens,istypicallyandstrategicallyambiguous:

ThepresentationofthepurelyphysicalremindsvisitorstoBodyWorldsoftheintangibleandunfathomable.Theplastinatedpost-mortalbodyilluminatesthesoulbyitsveryabsence.

Plastination transforms thebody,anobjectof individualmourning, intoanobjectof reverence, learning,enlightenmentand appreciation. I hope for BodyWorlds to be a place of enlightenment and contemplation, even of philosophical andreligiousself-recognition,andopentointerpretationregardlessofthebackgroundandphilosophyoflifeoftheviewer.

This message, only recently added to BodyWorlds shows, represents a sea-change in vonHagens’worldview.Inearlierexhibits,hewouldnothaveconsideredanyreferencetoa‘soul’or‘religiousself-recognition.’Now,heencouragesapeacefulinterchangeoftheseideas.

Kristevaandconsciousness

By experimenting on dead bodies rather than allowing them to take center stage in anaccepteddeathritual–suchasinternment,cremation,orskyburial–vonHagenshascrossedalinethatshockssomeconsumersandintriguesothers.Thereasonsforthisgobeyond‘merereligion,’promptingquestionsabouttheegoanditsboundaries.

As Freud and Jungobserved– andKristevaherself expresses– individual and collectiveconsciousnessabhorsdeath.Itremainsanobstaclewe,asmortals,cannotovercome.

Embalming processes from ancient Egypt to the present day, as well as faces on coins,talismans, burial tombs and embalmed corpses in silk-lined coffins speak to the profounddenialofourmortality.Despitetheexpense,thewaste,theillogicofitall,consumersintheWesternworld,atleast,sparenoefforttopreservethedepartedandensuretheircomfortonwhateverjourneytheybelievetheywilltake–knowing,ataprofoundlevel, it isajourneyweourselveswilltake.

The visceral feeling of abhorrence has a basis, Kristeva argues, in the breakdown ofboundariesthatallowustofunctiononaday-to-daybasiswithoutthinkingaboutmortalityandthechaosthatexistsbeyondourlingualstructures.Kristevapositsthatthereissomethingthat exists beyond our understanding of the world, that there are experiences that existoutsideourcivilizedboundaries.This‘other’whichisnotapartofus,norapartofthatwhichwe can control – neither subject nor object. This is the abject. Different from a theoryrecognizable to the social scientist, Kristeva’s theory of the abject ismore of a generalizedworld view that gives voice to our (ultimately ineffable) fear of the repulsive. As such, itprovidesanespeciallynicefitwithamuseumexhibitthatdealsincadavers.

Kristevapositsthatthepoweroftheabjectliesinitsinabilitytobecategorized.Itexistsas

arepugnancythathauntsus,butwhichalsopossessesasublimitythattransformsus.Themostconcise,andwholly incomplete,waytodefine theabject forquickreference is that it is theopposition of the self – in whatever form that may take – but it also a recognition of adichotomythatallowsforan‘I’oraselftoexist.Therevelationofthisboundaryisthefeelingofabjection.Smallwonder,then,thattheabjectsurroundsusandhastheabilitytodriveourcreativeendeavors.Artbecomes‘thatcatharsisparexcellence…whichisrootedintheabjectituttersandbythesametokenpurifies’(Kristeva,17).Iftheconsumerexperiencessomethingakin toa religiousawakening fromBodyWorlds, it isnoaccident, because religionand theabject are entwined. ‘The variousmeans of purifying the abject – the various catharses –makeupthehistoryofreligions.’

Divineinvention

AsKristevawouldpredict, that’showconsumerstypicallyreactafter they’veseentheBodyWorldsexhibit.Asamplingofcommentsintheguestbookshowtheextenttowhichtheabjecthasbeendiminished,eveneradicated:

Anamazingshow!WhatapieceofworkisMan!

GodsurelyknewwhatHewasdoingwhenHecreatedus!OnlyGodcouldhavecreatedsocomplicatedabeing!

Talkaboutamiracle.Trulybeautiful!

Ifthisdoesn’tmakeyoubelieveinGod,Idon’tknowwhatwill!

The vast majority of visitors are awestruck by what they see at Body Worlds. And thecomments,briefandebullient,tendtowardsthespiritual.ThanksandpraisetoaHigherBeingabound.Intelligentdesignisofteninvoked.VisitorsmarvelatthewondersofthehumanbodyasrevealedbyvonHagens,buttheultimateattributionisdivine.

Thismaynot be surprising, for several reasons.One is thatBodyWorlds deals in humanbodies thatwere once human beings.Most attendees of the exhibit arewilling to assign aspiritual dimension to the bodies. If the body is the temple of the spirit, as many peoplebelieve, then the body is still sacred, even if the spirit has left. Respect, if not reverence, isrequired.This iswhy themorevehement critics ofBodyWorlds ask that the plastinates beburiedratherthandisplayed.

Anotherreasonisthat,whenstandingbeforeacadaver-presented-as-plastinate,almostallviewersareawe-struckbytheintricacy,thefragility,and–strangelyenough–thebeautyofthesystemsondisplay.It’slikeseeingaphotooftheMilkyWay.Onesimplycannotconceiveof putting together something so complicated, on such a grand scale. Where the human

attributionfallsshort,thedivinestepsin,formostviewers.In Kristeva’s terms, BodyWorlds succeeds brilliantly at purifying the abject. The special

revulsion reserved for the cadaver has been controverted to admiration and affiliation.Thespectatorshungoutwith‘realhumanbodies,’anditwasn’tsobad.Thespiritualpresencesomanyvisitorsacknowledgecontainsasenseofrelief,asiftosay,‘IknewwecamefromGod!’

Other comments, gleaned from dozens of brief interviews with visitors as they left theexhibit,revealadeeppersonalconnectionwithparticularbodyparts,basedonahealthcrisisthataffectedalovedone,orthemselves:

Whentheyshowedtheblackenedlungsfromthesmoker,Iknewthat’swhatkilledmydad.

Myuncledranktoomuch,andhislivermusthavelookedlikethatonetheyshowedwithcirrhosis.

Seeingallthatfat…I’vegottostartexercising!

Manyrespondentsperceive theexhibitasacautionary tale.Marbled fat ina leg,blackenedtissueinalungbecometheobjectlessonsoflivescarelesslyled,oflovedoneslosttoosoon.Theresolution:turnfromyourwickednessandlive(healthfully),sothatyou’llbearoundforyourchildren’schildren.Atleastinthatmoment,visitorscommittoapathofcleanlivingthatwillensuretheirlongevity.

However,adistinctminorityofcommentsexpressedreservationswiththeexhibititself,aswellaswithplastination.Artists,aswellasthosewhohaveworkedinthemedicalprofessions,tookamorejaundicedview:

Hewantedtoturnadeadbodyintoaworkofart,andhefailedatboth.

He says he used real human bodies, but there’s maybe 3 percent of anything human left in these figures. It’s mostlysynthetic.

ThisislikenocadaverI’veeverworkedwith.Realcadaverssmelllikeformaldehyde,andtheirskinisgray.Theirmusclesaredarker.Andtheyneedventilation.

He’sremovedthesightandthesmellofthecadaver.He’stakenawaythestigmaandthetaboo.

Respondentswisetothewaysofanatomicalpreservationalmostgrudginglyacknowledgehistechnicalbrilliance,whilequestioningtheintention:

Iseewhathe’stryingtodohere.It’sapurposefulattempttoblendartandscience.Artmeetspop-science.Formostpeople,he’ssucceeded.

Inotherwords, experts in themedicalprofessionand thoseconcernedwithaesthetics focuslessontheoutcomeandmoreontheprocessanditscreator.

Abjectlessons

Bythenumbersalone,BodyWorlds continues tooccupya significantand sustainedculturalmoment.Butnumbersalonecannotexplaintheshow’soverwhelmingsuccess.

Rather,ourcultural-interpretivefindingsdemonstratethat,throughabrilliantapplicationoftechnologyandafluidapplicationoftheatricaleffects,BodyWorldscontrovertstheabjectintosomething palatable, even desirable. In this context, consumers tolerate the presence of thecadaver because most of them do not recognize it as such. Hence, a potentially horrificexperience becomes an hedonic one (Andreasen and Belk, 1980; Hirschman andHolbrook,1982).Moresignificantly,BodyWorldsoffersanalternativetothecadaver,andbyextension,todeath.Theplastinate,whichoffersthepossibilityofnever-endinglife.

Alongtheway,BodyWorldsanimatesandengagesconsumersinawaythatfewmuseumexhibitsdo.Inoneoft-repeatedinteractionpattern,amanpointstoabodypartinacasement,thenexplainstoawomanhowthatpartfunctions.Hedoessobyshowingherwhereitisonhis body.This theater ofmimesis and exhibitionism, set against the sublimity of the abject,crossesabridgewithoutburningit.Touch,flex, trace:onebodyrespondstoanother inpre-verbal,pre-consciousways.

Male consumers seem particularly energized by Body Worlds, as though they’ve finallyfoundamuseumexhibittheycanrelateto.Thenakedbodyposedinidealizedglory:what’snot to love? Part Greco-Roman locker room, part PlayboyMansion of the departed,BodyWorlds titillatesas iteducates.Andmanymenrespondaccordingly:softlychortling,peeringand pointing. The experience is intoxicating for many of them. But it can also beoverpowering,inducingakindofhyperfocusthatgoesbeyondflow(Csikszentmihalyi,1991).The securityguardswe interviewednoted that thatat least threepeople faint everydayatBodyWorlds,andtwoofthosethreearemen.

Byanymeasure,BodyWorldsisintenseandimmersive(Firat,2001).Thetheatricaleffectsofblackvelvetdrapes, laser-sharplighting,clearacryliccasements,slickvideos,andstylizedposters profoundly shape the consumption experience (Pine and Gilmore, 1999, 2011). Assound ismuffled, sight isheightened.Any typeofodor is,understandably,nonexistent.Thesenseoftouchisdenied.Yetconsumersappeartocompensateforthislackofsensorialinputbytouchingthemselves,flexingtheirmuscles,andtracingtheoutlineoftheplastinateswiththeirhands.Strangelyenough,BodyWorldsisanembodiedexperience(JoyandSherry,2003).Although consumers’ senses are attenuated, their living bodies relate to their once-livingcounterpartsinpre-consciousways.

Undeniably, vonHagens’ technical brilliance and flamboyant personahelpbuild a bridgebetweenthelivingandthenon-living.Hissuccessinpreservingcosmetizedcadaversthatwilllast for decades means that he and his plastinates are welcome in the most prestigious

museums of science and nature around the globe. This legitimation is an achievement(Humphreys,2010)thathelpspre-figureconsumerperceptionsabouttheexhibititself(i.e.,IfthisisshowingattheMuseumofScienceandIndustryinChicago,itmustbeokay).Oneneedonlyvisitknock-offexhibitsindiscountshoppingmallstoexperiencetheillegitimate,whichinthiscontextbecomesthefreakishandthemacabre.

Beyondtheseeffects,BodyWorldspromotesafascinating,ifsubtle,politicsofthebody.Afewareaswithintheexhibitdisplaypoliticalbiases,inspiteoftheexpectedequalitycreatedbytheskinlessplastinates.SomeEuro-centrismisprobablytobeexpected,givenBodyWorldsGerman origins, but the underlying exaltation seems to be for visitors to strive towardsbecomingtheÜbermensch.

Forinstance,thepostersfeaturequotesfromgreatthinkers,artists,andleaders.Ineachofthese instances, the individual’s nationality is linked to their words or accomplishments –except for Monet and Degas, the only prominent French nationals featured. And all thequotations focusonpower, leadership,andself-determination.Throughout theexhibit,BodyWorldsmakesitclearthattheconsumer’spreferenceshouldalwaysbetowardsstrength.Anunderlying jingoisticmessage pervades even the signage titles, such as ‘Battle theRadicals’(cancer)or‘TooMuchofaGoodThing’(obesity).ConsumersseeanAlzheimer-riddledbrainandaretoldthat,becausetheylivesolongintheFirstWorld,by2050,14millionAmericanswillhaveAlzheimer’s.Thentheconsumeristoldhowtoliveaslongaspossible.Themessageisnotalwaysconsistent,norisitalwaysclear.

Intheexhibit’sonlydirectacknowledgementthathumans,andtherebyconsumers,willdie,apost-mortemphotoofabodyinacasketadornsasignthatexplainswhathappenswhenthebraindies.However,inasubtleundermining,directlyadjacenttothismessageisaplastinateskeletonemergingfromagrave.Thistheatricalpositioningharkensbacktooldbeliefsaboutthedeaddancingatnight,reinforcingthetheme,howevercrudely,thatdeathisnotanend.

Thesecontradictionsaside,thebrillianceofBodyWorlds is thatvonHagenshascreatedagiantsafetylensthroughwhichconsumerscangazeupontheboundlessandfeelthesublimityof the abject without being consumed by it. A bridge has been built, but not burned;consumers can still go back. In that sense, plastination is the modern-day equivalent ofVictorian post-mortem photography: an application of a new technology that gives thegrievingthesolaceofimmortality–forthedeparted,andperhapsforthemselves.

Kristevaobservedthatthepresenceoftheabjectdrivescreativepowers.Wemakethingstoshowthatwearestillalive.Butsometimesthosethingstakeonalifeoftheirownandcomeback to haunt us. Like Frankenstein’s monster, Body Worlds circles the globe and hauntsconsumers, but in a form most of them can handle. The cadaver is back, but in a sleek,plastinatedpackage,a theatricallyproducedpalliative thatseemsreadytoaccompanyusonthatmostexcellentadventure,wheneverwe’reready.InthecaseofBodyWorlds, thereturnoftherepressediswhatdrivesbothproducersandconsumerson.

References

Andreasen,A.,andR.Belk.1980.Predictorsofattendanceattheperformingarts.JournalofConsumerResearch7,no.2:112–120.

Arnould, E., andM.Wallendorf. 1994.Market-oriented ethnography: Interpretation buildingandmarketingstrategyformulation.JournalofMarketingResearch31,no.4:484–504.

Csikszentmihalyi,M.1991.Flow:Thepsychologyofoptimalexperience.NewYork:Harper&Row.

Firat, F. 2001. The meanings and messages of Las Vegas: The present of our future.Management2,no.3:101–120.

Firat, F., and A. Venkatesh. 1995. Liberatory postmodernism and the reenchantment ofconsumption.JournalofConsumerResearch22,no.3:239–267.

Hirschman, E., andM.Holbrook. 1982.Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts,methods,andpropositions.JournalofMarketing46,no.3:92–101.

Humpheys, A. 2010. Semiotic structure and the legitimation of consumption practices: Thecaseofcasinogambling.JournalofConsumerResearch37,no.3:490–510.

Joy, A., and J. Sherry. 2003. Speaking of art and embodied imagination: A multisensoryapproach tounderstandingaestheticexperience.JournalofConsumerResearch30,no.2:259–282.

Kristeva, J. 1982. Powers of horror: An essay on abjection. Tr. by Roudiez, L. New York:ColumbiaUniversityPress.

Pine, B., and J.Gilmore. 1999, updated 2011.The experience economy:Work is theatre andeverybusinessastage.Boston,MA:HarvardBusinessPress.

PartVAlternateendings

17The‘mortalcoil’andthepoliticaleconomyofdeath

AcriticalengagementwithBaudrillard

Ai-LingLai

Attheverycoreofthe‘rationality’ofourculture,however,isanexclusionthatprecedeseveryother:…theexclusionofdeadandofdeath.Thereisanirreversibleevolutionfromsavage(pre-modern)societiestoourown:littlebylittle,thedeadceasetoexist.Theyare thrownoutof thegroup’ssymboliccirculation….Strictlyspeaking,weno longerknowwhat todowiththem, since today, it isnotnormal tobedead, and this isnew.Tobedead is anunthinkable anomaly;nothing else is asoffensiveasthis.Deathisadelinquency,andanincurabledeviancy…Thecemeterynolongerexistsbecausemoderncitieshaveentirelytakenovertheirfunction:theyareghosttowns,citiesofdeath.Ifthegreatoperationalmetropolisisthefinalformofanentireculture,then,quitesimply,oursisacultureofdeath.

(Baudrillard(1993),SymbolicExchangeandDeath,pp.126–127)

Introduction

ThischapterprovidesacriticalengagementwithJeanBaudrillard’s(1993)SymbolicExchangeandDeath by discussing how the concept of ‘symbolic exchange’ challenges themodernistaccountof‘deathdenial’inWesternsocieties(Becker,1973;Aries,1974).The‘denialofdeath’thesisispremisedontheassumptionthatcultureemergesasawellspringofhumanactivitiestocopewiththeanxietyofdeath;totheextentofitsradicalextraditionfromlife(Baudrillard,1993;Bauman,1992).Baudrillard(1993:147)ishighlycontemptuousoftheexclusionofdeathin modern societies, claiming that this constitutes a ‘phantasm’ that is concealed throughvarious cultural institutions. Specifically, Baudrillard observes how culture has put in placevarious survival policies to foster an ‘imaginary’ transcendence (p. 131), as evident in thepromise of (1) religion in securing immortality in the ‘afterlife’ (p. 128); (2) scientificrationalityinmasteringthematerialityofdeath(p.152)and(3)capitalistpoliticaleconomyincultivating ‘fantastic secularisation’ through the production and accumulation of capital (p.129).Thischapterfocusesitsdiscussionon(2)and(3).

Inparticular,Idiscusshowthemortalbodyemergesasalocusofsocialcontrolandatargetofmarketplaceintervention(Turley,2005).Baudrillardexplainsthatthispre-occupationwiththebodyisrootedintheculturalredefinitionofdeathasabiologicalphenomenon–aconcepthecalls‘punctualdeath’.Tierney(2012;1997)arguesthat‘punctualdeath’reflectsmodernity’sattempt to rationalisedeath ina scientificmanner.Elsewhere,Bauman (1992) contends thatthebidfor(im)mortalityinmodernityispoignantlymarkedbytheparadoxicalstrugglewiththebody,whichisatonceaconduitoflifeandapotentreminderofdeath.ForBaudrillard,asforBauman,death infiltrates theveryfabricofmodern livesas individuals invest invariousbodyprojects(Shilling,1993)andculturalpractices1tocometotermswiththeephemeralityoftheirmortalcoils.Baudrillardarguesthatsuchinvestmentscreatean‘illusion’ thatmasksthe symbolic absence of death (Perniola, 2011),while simultaneously re-establishes it as anequivalent‘presence’intheeverydaypraxisoflife.AsBaudrillardargues,modern(consumer)cultureisprofoundlya‘cultureofdeath’(p.127).

Drawing on the writings of Bauman (1992), Turley (2005: 74) argues that ‘much ofconsumptionisacrusadeagainsttheeventualitiesofdeath’andthatconsumercultureascendsinpowerbyprovidingindividualswithavenuesto‘buytheirwayoutofdeconstructeddeath’.Elsewhere,Turley(1997)concurswithBaudrillard,statingthatdeathcannotbeconceptualisedasapunctual terminusadquem,whichmarks theomegapointof consumption. Instead,hearguesthatdeathiseverywherepresentintheconsumptionlandscapesandthusneedstobe‘reinstated on an equal footing with living’ (p. 352). He therefore suggests that interestinginsightscanbegleanedbyexploringconsumptioncontextswheredeathisnon-imminent.

To date, death studies in consumer research have tended to focus on the role ofconsumptionand(dis)possessionthattakeplaceduringthe‘fatefulmoment’ (Giddens,1991)when death is imminent (Turley, 2005). For instance, these studies explore the role ofmortuary rituals in the consumption of funerals (Bonsu and Belk, 2003; Gabel et al., 1996;Ozanne,1992),theroleofpossessionsforthebereaved(O’DonohoeandTurley,1999;Gentryetal.,1995;YoungandWallendorf,1989;Turley,1995),theexperienceofdispossessionamongdying consumers (Pavia, 1993; Stevenson and Kates, 1999) and the posthumousmemorialisationofthedeparted(O’DonohoeandTurley,2006).Whilethesescholarspavetheway for the exploration of mortality in consumer research, their studies are neverthelessrestrictedtotheconceptualisationofdeathasanend-of-lifeevent.Thischapterendeavourstobroadenthestudyofdeathbyexploringitsconcealedpresenceinconsumerculture.

ThischapterwillcommencewithareviewofBaudrillard’scritiqueofmodernityandhowthis leads tohisexplorationof ‘symbolicexchange’asacounter-narrative.Thenext sectionrevisits the ‘denial of death’ thesis from Baudrillard’s perspective and discusses hisdeconstructionofthetheory.ThefinalsectionsdrawonBaudrillard’sobservationtoanalysehowmodernsocietiesconstructacultureofhygiene,longevityandsecurityaroundthemortalbodyandhowtheconceptof‘symbolicexchange’isimplicatedwithinthesecontexts.

Baudrillardandtheturntosymbolicexchange

Baudrillard has often been described as a provocateur (Kellner, 1994) since hiswritings areoftenintendedasaprovocationtoinducehisreadersintoconsideringanalternativevisionofmodern life (Bogard, 1990). InTheMirror ofProduction (1973/1975),Baudrillardmounted asystematic attack on classical Marxism (Kellner, 1994), arguing that Marx’s productivistideologyiscounter-revolutionary.Heexplainsthattheprivilegingofproductionasacentralprincipleintheorganisationofsocietyisinadequatesinceitmerelyreinforcestheagendaofcapitalism(Kellner,1974).AccordingtoPoster(1975:3),BaudrillardisparticularlyconcernedwithMarx’srationalisationofsocialwealthasauniversalactivityofmen,sincethisconvinces‘menthattheyarealienatedbythesaleoftheirlabourpower;henceitcensorsthemuchmoreradical hypothesis that they do not have to be labour power, the “unalienable” power ofcreatingvaluebytheirlabour.’

Symbolic Exchange and Death reflects Baudrillard’s radical break from Marx’s politicaleconomy (Kellner, 1994). Inspired by Marcel Mauss’ (1950/2002) study of gift economies,Baudrillardturnstotheconceptof‘symbolicexchange’2(whichcharacterisedtheorganisationoflifeinpre-modernsocieties)toofferanemancipatoryalternativetoMarx’sproductionlogic(Kellner, 1994). Baudrillard proposes that it is through the reinterpretation of death assymbolic exchange thatwe can begin to destabilise the totalised value system of capitalistpolitical economy (Hegarty, 2004; Groom, 1996). As Baudrillard (1993: 187) remarks, ‘ifpolitical economy is themost rigorous attempt to put an end to death, it is clear that onlydeathcanputanendtopoliticaleconomy.’

Baudrillard defines the ‘symbolic’ as ‘the cycle of exchanges, the cycle of giving andreturning,anorderbornofreversibility’(p.136).Here,deathisofferedasacountergiftinthesymbolicexchangewiththeliving.Byconceptualisingdeathintermsofsymbolicexchange,Baudrillardhopestorekindlethereciprocalrelationshipbetweenthedeadandthelivingsince‘death is given and received, and is therefore reversible in the social exchange, soluble inexchange’(p.132).

Inpre-modernsocieties,thedeadisembracedbythelivingasacontinuouspresencewhostillhasaroletoplay(Tierney,1997).AsBaudrillard(1993:159)observes,symbolicexchangedictates that ‘life is givenover todeathanddeath continues to articulate life andexchangewithlife’byinfusingitwithmeaning.Assuch,symbolicexchangechallengesthemodernideaof lifeasabiological linearity thatbeginswithbirthandendswithdeath.Ratherbirthanddeath are to be understood as a social cycle that perpetually sustains itself. From thisperspectivethen,theboundariesbetweenthelivingandthedeadarepermeablesincetheyaremutuallyenriching,interdependentandreversible3(Tierney,1997).

AccordingtoBaudrillard,modernculturehasseveredthesocialrelationbetweenthedead

andtheliving.Heexplainsthatthisisduetothewayinwhichmoderncultureoperates,whichis predicated on the process of accumulation at the expense of symbolic exchange. Hecontendsthattheprimaryenginethatdrivestherationalityofcapitalistpoliticaleconomyistheabolishmentofdeaththroughtheaccumulationoftime-as-value(longevity).However,astime accrued through thepostponementof (biological)deathcanno longerbe symbolicallyexchanged;itbecomesobjectifiedasacurrencytobeconvertedintolife-capital(e.g.lifespan).Concomitantly, the dead and the dying are divested of their value as social beings and arethereforeprecludedfromengaginginareciprocalexchangewiththe living. Inotherwords,thedeadhasnothing‘valuable’toofferthelivingandthusmustbeexiledfromsocietyand‘thrown out of the group’s symbolic circulation’ (Baudrillard, 1993: 126). In sum, capitalistpoliticaleconomyreduces ‘life toanabsolute-surplusvalueby subtractingdeath from it’ (p.127).

WhenBaudrillardbemoansthatwehavewitnessedanirreversibleevolutionfromthepre-modernageofsymbolicexchangetothemodernageofpoliticaleconomy,itiseasytodismisshis thesis as anostalgic longing for a fusionalutopia (Turley, 1997).Baudrillard refutes this,statingthatthereturntothepre-modernagecannotbeconsideredasnostalgiasinceitdoesnot constitute a ‘rediscoveryof somemiraculous innocencewhere the followers of “desire”roamfreelyandtheprimaryprocessesarerealisedwithoutprohibition’(p.137).However,heacknowledges that his conceptualisation of ‘symbolic exchange’ is deliberately utopian. Bystressing its extreme, Baudrillard hopes to offer ‘symbolic exchange’ as a counter-myth(Tierney,1997) thatchallenges themetanarrativeofmodernity.According toHegarty (2004:16),Baudrillard isnotentirelyopposedtomodernistprogress,buthe isdisen-chantedbyitsdistortion under capitalismwhere death ‘becomes the object of a perverse desire’ (p. 147)invested intheseparationof lifeanddeath.SymbolicExchangeandDeath can thereforeberead as a deconstruction of modern culture (Groom, 1996), and in so doing, engender aconceptualisationofdeaththatisreversible,reciprocalandinseparablefromlife.Baudrillard’sanalysis therefore provides a useful interpretation of the ‘denial of death’ thesis currentlydominatingthesocialsciences.

Revisitingthedeathdenialthesis

According to McManus (2013), the ‘denial of death’ thesis is deeply entrenched in themetanarrativeofmodernity.Proponentsof the thesishaveoftendescribedmoderndeathas‘offensive’ (Becker, 1973), ‘a taboo’ (Gorer, 1955/1965), ‘remote and imminent’ (Aries, 1987)and ‘an embarrassing encounter’ (Elias, 1985). The thesis has gained increasing prominencewithinthesocialsciences (especially insociology)asacanonicalbodyofwork(Stanleyand

Wise,2011).ThetheoryhasitsrootsinthepsychoanalyticanalysisofErnestBecker(1973:33),whoargues thatculture isamanifestationofman’screative life-ways todefendagainst theanxietyofdeath.Meanwhile,Berger(1967/1990)contendsthatsocietyisaproductofhumanactivities where men come together to construct a meaningful ‘sacred canopy’ to shieldagainsttheterrorofanomie.Yet,despiteoccupyingadominantpositionwithinthediscipline,the‘denialofdeath’thesisisnotwithoutitscriticisms.

Becker and Berger have been criticised for their over-psychologised, universalised andahistoricalviewsondeath(Seale,1998;Shilling,1993;MooreandWilliamson,2003).McManus(2013)arguesthatthe‘denialofdeath’thesisdoesnotallowfortheexplorationofmarginalexperienceandanuancedunderstandingofdeathanddying.Similarly,Baudrillard(1993:159)posits thatdeathmustbeunderstoodas ‘anuanceof life; and life is anuanceofdeath’.Assuch,heconsidersitabsurdthatmodernityshouldnegatedeathasan‘unthinkable’anomaly–i.e.,adeviant‘other’oflife.Indeed,Baudrillardproclaimsthat:

The irreversibilityofbiologicaldeath, itsobjectiveandpunctual character, is amodern factof science. It is specific toourculture. Every other culture says that death begins before death, that life goes on after life, and that it is impossible todistinguishlifefromdeath.

(1993:159)

WhileBaudrillardmayhaveover-generalised the inseparabilityof life/death in ‘everyotherculture’, he nevertheless highlights the unique way in which modernity has repressed thesymbolicpotencyofdeathonceenjoyedby thedead (Tierney,1997).Hecontends thatpre-modernsocietiesdonothaveaconceptofbiologicaldeathasapunctualterminationoflife.He does not dispute that death can be terrorising in these societies; rather the exigency ofdeath is ‘soluble’ in symbolic exchange as it conjures away ‘the double jurisdiction, therepressedpsychicalagency(and)thetranscendentsocialinstance’(p.136).

In other words, it is because death is de-socialised that modern individuals come toexperience it as a ‘mortal’ danger’ since ‘what cannot be symbolically exchanged becomesthatwhichhauntsus’(Hegarty,2004:43).Baudrillardprovidesahistorical-socialinterpretationofFreud,claimingthatmodernsocietyhastransformeddeathrepressionintodeathdrive; itspsychicalenergybecomesamplifiedasahidden,subterraneanpsychologicalpower(Perniola,2011: 347). Consequently, life inmodernity is a life lived in the shadow of death – as therepresseddrivematerialises as a senseof ‘uncanniness’ (Unheimlich) that takes the formofdeath anxiety. For Baudrillard then, the denial of death is a manifestation of the ‘socialrepressionofdeath,(whichinturn)facilitatestheshifttowardstherepressivesocialisationoflife’(p.130).

Meanwhile,sociologistssuchasSeale(1998:3)arguethatthe‘socialorganisationfordeathin late modernity is remarkably active, realistic and death accepting’. He distinguishes thepsychological‘denialofdeath’fromthesociologicalperspective,postulatingthatdeathisnot

so much ‘denied’ as it is ‘sequestered’ and systematically managed. According to Giddens(1991:48),individualscreate‘anontologicalreferencepointasanintegralaspectof‘goingon’inthecontextofday-to-daylife’.Ontologicalsecuritymustthereforebemaintainedthroughthe routine ‘bracketing’ of death if one is to realistically immerse in the practicality ofeverydaylife.

Sequestration therefore involves the relocationofdeath fromthe inter-mundanespaceofpublic life to the private sphere,where death is often understood as institutionalised dying(StanleyandWise,2011;Howarth,2007).ThelatestONSstatistics(2013)documentedthat50percentofdeathsinEnglandandWalestookplaceinNHShospitalsandanother28percenttook place in care homes and hospices while only 21 per cent died in their own home.Baudrillard(1993)attributestheinstitutionalisationofdeathtotheprogressivemedicalisationofthedying/deadbody,which‘nolongerhasanyplace(togo)butwithinatechnicalmilieu’(p.183).Byrelegatingthemanagementofthedying/deadbodytothefunctionalspace/timeofthehospital,thesymbolicdifferencethatidentifiesthedeceased/patient’spersonhoodisthenneutralisedandobjectified.

Consequently,animpenetrableveilofsilencehasbeguntoformaroundthedying,whosesocialdeath4precedestheirbiologicaldeath(MulkayandErnst,1991).Elias(1985:85)observesthatdyinghasbecomealonelyaffairsince‘neverbeforehavepeoplediedsonoiselesslyandhygienicallyastoday…insocialconditionsfosteringsomuchsolitude’.Baudrillard(1993:163)concurs,statingthatthe‘thirdage’,andbyextension,the‘dying’,hasbecomea‘deadweight’onsociety,whosesocialexistencehasceasedtobesymbolicallyrecognised.

StanleyandWise (2011: 948)dispute the sequestration thesis, stating that institutionaliseddyingdoesnotnecessarilyreplacetheimportanceofdomesticfigurationas‘peoplecontinuetorespondtodyinganddeath,notasunconnectedindividuals,butasmembersofanetworkof interpersonal relationships’. In Baudrillard’s term, the living and the dying continue toengageinareversiblesocialrelationthroughsymbolicexchange,wherethesharedexperienceofdeath/dyingisreciprocatedthroughtherevitalisationofkinship.AsWalter(1999)observes,thedeadremainsociallypresentthroughwills,ashesandgravesaswellasthroughmemories,intheongoingbiographyof the living(Bauman,1992). Inaddition,StanleyandWise(2011)argue that death is equally present in the public domain as it is in the private sphere, asdemonstratedbypublicmourningpracticessuchasroadsideshrines.Morerecently,theadventofsocialmediahasfuelledtheemergenceofanewformofpubliccommemorationinwhichprivate deaths are collectively shared online. Walter (2014) argues that online memorialculture has transformed the social relationship between the dead and the living that isreminiscent of the pre-industrial modes of mourning, which, as Baudrillard argues, ispredicatedonsymbolicexchange.Here,thesharingofonlinememorialsisakintothesocialexchangeofgift,whichrejuvenatesthereciprocalbondbetweenmembersof themourner’scommunity.Atthesametime,thesocialpresenceofthedeadiskeptaliveastheycontinueto

impartlessonstothelivingintheformofcollectivememories(Tierney,1997).WhileWalter(2014)considersonlinememorialcultureasanewchapterinthehistoryofmourning,StanleyandWise(2011)suggestthatthereisapluralisationindeathpractices,inwhichinstitutionallysequestereddeathexistsalongsidedomesticfiguration.FollowingBaudrillard,Tierney(1997)argues that the institutionalisation of death is not simply an act of sequestration; rather itconstitutestheveryfoundationuponwhichpowerisestablished.AsBaudrillard(1993)argues:

Power is possible only if death is no longer free, only if the dead are put under surveillance… The economic operationconsists in life taking death hostage. This is a residual life which can from now on be read in the operational terms ofcalculationandvalue.

(p.130)

Themortalbodyemergesasa fundamental sitewhere thestruggle forpower isenacted. Ifpolitical economyoperates on thebasis of keepingdeathunder surveillance, the body thenconstitutes the ground on which the battle to preserve life-as-value is fought. In the nextsection,Iwilldiscusshowmodernsocietieslocalisetheirefforttomanagethemortalbody.Inparticular,Iwill illustratehowanetworkofindustrieshasspawnedaroundthemortalbodyby turning (1) sanitisation (2) longevity and (3) security into valuable investments in acapitalistpoliticaleconomy.

Sanitisationandthehygienicculture

Ourwhole culture is hygienic, andaims to expurgate life fromdeath.Thedetergents in theweakestwashingpowder areintended fordeath.To sterilisedeathatall costs, tovarnish it, cryogenically freeze it, air condition it,putmake-upon it,designit,topursueitwiththesamerelentlessnessasgrime,sex,bacteriologicalorradioactivewaste….Deathmustthereforebenaturalisedinastuffedsimulacrumoflife.

(Baudrillard,1993:180–181)

Baudrillardobserveshowmodernculturehasmade‘hygiene’itsbusiness,onethatisintendedto police, sterilise and expunge death from the realm of the living. From detergents todisinfectant, fromfoodhygienetosexualhygiene, frompestcontrol tobordercontrol, fromwastemanagement to sewagemanagement – the task ofmodern culture is to ensure thelivingishermeticallysealedfromthecontagionofdeath.

McManus(2013)observesthatagloballyco-ordinatednetworkofdiseasesurveillancehasbeenestablishedtocopewiththeonsetofemergentinfections.Thisisperhapsmostnotableinthe 2003 SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) outbreak in Southeast Asia, whereaffected and neighbouring countries joined forces to set up a series of regional diseasesurveillance networks to control the cross-border transmission of the deadly virus and tofacilitate the global exchange of information (New Straits Times, 2003; Caballero-Anthony,2005; Curley and Thomas, 2004). The scale of the SARS outbreak reflects the distance and

rapidity in theglobal flowsofpeople (McManus, 2013), and thusnecessitates a surveillanceapproachthattargetsthemovingbodyoftravellers.Bordercheckpointsbecamethevanguardin the global policing of epidemic. Here, travellerswere ushered through thermal imagingscanners where they were scrutinised andmonitored for signs of infection (New Scientist,2003).Compulsoryquarantineandforcedmedicaltreatmentwerealsoimposedtoisolatethe‘infected’bodyfromthe‘uninfected’body(McManus,2013). Inisolation,the‘infected’bodycan then be neutralised within the sterilised space of the clinic and medical laboratory(Baudrillard, 1993).Meanwhile, the streets of Asian cities swarmedwith surgicallymaskedfaces(Cohen,2003),creatingaforebodingatmosphereofdeathascivilianssoughttostaveofftherisksof infection. Interestingly, thesurgicalmaskhassinceattaineda fetishisedstatus inAsiaasafashionsymbol,withchicdesignerandcharacterimprintedmaskswidelyavailableforconsumption(Yang,2014).Assuch,thefacemaskveilstheunsettlingpresenceofhazardsby turning thecultureofhygiene intoa stylisationofdeath,orwhat themediahas termed‘Smog-Couture’ (RT News, 29 October 2014). More recently, the Ebola outbreak in WestAfrica has transformed the way in which the ‘infected’ body is handled and managed, asevidentinthefollowingBBCNewsarticle:

Ebolarelieson intimatesocial interaction toensure itscontinuedsurvival– it ispassedon throughclosecontactwith thebodily f luidsof infected individuals…Themostsimplehumantouch–ahandshakeorahug–wasquicklydiscouragedacrossthethreeworstaffectedcountries.Liberialostitstraditionalfinger-snapgreeting.Andthefabricofthefinalgoodbyechangedtoo.Traditionalburialceremonieswerere-written,mourningpractices–suchaswashingthebodiesofthedeceased–werebanned.NowafamilycanexpectanEbolaresponseteamtoturnup,infullspacesuit-likegear,totakebodiesawayinthemostdignifiedwaypossible inthecircumstances.Attheheightof theoutbreak,entirecommunitieswerequarantined.AndforsomeinSierraLeone,Christmaswascancelled.

(BBCNews,23March2015)

TheEbolaandSARSoutbreakshaveheightenedthecultureofhygiene,whichprohibits thephysicalcontactbetweenthosewhoareinfectedandthosewhoarenot.Theleakyboundariesoftheinfected/deceasedbodiesaredeemeddangerousand‘unhygienic’sincetheythreatentocontaminate the uninfected/healthy bodies (Douglas, 1966; Baudrillard, 1993). Consequently,thebodyispathologisedasapotentialrepositoryofdiseaseandasourceofdeath,whichmustbemanagedandcontained(Armstrong,1987;Foucault,1973).

Indeed it is the concern for publichealth and improved sanitation (in the latenineteenthcentury) that have led to the emergence of professional deathcare industry (Metcalf andHuntington, 1991).AsMcManus (2013) observes,medical andmortuary experts have takenoverthetasksofmanagingandcaringforthedeceased,whichwereoncetheresponsibilityofthe community.As a result,modern individuals have become increasingly de-skilled in thehandlingof thedeceasedbody.Byconceding thebody to thecareofmortuaryexperts, thedeceased can then be transported to the techno-clinical space (morgue, crematorium,embalmingroom),wherevariouspseudo-scientifictechniquesareemployedtosafelycontain

thedecomposingpotentialoftheflesh(Hallametal.,1999;McManus,2013).Baudrillard (1993) is especiallyperturbedby themodernpracticeof sarcophagic rituals–

such as embalming (and more recently the freezing of the body through cryogenics) – inwhich the body is artificially preserved to take on the ‘appearance of life’. For instance,embalmingisorchestratedtomaskthesignsofdeathandtoreturnthedecomposingbodytothe‘naturalnessoflife’(Baudrillard,1993).Inimitatinglife,thebodyis‘madetolie’(Hallametal.,1999)andinsodoing,reinforcesthemodernbinarythatprivilegeslifeas‘natural’whiledeath is problematised as an ‘offence’ against nature. The embalmed body is therefore a‘stuffedsimulacrumoflife’(Baudrillard,1993),whichconcealsthescandalofdeath(Bauman,1992).

Once again, Baudrillard urges us to return to pre-modern societies, where there is noambiguity between the living and the dead. Instead of preserving the body, pre-modernsocietiesembracethedecayingmatterasasignifierthatmarksthedeceased’sriteofpassagefromtherealmof the livingto therealmof thedead.Assuch, theydonotsee theneedto‘makethedeadplaytheroleoftheliving’(p.181)forthedeadareconcededtheirdifferencesthroughtheirputrefyingflesh,whichisbequeathedtothelivinginsymbolicexchange.

AccordingtoMcManus(2013),anewarchetypeofdeathmanagementisbeginningtotakeshape inmodernity.Most notably, bespoke funerals call for greater collaborations betweenmortuaryexperts, thedeceasedandtheirnext-of-kinto ‘negotiatethesymboliccontent, themeaningandtheterms-of-passageforthosewhoaretransitioningfromlifetodeath’(p.105).Thereturntothesymbolicisalsoobservedinemergingeco-friendlydisposalpracticessuchasnaturalburialandnewcremationpractices.Rumbleetal.(2014:244)demonstrateshowthesedisposal practices constitute a de-sequestration of death by reclaiming the communal spacewhere thedeadandthe living intermingle.Here, thedeadenters intoareciprocal symbolicexchange with the living through the act of gifting’ or ‘giving something back’, and thusnourishestheinterconnectionbetweenthem,theenvironmentandthefuturegeneration.Eco-friendly disposal practices also transform the association of the decomposing body as‘unhygienic’and‘resourceconsuming’tothatwhichis‘purifying’and‘productive’,asdepictedinthediscourseofnaturalburial:

Innatural burial discourse, human remains nourishnature andbecomepart of thenaturalworld that sustains the living(West,2008).Suchrhetoricinvokesananimategiftingtonature,tofecundity,andtofuturegenerations…Suchviewsmakethenaturallyburieddead‘valuable’tothelivingandtotheplanet–byfertilizingthesoil,theypropagatenewlifeforthebenefitofnatureandenjoymentfortheliving.Inthisway,thecorpseisnolongeratoxicbodytobedisposedofbutratherafertilebodytobedispersedbackintothesoiltonurturenewlifefromitsverydecomposition.

(Rumbleetal.,2014:247,italicsinoriginal)

While emerging cultural practices are beginning to revive the symbolic value of thedead/dying body, Baudrillard argues that modern societies are deeply invested in themaintenanceofthe‘living’body.Inthenextsection,Idiscusshowmodernsocietiescapitalise

on the prolongation of biological life and how the amassing of biological capital becomestantamounttotheconvertibilityoftimeasvalue.

Timeasvalue:naturaldeathandlongevity

According to Baudrillard (1993),modern societies put a premium on the absolute ‘value oflife’,whichmustbepreserved through theaccumulationof time.Assuch, the ‘value of life’espousesthe‘valueoftime’.Aslivingbecomesaprocessofaccumulation,theprolongationoflife comes to be equated with the attainment of longevity (Tierney, 1997) accomplishedthrough thebiological deferment of death.According toMcManus (2013), anewculture ofdeath isemergingandbecomesembedded inaconsumer-basedcultureof longevity,wherethereisanexpectationthattheprocessofageingcanbedelayed(ifnotreversed).Baudrillardargues that science and technology, in particular biomedicine, plays an important role inprogressively pushing back the temporal frontiers of death and towards a linear infinity oftime-as-value.

Consequently,theaccumulationoftimeconstitutesthemarkerofmodernprogress,whichnecessitates its quantification since it elevates scientific knowledge as objective truth. Thequantification of time-as-value is most notable in statistics charting patterns of lifeexpectancies, mortality rates, birth rates, morbidity rates, and success rates in medicaltreatments.AccordingtoBaudrillard(1993),theprolongationoflifeispredicatedonlocalisingdeath in a precise point in time and space, and in modernity, this is directed at themaintenanceofthebodyasamachine:

But our modern idea of death is controlled by a very different system of representations: that of the machine and thefunction. A machine either works or it does not. Thus the biological machine is either dead or alive…. The mind-bodyduality…isdeathitself,sinceitobjectifiesthebodyasresidual,asabadobjectwhichtakesitsrevengebydying….Thereforethemortalbodyisnomore‘real’thantheimmortalsoul:theidealismofthesoulandthematerialistidealismofthebody,prolongedinbiology….Thesubjectneedsamythofitsend,asofitsorigin,toformitsidentity.

(Baudrillard,1993:159)

The ‘body-as-a-machine’ is a Cartesian metaphor predicated on the laws of mechanicalcausation andmathematical reasoning as its epistemological foundation (Crossley, 2001). Adeadbody,likea‘broken’machineisnothingbuta‘badobject’thathasirreversiblyexhaustedits functionalvalue.Thebody-as-machinemetaphor thereforecorrespondswith themodernconceptionofdeathasapunctualcessationofbiologicallife(Tierney,2012).Thus,oneiseitheraliveordead; themachine iseitherworkingornotworking.Meanwhile, thevitalityof thebiologicalmachinerestsonoptimisingitsfunction.Inaddition,Baudrillardacknowledgesthatthe body is central to the construction of self-identities in modernity (Mellor, 1993). Sincedeath is de-socialised in modernity, individuals require the myth of biological death to

rationalise the ‘demise’ of the self (Tierney, 2012). Equally, such amyth also heightens thequest for modern individuals to work on the body as part of their identity constructions(Shilling,1993).

Bauman (1992) remarks that thepursuitofhealth– in the formof self-careprojects (e.g.dietingandexercise)–hasbecomeapre-occupationforindividualsinmodernsocieties.Thehealthandfitnessindustryisassertinganincreasingholdontheconsumingbodybyofferingaplethora of health-care products/services aimed at disciplining and optimising its biologicalfunction. Consequently, fitness becomes objectified as biological capital, which must bemeasuredandmonitoredintermsofbodymassindex,optimalheartrate,cholesterolleveletc.Bybuilding-upone’sbiologicalcapital(fitness),oneisalsoamassingtime-as-capital,whichisquantifiedintermsoflifeexpectancy.Assuch,consumerscan‘buytime’bybuyingintothe‘cultureoffitness’(Sassatelli,2010).

Bauman (1992) claims that the participation in self-care regimes is tied to the moraldiscourse of self-responsibility. Bymanaging one’s health, one also plays a personal role incontrolling theunmanageable ‘problem’ of death.However,Baudrillard (1993) is concernedthattheculturalinsistenceonpreserving‘life-as-absolute-value’hascompelledindividualstoadhere to the moral ‘duty’ to ‘stay alive and healthy’. For Baudrillard, such a moralisticdiscourse conceals the expansion of State control across an individual’s entire lifespan, inwhichhe/sheisstrippedofthefreedomtoexercisepersonalchoicesovermattersoflifeanddeath:

From birth control to death control, whether we execute people or compel their survival, the essential thing is that thedecisioniswithdrawnfromthem,thattheir lifeandtheirdeathareneverfreelytheirs,buttheyliveordieaccordingtoasocialvisa.

(Baudrillard,1993:174)

Inmodernity,deathasaresultofbiologicalcausesisseenasa‘natural’wayofdyingsinceit‘comesundermedicalcareandfindsus ingoodhealthandoldage’ (Baudrillard,1993:175).Consequently, ‘natural death’ is idealised as ‘good death’ as it comes ‘at life’s proper term’(Baudrillard,1993).Onthecontrary,premature, suicideandviolentdeathsaredesignatedas‘unnatural’or‘baddeath’astheydefytheorthodoxytopreserve‘life-as-value’.Indeed,dyingatayoungageis‘scandalous’sinceitsignifiesthefailureofscientificrationalitytoprolongthebiological capital of life. Violence, and, in particular, suicide, are considered the ultimatesabotage to ‘life-as-value’as it involves thewilfuldestructionofbiological capital, and thussubvertsStatemonopolyoverdeath(Baudrillard,1993).

Tierney(1997)arguesthatsuicideisasubversiveformoffreedomthatcalls intoquestionour dependence on modern medicine in deciding when and how we should die. This isespecially acute in recent years as we witness an increase in public demands for legalisedeuthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (Guardian, 18 July 2014).McManus (2013) alludes

thatthe‘right-todie’movementsignalsashiftinpower,inwhichmedicalprofessionalarenolongerseenasfiguresofauthority;rathertheymustnegotiatewiththedying(asopposedtodictating) themannerofdeath that is deemedappropriate.Tierney (1997) is less optimistic,and instead concurswith Baudrillard, arguing that the legalisation of the ‘right to die’willmerelyreinforcethesocialcontrolofdeathbymedicalauthorities.Baudrillardquestionsastowhether it is possible to integrate death as a social service that is made available forconsumption as part of the healthcare system.He is, however, sceptical of such a prospect,postulatingthatbyallowingindividualstoexercisethefreedomtodie,modernsocietiesmustalso renounce the idea of preserving life-as-absolute-value (sanctity of life). Such an ideacontravenesthevestedinterestbiomedicinehasplacedingoverningthebiologicalbodyasasiteofnaturaldeath.

Andifyourdeathisconcededyou, itwillstillbeby(medical)order…deathproperhasbeenabolishedtomakeroomfordeathcontrolandeuthanasia…itisnolongerevendeathbutsomethingcompletelyneutralisedthatcomestobeinscribedintherulesandcalculationsofequivalence.Itmustbepossibletooperatedeathasasocialservice,integrateitlikehealthanddisease under the sign of the Plan and Social Security. This is the story of ‘motel-suicides’ in the USA where, for acomfortablesum,onecanpurchaseone’sdeathunderthemostagreeableconditions(likeanyotherconsumergood)…Whydid death not become a social service when, like, everything else, it is functionalised as individual and computableconsumption in social input and output? In order that the system consents to such economic sacrifices in the artificialresurrectionofitslivinglosses,itmusthaveafundamentalinterestinwithdrawingeventhebiologicalchanceofdeathfrompeople.

(p.174)

Asmodernsocietycontinuestoprivilege‘naturaldeath’,itinevitablysuffersfroma‘collectiveparanoia’ where ‘unnatural deaths’ such as accidents, murder, terrorism etc. threatens toundermine social order. This engenders the marketisation of ‘security’ as a form ofcommodity.

Securityanddisastercapitalism

Baudrillard (1993,p.177)argues that security isan industrialbusinesspredicatedon turningaccident, disease and pollution into capitalist surplus profit. This observation is reflected inNaomi Klein’s (2007) depiction of ‘disaster capitalism’. InThe Shock Doctrine, Klein (2007)reveals how private corporations capitalise on the collective trauma in the aftermath ofcatastrophic events by turning it into commercial opportunity (McManus, 2013). She arguesthattheriseinneoliberalfreemarketpolicieshaveledtotheprivatisationofaid,whichseescorporationstakingoverthetaskofdisastermanagementcontractedtothembygovernmentagencies, thereby shifting considerable wealth from the public sector to the private sector.Following the devastating impact of Hurricane Katrina, Klein observes how NewOrleans’public infrastructures such as housing, hospitals and schools have beendemolished– in the

nameofthecity’sclean-upoperation–topavewayforthedevelopmentofprivatehousing,which potentially generates considerable revenue for the developers. As such, disastercapitalismhas reinstated the classdividebetween thewealthyand thepoor and segregatesthosewhocanaffordtopaytheirwayoutofdeathandthosewhocannot:

TheRedCrosshasjustannouncedanewdisaster-responsepartnershipwithWal-Mart.Whenthenexthurricanehits,itwillbe a co-production of BigAid and Big Box. This, apparently, is the lesson learned from theUS government’s calamitousresponse to Hurricane Katrina: businesses do disaster better. ‘It’s all going to be private enterprise before it’s over,’ BillyWagner,emergencymanagementchieffortheFloridaKeys,currentlyunderhurricanewatchfortropicalstormErnesto,saidinApril. ‘They’vegot theexpertise.They’vegot theresources.’Butbefore thisnewconsensusgoesanyfurther,perhaps it’stime to take a look atwhere the privatisation of disaster began, andwhere itwill inevitably lead…One year ago,NewOrleans’sworking-classandpoorcitizenswerestrandedontheirrooftopswaitingforhelpthatnevercame,whilethosewhocouldpaytheirwayescapedtosafety.Thecountry’spoliticalleadersclaimitwasallsometerriblemistake,abreakdownincommunication that is being fixed. Their solution is to go even further down the catastrophic road of ‘private-sectorsolutions’.

(Guardian,30August2006)

While‘disastercapitalism’emergesintheaftermathofacatastrophicevent,Baudrillard(1993)observeshowsecurityismanufacturedandbuiltintotheproductionlineofconsumergoods,therebycreatinganartificialmilieuofdeath.Fromcrashtestdummiestoaviationblackboxes,from health warnings on cigarette packaging to the regulation of sexual health, from lifeinsurance to eco-friendly offerings, consumer culture operates as a colossol armour, safe-guarding the consuming body. Indeed, Baudrillard contends that the ‘biologisation of thebody’goeshand inhandwiththe ‘technicisationof theenvironment’andthematerialityof‘techno-security’becomesanextensionoftheembodiedself(Belk1988).Baudrillard(1993,pp.177–179)illustratesthisinhisexampleofcarmanufacturing:

‘Belt up’ says an advertising slogan for seatbelts … Thus car safety: mummified in his helmet, his seatbelt, all theparaphernalia of security,wrappedup in the securitymyth, thedriver is nothingbut a corpse, closedup in another, non-mythicdeath,asneutralandobjectiveastechnology,noiselessandexpertlycrafted.Rivetedtohismachinegluedtothespotin it,heno longer runs theriskofdying, sincehe isalreadydead… theprotectivearmour is justdeathminiaturisedandbecomeatechnicalextensionofyourownbody….Afterhavingexaltedproduction,todaywemustthereforemakesecurityheroic.Atatimewhenanybodyatallcanbekilleddrivinganycarwhatsoever,atwhateverspeed,thetrueheroishewhorefusestodie.

ForBaudrillard,theconsumingbodyisalways‘alreadyacorpse’whosedeathismomentarilysuspendedwithinthetechnologicalmilieuthatmakesupmaterialculture.Justasthedriverisasuspended‘mummifiedcadaver’,theholderoflifeinsurancepolicyisnothingbuta‘corpseinthemaking.’Security,forBaudrillard,isan‘industrialprolongationofdeath’madepossibleby the material production of ‘safety’. The car in this instance is a technologised hearse,manufacturedtococoonthebody,andthusactasaprotectiveskinagainstthepotentialityofaccidentaldeaths.

Inaddition,Baudrillardobserveshow‘safety’ismadeheroicthroughthemoraldiscourseofresponsibilitywhere‘beltingup’comestoberegardedasanactofagoodcitizen.Inasimilar

vein,thebreachingof‘safety’normsisregardedasarebelliousact.ThisisbestencapsulatedinSchoutenandMcAlexander’s(1995)studyonHarleyDavidsonsubculture.TheyobservehowHarley riders abhor the mandatory wearing of helmets, which they see as a symbol ofconfinement. This facilitates the emergence of a market for products that allow riders tosubvertthelegislationofsafetyandembracethespiritoffreedom.

Still,thechinkinthearmourofsecurityinvokes‘terror’asitsignifiesabreakdowninsocialcontrol, leaving the consuming body unarmed and vulnerable. As Baudrillard (1993)proclaims, accidents (including catastrophe) are sabotage and identifying the causes ofaccidentsisimperativeinmodernsocietiessinceaccidentaldeathsdonotabidebythelawofrationality. The recent disappearance of theMalaysianMH370 flight is disturbing preciselybecause the incident brings to home a false sense of security society placed on moderntechnology:asentimentbestencapsulatedbythefollowingheadlines:‘TheMalaysiaAirlinesDisappearanceShowsTechnology’sLimits’ (WallStreetJournal,11March2014).Yet, it is totechnology that modern societies turn in the aftermath of disasters. As evident in themultinationalsearchforthemissingplane,theworldrespondedbydeployingaparaphernaliaoftechnologies–rangingfromsatelliteimagingchartingthesouthernIndianOcean,tosearchvesselsdocumentingtheunderwatertopographyoftheseabed(BBCNewsAsia,September2014).Thisensuresthat‘security’remainsatechnologisedoperationthatcontinuestofeedintothemyth of scientific progress.While the headlines were dominated by news locating the‘cause’ of the airplane disappearance, the casualties (with the exception of the pilots)werereduced to statistics of missing nationalities, whose deaths (while mourned) weredepersonalised as objective facts, inflaming the ensuing political tension betweenMalaysiaandChina.

In addition, Baudrillard argues that modern consumer culture does not only prosperthroughthematerialproductionofsecurity.Rather,consumercultureisperpetuatedthroughan ongoing ‘manufacturing’ of risks. According to Giddens (1991), manufactured risk is aconsequence of the modernisation process and as such is a product of human activity. Inparticular, Giddens observes that rapid technological changes have produced unanticipatedramifications, which become materialised as ‘high-consequence risks’. Due to its emergentcharacter,thereisalackof(concrete)experienceastowhattherisksareandhowtheycanbeeliminated, which therefore renders ‘high-consequence risks’ largely unpredictable.Environmentalhazards (e.g.Chernobyl,BPOil Spill), biomedical side-effects (e.g.Dolly theSheep),geneticallymodifiedfood,anddeepspacemining(e.g.asteroidmining),areexamplesof‘high-consequencerisks’thathavecontributedtothisunsettlingatmosphereofinsecurityinmodernity.AsBeck (1992: 20) proclaims,modern society is a risk society,where there is aheightened reflexivity of risks, inwhich the ‘promise of security growswith the risks anddestructionandmustbereaffirmedoverandoveragaintoanalertandcriticalpublicthroughcosmeticorrealinterventionsinthetechno-economicdevelopment.’AccordingtoBaudrillard,

the ongoing production of risks begets the growing demand for solutions. As such, it hascreatedasocietywhereindividualsmustfightfortheirrightstosecurity.Baudrillardregardsthe industrialisation of security as ‘social blackmail’, since it acculturates consumers intobelievingthattheyneedtoinsureagainstrisksthataremanufacturedbytheindustryinthefirstplace.

Conclusion

In this chapter, I have discussed how Baudrillard’s conceptualisation of symbolic exchangeposesachallengetothemodernistaccountofdeath.Inparticular,thischaptershedslightonBaudrillard’s vision of capitalist political economy, which is sustained through theaccumulationof time-as-capital by exerting social control over themortal body.Consumercultureemergesasapowerful institutionsince it facilitates theprocessofaccumulationandprovides resources for the biological prolongation of life. In other words, we are made‘survivors’ through our practical immersion in consumer culture, and through which webecome socialised into a culture of hygiene, longevity and security. Yet, Baudrillard arguesthatoursurvivalthrough(consumer)cultureisultimatelyfutilesincetheactofaccumulationreduceslifetoanabsolute-surplus-value(p.127),whichiscontinuouslyheldransombydeath.Assuch,thepreservationoflife-as-valuebegetstheequivalentproductionofdeath.

Baudrillard is convinced that the return to the symbolic will abolish the demarcationbetween life and death, and in doing so, restores the social significance of death. Morerecently,theemergenceofnewdeathpractices(e.g.naturalburial,onlinememorial)suggestsa return of the symbolic. Yet, the extent to which such practices are able to revolutionisemoderndeathpracticesremainstobeseen.ForBaudrillard,revolutionispossible ifmodernsocieties embrace the raw encounter with life and death in an immediate and reversiblemanner.Afterall,asBaudrillardalludes,wearealwaysalreadya‘deadmanwalking’.

Notes

1 The bid to deconstruct mortality can be observed through body projects such as health and fitness, sports, cosmetic

surgeries, etc., aswell as through cultural practices such as the seeking of peak experiences, nationalism, relationships,

wealth,justtonameafew.

2Baudrillardusestheterm‘symbolicexchange’torefertoa‘formoftransactioninwhichtheexchangeofobjectscannot

takeplaceinanysystemwithoutthreateningthatsystemwithimminentcollapse’(Groom,1996:689).

3Baudrillarddrawson the rite of initiation todemonstrate the reversibilitybetweenbirth anddeath.Here, the initiate

symbolically transverses the rite of passage, which marks the death of childhood and the transition into adulthood.

Initiationisthereforeasimulationofdeath(Perniola,2011)aswellasasecondbirth thatfacilitatestheinitiate’sentry

intothesymbolicrealityofexchange(Baudrillard,1993).

4 Social death occurswhen an individual has been strippedof his/her personhood and thus ‘ceases to exist as an active

individualagentintheongoingsocialworldofsomeotherparty’(MulkayandErnst,1991:178).

References

Aries, P. (1974). Western Attitudes Towards Death: From the Middle Ages to the Present,Baltimore:JohnHopkinsUniversityPress.

Aries,P.(1987).TheHourofDeath,London:Penguin.Armstrong,D.(1987).SilenceandTruthinDeathandDying.SocialScienceandMedicine,Vol.

24(8):pp.651–658.Baudrillard,J.(1973/1975).TheMirrorofProduction.St.Louis:TelosPress.Baudrillard,J.(1993).SymbolicExchangeandDeath,London:Sage.Bauman, Z. (1992). Mortality, Immortality and Other Life Strategies, Standford: Stanford

UniversityPress.BBCNewsAsia(8September2014),MissingMalaysiaplaneMH370:Whatweknow.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-26503141.Accessedon1October2014.BBCNews.(2015).HowEbolaChangedTheWorld.BBCNews.23March2014.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-31982078.Accessedon10April2015.Beck,U.(1992).RiskSociety:TowardsaNewModernity,SagePublication:London,Thousand

OakandNewDelhi.Becker,E.(1973).TheDenialofDeath.NewYork:FreePress,1973.Belk,R.W.(1988).PossessionsandtheExtendedSelf.JournalofConsumerResearch,Vol.15(9):

pp.139–168.Berger,P.L.([1967]1990).TheSacredCanopy,ElementsofaSociologicalTheoryofReligion,

NewYork:AnchorBooks.Bogard, W. (1990). Closing Down The Social: Baudrillard’s Challenge to Contemporary

Sociology.SociologicalTheory,Vol.8(1):pp.1–25.Bonsu, S., andBelk, R.W. (2003).DoNotGoCheaply intoThatGoodNight:DeathRitual

ConsumptioninAsante,Ghana.JournalofConsumerResearch,Vol.30(June):pp.41–55.Caballero-Anthony,M. (2005).SARS inAsia:Crisis,Vulnerabilities,andRegionalResponses.

AsianSurvey,Vol.45(3):pp.475–495.Cohen,J.(2003).DoSurgicalMasksStopSARS?SlateMagazine.7April2003.

Crossley,N.(2001).TheSocialBody:Habits,IdentityandDesire,London:Sage.Curley,M.andThomas,N. (2004).HumanSecurityandPublicHealth inSoutheastAsia: the

SARSOutbreak.AustralianJournalofInternationalAffairs,Vol.58(1):pp.17–32.Douglas, M. (1966). Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo,

London:RoutledgeandKeeganPaul.Elias,N.(1985).TheLonelinessofDying,Oxford:Blackwell.Foucault,M.(1973).TheBirthoftheClinic,trans.A.M.S.Smith,London:Tavistock.Gabel, T. G., Mansfield, P. and Westbrook, K. (1996). The Disposal of Consumers: an

ExploratoryAnalysisofDeath-RelatedConsumption, inK.P.CorfmanandJ.G.LynchJr.(eds.),Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 23, Provo, UT, Association for ConsumerResearch:pp.361–367.

Gentry,J.W.,Kennedy,P.F.,Paul,C.,andHill,R.P.(1995).AFamilyTransitionsDuringGrief:Discontinuities in Household Consumption Patterns. Journal of Business Research, Vol.34(September):pp.67–79.

Giddens, A. (1991).Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age,Cambridge:PolityPress.

Gorer,G. (1965 [1955]).PornographyofDeath. InDeath,GriefandMourningGardenCity,NewYork:Doubleday.

Groom,N.(1996).Review:SymbolicExchangeandDeath.TheModernLanguageReview,Vol.91(3):pp.689–691.

Guardian(2006).DisasterCapitalism:HowToMakeMoneyOutofMisery.30August2006.www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/aug/30/comment.hurricanekatrina.Accessedon7April2015.

Guardian(2014).HouseofLordsDebateEvenlySplitOverAssistedDyingLegislation.18July2014.www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/18/assisted-dying-legalisation-debate-house-lords.Accessedon7April2015.

Hallam,E.,Hockey, J.,andHowarth,G. (1999).BeyondtheBody:DeathandSocial Identity,London:Routledge.

Hegarty,P.(2004).JeanBaudrillard:LiveTheory,LondonandNewYork:Continuum.HowarthG.(2007).DeathandDying,Cambridge:Polity.Kellner,D. (1994). Introduction:JeanBaudrillard intheFin-de-Millenium, inD.Kellner (ed.).

Baudrillard:ACriticalReader,CambridgeandOxford:Blackwell,pp.1–24.Klein,N.(2007).TheShockDoctrine:TheRiseofDisasterCapitalism.London:Penguin.McManus,R.(2013).DeathinaGlobalAge,PalgraveMacmillan:London.Mauss,M. (1950 [2002]).TheGift:TheFormandReason forExchange inArchaic Societies,

trans.W.D.Halls,London:RoutledgeClassics.Mellor,P.A. (1993).Death InHighModernity:TheContemporaryPresenceandAbsenceof

Death, in D. Clark (ed.),The Sociology of Death: Theory, Culture and Practice, Oxford:

BlackwellPublishers,pp.11–30.Metcalf,P.andHuntington,R. (1991).CelebrationsofDeath:TheAnthropologyofMortuary

Ritual,PressSyndicate,UniversityofCambridgePress:Cambridge.Moore, C. and Williamson, J. B. (2003). The Universal Fear of Death and The Cultural

Response,inHandbookofDeathandDying,SagePublications:ThousandOaks,CA,pp.3–14.

Mulkay,M.,andErnst, J. (1991).TheChangingProfileofSocialDeath.European Journal ofSociology,Vol.32:pp.172–196.

NewScientist,(2003).AirportsScanForSARSvictims’FlushedFaces.24April2003.www.newscientist.com/article/dn3656-airports-scan-for-sars-victims-flushed-faces.html#.VVzBYvlViko.Accessedon5April2015.

NewStraitsTimes,(2003).Pre-travelChecksforASEAN.27April2003.O’Donohoe,S.,andTurley,D.(1999).Consumption,IdentityandCopingStrategiesinTimes

ofCrisis, inE. J.ArnouldandL.M.Scott (eds.),Advances inConsumerResearch,Provo,UT,AssociationforConsumerResearch,Vol.26:pp.421–423.

O’Donohoe, S. and Turley, D. (2006). Compassion at the Counter: Service Providers andBereavedConsumers.HumanRelations,Vol.59(10):pp.1429–1448.

ONS Statistics (2013). National Survey of Bereaved People (Voices), Office for NationalStatistics.

Ozanne,J.L.(1992).TheRoleofConsumptionandDispositionDuringClassicRitesofPassage:The Journey of Birth, Initiation and Death in J. F. Sherry Jr. and B. Sternthal (eds.),AdvancesinConsumerResearch,Vol.19:pp.396–403.

Pavia, T. (1993). Dispossession and Perceptions of Self in Late Stage HIV infection, in L.Mcalister and M. L. Rothschild (eds.), Advances in Consumer Research, Provo, UT,AssociationforConsumerResearch:pp.425–428.

Perniola, M. (2011). Being-Towards-Death and The Simulacrum of Death: Heidegger andBaudrillard.CulturalPolitics,Vol.7(3):345–358.

Poster, M. (1974). Translator’s Introduction, in J. Baudrillard, The Mirror of Production, St.Louis:TelosPress:pp.1–20.

RTNews.(2014).SmogCouture:FacemasksoncatwalkatChina’sFashionWeek.29October2014,http://rt.com/news/200443-china-facemask-catwalk-pollution/.Accessedon5April2015.

Rumble, H., Troyer, J., Walter, T. and Woodthorpe, K. (2014). Disposal or Dispersal?:EnvironmentalismandFinalTreatmentoftheBritishDead.Mortality,Vol.19(3):pp.243–260.

Sassatelli,R.(2010).FitnessCulture:GymsandTheCommercialisationofDisciplineandFun,BasingstokeandNewYork:PalgraveMacmillan.

Schouten,J.W.andMcAlexander,J.H.(1995).SubculturesofConsumption:AnEthnography

oftheNewBikers,JournalofConsumerResearch,Vol.22(1):pp.43–61.Seale,C. (1998).ConstructingDeath: The Sociology ofDying andBereavement, Cambridge:

CambridgeUniversityPress.Shilling,C.(1993).TheBodyandSocialTheory,London:Sage.Stanley, L. andWise, S. (2011). The Domestication of Death: The Sequestration Thesis and

DomesticFiguration.Sociology,Vol.45(6):pp.947–962.Stevenson, G. and Kates, S. M. (1999). The Last Gift: The Meanings of Gift-Giving in the

ContextofDyingofAids, inE.J.ArnouldandL.M.Scott (eds.),Advances inConsumerResearch,Provo,UT,Vol.26:AssociationforConsumerResearch:pp.113–118.

Tierney,T.F.(1997).Death,MedicineandTheRighttoDie:AnEngagementWithHeidegger,BaumanandBaudrillard.BodyandSociety,Vol.3(4):pp.51–77.

Tierney, T. F. (2012). Punctual Selves, Punctual Death and the Health-Conscious Cogito:Descartes’DeadBodies.EconomyandSociety,Vol.41(2):pp.258–281.

Turley, D. (1995). DialogueWith The Departed, in F. Hansen (Ed.), European Advances inConsumerResearch,Provo,UT,AssociationforConsumerResearch,Vol.2:10–13.

Turley,D.(1997).APostcardfromTheVeryEdge:MortalityandMarketing,inS.BrownandD. Turley (eds.),Consumer Research: Postcard From The Edge, London and New York:Routledge,pp.350–377.

Turley, D. (2005). Death, Where is thy Sting? Mortality and Consumer Motivation in theWritings of Zygmunt Bauman, in S. Ratneshwar and D. G. Mick (eds.), InsideConsumption:ConsumerMotives,GoalsandDesires,LondonandNewYork:Routledgepp.67–85.

WallStreetJournalOnline(11March2014),TheMalaysiaAirlinesDisappearanceShowsTechnology’sLimits:Radar,SatellitesArePowerfulToolsbutStillHaveLimitedReach.http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304250204579433581873448554.Accessedon1May2014.

Walter,T.(1999).OnBereavement.Buckingham:OpenUniversityPress.Walter,T.(2014).NewMourners,OldMourners:OnlineMemorialCultureasaChapterinthe

HistoryofMourning.NewReviewofHypermediaandMultimedia,Vol.21(1):pp.1–15.Yang,J.(2014).AQuickHistoryofWhyAsiansWearSurgicalMasksinPublic.Quartz.19

November2014.http://qz.com/299003/a-quick-history-of-why-asians-wear-surgical-masks-in-public/.Accessedon5April2015.

Young, M. M., and Wallendorf, M. (1989). Ashes to Ashes, Dust to Dust: ConceptualizingConsumer Disposition of Possessions. In T. L. C. E. Al. (ed.), American MarketingAssociationWinterEducators’Conference,Chicago,AmericanMarketingAssociation:pp.33–39.

18Thespectreofposthumanismintechnologyconsumption

Thedeathofthehuman?

MargoBuchanan-OliverandAngelaGraciaB.Cruz

Themarriageofreasonandnightmarethatdominatedthe20thcenturyhasgivenbirthtoanevermoreambiguousworld.Acrossthecommunicationslandscapemovethespectresofsinistertechnologies.

(J.G.Ballard)

Ourmachinesaredisturbinglylively,andweourselvesfrighteninglyinert.

(D.J.Haraway)

Introduction

In the context of ‘technology-intensivemarkets’ (John,Weiss, andDutta 1999: 78), a latentcultural concern has emerged about the location of agency and the death of humansubjectivity.Whilethenotionsofnightmare,disturbance,andfrightevokedbythe‘spectresofsinistertechnologies’(Ballard1973:96)havelongbeenathemeininterdisciplinarydiscoursesof science, technology, and society (Clarke 2002; Helman 1988; Virilio 1997), marketingscholarsandmarketingcommunicationstextshaveremainedlargelysilentonthedeep-seateddisturbanceevokedbytheseontologicalconcerns.Thepurposeofthischapteristoilluminateandillustratetheseconcerns.

This chapter contributes to the stream of marketing literature known as posthumanconsumer culture. Posthuman consumer culture has been conceptualised as both anepistemologyandanaestheticmode.Previousstudieshaveexaminedvisualrepresentationsofposthumanism as represented by the figure of the cyborg (Campbell,O’Driscoll, and Saren2005; Giesler 2004; Giesler and Venkatesh 2005; Schroeder and Dobers 2007; Venkatesh,Karababa, and Ger 2002). Scholars have further traced the linkage between posthuman

epistemologiesandculturalproduction(VenkateshandMeamber2006).Inaddition,whilenotexplicitly linkedwith posthumanist concerns, explorations of technology consumption havealso illustrated how consumers experience technologywith a degree of ambivalence (Mickand Fournier 1998), identity tension (Schau and Gilly 2003), and anxiety (Meuter, Bitner,Ostrom, andBrown 2005;Mick and Fourner 1998).More recently,marketing scholars havebeguntolinkposthumanvisualaestheticsandconsumerambivalencetothewider‘contextofcontext’ (AskegaardandLinnet2011: 381) inwhich these representationsand responsesareshaped (Buchanan-Oliver, Cruz, and Schroeder 2010; Buchanan-Oliver and Cruz 2011;Campbell and Saren 2010). These studies are beginning to uncover a genealogy of socio-historicalandontologicaldisquietinhowhumansfacetheirtechnologies.

Building on this initial foundation, this chapter further explores ontological disquiet inhuman–technology interactionsbydrawingon the conceptof abjection (Kristeva 1982) andillustrating how three forms of abjection play out in a marketing communications text tounderlineaprofoundandattimesinarticulablehorrorconcerningthepotentialoftechnologyto disintegrate human subjectivity. We will examine recent theoretical assumptions abouthuman interaction and relationship with machines, conceptualised as posthumanism. Inparticular,we show that abjection – the fear of losingwhatmakes us human– permeatesposthumanistdiscourses.Suchfearsariseoutof theerosionofclear-cutboundariesbetweenhuman/nonhuman, between organic/mechanistic, and between agency/dependency. Wefurther illustrate various forms of abjection through a close examination of Playstation 3’s‘Baby’ advertisement. Anxieties over the death of human subjectivity, while ordinarilyrepressedinmarketingrepresentationsoftechnologyadvertising,constituteasignificantandpalpableculturalconcernwhichaccompaniestheemergenceoftechnology-saturatedmarkets.Given the simultaneously disturbing and arresting power of these ontological concerns,weinterrogate the efficacy of addressing such ontological anxiety in the marketingcommunicationoftechnologybrands.

Thespectreofposthumanismintechnologyconsumption

Posthumanism posits a state of human/machine intersection where no separation existsbetweenthehumanbodyandthemachine.AsHayles(1999:3)explains:

In the posthuman, there are no essential differences or absolute demarcations between bodily existence and computersimulation,cyberneticmechanismandbiologicalorganism,robotteleologyandhumangoals.

Posthumanism arises in opposition to the concepts of Enlightenment Humanism andModernism.Posthumanismacknowledges the limitations of a humanist concept of ‘man’ incontrol (Gane 2005) and encourages a hoped-for transcendence ofmateriality (Wolfe 2010)

which ‘embraces the possibilities of information technologieswithout being seduced by thefantasies of unlimited power and disembodied immortality’ (Hayles 1999: 5). In this vein,Venkatesh et al. (2002: 446) write that the emerging posthuman paradigm ‘views theintersection of human andmachine as a postmodern possibility in contrast to the receivedview under modernist thinking which considers these two entities as distinctly separate.’Throughouttheseconceptualisationsisarepeatedchallengetomodernistdichotomieswhichdemarcate clear boundaries between humans and their machines. Hence, posthumanistdiscourses offernewpossibilities for rethinkinghuman subjectivity. Posthumanist discourseshighlight the constitutive role of technology in allowing consumers to ‘re-code’ and ‘re-configure’ themselves and dissolve the traditional boundaries of modernity (Firat andVenkatesh 1993). To counteract the cultural displacement of Humanism, Posthumanismconsiders necessary the rapid evolutionary human development in this technologicallyinformed age throughmechanical, biotechnical, or digitalmodification of the human body.Thesemodifications range from the use of simple prosthetic devices such as spectacles andcontactlensestoenhancebodymotorandsensoryfunctions,tothebuildingoftechnologicalenvironmentsaroundthebody,totheincorporationoftechnologyintothebodyasinthecaseofcosmeticsurgery(Featherstone2000).

Posthumanistdiscoursesengendertensionsbetweencelebratoryfascinationandontologicalanxiety.AsHayles(1999:283)posits,‘theprospectofbecomingposthumanbothevokesterrorandexcitespleasure’.Suchanintersectiongivesrisetoakeytensionintheculturalzeitgeist;what Haraway (1991: 150) calls the ‘border wars’, in which modernist boundaries anddistinctions between humans and machines are simultaneously contested, blurred, andreaffirmed. Associated with these border wars is a crisis of human subjectivity. Bukatman(1993:2)observedthattheriseofelectronictechnologyprovokes‘asetofcrucialontologicalquestionsregardingthestatusandpowerofthehuman’(emphasisinoriginal).AsBukatman(1993: 5) further explains, ‘a desire for the extension of power that technologies permit isaccompaniedbytheconcomitantfearofalossofpowerandtheweakeningofhumancontrol.’

Theseconflictsandconfusionsarevividlyembodiedinthehybridandliminalfigureofthecyborg,characterisedbyambiguity,indeterminacy,contradiction,incoherence,andporosityofboundaries.Thecyborg,Haraway(1991:149)notes,isaliminalandcontradictoryfigure:bothmaterialandmetaphorical,both ‘acreatureof social realityaswellasacreatureof fiction’.The figure of the cyborg is used to underline and celebrate the hybridity, contingency,partiality, and incoherence of embodied subjectivity. A figure which is both human andmachine, both flesh and metal, both spiritual and material, and ambiguous in gender, thecyborg for Haraway (1991) is the embodiment of liminality in its juxtaposition ofcontradictoryoppositesandinitsinherentlyhybridnature.Thefigureofthecyborghighlightsthe potential to break down traditional dichotomies between human and animal, organismandmachine,physicalandnon-physical.Thenotionofthethirdspace(Campbelletal.2005)–

a space of heterogeneity and impuritywhich resists thedualistic separation associatedwithmodernistconceptions–isparticularlyrelevanthere,asiteruptsintheliminalfiguresofthesuperhuman,therobot,andthecyborg.Thesearecreatureswhichembodythethirdspacebyconfounding traditional dichotomies and straddling the boundaries betweenhuman/nonhuman, subjective/objective, living/nonliving, organic/artificial, spiritual/material,ambiguous/mechanisticandempowered/enslaved.

However,suchambiguitiesarecommonlycodedinabjectterms.Kristeva(1982)introducesthe term abjection to describe a state of ontological liminality and paradox which issimultaneously fascinating and repulsive. Beyond their liberatory promise (Venkatesh et al.2002),posthumanistdiscoursesparadoxicallyharbourdangers, threats,andanxieties. Indeed,suchliminalstatesofbeingdonotfitineasilywithregularnarrativesorextantcategoriesandtend to be conceived as polluted, taboo, and associated with impurity, alterity, exclusion,dangerandOtherness.Inthisvein,Derrida(1978:293)writesof

theasyetunnameablewhichisproclaimingitselfandwhichcandoso,asisnecessarywheneverabirthisintheoffing,onlyunderthespeciesofthenon-species,intheformless,mute,infantandterrifyingformofmonstrosity.

Clarke(2002:35)similarlyobservesthat‘liminalbeingsare[…]perceivedaspolluting[…]andaremoreoftenthannotcharacterizedasmonstrous,diseased,queer,marginal,black,insaneorfemale.’ This is unsurprising because what ‘dies’ in the human–technology interaction asframed by posthumanist lenses is the idea of a coherent human subject as defined bymodernistconceptions.Thecyborgisadramaticvisualrepresentationoffusionsofthebodyandtechnology,withnon-biologicalmaterial literallypiercing,mergingwithorenteringthe‘biologicalskin-bag’(Clark2003).

The cyborg figure commonly invokesnotionsofOtherness, the abject and theunnatural,carrying with it mythic resonances with Frankenstein’s monster and anxieties aroundpollution,contamination,recombination,andmiscegenation(Helman1988).Thisunionoftheartificial, unnatural, nonhuman, and Other with human being is a problematic and uneasymerger,raisingconcernsaroundthedilutionorpollutionofhumanidentity.Inparticular,theconceptoftheabjectisassociatedwithfeelingsofanxiety,fear,andhorror.TheabjectsuffusesVirilio’s(1997:20)depictionof

thiscitizen-terminalsoontobedeckedouttotheeyeballswithinteractiveprosthesesbasedonthepathologicalmodelofthe‘spastic’, wired to control his/her domestic environment without having physically to stir: the catastrophic figure of anindividualwhohaslostthecapacityforimmediateinterventionalongwithnaturalmotricityandwhoabandonshimselfforwantofanythingbetter,tothecapabilitiesofcaptors,sensorsandotherremotecontrolscannersthatturnhimintoabeingcontrolledbythemachinewithwhich,theysay,hetalks.

Inasimilarvein,Woodward(1994:62–63)writesthat‘mostofusfearthefutureprospectoffrailtyasacyborg,“hookedup”…toamachine.’

Such anxieties around posthuman abjection have been widely explored in cultural sites.

Withinpopularculture,literarytexts(e.g.‘Neuromancer’,‘I,Robot’,‘BraveNewWorld’,and‘NovaExpress’)andpopularfilms(e.g. ‘TheTerminator’, ‘BladeRunner’, ‘TheMatrix’, ‘Her’,‘Lucy’, and ‘Transcendence’) represent a liminal vision of human–machine interactions andtheirpsychologicalandsocio-culturaltensionsandrepercussions.Withintheacademy,scholarsfrom media and communications studies, cognitive neuropsychology, cultural studies, andcriticaltheoryhaveexploredtheseposthumantensions.Theseperspectivesarecontinually‘re-visioning’technologyandinfluencinghowconsumersthinkaboutandexperiencetechnologyproducts, raising questions of identity, immortality, and the death of the human. To closelyillustrate how abjection erupts in cultural expression, we now focus our attention on aneruptionofposthumanabjectionthroughacloseanalysisofamarketingcommunicationstext.

TracingthedeathofthehumaninthePlaystation3‘Baby’advertisement

ThePlaystation3‘Baby’advertisement,whichoriginallyairedin2006,isthefirstofaseriesoftelevision commercials which promoted Sony’s launch of its Playstation 3 gaming console.This 30-second advertisement opens from a brief state of initial darkness to the sight andsound of bright fluorescent lights flickering to life. The establishing shot reveals a clinicalwhite room, perhaps a laboratory or an interrogation room.Themise-en-scène presents anunclothed andungenderedBaby, sitting in one corner of the room, facing a black box (thePlaystation 3) in the opposite corner. The soft-fleshed Baby is positioned with both armsextended towards the machine. As deep, rumbling, and foreboding music slowly rises inintensityinthebackground,shotsoftheBabyareinterspersedwithshotsofthePlaystation3.Intheseshots,theimageoftheBabyisreflectedinthePlaystation3’sshinysurface.Suddenly,theBabyopens its eyes to the soundofa cameraclickandexhibits a rangeof life-likeyetcompeting and incongruent emotions. TheBabymakes cooing noises and lifts up its handstowards the Playstation 3, as if reaching for the machine (in propria persona the Baby’smother?).TheBabyblinksseveraltimeswhilesmiling,andwehearthelaughterofaninnocentbaby.WethenseetheBaby’ssmile transformintoa frownandthenacry,but this iseerilyjuxtaposed against the sound of amechanical adult laugh. The Baby then opens itsmouthwide while we hear a screeching and mechanical gasp. Its eyes display an expression ofsurprise,orperhapsfear.AcloseupoftheBaby’seyesshowsdifferentgamingscenesflashingthroughitseyes.WehearthesoundofcryingandseetearsrunningdowntheBaby’scheeks.Suddenly, thesetearsrunbackuptheBaby’scheeksandinto itseyes,whichthenturnfieryred.Wearereturnedtotheoriginalestablishingshotofthewhiteroom.Here,thePlaystation3slowlylevitatesabovethefloorastheBabyutters,inamechanicalanddistantvoice,‘Ma-

ma’.ThefinaltitlefeaturesafrontalshotofthePlaystation3andreads‘PlayBeyond’.Finally,thescreenfadesouttoblackandfeaturesthesymbols‘III7’.

This advertisement provides a useful text for illuminating the horror of posthumanabjection and thinking about the death of human subjectivity in the context of theomnipresence of human–technology encounters. While advertising texts tend to favourrepresentations in which technology is cast in the role of the helpmeet – a benevolent,enabling, and emancipatory assistant of human life, the Playstation 3 ‘Baby’ advertisementuniquely addresses post-human fears concerning how human–technology interactionmightdenaturalisehumansubjectivityandrenderthehumanobsolescent.Indeed,thecontroversialreception of this advertisement at the time of its release suggests that, in the technologymarketplace, there is an expectation that such fears are to be repressed in advertisingrepresentations. In confronting and vivifying these issues, this advertisement represents aneruptive moment in the media representation of technology and a stark exception in thelandscapeoftechnologyadvertising.Itispreciselybecausethisadvertisementisanoutlierthatit forms the object of our close analysis. This advertisement is not intended to be arepresentativeexemplarofnormativemarketingcommunicationspracticeoranexpressionoftheprivileged intentionality of a cultural producer (Barthes 1977), but auseful platform forthinking about and illustratingkey tensionswithin the cultural zeitgeist shaping technologyconsumption.

This advertisement heightens these concerns through intertextual references to bothdystopic science fiction texts (for example, the Playstation 3 console resembles Hal, thepowerful black monolith from the film ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’) and horror texts (forexample,theBabyresemblesChuckyfromthefilm‘Child’sPlay’).IndrawingontheGothictradition, this advertisement represents unspeakable fears (Bruhm 2002: 171) which remainlatentinhumaninteractionswithtechnology.Inparticular,thisadvertisementraisesquestionsabout what it means to be human in the context of increasing similarities, role reversals,metaphorical conflations and boundary breaches between humans and their machines,signalling deep-seated anxieties surrounding the human–nonhuman boundary. In thefollowing analysis, we show how this advertisement illustrates the posthuman abjection ofhumanagencyinaccordancewiththefollowingthreethemes:abjectionofhumanautonomy,abjectionofthehumanbody,andabjectionofhumanemotion.

Abjectionofhumanautonomy

Severalelementsintheadvertisementanimatetheabjectionofhumanautonomy.Theideaofhuman agency and free will is contested and denatured in the face of issues of unhealthydependenceontechnologyandsurveillancesocieties,bothofwhichareincreasinglyenabled

withintechnology-saturatedmarkets.Manyposthumanisttheorists(Bukatman1993;Postman1993;Virilio1997)seehumansasincreasinglyimprisonedbyandrenderedhelplessinthefaceof their machines. In contrast to the metaphor of technology-ashelpmeet, that which issupportive ofhuman life,machines are seen to control anddelimithumanactivity, therebyinverting the master–slave dialectic which would ideally characterise human–machineinteractions.Thisinversionisprovocativelyillustratedtowardstheendoftheadvertisement,intheimageofthePlaystation3risingabovethefloor.Ononelevel,thiscanbereadastheelevation and worship of machines – an ironic underscoring of their godlike status withintechnology-saturatedmarkets.Thiscanalsobereadasanintertextualreferencetotheseminalscience fiction and popular cultural text ‘2001:A SpaceOdyssey’,wherein the reverence oftechnology as a harbinger of human progress is symbolically enacted in an initial scene inwhichtheprimitiveapeselevateabone(thefirsttool)bythrowingitintothesky.Indeed,thelevelofhypesurroundingnewproductreleasessuchas thePlaystation3,or inmorerecenttimes,theiPhone6,providesreal-worldtestimonytowidespreadconsumerfascinationwith,andreverenceof,newtechnologies.Onanotherlevel,thePlaystation3closelyresemblesHal,the black monolith from ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’. In the original film, the monolith is anadvanced machine built by an otherworldly species which triggers human evolutionaryprogress at key points in history. In the final scene of the film, the human (Dave) agesdrasticallyandatthepointofhisdeath,hashisconsciousnessmergedwiththemachine(themonolith).Here,theposthumansingularityisbornatthemomentofthedeathofthehumanbeing. By making intertextual references to the monolith, the Playstation 3 advertisementevokes fearsof technologieswhicharealienandsuperior tohumanunderstanding,butalsofearsoftransformingthehumanbeingintosomethingother-than-itself.

In addition, the figure of the naked and unarmoured Baby, (qua the consumer), sitsimprisonedinthewhitelaboratoryandistransfixedbythemachine,evokingfearsofhumandependency, vulnerability, defencelessness, and infantilisation in the face of totalisingtechnologies.Theseimagessuggestthecolonisationofthehumanmindbythedemandsandrhythmsofthemachine,wherebyhumanimaginationandcognitionaredictatedanddistortedby our technologies. This mirrors Postman’s (1993) contention that we have allowedtechnologytodominateallaspectsofhumanlifetotheextentthattechnologyhaseffectivelyeliminated all alternatives to itself. In ‘Technopoly’, Postman (1993) provides an account ofhow technology structures and dominates our sociocultural institutions and knowledgestructurestoanunhealthyextent.Here,Postman(1993)constructsanarrativeofatool-usingculture,where technology isbornasabenignenablerunderhumanity’spowerandcontrol,but then shifts towards a technocracy, where technology attacks the culture, ultimatelybecomingaTechnopoly,atotalitarianandall-consumingtechnocracy.Suchisthemostcurrentzeitgeist explored in themovies ‘Her’, ‘Lucy’, and ‘Transcendence’.Other extreme forms ofvulnerabilityandapathologyofdependencecanoccurwhenconsumersbecomeaddictedto

technologiessuchasvideogames,cellphones,orsocialmediaandfindthemselvesunabletolivewithout these technology-mediated interactions. Bukatman (1993: 17) characterises thisphenomenon as ‘image addiction’. While the machine can be characterised as a drug,deliveringanintenselypleasurableexperience,being‘undertheinfluence’connotesalossofagency,withthehumanaddictseenastheultimateembodimentofabeingcontrolledbyanddependentonthemachine(Virilio1997).

Fears of technology-enabled surveillance further contribute to the abjection of humanautonomy.These fearsarecoded in thisadvertisement through the settingofawhite roomwithnodoors, suggesting that the room could be the site for a scientific experiment or aninterrogationroominwhichtheBabyistobereadasaBenthamitebeingwhoisconstantlysurveilled.Thisreflectsanatmosphereofentrapmentandparanoia,asenseinwhichthereisno escape from an all-encompassing technological network. Downey and Dumit (1997: 5)underlinethesuffocatingandpervasiveforceoftechnologywhentheywrite:

[W]ecannotsayNotothemedicalcomplexthatappropriatesourbodies,definesourstateofhealth,andpositionsus inacontinuum of fitness from the temporarily abled to the permanently disabled. We cannot say No to thecorporate/government informationcomplexthatwiresoursocialsecuritynumbers,driver’s licenses,bankaccounts[…]andothertechnologicalvectorsofidentity.WecannotsayNototheexperienceofscience,technology,andmedicinecollectivelyasadiscipliningcenterthatpolicesothermeaningsandorderspowerrelationsincontemporarylife.

Technology can indeed be seen to facilitate a panoptic mode of constant surveillance, forexampleinminute-by-minutemonitoringofhowemployeesspendtimeattheirworkstations,or how internet shoppers spend their time and money online. Indeed, the increasingblanketing of information communication technologies over the globe leads to concernsaround the close scrutiny of personal information by governments and corporations. Thus,technologyemergesasanapparatusfortheproductionandcontrolof‘docilebodies’(Foucault1977)andisimplicatedinthetotalisingpowerofgovernmentalandeconomicinstitutionsoverindividualbodies.

Abjectionofhumanembodiment

TheuncannyfigureoftheBaby/robotprovokesfurtheranxietiesassociatedwiththeabjectionofthehumanbody.ThefigureoftheBabyisfirmlyentrenchedwithinthegenreconventionsofbodyhorror.AsHurley(1995:203)explains:

Body horror seeks to inspire revulsion – and in its ownway, pleasure – through representations of quasi-human figureswhoseeffect/affectisproducedbytheirabjection,theirambiguation,theirimpossibleembodimentofmultiple,incompatibleforms. Such posthuman embodiments are liminal entities, occupying both terms (or rather, existing in the slash betweenthem)oftheoppositionhuman/not-human.

InthePlaystation3advertisement,thecoreoftheuncanninessstemsfromtheuncertaintyof

howtoreadthefigureoftheBaby.Isithuman?Isitarobot?Isitadoll?Isitachild?Isitanadult?WhiletheBabycouldsimplybereadasamechanisedrobotoralifelikedollgiventheplasticappearanceof itsskinanditsmechanisedmovements, thisreadingiscontradictedbyotherelements:theBaby’sskinattimesappearssoftandplastic,resemblingahumanbaby(incontrasttothearmouredmetallicfiguresseeninfilmssuchas‘I,Robot’or‘TheTerminator’);the Baby’s eyes and face are highly expressive and display a range of human emotionsincludingdelight,sadness,andfear.TheBabyfurtherdispelsbiological fluids in theformoftears, which are then reversed and absorbed back into the Baby’s eyeballs. These highlytransgressive acts denaturalise and destroy the coherence of the child’s body, denying itshumanlifeandpotentiality.Intheseways,thefigureoftheBabyissimultaneouslycodedasbothhumanandnot-human.Incontrastwithstereotypicalrepresentationsofthemetallicandmechanistic robot, the Baby/machine defies simplistic categorisation and straddles theboundary between human and nonhuman; it is difficult to read. In straddling thesecontradictions, the mutable figure of the Baby’s body is unsettling and monstrous in itscontinuousslippagebetweenhumanandmachineembodiment.

In addition, the figure of the Baby/robot/doll evokes fears of endowing machines withqualities that are considered exclusive to human beings, thereby challenging the innatenessand specificity of human embodiment. A border war is being played out in the boundarybetweenhumanandmachinebodies.Indisplayingelementsofhumanembodiment,thefigureoftheBabyblurstheboundarybetweenwhatisaliveandwhatisnot.TheuncanninessoftheBabyreflectswiderconcernsabouthumansanimatingtheirtechnologiesinvariouswaysandconferring the properties of higher beings onto inanimate objects. Indeed, toy baby dollswhichopentheireyes,talk,eat,andbreatheoftenblurthelinebetweenlivingandnon-livingembodiment in attempts to offer ‘lifelike’ baby experiences to children. This advertisementtakes the uncanniness of this interaction to a different level. As Zuboff (1988) observes,machines are increasingly exhibiting complex intelligence, simulating human emotion, andtakingon‘human’taskstotheextentthattechnologycanbeseentotakeonalifeofitsownand confound these clear-cut dichotomies.Ashumans increasingly divest their agency ontomachines(Clark2003),theboundarieswhichdistinguishhumansandmachinesareblurredasagencyappears tono longerbeanexclusive featureofhumanbeing.Luke (2000)coins theterm‘zombiosis’todescribethewaysinwhich‘dead’commoditiesareactivatedby‘undeadlabour’andthuspossess‘artifactancy’,theabilitytoact.Hearguesthatwebreathelifeontoourmachines,suchthat‘Alleffusionsofobjectivitycracklewithsubjectivity’(Luke2000:48).

DespiteLuke’s(2000)optimisticslant,suchdevelopmentsalsoprovokeanxietiesaroundthereplication of brain function in non-biological, man-made artefacts to the extent that anydifferencesbetweenhumanandmachineembodimentarenegligible(Haugeland1985).Inthisvein,theuncannyvalleytheorydescribesextremelynegativeemotionalresponseswhennon-living beings such as prosthetic hands, dolls, and robots that seem ‘almost human’ are

animated and exhibit anthropomorphic behaviours (Mori 1970). Such extreme reactions areclearly based on modernist discourses of bodies and machines as distinct entities, and anassociationofhybridbeingssuchas ‘almost-human’robotsandcyborgswith theabject, thepollutedorthetaboo.TheFrankensteinianmyth,forinstance,seesscienceandtechnologyasbreeding the unnatural ‘Other’, a pervasive and perpetuating myth which constructstechnologyandhumanspiritualityasoppositional(Helman1988).

Abjectionofhumanemotion

Further issues surrounding the abjection of human emotions and human relationships aresuggested by the structuring absence of the Baby’smother or any human caregiver in thisadvertisement.Whatarewe tomakeof theenigmaticending, inwhich thePlaystation3 iselevatedandtheBabyutterstheword‘mama’?Whatdoesitmeanthatamachineseeminglyreplaces themother’s teatbecominga siteofbehaviouralandaffectivenourishment?Theseimages can be read as a representation of wider fears about the ways in which human-technology interactions are supplanting and polluting human relationships. Machinesincreasingly‘standin’forpeopleandplayimportantrolesinsocialscripts.Forexample,thereisatrendtowardstheuseofself-servicetechnologiessuchasATMsandkiosks(Meuteretal.2005),whichcanbeseenascentral‘actors’inroutineserviceencounters.Withinthehome,thetelevision can be used to ‘babysit’ children (Morley 1986), raising concerns around theincreasing use of machines for social instruction, arbitration and gratification. Moreover,technology may reduce the quality of interpersonal communication or result in increasedisolation,whichhasbeenshownwithinternetuse(Krautetal.1998).

Beyondmakinghumansincreasinglyredundantincontemporarysocio-technicalnetworks,such developments also carry ramifications for the phenomenology of human emotion,perception, andmemory. Because the Baby/robot/doll exhibits human emotions which aresimultaneously recognisable and alien, this raises and problematizes the idea that humanemotionscanbeprogrammedandreplicated,andthusrenderedirrelevant;amerecara-paceor performance of a ‘real’ emotion. As Botting notes (2005: par. 17): ‘humans glimpsethemselves in the machine, the same and yet different, duplicatable and dispensable,replicatable and replaceable.’ Futhermore, the figure of the Baby/robot evokes fears ofrenderingtheconsumerintoanemotion-producing-machine,amereterminusorappendageinanetworkofothermachines.Inthisvein,Baudrillard(1988)observedthehumansubjectasrenderedintoa ‘terminalofmultiplenetworks’.Woolgar(1991)similarlyseestechnologyasconfiguringuserswhosebehavioural repertoires are regimentedby the requirementsof themachine. In the Playstation 3 advertisement, the Baby becomes ametaphor for the humantransformed intoan image-processingandemotion-producingmachine.AsMusk (2014)has

recentlyforewarned:‘Hopewe’renotthebiologicalbootloaderfordigitalsuperintelligence.Unfortunately,thatisincreasinglyprobable’.Ballard(1984:96)alsoforeshadowed,inthisvein,the‘deathofaffect’ inwhichthehumancapacitytoemoteisdenaturedinthefaceofover-stimulation. The Baby represents a ‘hollow body, emptied of qualities associated withpersonalityandaffect’(Scheer2002:85).

Moreover, thespeedatwhich the images flash through theBaby’seyesand thespeedatwhich the Baby’s emotional expressions change echo wider cultural concerns about thecolonisationofhumanperceptionandemotion.AsarguedbyVirilio (1991)andLash(2001),therelentlessspeedoftheinformationnetworkthreatensthecapacityformeaningfulhumanengagementand,indeed,diminishestheusefulnessofhumancontemplationinthecacophonyof accelerated information. Here, the human faculty of contemplation, judgement, andreflectionisthwartedbytherelentlessflowofmachineinput,diminishingthehumanintoaresponsecreature.DespitetheinnocencesuggestedbytheedenicnakednessoftheBaby,andthe fact that it is a baby, the potentiality of this life is disturbingly denied as the Baby isrendered into an empty vessel, lacking in memory or history, merely awaiting the nexttechnologicalinputinordertoproducethenextemotionalreaction.

Discussion

Drawing on the concept of abjection, our close analysis has shownhowhuman-technologyinteraction provokes fears associatedwith the abjection of human autonomy, embodiment,and emotion. In the Playstation 3 advertisement, the death of human subjectivity coincideswith the birth of the machine. The figure of the Baby, born a posthuman, denies theRomanticism associated with modernist conceptions of humanity. The figure of the Baby,semioticallysignifyingbirthandnewlife, issimultaneouslypolluted in thisrenderingas theultimateprogrammablemachine.Thisrepresentsthetechno-socialrealitiesthattheconsumeris ‘born’ into: a posthuman reality in which the human no longer connotes a privilegedposition.Itisaworldinwhichthehumanitselfhasbeentransformedintosomethingother-than-itself. This advertisement evokes Burroughs’ (1964) concept of ‘terminal identity’. AsBukatman(1993:9)explains,terminalidentityis‘anunmistakablydoublearticulationinwhichwefindboththeendofthesubjectandanewsubjectivityconstructedatthecomputerstationor television screen’. By conflating metaphors of birth and death, the Playstation 3advertisementvividlyexemplifiesthespectreofterminalidentity–ofthedeathofthehuman–associatedwiththeculturalzeitgeistofposthumanism. In illuminatingtheseconcerns, thischapterextends theparadigmofposthumanconsumerresearchanduncoversadeep-seatedontological disquiet concerning technology consumptionwhich touches on issues of human

materiality,identityand,ultimately,immortality.Adiscussionofposthumanistabjectionanditsrelationtoontologicalanxietyremainstobe

more fully articulated in marketing theory. Certainly, marketing scholars have discussedlinkages between posthuman epistemologies and the postmodern decentering of humansubjectivity (e.g. Buchanan-Oliver and Cruz 2009; Buchanan-Oliver et al. 2010; Giesler andVenkatesh 2005; Venkatesh and Meamber 2006). Marketing scholars have additionallyexplored the shift from modernist dichotomies to posthuman ambiguity as vivified incyborgian representations (Campbell et al. 2005; Giesler 2004; Schroeder and Dobers 2007;Venkatesh et al. 2002). However, scholarly engagements with the fundamental disquietassociated with technology consumption have been limited (for exceptions, see Buchanan-OliverandCruz2011;CampbellandSaren2010).WenotethatCampbellandSaren’s(2010)work, which traced associations between the primitive and horror in marketingrepresentationsofposthumanembodiment,wasnotpublishedinamarketingjournal.

Whyisthehorroroftechnologynotbeingdiscussedinmarketingtheory?Giventherecentturn in consumption research towards the ‘dark side’ of consumption phenomena, asevidenced in studiesof addictive consumer-brand relationships (Buchanan-Oliver andSchau2012), and recent explorations of the agency of objects (Epp and Price 2010), the currentrepression of fears around the death of human subjectivity in the face of technologicalpervasiveness is surprising. This shift frommodernist views of technology to posthumanistviews (and fears) of technology is an important area of study because it represents animportant cultural movement which forms the wider ‘context of context’ (Askegaard andLinnet2011)fortechnologyconsumption.Whatdotheseeruptionsofdisquietteachusabouttheculturalzeitgeistof technologyconsumption?Towhatextentdo theseontological fears,clearly prevalent in the cultural zeitgeist, inform consumers’ technological imaginaries?Wehopethatthischaptersparksfurtherdiscussioninthisarea.

Inaddition,wehavepreviouslyobserved that the juxtapositionofhorrorand technologyrepresentation–asevidencedinthePlaystation3‘Baby’advertisement–constitutesastarkexceptioninthelandscapeofposthumanaesthetics,inwhichcyborgsaremoreoftenframedin servile, celebratory, or non-threatening terms. This contrasts with popular culturerepresentations,inwhichatensionbetweenfascinationandrepulsiontowardstechnologyarefrequentlyplayedout.Bukatman(1993:10)argues that ‘Sciencefictionconstructsaspaceofaccommodation to an intensely technological existence’ (emphasis in original). Featherstone(2000: 2) also notes how science fiction literature such as Gibson’s (1986) descriptions ofcyberspace in ‘Neuromancer’ extends the ‘horizons of expectations of human–machinefusions,’ transforming common understandings of the body and technology and impactingbusinessandresearchpractice.

Why is this ‘space for accommodation’ (Bukatman 1993: 10) seemingly absent in thelandscapeofmarketing communications?Whydomostmarketing communications texts of

technological brands repress the unrest associated with human abjection in technologyconsumption? Where do these eruptions appear, and why? One could surmise that this iscongruentwithPodoshen,Venkatesh,andJin’s(2014)recentobservationthatutopiaisamorepopular topic ofwriting in consumer culture thandystopia.However, the current dearthofdeathinthelandscapeoftechnologybrandingisparticularlysurprisinggiventwoargumentsin themarketing communications literature.Oneargument suggests that advertising shouldreflect wider cultural concerns in order to achieve resonance with its intended audiences(McCracken 1986). As Meamber and Venkatesh (2006) more recently argue, ‘A culturalproductthatprovidessymbolicbenefitsconsistentwithculturalprioritiesismorelikelytobeaccepted than the one that does not’. As reflected in the entrenchment of posthumanistdiscoursesinboththeoreticaldiscoursesofscience,technology,andsociety,aswellaspopularculture texts, the death of human subjectivity is a key tension in the cultural zeitgeist. Asecondargumenthas shown that, in contrast tobeing likeable and conventional,marketingcommunications texts can deploy grotesque and macabre imagery to arrest and achieveengagementwith viewers (Phillips andMcQuarrie 2010).Why aren’t theremore exampleswhichparallel the captivating, repulsive, andenigmatic figureof theBaby incontemporarymarketing communications? In such an aporia, the puzzling Playstation 3 ‘Baby’advertisementisasignificantmarketingcommunicationstextwhich,inourview,givesvoicetoontologicaltensionswhichunderliehuman–technologyinteractions.

Bukatman (1993: 281) observes a dialectic between death and immortality in popularcultural imaginaries of human–technology interaction: ‘in science fiction the death of thesubjectiscontinuallyactedoutinaformthatyieldsarebirthonanotherplane’.Forexample,inRudyRucker’snovel‘Software’,ahumanmindis‘uploaded’intoaroboticbody.In‘2001:ASpaceOdyssey’,themomentofDave’sdeathgiveswaytoare-incarnationinanewform:themerging of the human and themachine.More recently, in BigHero 6 (2015) themachinereproducesavideocaptureoftheprotagonist’sdeadbrother(anditsowncreator)whichbothmemorialisesandimmortalisesitsprogenitor,andperpetuallyvivifiesitsgenesis:aperpetualre-birthing and interaction of both human andmachine. As Featherstone (2000: 10)writes,‘technoscience[…]allowsustocreatebodieswhichescapethefatefulnessofbothDNAandGod.’ Indeed, aspirational marketingmessages tend to reinforce the perfection, infallibility,and capability of technology to extend human capacity (Salomon, Perkins, and Globerson1991) and in some cases, extend human life (Munson 2002; Olshansky, Carnes, and Grahn1998). If the relentless advance of technology in contemporary consumer cultures indeedconstitutesthenextstageofhumanevolution,whataretheimplicationsofthesetechnologicaladvances on human subjectivity? Does a Faustian bargain permeate our relationship withtechnology – dowe exchange our humanity for immortality? Posthumanist theories beginwiththesequestions.

References

Askegaard,S.,andLinnet,J.T.(2011).TowardsanEpistemologyofConsumerCultureTheory:PhenomenologyandtheContextofContext.MarketingTheory,11(4),381–404.

Ballard,J.G.(1973).Crash.London:Cape.Ballard,J.G.(1984).IntroductiontoCrash.Re/Search,8/9.Barthes,R.(1977).DeathoftheAuthor.InHeath,S.(ed.)Image,Music,Text.London:Fontana

Press.Baudrillard,J.(1988).TheEcstasyofCommunication.Brooklyn,NY:Autonomedia.Botting,F.(2005).ReadingMachines.GothicTechnologies:VisualityintheRomanticEra.

www.rc.umd.edu/praxis/gothic/botting/botting.html.Bruhm, S. (2002). Contemporary Gothic: Why Do We Need It? In J. E. Hogle (Ed.), The

CambridgeCompaniontoGothicFiction.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Buchanan-Oliver, M., and Cruz, A. (2009). The Body and Technology: Discourses Shaping

Consumer Experience and Marketing Communications of Technological Products andServices.AdvancesinConsumerResearch,Duluth,MN.

Buchanan-Oliver, M., and Cruz, A. (2011). Discourses of Technology Consumption:Ambivalence,Fear,andLiminality.AdvancesinConsumerResearch,StLouis,MO.

Buchanan-Oliver,M., andSchau,H. J. (2013).ConsumingSpirituality and the Spirituality ofConsuming Media Narratives. In D. Rinallo, L. M. Scott and P. Maclaran (Eds.),ConsumptionandSpirituality(pp.81–94).NewYork:Routledge.

Buchanan-Oliver,M.,Cruz,A.,andSchroeder,J.E.(2010).ShapingtheBodyandTechnology:Discursive Implications for the Strategic Communication of Technological Brands.EuropeanJournalofMarketing,44(5),635–662.

Bukatman, S. (1993).Terminal Identity: The Virtual Subject in Postmodern Science Fiction.Durham:DukeUniversityPress.

Campbell, N., and Saren, M. (2010). The Primitive, Technology and Horror: A PosthumanBiology.Ephemera:TheoryandPoliticsinOrganization,10(1),152–176.

Campbell,N.,O’Driscoll,A., andSaren,M. (2005).CyborgConsciousness:AVisualCulturalApproach to the Technologised Body. Paper presented at the European Advances inConsumerResearch,Goteborg,Sweden.

Clark, A. (2003). Natural-born Cyborgs: Minds, Technologies, and the Future of HumanIntelligence.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

Clarke,J.(2002).TheHuman/NotHumanintheWorkofOrlanandStelarc.InJ.Zylinska(Ed.),TheCyborgExperiments:TheExtensionsoftheBodyintheMediaAge (pp.33–55).NewYork:Continuum.

Derrida, J. (1978).Writing andDifference (A. Bass, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago

Press.Downey, G. L., and Dumit, J. (1997). Locating and Intervening: An Introduction. In G. L.

Downey and J. Dumit (Eds.), Cyborgs and Citadels: Anthropological Interventions inEmergingSciencesandTechnologies(1sted.,pp.5–29).SantaFe,NM:SchoolofAmericanResearchPress.

Epp,A.M.andPrice,L.L.(2010).TheStoriedLifeofSingularizedObjects:ForcesofAgencyandNetworkTransformation.JournalofConsumerResearch,36,820–837.

Featherstone,M. (2000).BodyModification:An Introduction. InM.Featherstone (Ed.),BodyModification(pp.1–14).London:Sage.

Firat, A. F., and Venkatesh, A. (1993). Postmodernity: TheAge ofMarketing. InternationalJournalofResearchinMarketing,10,227–249.

Foucault,M. (1977).DisciplineandPunish:TheBirthof thePrison (1stAmerican ed.).NewYork:PantheonBooks.

Gane, N. (2005). Radical Post-humanism: Friedrich Kittler and the Primacy of Technology.Theory,CultureandSociety,22(3),25–41.

Gibson,W.(1986).Neuromancer.London:Grafton.Giesler, M. (2004). Consuming Cyborgs: Researching Posthuman Consumer Culture. Paper

presentedattheAdvancesinConsumerResearch,Valdosta,GA.Giesler, M., and Venkatesh, A. (2005). Reframing the Embodied Consumer as Cyborg: A

Posthumanist Epistemology of Consumption. Paper presented at the Advances inConsumerResearch,Duluth,MN.

Haraway,D.J.(1991).ACyborgManifesto:Science,Technology,andSocialist-FeminismintheLateTwentiethCenturySimians,Cyborgs,andWomen:TheReinventionofNature.NewYork:Routledge.

Haugeland,J.(1985).ArtificialIntelligence:TheVeryIdea.Cambridge,MA:MITPress.Hayles,N.K. (1999).HowWeBecamePosthuman:VirtualBodies inCybernetics, Literature,

andInformatics.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.Helman, C. (1988). Dr Frankenstein and the Industrial Body: Reflections on ‘Spare Part’

Surgery.AnthropologyToday,4(3),14–16.Hurley, K. (1995). Reading Like an Alien: Posthuman Identity in Ridley Scott’sAlien and

DavidCronenberg’sRabid. In J.Halberstam and I. Livingston (Eds.),Posthuman Bodies(pp.203–224).Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress.

John, G., Weiss, A. M., and Dutta, S. (1999). Marketing in Technology-Intensive Markets:TowardaConceptualFramework.JournalofMarketing,63(4),78–91.

Kraut,R.,Patterson,M.,Lundmark,V.,Kiesler,S.,Mukophadhyay,T.,andScherlis,W.(1998).InternetParadox:ASocialTechnologythatReducesSocialInvolvementandPsychologicalWell-Being?AmericanPsychologist,53(9),1017–1031.

Kristeva,J.(1982).PowersofHorror:AnEssayonAbjection.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversity

Press.Lash,S.(2001).TechnologicalFormsofLife.Theory,CultureandSociety,18(1),105–120.Luke, T. W. (2000). Cyborg Enhancements: Commodity Fetishism and Human/Machine

Interactions.Strategies,13(1),39–62.McCracken,G.(1986).CultureandConsumption:ATheoreticalAccountoftheStructureand

Movementof theCulturalMeaningofConsumerGoods.JournalofConsumerResearch,13(June),71–82.

Meuter, M. L., Bitner, M. J., Ostrom, A. L., and Brown, S. W. (2005). Choosing AmongAlternative ServiceDeliveryModes:An Investigation ofCustomer Trial of Self-ServiceTechnologies.JournalofMarketing,69(April),61–83.

Mick, D. G., and Fournier, S. (1998). Paradoxes of Technology: Consumer Cognizance,Emotions,andCopingStrategies.JournalofConsumerResearch,25(September),123–143.

Mori,M.(1970).TheUncannyValley.Energy,7(4),33–35.Morley,D.(1986).FamilyTelevision:CulturalPowerandDomesticLeisure.London:Comedia

PublishingGroup.Munson, R. (2002). Raising the Dead: Organ Transplants, Ethics, and Society. New York:

OxfordUniversityPress.Musk,E.(2014)[email protected],from

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/496012177103663104.Olshansky, S. J., Carnes, B., and Grahn, D. (1998). Confronting the Boundaries of Human

Longevity.AmericanScientist,86(1),52.Phillips, Barbara J., and Edward F.McQuarrie. (2010). Narrative and Persuasion in Fashion

Advertising.JournalofConsumerResearch,37(3),368–392.Podoshen, J. S., Venkatesh, V., and Jin, Z. (2014). Theoretical Reflections on Dystopian

ConsumerCulture:BlackMetal.MarketingTheory,14(2),207–227.Postman,N. (1993).Technopoly: The Surrender ofCulture toTechnology (1stVintageBooks

ed.).NewYork:VintageBooks.Salomon,G.,Perkins,D.N.,andGloberson,T.(1991).PartnersinCognition:ExtendingHuman

IntelligencewithIntelligentTechnologies.EducationalResearcher,20(3),2–9.Schau,H.J.,andGilly,M.C.(2003).WeAreWhatWePost?Self-PresentationinPersonalWeb

Space.JournalofConsumerResearch,30(3),385–404.Scheer, E. (2002).WhatDoes anAvatarWant? Stelarc’sE-motions. In J.Zylinska (Ed.),The

CyborgExperiments:TheExtensionsoftheBodyintheMediaAge(pp.81–100).Schroeder, J. E., and Dobers, P. (2007). Imagining Identity: Technology and the Body in

MarketingCommunications.AdvancesinConsumerResearch,Duluth,MN.Venkatesh, A., and Meamber, L. A. (2006). Arts and Aesthetics: Marketing and Cultural

Production.MarketingTheory,6(1),11–39.Venkatesh,A.,Karababa,E.,andGer,G. (2002).TheEmergenceof thePosthumanConsumer

andtheFusionoftheVirtualandtheReal:ACriticalAnalysisofSony’sAdforMemoryStick.PaperpresentedattheAdvancesinConsumerResearch,Valdosta,GA.

Virilio, P. (1991). The Aesthetics of Disappearance (1st English ed.). New York: SemiotexteBooks.

Virilio,P.(1997).OpenSky.LondonandNewYork:Verso.Wolfe,C.(2010).WhatisPosthumanism?Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.Woodward,K. (1994).FromVirtualCyborgs toBiologicalTimeBombs:Technocriticismand

theMaterialBody.InG.BenderandT.Druckrey(Ed.),CultureontheBrink:IdeologiesofTechnology(pp.47–64).Seattle:BayPress.

Woolgar, S. (1991). Configuring the User: The Case of Usability Trials. In J. Law (Ed.), ASociologyofMonsters(pp.58–99).LondonandNewYork:Routledge.

Zuboff,S.(1988).IntheAgeoftheSmartMachine:TheFutureofWorkandPower.NewYork:BasicBooks.

19Poeticallyconsideringdeathanditsconsumption

TerranceG.Gabel,Editor

Tocommunicate the essenceof someofourmostmeaningful consumerexperiences, theprecise, linear languageof scienceandacademiamaybe,inandofitself,unsuitable…Perhapsemotionaltruthsarebestcommunicatedemotionally.Perhapsweknowcertainthingsaretrueandvalidbecause, likegoodpoetry,theyresonatewithinus,expandingandenrichingourconsciousness.

(SherryandSchouten,2002,p.219)

Often,indeath,everythingelsefails.Weareleftonlywiththemusicandmeaningofpoetry.

(Young,2010,p.xv)

Among themost veiled and emotionally charged of life’s experiences are those related todeath.Giventhatpoetryhaslongbeenrecognizedasanunparalleledmeansofexpressingandunderstandingthemostcomplexandemotionalaspectsoflife(SherryandSchouten,2002),itisoflittlesurprisethatfewpoetsregardedasthefinestofallwordsmithshavenot,sincetimeimmemorial,grappledwithdeath.

Recently, within marketing and consumer research, poetry has slowly but progressivelycometoberecognizedasameansbywhichtounderstand,express,celebrate,and/orconfrontthatwhichdefies scientificorothermore “scholarly”explanation (Canniford,2012;Wijland,2011;SherryandSchouten,2002).This“poeticturn”hasmanifesteditselfmostnotablywithinthenascentrealmofConsumerCultureTheory(CCT);mainlyinpoetryreadingsessionsheld– with published chapbooks in hand – in concurrence with the annual CCT symposium.Death-related poetry penned by marketing and consumer researchers has there entered –albeit randomly– theCCTcircuit (see, for example:Arnould, 2014; Steinfield, 2014;Gabel,2013,2010;Downey,2011,2010a,2010b,2010c).

This chapter represents the first formal, organized attempt to better understand death-related consumptionexperienceandmeaningvia the creationanddisseminationof originalworks of poetry. The chapter’s title reflects the broad, eclectic perspective of death andconsumptionhereinpursued.Weconsiderfuneraryandother–good,service,andideological–productconsumptionactivitiesandexperiencestranspiringinthecontextofdeath.Wealso

embracethenotionthatdeathoftenbrutallyconsumesthosedealingwithit;a“consumptionofconsumersbydeath.”Inturn,asvividlyexpressedinseveralofthepoemsinthischapter,consumption acts or experiences and/or memories thereof may be instrumental incatharticallycopingwith“beingconsumedbydeath.”

Towardthisend,gatheredtogetherandpresentedhereisasmallcollectionofdeath-relatedpoetic utterances from regular contributors to theCCTpoetry dialogue aswell as those ofseveralkindred-spirit“newrecruits.”Orderingofthepoemsisbasedonloosecategorizationintofouremergentandnotnecessarilymutuallyexclusivethemes/types.Appearingfirstarethosewhereintheauthorconsidersand/oralludestowhatitfeelsliketodealwiththedeathoffriendsandlovedones.Wethentransitionintoworksinwhichthepoetcontemplateshisorherowndeath.Followingthatarepoemsthatdonotfocusonthedeathofaparticularpersonas much as they do on culturally prescribed death-related consumption ritual and/orconsuming some thing or things as a consequence of systemic, macro-level market forcesshapedbydecisionsmadebyglobaleconomicandpoliticalelites(e.g.,themarketingofwarand traditionalmass religionand the endless cycle ofwork, death, grief, healing, andworkassociatedwith dominant energy production and consumption practices). Finally, in closing,twoepitaphpoemsareoffered.

ConsumingLoveandDeath

BySidneyJ.Levy

CultureTheoristsstudytheConsumers,ConvertingintofactsallthoserumorsAboutwhattheybuyandwhattheysell,Interpretingforjournalswhatsubjectstell.

LatelyweseethatDeathisacommodityLikeanythingelseinthemarketvicinityAsabrandedideaanditsattendantgear,Themedicalcare,interment,andallwefear.

Deathisthebiggest,mostsuccessfulvendor;Itsserviceishuge,ofallillsthegreatestmender.ItneedstoadvertisetoabsolutelynooneBecauseitstotalmarketsegmentiseveryone.

Anyway,thisismychancetobeasubject,Acasestudythatreviewerswon’treject,AboutmypersonalactionsinthiscultureWhereDeathwaitsmyturnwithitsnurture.

Theadsnaggedatme,haveyouawill?Asifwritingonewasliketakingapill.SoIdidit,notthatIhadmuchtoleave;Maybeitgavemeasenseofreprieve.

Wealsoboughtpoliciesforcremation,Feelingplanfulandavirtuoussensation.And,oh,yes,anotherforlongtermcare,AsiftotellDeath,Ha,youbetterbeware.

Didtheseconsumeractsdomuchgood?ThatisaresearchquestionIstillbrood.Manyfolksdon’tmakeplansthisway.Theirphilosophyletsthemignoreorpray.

Theoldsongsays,Loveiseverywhere,Itsmagicperfumefillstheair.Ah,there!ButsotoodoesDeathpervadeone’slife.Iknowtoowell:ittookmysonandmywife.

LastnightIdreamedtheword“Anodyne”Asifrepeatingitcuredillsofmine.Yettooitmeansdonotoffend;Howthencansuchobsequymend?

Suchcontradictionsstirmymind.Oldeyescanseebutarealsoblind.TocleavemaymeantocutinpartsAndalsosayswejoinourhearts.

Bobettewasill,Icaredforheratbedside.Isaid,“Iloveyou,”ashereyesopenedwide.Shesmiled,movedhandtoherheart,anddied,Andthen,asnow,Icried,Icried,Icried.

Thus,youaredeadandhaveleftmeDearOnes,whyhaveyoubereftme?EversinceI’mamansobereaved,Leftalonetopine,andevergrieved

Isearchtofindtheopposingside,SeekingreasonswhyIshouldabide.YousaidImuststayandstillfindjoyWhenmyimpulseisalltodestroy.

Ithoughttohelpmysaddrearyhead:Whataboutdeathhadgreatpoetssaid?IfoundthatConradAikensharedmyfate;Hesaid,“Iamwithoutyou,allisdesolate.”

IcanwithKeatsthinkofmylastbreath,Withhim“halfinlovewitheasefulDeath,”EnjoyingBrowningaswereIhighonmeth,“Ishallbutlovetheebetterafterdeath.”

Butno,bettertobuywhatThomassoldTocountertheallureoftheendlessColdAndcontinuetowagethelivingfightAnd“rageagainstthedyingofthelight.”

So,isallthisasiflifewereabusiness?Canwebuyandsellbotheaseandstress?Themundaneworldsaysitmustbeso,Promotinghowtoprepareandgetreadytogo.

Toseeasondie,toseeawifedie,Imustconfess,TosaywhatIfeelthere’snowaytoexpress.AttheslightesthintofmemoryallIdoisweep;Asaconsumeroflove,O,thepriceissosteep!

Things…IDoNotAsk

ByTerranceG.Gabel

Idonotaskwhyyoudidwhatyoudid

IdonotaskwhyIrememberyouthroughmaterialthingsof30and40yearspast…

Levisjackets; weatheredshades tatteredblue reekingofsmoke throughoutschool

theJavelin; fadedadullpissyellow brokendown orparked asoftenasnot

Budweisercans; theexplodingtabletoppyramid youf lewatopmethrough rolling,clanging,howling acrossthedustywoodenf loor

Idonotask

whyIrelivethesethingseverytimeIseeatrainrollby

IdonotaskwhyIcomeherebesidebloodlesstrackswhereyoudidnotjuststandwithdefiantdeterminationandasifthesethingsmeantnothing

IdonotaskwhyIfindmyselfheresooftensoneartonsofscreamingsteeltofeelthegrittybreezetofacetheghostsofthesethingssograndlysoboldlyconsumed.

Idonotaskwhy.Ilaugh.Icry.

TearsApart

ByPilarRojasGaviria

InhonorofPatriciaGarcia-Prieto

PartIThesandclockhasrundown,Itisallnowjustamatterofremainingawake…EndlesstimeInasharedlife-part,Whenfallingapart,Myheart,Beingintheworld,Whenyouaremyworld.Beingwithyou,Yourbreath,

Myblessing.Nexttomysoul,Youlaugh,MusicandArmagnacThrillingme,Andweare“chronicallyill”Inthislast,glamorous,dance.Notmuchtimetosaygood-bye.HowmuchIwouldhavelovedJusttobethere,Andthereagain,Differentshoesandhairstyles,Passingthroughthehardandthegoodtimes,Gettingoldandperhapsfat.Tellingyou,tearsapart,Whenlifegetstough,HowmuchIwouldhavelovedMakingyousmile,Thatonelasttime.

PartIIIfwehadjustonemoredayBackinGreece:AblueoceanAndadeepbreath.It’sallabouttoclose,Timetodecideonthemagicalbox.Nopossiblereplacements,Theysaid.Runningoutofpieces,Nonewlungs,heartorkidneys.Isthishowfartheycango?Notimpressed,whilecollectingthepiecesOfaheartonceagainfallingapart.Youmayfeel:Thecoldinside,Thegreyoutside,Youwillhaveupsanddowns,Asyouimproviseyourwaythroughlife!AndthenyoumayhavealookAtourmagicalbox,WhereItreasuredforyou,Amongothervaluables:Myhellokittyangels,Onepinkandoneblue,Youneverknowwhichdreamwillcometrue.Aquillpen,Waitingforyourfirstalphabet.Ahairtie,ToseehowcloseyouaretomeOnthedaysyouask:Howstrongismyloveforyou?

Myfavoriteparagraph,OnKafka’sMetamorphosis,Amustreadinbusylifedays!Somerandomnotesandletters,testamentsOfasmuchanticipatedloveasIcangivetoyou.Closingthebox,Outside,Youandme,WemanagedtotakeoutThoseauxiliaryties,Ontheredandblackbike,Rollingallaround,Welaughandjump,Tearsapart,Youaredoinggreatforsomeoneofyourage!Allthisasmyenddrawsvividlynear.Holdingyouonelasttime,Wishingyouasweet,endlessride,Lovingyou,Mycherishedchild,Forever.

Changling

ByHilaryDowney

Inoticed,whenoutofcharacterYourvoiceslippedin,youmustAttendthatlilactree;theyouHadafinalityIwouldnotshare,Hostilityhung,abarriercreatedThatcouldnotbeovercome,Imulleditoverandover,beforeRakingitupagain;asonemightGivelifetodyingembersintheblackenedGrate,Icalledback,sureyouwillmakecertainOfthat;notawaitingtheresponse,IgabbledOvercracksnowcreatedinconversation,Banterandbabble,theorderoftheday

Itwasafirsttoe-dippingintoareality,Afuturelife;wherelossandlaughterOfavoicesinged,tingedandcherishedsinceChildhood,islost.Ablanketfromthebigoutdoors,AwellinwhichIswim,swamandwantto,always,Isslowlysiltingin.NowIhearineveryturnOfphrase,thatuncertainty,myunwillingness

Tosee,frailty-falling,fadingasautumnalLight,burntochrenowuponus

Toacknowledge,Ihavetoaccept,ThatdoorwillholdtightagainstbrushOfdownandf lesh.MymouthwillnotSoundoutsickening-syllables,castout,Cage-caughtintheair,pressing,pulsating,Dayonday.Youarenotwelcomenow,OrevertosharetheseroomsofhomeYouhavenolegitimacyhere,cladinRaimentsofsleep.IwillwatchforyouComesteelingdownonnightbeamsAndhaltyourstare

Yougrapplewithigcróilíanbháis,1

Unwieldyroots,shootsofclingingclematisHoneysuckleandfibrousivy,sewndeepinredBrick.Youmastertheunruly,untamedgrowthBattlingtoquelltheuprisingthatstrikesAtwill,andtriestostill,yourloveoflife.Ifollowfromthekitchenwindow,yoursoftFootfallthroughwildgrass;afootstepIhearandknow,fight-falling

FromthegardentothebedroomClearingasyougo,bagsbulgingwithCobbledcharitytreats;toobig,wekeepToomuch,suchurgencyintheclearingHeightensmyvulnerability.IquestionthisChaos;aggression,annoyanceforanabsenceTocome.IamallbutdrowninginsorrowFormychangling

Fivepoemsontherecentdeathanddyingofmyparents

TheThought

ByTerranceG.Gabel

thethoughtinitiallycamehardtomesomewherebetweentoolateandtoosoon

thatperhapsitwouldbebetterforittocomesooner

toseenomorewhathasbeenseentheselastmonths

thattechnology,expectations,andfearshaverenderedlivinghoweverunimaginablymiserablemorepossiblemoreacceptablemoreimportantthandyingagooddeath

ofwhatIwoulddoifshemymotherweretoaskmetoenditforherrightherenowthatitisnolongertoosoonortoolateorwrongtobeatleastconsidered

ThisisIt

ByTerranceG.Gabel

IknowevenbeforeIseetheareacodeofmybirth

thisisit

thetimehascomeoneyouarenotsupposedtohopeforthatIhavemanytimes

Idonotanswer…

IpaceadarkenedroomrecallinghowIwonderedhowImightreactwhenthetimewouldcomethinking“notlikethis”

Ishower

along,tearfulcleanseupagainstthewall…

readythecar

returnthecall

yes…

myangelicmotherpeacefullyandquietlysingingAmazingGracewiththenursetowhichIspeaktwohourspastinahospitalonehourawayandIwasnotthere…

therewasworkI“hadtodo”sixty-plus–butnever-enough–hourseachofherlonelylastweeks…

andthoseundyingscenesIwishedtoavoidmoreofclosingactsfromthefinalthreeofher87years“lived”ina“nursinghome”positionedas“healthcenter”fadingbruisingforgettingbleedingrottingparalyzedandharnessedmechanicallyhoistedoutofbedlikethecowinApocalypseNowtobefedandmedicatedprofitablyprolongedamidsttheendlessdirgeofmuffledscreamsandbabblingsandmoanswhichshewillsopatientlyandwithoutprotestsuffernomore…

thisisit

Imustgo.

WeeksPassed

ByTerranceG.Gabel

threeweekshavepassedsinceyouleft

Ithoughtthatbynow

itwouldbebetterbutthereisnothingthatis

nobottleorpillorroadorplaceorshoworsongorpoemorpersonorotherthingmaterialornotisascapableasIhadhoped

threeweeksfightingfeelingsthatIshouldfeelacertain,expectedway

threeweeksexpectingnothingthreeweekstellingmyselfIdidallIcould

ohhowIlie

…Inoticethecalendarandthroughtearsseeithasbeensixweeksinsteadofthree

KeepingDad

ByTerranceG.Gabel

nowItrytohelpkeepdadaliveoutofharm’swidemarketway…

thoughhenowseemstowanttoliveaslittleasIwishtoseehimdie

hewantsnothingtodowithanythingoldornewhedoesnotunderstandorhearoreatorcallorwanttodomuchofanythingbuttwistthoughtstheorizeconspiracies

intoself-fulfillingworst-casescenarios

Ihaulhimtolawyersandbanksfilloutrun-onformsbackandforthtodoctorsforteethandhearingaidsthatcostfartoomuchandthatheknowswillnotworkImakedead-endautomated-awaycallsfightinginsuranceandtheimpoverishedstateheworkedsohardforsolongforsothathislastyearsmightbeconsumeddefendingagainsttheoffensivesecretparallelworldfinepeoplejustdoingtheirjobswhattheyhavetodolegalizingjustifyingmonetizingthevulnerabledyingold

BoughtIn

ByTerranceG.Gabel

youboughtmeintotheworldofhavingofwantingmyown

taughtmetoooftheworldofenoughofappreciatinghowtonotforget

likethered,white,andblue10thbirthdaybasketballandthe1stBlackSabbathcassetteon#15thatplaynolongeryetstillfunction

thankstobothofyou

forallthisnevertobenotherewithme

GoodbyestoNelsonMandela

ByLaurelSteinfield

JoziskiesGrievedMadibaAsheleftourearthlyworldGreysobernessHungheavilyfordaysInlifelesscloudsColdnessseepedintothesummerairThemourningsundidnotshine

Theunsettlednightskiesweptrainstormswhippedbemoanedwindsendingthehumancelebrationsofthefreedmanwhodancedupintownshipsandchantedoutsidetheblackbarredhousegates

MancelebratedMadiba’slifewhilenaturelamentedthedepartedroyalspiritorperhapsasAfricanloreavowsitwasthegodsrainingdowntheirjoywelcomingourTatahome

TheFinestFlour

ByJohnSchouten

Somewhereonamountain,yousaid,maybeattherootsofabigDougfir.ButIchoseagianthemlockinsteadafewminutes’walkintothewoods.

Thefirsaremajestic,butthehemlockknowstobowitshead.

Howtiredandsaggywebecame,howloathtoletaneveningpasswithoutabottleofwineandsomethingonthetelevision,afootinmylaphungrytoberubbed,toespulleduntiltheysnapped.

Iregretthepangsofshamewesharedoverallthosehoursofsameness,thehoursofwell-earnedf labslabbedoffinhammocksofcoolskin,thegroansoflaughteratsomedarklyfunnyline.

I’vestoppedwatching,youknow.Thesetsitsdarkandholdinghalf-watchedseasonsofHBOandShowtime.Thescreenprojectsanemptyroomandglimpsesofapassingghost.

Ihaveanewhabit.Youmightapprove.Ibakebread,asmallloafeveryweekonSundayafternoon.ByThursdayit’sgone.Inevershareitwithanyone.

WhenIfinallygottheurnIletitsitforthelongesttimeonthekitchencounter,nexttotheMixmasterthatfollowedusaroundtheworldandbackagain.

InthefallIfinallyopeneditandsiftedyouthroughafinestrainer.ThecoarserbitsItooktothehemlock.ThatwasaSundayafternoon.ByThursdayyouweregone.

Thefinestf lourItransferredtoacrockeryjar.IhavetworecipesIlikebest,onethattakespumpkinseedsandanotherwithcherriesandhazelnuts.ToeveryloafIaddapinchofdelicateash.WhenthatisgoneI’llbakenomore,butI’llreturntothehemlockandaskittocomparenotes

onnutritionalvalueandf lavorknowingfullwellbeforeIgothatIgottheverybestofyou.

ObservationsatMyOwnFuneral2

ByJohnSchouten

Whatisthisplace?Aseawall?Peoplegatheredatapier?Isensewaterhere,andsalt.

Ihavenoeyes,noears.Nofingertips.Emotionalcontoursshapetheair:agranitefistlodgedinancientice,themineralsmellofunfinishedbusiness,burrowingwormsoffear.

Ibegintounderstand.Thisisnottheshore.Thereisnoboat.Nocryofgulls.WhatIimaginedtobef loatinghereisjustaboxofsouringbones.

Myf leshandblood,areyoualsointhisplace?Whichofthesehuddledshapesareyours?Isiftthroughthemandtrytotraceyouremotionalsignatures.

Hereawomanholdsapictureofme,onlyyoungerandcrueler.Igetfrayingpaper,brokenglass,sandattheheartofamisshapenpearl.

Andherearageofmuscle,atongue-tiedbrain,af lashofsugarinf lame.InhimIhearmyownvoice,thebasslineinasongofhope,despair,disdain.Myson,growstrong.

Andyou.

Iwouldknowyouanywhere.Youaremyopencountry.Iknowyoureverystreamandeverywood.Everybladeofgrass.Iwouldinhabit,ifIcould,thisemptyspace,thissparrow’snestfillingupwithsnow.Iseeyouhavekeptsecrets.Jewelswrappedinpaperyleaves.Iwillletthembe.Youhavedoneasmuchforme.

heartattack

ByJohnF.Sherry,Jr.

acrinklinglikeuncrumplingcellophane,likesplashedtabascopricklingthatcrampedspacebeneaththeribs,alatticeworkofsharpandlowvoltjoltsandspikyprobesandfullness.curledlikeashrimpatopanunmadebed,holdingmyselfagainstthebuzzofradiantcurrentcoursingthroughclenchedjaw,sofarfromhome,sofarfromallIlove,feelingfoolishtohavepickedthisplacetomisreadsignsInevershouldhaveseen,wonderingifwidowhoodbecomesyou.

SymbolsforSale:ACaseStudy

BySidneyJ.Levy

Flowersservethecultureofconsumermentalfitness.‘Thoughnotfood,clothing,shelter,theyarebigbusinessAnindustryoftwenty-eightbilliondollarsayear,Withmanyf loralcustomsthathelpallayourfear.

Ateachcycleoflifef loriculturemeansalottousWhetherscatteredorsetinchesapartaswefussWebuysomeseedsandplantthemintheearth.Andlovinglywatchthemastheseedlingsgivebirth.

Theypokeupwithstrengthdespitetheirfragility,Soakingupwater,facingthesunwiththeirability,Puttingouttheirstemsandtheirf ledglingleafing

Andgreeningourthumbswithcreditforachieving.

Nextcomethebuds,thosedearplumpharbingers,WithanxiousnurtureandhopethatnothinginjuresApromisethatpointsuplikehandsheldinprayerTheburgeoningbloomsthey’reabouttodeclare.

Thewonderoff lowerswhethergrownorbought:Withemotionalintensitytheyarealsofraught,Delightingthesensesascolored,delicate,fragrant,Withtheirsymbolismtheyareladenandf lagrant.

Invasesaroundthehousetheyserveasbrightdécor,Ortheycomeshylyasagiftforanerrortheydeplore.Thetulipsandtheirisannouncethatspringishere,AndasinglerosemaysaythatIloveyoumydear.

Whensicktheysaywe’resorryandpleasegetwell;Theysurroundweddingaltarsandmakeeventsswell.Theycongratulatepromotions,canexpressourthanks,Andevenbringasmiletothefaceofgrumpycranks.

Butalas!Wealsoknowthatinf lowersanevillurks:Theysaythatlifeisshortdespitebeautyandgoodworks.LikeAlbright’swreathonthefunerealdoorwerue:“ThatwhichIshouldhavedoneIdidnotdo.”

Thef lowersdieindays,rotting,molderingintheirvases,Droppingtheirdeadleavesontheirdoiliesorlaces.Likeultimaterespiratorsormeds,measuresbrutal,Thosepennies,sugar,vodka,andbleachareallfutile.

So!Flowersspeakaestheticallyofthepleasuresinlife’Webuythemandwegivethemtoexpresslessstrife.Theysymbolizetheconsumptionofourspanofdays,Tellingwithfragrantbreathofcertaindeathinsubtleways.

CoalTownHospice

ByRobertNeimeyer

OnthebanksoftheOhio,farfromthenamableplaces,thetownsquats,wounded.Thesturdygirdersofthebridgescarrycarsaway,away,acrossthebrownexpanseofriverbleedingthesehills,

acrossthetracksoftheC&Xcoursingwiththeirloadsofcokeandsteel.Inthepre-dawndrizzleMainStreetstandsemptyasthestores,theirvacanteyesleakingthedreamsofgrandfathers.

OneitherendoftowntowertheGoliathsoftheplant,therefinery.Theyannouncethedescentintothisvalley,bartheexit,squelchhopewithbelchingfumes.Betweenthemthetowncrouches,subservient.

Thereisstillworkhere,depositstobemadetobankaccounts,tolungs.Thecancersendsitsmetastaseswindingdownthewidestreets,thebackalleys.Theeagertendrilsfindtheunstoppedcracksunderdoors,theopenwindows,mouths.Fortheyoung,thereisonesurewayout.

Itisherethathospicedoesitsdarkwork,laysitslighthandonlaboringchests.Theplantshavesetdownrootsinthefurrowedbrows,sewnseedsofneedinthefertilef lesh.Questionsseeplikeoilfromthepores.Likehistory,nurseshavenoanswerstogive.Theyfillthebeds,fillthebagshangingonsteelpoles,coaxtheanodyneintocollapsingveins.Witheachloss,chaplainssuturethewoundswithfamiliarverse,laythedeadtorestinthescarredsoil.Socialworkersapplytheirgentlepresstothebereaved,nudgethembacktolife,

backtothefactories.Intheend,thesurvivorscarrythememoryontheirbentshoulders,

feeltheheavyhandofobligationthatfollowsthemtothefurnaces,totheirhomes,

likegrief.

PiousMen

ByGregoryW.Boller

Slothful…

Gluttonous,

ThesecadgersOfheaven’sprurience.

StealingdesperateprayersinsecretWhilebelchingtheirsalvationwithsmug,pretentiouswooliness;Evenrapturedcopulationswithitinerantangelscannotslaketheirthirstformurderinginnocence.

Gleefullystokinghell’spyresoftheeternalinquisition,Pissingpietyforwrath’sfuel,ThesesavedcelebrantsKnownoPenitence.

ScrapingClutchingCovetousSinnersall…Girdedwithgreed,Fetteredastridedeath’spalesteed,“Towar,”theycry,and“Staythecourse,”Liftingshatteredf leshandburntlivesinfetidsacrificetotheirgod’sdecadence.

Darkfearsnourishmalignantlonelinessintheirenvy,StarvinginnocentsofemotionalintimacyWithbulimicritualsTopurgeFemininity.TerrifiedTorturedTestosteroneSurgesangrily.GodtheFather,TheSonandHolyGhost

DressaswarriorsforSunday’sménageàtrois,AndhopefulmindsaredevouredofdreamsbyhostsoftheHolyPestilence.

NottheFuneralforaFriend

ByGregoryW.Boller

Latewinter’spallidmorningsky,Rudelycarvedfromcoldleadbeckons;Blackleavesglaremeanlyandf ly.

GraspingchantsinthisHouseoflies–Ancienttimbresofferedagod,Gatheringsorrowandcries.

Iamrapedwithtalesofrapture;Abused,unwilling,byJesus;Gavagedwithpuremanufacture.

Mycelebrationofhertime,Nowbentformedievalpurpose,Insteadvomitshatewritbenign.

Covetoushollowlipsfeignpraise–Ministeredemptinesswithpsalms,Whileloversrecallherdays.

Marchers’grimagoniespassnear,Fleeingthesoftpetaledcaisson;Seareddreams’darkglowssighwithfear.

EPITAPH

ByHilaryDowney

Ireturntodullmemories,f lamedbyfreshFinality,acullingofsplinteredcraft-makingTintedroseinthegatheringgaze,Hotspotsofhunger-heldhighlightsPlaymymind,soft-sootheinAgossamerbind;kaleidoscopicsnapshotsOfhedonicconsumptiontimes

Freshfinalf lame,theTurningdownofday,awakeningOfyesteryear,theshimmeringofYouthnowawashwithspume,Frivolousfervour,batedbreath,Uponbás’sdrum,Ibeat;aretreatOnrhythmicconsumptiondesires

anepitaphinvokingninemusesandnormdenzin

ByJohnF.Sherry,Jr.

weatheringsevenmoments,awakeninginoureighthdayofcreation,

mourningthegoldenagebeyondblurredgenresandtherepresentingcrisesofourcontestedmethods,

seekingrightandtoavertthehiddenconsequenceofneeding,wanting,having,publishingandperishingandpublishingagain,

welongforthatninthmoment,thenumberofcirclesofhellwe’veseenfreezeover,ourluckynumbernine,weconjureaninthlifewhereeachofuscangothewholenineyardsdressedtothenines,perhapsretireoncloudnine,

asifhistoryweren’taweaponbeingwrittenbythevictors,asifourmomentsweren’tassavoryintheirmelting,

asifnineoftendoctorscouldeveragree

Notes

1igcróilíanbháis=throesofdeath.

2AnearlierversionappearsinAdvancesinConsumerResearch,Vol.32,p.9,2005.

References

Arnould,Eric(2014)“ToMyFather(WhoseBirthdayI’veForgotten)”InSherry,J.F., Jr., J.W.Schouten, and H. Downey (eds.) Caribou Coracle Tera. St. Bathans (New Zealand):UniversityofSt.BathansPress,pp.36–37.

Canniford,Robin(2012)“PoeticWitness:MarketplaceResearchThroughPoeticTranscriptionandPoeticTranslation,”MarketingTheory,12(4),pp.391–409.

Downey,Hillary(2010a)“SuppressingtheMedicalModel”InWijland,W.,J.W.Schouten,andJ.F. Sherry, Jr. (eds.) Canaries Coalmines Thunderstones. St. Bathans (New Zealand):UniversityofSt.BathansPress,p.16.

Downey,Hillary (2010b) “Family atWar” InWijland,W., J.W. Schouten, and J.F. Sherry, Jr.(eds.)Canaries Coalmines Thunderstones. St. Bathans (New Zealand): University of St.BathansPress,p.17.

Downey,Hillary(2010c)“TheFallennessofHumanity”InWijland,W.,J.W.Schouten,andJ.F.Sherry,Jr.(eds.)CanariesCoalminesThunderstones.St.Bathans(NewZealand):UniversityofSt.BathansPress,p.18.

Downey,Hillary (2011) “TheLastGift” InWijland,R. (ed.)CoyotesConfessionsTotems. St.Bathans(NewZealand):UniversityofSt.BathansPress,p.20.

Gabel, TerranceG., (2010) “End Products” InWijland,W., J.W. Schouten, and J.F. Sherry, Jr.(eds.)Canaries Coalmines Thunderstones. St. Bathans (New Zealand): University of St.BathansPress,pp.21–22.

Gabel,TerranceG.,(2013)“TheWrongTime”InSherry,J.F.,Jr.,J.W.Schouten,andH.Downey(eds.)CardinalCuentoTianda.St.Bathans(NewZealand):UniversityofSt.BathansPress,pp.16–17.

Sherry, John F. and John W. Schouten (2002) “A Role for Poetry in Consumer Research,”JournalofConsumerResearch,29(2),pp.218–234.

Steinfield,Laurel(2014)“GoodbyestoNelsonMandela”InSherry,J.F.,Jr.,J.W.Schouten,andH. Downey (eds.) Caribou Coracle Tera. St. Bathans (New Zealand): University of St.BathansPress,p.10.

Wijland, Roel (2011) “Anchors,Mermaids, Shower-Curtain Seaweeds and Fish-Shaped Fish:TheTextureofPoeticAgency,”MarketingTheory,11(2),pp.127–141.

Young,Kevin(2010)“Introduction”InYoung,K.(ed.)TheArtofLosing:PoemsofGriefandHealing.NewYork:Bloomsbury.

20Examiningdeathandlearningaboutlife

JeffreyPodoshen

In terms of understanding death consumption and its trajectory, the authors in this volumehave paved a path of deep examination, introspection and reflection that offers significantinsight into humanity and how the living deal with death. In these times of increaseduncertainty, economic strife, and global unrest, the prospect of death may be more at theforefrontofourminds.Thismeansthatdeath,andinsomecases,associatedviolenceand/orhistoricviolenceordistressispermeatingoureverydaylivesandourconsumptionpracticesinwayswehaven’t really reflectedon in thepastnumberofdecades.Further, it isclear fromthesechaptersthatthereisincreasingattentiononthe“performance”ofthespaces(asweseeinMcKenzie’s andHackleyandHackley’s chapter) andpractices related todeath, givingusmore opportunity to understand the discourse surrounding death in tourism, rituals andconsumption. Insomecases,performancebecomes interconnectedwiththehorrorsofdeathor theabject, as inDrummondandKrszjsaniek’swork. Inothercases,deathand its relatedmaterialitydealswiththesymbolicand/orrelational(seeDobscha,etal.2012).Thisincreaseinwhathasbecomemoresalient,aswellasmoreacceptabletowitness,engageinanddiscuss,initself, indicates a cultural shift towards an environment whereby humans are forced toconfrontmoretangiblerealitiesofdeath inconsumptionpractices.Deathandtheabjecthasbeen a topic of increased interest in recent history as humans appear tomake sense of theviolencethatsurroundsthemandhasbecomeever-so-presentintheglobalmedia(Podoshen,etal.2015)–amediawhichisreportingonmassandserialdeathandviolenceatanalarmingrate–whetheritbeISIS,gunviolenceorpublicunrest.Nolongerareimagessanitizedbythenewsmedia,butratherimagesandstories,inrawform,areavailabletoeveryoneinsecondsviasocialmedia.Infact, it isnearlyimpossibletosimply“turnoff”mediaanditsassociatedimagesinthedigitalage.

Consuming death and related activities beyond the traditional funeral or religious ritualreflectsatransformationinoursearchforanswersandexplanationsthatgobeyondthelimitsofmere religiosityor culturalmores.Further, asdemonstratedby someof thework in thisvolume, the concept of death and dying finds itself as a central ethos in a myriad ofconsumptionactivity,tourismandmaterialisticsensemaking.Oncecenteredonritual,religion

and community, death as a consumption practice and consumer culture construct hastranscendedpreviousboundaries,prejudicesandbeliefs.Deathconsumptionandinteresthasrapidly begun to remove itself from being viewed as merely a transgressive consumptionactivity. Schadenfreude labels of this typeof consumer activity are being replacedbymoreintrospectivethoughtsandfeelings.Deathisnotsomethingthatweavoid(orcantrytoavoid)like we once did. As Marketing academics, many of us probably use the product of lifeinsuranceastheexemplaroftheunsoughtgood.Therealityisthatdeath-relatedproductsandservicesarenotreallyasunsoughtastheyoncewereandhowwedealwiththematerialityofourbodiesisonethattakesonevenmoresignificanceasourplanetgetsmorecrowdedandmoretumultuous.

Deathconsumption todaycontinues to furtherblur linesofacceptabilityandmortalityasevidencedbyWelch’swork inthisvolumeandmightevenfinditselfblendingandbridgingthemeswedon’t“normally”associatewithdeath,suchasrenewedanddeeperunderstandingsof erotica, art and sex.As evidenced in the recent literature (Venkatesh, et al. 2015) globalundergroundandextremesubcultureshaveusedsexandgenderissuestomakeprovocativestatementsnot justaboutdeathanddying,butabouttheliving,culture(s)andsubcultures(s)and attempts to deny or defy death. This falls into line with Stone and Sharpley’s (2008)assertions that activities such as dark tourism and death-related consumption really tell usabouthumanscurrentlylivingandbreathing,theirthoughts,feelingsanddispositions,andnotnecessarilysomuchaboutthedead.Thisfocusontheneeds,wantsanddesiresofthelivingbased on the dead has manifested itself in increasingly popular quests for understandingancestryasevidencedbyNeilsonandMuseorthroughmythologizingdeceasedcelebritiestobringlivingfansclosertothemasseeninRadfordandBloch’spiece.

It should come as little surprise that while we are producing this text, Silicon Valleyscientists, investors,bankersandbillionairesareattempting to findways to live foreverandthat death, violence and environmental concerns about the body are at the forefront ofpopular culture and consumption activity. As Dobscha mentions in the Introduction,embarkingonthestudyofdeathandconsumptionisonethatcausesdiscomfortformany,yetappearsinthepublicandnon-publicdiscoursemoreandmore.Thisallcreatesaninterestingamalgam thatmakes a sharp statement about the current state of neoliberalism, consumerbehavior andwhat liesbeyond.Will economicpower really allowus to escapedeath?Willtherebesuchathingas“terminalillness?”Howwilldeathritualsandtraditionschangewhenwerunoutofspacefortheearth’sbodies?Howwillthedigitalworldpreservethememoriesofthedead–andbetteryet–howwillthedeadbecome“resurrected”inthedigitalrealm?Imight argue that underlying all of this is the issue of control – control of our bodies, ouridentitiesandourenvironment–inanerafilledwithuncertainty,economicstrifeandnever-endingwar.Forsome,deathisoneofthefewthingswecancontrol,oratleastbetterpreparefor,and,assuch,theimplicationsofthisrealityareunsurprisinglymanifestinconsumption.

References

Dobscha,S.,Drenten,J.,Drummond,K.,Gabel,T.,Hackley,C.,Levy,S.,Podoshen,J.,Rook,D.,Sredl,K.,Tiwaskul,R.A.andVeer,E.(2012).Deathandallhisfriends:Theroleofidentity,ritual,anddisposition in theconsumptionofdeath. InZ.Gurhan-Canli,C.Otnes,andR.Zhu (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research Volume 40 (pp. 1098–1099), Duluth:AssociationforConsumerResearch.

Podoshen,J.,Venkatesh,V.,Wallin,J.,Andrzejewski,S.,andJin,Z. (2015inpress).Dystopiandarktourism:Anexploratoryexamination,TourismManagement.

Stone, P., and Sharpley, R. (2008). Consuming dark tourism: A thanatological perspective.AnnalsofTourismResearch,35(2),574–595.

Venkatesh,V.,Wallin,J.J.,Walschots,N.,Netherton,J.,andPodoshen,J.(2015inpress).“Givinghead to the dead”: Penetrating, defiling and polluting the ethos of death in necrophilicdeath metal. In Aggrawal, A., Hickey, E. and Mellor, L. (eds.), Necrophilia: A GlobalAnthology.SanDiego,CA:Cognella,Inc.

Index

Pagenumbersinitalicsdenotetables,thoseinbolddenotefigures.

100GreatestAdvertisements,The(Watkins)26

abjection242,249,251–253,277,279–280,316; ofhumanautonomy281–283; ofhumanembodiment 283–285; ofhuman

emotion285–286

AdamandEve50

advertising2,3;Barregranitecampaigns1910–191715–17;casehistoryadvertising26;cemeterymonuments13;collapseof

the Barre initiative 17–18; color photographs 23; costs 18; erotica 43; Playstation 3 ‘Baby’ advertisement 280–286,

286–287,288;RockofAgescampaigns1919–192718–21;tableauxadvertising23;VermontMarbleCompanycampaigns

1927–193221–25

afterlife2,49,51,173,191,257

alkaline hydrolysis (AH) 6, 75–88, 232, 234–237, 238–240; AH in transition 80–83; background information 77–79;

controllingfuneraltechnologies75–77;criticismof81–82;distinctivenessoffunerarycontexts81;asaformofcremation

80–81;legitimacyof85–86;morality81–82,84–85,86;namingpractices80–81;professionalidentityintransition83–86;

systemsdesignfeatures82;technologiesandidentitiesintransition79–86

AllThatisBeautifulShallAbideForever23,24

Altena,Marga59

AmericanBeauty(film)44

AmericanPetProductsAssociation(APPA)159

AmericanStoneTrade16–17,18

AmericanWayofDeath,The(Mittford)124

anepitaphinvokingninemusesandnormdenzin(poem,Sherry)313–314

Ancestry.com7

animals7,80,81,82,85;consumerbehaviorandthepetfuneralindustry166;funeralservices165;human-pet relationship

155–157;memorialanddeath-relatedconsumption164–165;andmemorialization155–169; pet cemeteries 164; pets as

surrogatechildren/familymembers157–158;psychologicalandsociologicalviewsofthehuman-petrelationship157–158;

reactiontopetloss159–161;rituals,funeralsandmemorialsforpets162–164;sizeofthepet-relatedindustry159

anthropomorphism160–161

anxiety3,157,161,172,233,257,260,261,277,278,279,287

Aries,Philippe59

Arnould,EricJ.4

artists113–114

ashes67–68,69,127,219,231

assistedsuicideseesuicide

attachment112,114–115,157,160,161;tophysicalremains225–226

Augustine50

Australia59

authenticity57,62–63,70;ashdisposition67–68;anddarktourism33–34;andtheLeningrad/Sarajevosieges34;negotiated

authenticity34–35;theoplacityauthenticity35–36

Aylesworth,Andrew164

Bacon,Kevin110

Baker,CourtneyNations8,213–227

Baker,StaceyMenzel8,213–227

Bakhtin,M.101

Ballard,J.G.286

BarreGranite17

Barre,Vermont granite industry 14–15; campaigns 1910–1917 15–17; collapse of the Barre initiative 17–18; Rock ofAges

campaigns1919–192718–21

Bass,MaryClaire30–42

Baudrillard,Jean8–9,44,52,53,257–275,260,286; and capitalist political economy257,259, 260, 271–272; contempt for

modern society’s exclusion of death 257; death denial 257, 260–263; natural death and longevity 266–269; ‘punctual

death’concept258;sanitisationandthehygienicculture263–266;securityanddisastercapitalism269–272;sequestration

andinstitutionalisationofdeath262–263;andsymbolicexchange259–260;valueoflife266,268,272

Bauman,Z.44,48,52,53,258,267

Beck,U.271

Becker,Ernest260,261

BeforeISayGoodbye(Picardie)199,200,202–203,204–205,206–207

Beham,HansSebald50–51

Belgium186;studyonradicalalternativestohumandisposal228–241

Belich,James66

Belk,RussellW.3,6,93,111,138,143,171

Bell,Atholl20,22

bereavement3,4,62,63,65,161;seealsomourners/mourning

Berger,P.L.260–261

Berman,J.208

Berning,CaroleK.4

bettersendoff.co.nz61

Bio-ResponseSolutions,Inc.78,80,81,82,85

biographicalnarratives63,65,67,141,142;pathographies198–209

Birchall,C.64

Bloch,PeterH.6,108–122,116

bodydisposition265;alkalinehydrolysis(AH)/resomation6,75–88,232,234–237,238–240;Belgianconsumeracceptanceof

cremation alternatives 232–239; burials 1, 231, 233–234, 265–266; choice of disposal method 233–234; cremation

alternatives 231–232; cremations 7, 64, 67, 76–77, 126–131, 127, 128–129, 165, 215, 218–221, 229–230, 231, 231–232,

233–234; cryomation231–232,234–237; data analysis 215–216; data collection 215–216; disposition research 213–214;

emotional aspects of disposal 213; environmental challenges 228–229, 230–232; inseparable notions of life and death

217–218;institutionalsettingofmortuarypracticeinBelgium229–230;makingsenseoflifeanddeathstudy8,213–227;

physical remains as inalienablewealth 221–224; presenting cremationalternatives in themarketplace 238–239; radical

alternatives study 228–241; role transitions, liminality and identity negotiation 214–215; study context 215; type of

disposalandidentity218–221;viewingthebody224–225

BodyWorlds exhibition8,242–253; abjection242,249,251–253;Baseball Player section 245–246; darkmaterials 246–248;

descriptionofexhibition243–245;Kristevaandconsciousness248–249;reactionsofviewers249–251;spiritualdimension

249–251;whole-bodyplastinates245–248

body-as-machinemetaphor266–267

Boller,GregoryW.311–313

Bonsu,SamuelK.3,4,6,93

Botting,F.285

BoughtIn(poem,Gabel)304

Boutinet,Jean-Pierre187–188,194

Boutwell,Milne&FarnumCo.15,18–21,22

Bowker,G.C.78–79

Bradshaw,Jason85

Brucks,Merrie145

Buchanan-Oliver,Margo9,276–291

Buddhism94;hungryghostsandThaiTheravā daBuddhisttradition94–95

Bukatman,S.278,283,286,287,288

burials233–234;environmentalchallenges231;greenburials1,265–266

Burt,E.23

Bury,M.198

C:BecauseCowardsGetCancerToo(Diamond)199–200,200–202,203,204,205,206–207

Cahill,Spencer83

calendars:DeathandtheMaiden(D&M)artgenre43,49–51;eroticcalendarsofCofaniFunebri44–47; erotic calendars of

Lindner47–48;futurismconcept44,51–53

Campbell,N.287

CanadianGenealogySurvey(CGS)174–175,177

Canning,Louise8,228–241

capitalism57;capitalistpoliticaleconomy257,259,260;securityanddisastercapitalism269–272

Carroll,Brian141,151

cars51,52–53

Caswell,Glenys58

CatholicChurch48,49,220,229,232

Cave,Steven171,173–174,178,179

celebrants62–63,65

celebrity deaths 6–7, 59, 108–122; artists 113–114; celebrity watching 108; celebrity worship 109–110; consumption as a

responsetocelebritydeaths114–117,116;griefandmourning108–109,112–114,118;para-socialrelationships110–112;

positive outcomes 119; products/objects associated with celebrities 109–110, 111–112, 113–114, 115–117; sacralization

concept111,113

cemeteries222–223,231;petcemeteries164;Sarajevosiege38,39

cemeterymonumentindustry5–6,13–29;advertising13,14;Barregranitecampaigns1910–191715–17;collapseoftheBarre

initiative17–18;communicationsmechanisms13–14;fall insales25; industrialproduction13;RockofAgescampaigns

1919–192718–21;VermontMarbleCompanycampaigns1927–193221–25

Cengiz,Hakan6–7,123–134

Changling(poem,Downey)299–300

Chapman,Ken164

Chhabra,K.33–34,40

ChurchofJesusChristofLatterDaySaints(LDS)179

CityHall(Sarajevo)35

CityofGod(Augustine)50

Clarke,J.279

CoalTownHospice(poem,Neimeyer)309–311

CofaniFunebri43,44–47,51

coffins: as an allegory for death 48; and erotic art 43–56; erotic calendars ofCofani Funebri 44–47; erotic calendars of

Lindner47–48;linkswithcars52

consumerculture8–9,91–92,258,272;consumerculturetheory(CCT)292;posthumanconsumerculture276–277

ConsumingLoveandDeath(poem,Levy)293–295

consumption of death 2–3, 5, 316–318; pathographies 198–209; and poetry 292–315; as a response to celebrity deaths

114–117,116;ritualanddeathinconsumerresearch93–94;seealsoonlinememorialization

contagion111–112

contamination111–112

Conway,S.62

corpsesseebodydisposition

Costa,J.A.111

CountryGentleman18,23,24

Crash(novelandfilm)52

CremationAssociationofNorthAmerica(CANA)126,127

cremations 7, 64, 67, 76–77, 126–131, 127, 128–129, 165, 215, 233–234; in Belgium 229–230, 231; consumer acceptance of

cremationalternativesinBelgium232–239;cremationalternativesinBelgium231–232;andidentity218–221;presenting

cremationalternativesinthemarketplace238–239

Crouch,Mira59

Cruz,AngelaGraciaB.9,276–291

cryomation231–232,234–237,265

Curasi,CarolynFolkman4

cyborg246,276,278–279

dark tourism5,6,30; and authenticity 33–34;marketing of the Leningrad/Sarajevo sieges 32–33; negotiated authenticity

34–35; packaging of the Leningrad/Sarajevo sieges 39–40; primary data collection for sieges study 36–39; scope and

frameworkof33;siegesofLeningradandSarajevo,backgroundto31–32;theoplacityauthenticity35–36

Darmody,A.4

Davies,D.48

deMello,G.203

death: celebrity deaths 108–122; connectionwith erotica 6; death denial 257,260–263; ignored as a topic of inquiry 2–3;

institutionalisationandsequestrationof262–263;materialityof7–8,92,102;andvoluntarysimplicity123–134

DeathandtheMaiden(D&M)artgenre43,49–51

DeathCafés61,70n1

DerTodundDasMädchen(Manuel)50

Derrida,J.279

Diamond,John199–200,200–202,203,204,205,206–207

Dietvorst,ThomasF.4

Director,The86

disastercapitalism269–272

disease263–264

distanciationprocess5–6

DNAtesting171,173

Dobscha,Susan1–10,164

Downey,G.L.283

Downey,Hilary299–300,313

Driver,T.F.94

Drummond,Kent8,242–253

Dumit,J.283

Dunnett,S.203

Dürer,Albrecht49–50

Durkheim,Emile186,186,195

Ebola264

Edwards,Jeff78,84–85

Ekelund,R.B.113

Elgin,D.124

Elias,N.262

Elliott,BruceS.5–6,13–29

embalming76,79,82–83,83–84,265

emotions4,59,62,63;andbodydisposal213,233–234;andtechnology285–286

empowerment203–205

environmentalaspects8,69,127,228–229,230–232

Epitaph(poem,Downey)313

erotica 6; bondage and domination (BD) themes 46–47;Cofani Funebri, erotic calendars 44–47; Death and the Maiden

(D&M) art genre 43, 49–51; futurism concept 44, 51–53; iconicity 43, 51; Lindner, erotic calendars 47–48; religious

symbolism45,46

“EternalFlame”(Sarajevo)35

EternalPortal140

ethics187;clinicalethicsmethodology194–195

euthanasia185,186,193,268

extendedselfconcept138,143–144

Facebook109,131,140

Fahlander,Fredrik8

familyhistoryresearchseegenealogy

Faunce,W.A.1,2,6

Faust,DrewGilpin75

Featherstone,M.287,288

Fernandez,K.V.4

finalf ling.com(website)61

FinestFlour,The(poem,Schouten)305–307

Fisher,Dean86

Foley,M.33

Forbesmagazine125

France184,186–187

Frank,A.198

Freud,Sigmund47,248,261

Frith,Hannah62

Fulton,R.L.1,2,6

funeralprofessionals2,52,59;divisionof“frontstage”and“backstage”work75–76,86; identities76–77,79,82–86;roleof

62–63,75–76;seealsofunerals

funeralservicesindustry125–126,125,126;pets165,166

funerals 124–125; ashes, placement of 67–68, 69, 127; burials 1, 231, 233–234, 265–266; costs 112–113, 125, 125, 127;

cremations 7, 64, 67, 76–77, 126–131, 127, 128–129, 215, 218–221, 229–230, 231, 233–234; death-related products and

services126;directdisposal64–65;intimacy67;personalisationandtheethosofopenness58–60;personalisedfunerals57;

privatefunerals6,64–65;realitiesandpracticalitiesofarrangement64–69;responsibility,costandfuneraloptions60–64;

secularization59,66;spirituality68–69;seealsobodydisposition

futurismconcept44,51–53

Gabel,TerenceG.7,9,112–113,137–154,292–315,295–296,300–304

Gale,J.3

Gannal,J.N.79,82–83

Garces-Foley,Kathleen58

Gavira,PilarRojas297–298

genealogy 7, 170–183, 222; concern with the future 178–179; digital technologies, use of 178; family history’s role in

respondents’lives177–178;immortalizingancestors178;literaturereview171–172;profileofstudyrespondents175–176;

reasons for researching family history 176–177; study limitations and conclusions 179; studymethod 174–175; Terror

ManagementTheory(TMT)171–173,177–178,179;theoreticalperspectives172–174;willtoimmortality173–174

Gentry,JamesW.4–5,8,213–227

Germany58–59

Gibson,W.287

Giddens,A.13,261–262,271

Giesler,M.203

GoodbyestoNelsonMandela(poem,Steinfield)305

Gorer,Geoffrey59

Gould,S.J.95

granite 14–15, 24–25; Barre granite campaigns 1910–1917 15–17; collapse of the Barre initiative 17–18; Rock of Ages

campaigns1919–192718–21

GraniteManufacturersAssociation26

Granite,MarbleandBronze16,17

gravemarkersseecemeterymonumentindustry

greenburialsseeburials

Greenburg,J.172

Greenslade,Roy199–200

grief4,62,63,65,94,141–142;forcelebrities108–109,112–114,118;conceptualizationsof118;disenfranchisedgrief161;for

lossofapet160–161

Hackley,Chris6,91–107

Hackley,RungpakaAmy6,91–107

Hagens,Gunthervon243,244,245,247–248,252

Hal(from‘2001:ASpaceOdyssey’)281,282,288

Haraway,D.J.278

Hayles,N.K.277,278

heartattack(poem,Sherry)308

Hegarty,P.260

Heuermann,K.33–34,40

Hinman,H.P.15–16,17,18,19,20

Hirschbaum,August21

Hirschman,Elizabeth158,171

Holcomb,JustinS.58

Holloway,M.58,67

Hornborg,Anne-Christine68

Horton,D.110

Howarth,G.76

Howitt,JohnNewton23,24

HumanBeast,The(Zola)52

hungryghostfestivalsseePeeTaKohnhungryghostfestival

Hurley,K.283–284

iconicity43,51

identities: of the dead 63, 67, 68; and death 214–215; extended self concept 138, 143–144; fans of celebrities 111, 114,

118–119;andfuneralproducts/services57;funeralprofessionals76–77,79,82–86;andgenealogy177–178; post-mortem

identityconstruction61,138–140;self-identityformation171;technologicalidentity80–81;terminalidentity286–287;

andtypesofbodydisposal218–221,226

immortality173–174,178,179,184

incorporation115

individualism57,59,92

internet59,61,117,204;seealsogenealogy;onlinememorialization

introjection115

introspection145

Jacobson,MichaelH.58

Jacoby,Jacob4

Jalland,P.59

James,C.109

Jin,Z.288

Johnson,R.115

Jonsen,A.R.194

Kearl,MichaelC.58

KeepingDad(poem,Gabel)303–304

Klein,Naomi269

Kozinets,R.V.111,138,150,153

Kristeva,Julia242,246,248–249,250,253,279

Krszjzaniek,Eric242–253

Lai,Ai-Ling8–9,257–275

Lambert,Dean76

Lambert,Ron175,176,178

Landry,Katie141,151

Lane,H.198

Lash,S.286

Lastovicka,J.L.4

Lefebvre,H.44,51

Legacy.com140

Lemonnier,Mélanie79

Leningrad siege 30; and authenticity 33–36; “Histours Siege of Leningrad Battlefield” 36; marketing of the siege 32–33;

MonumenttoHeroicDefendersofLeningrad35,36–37,37,38;packagingof39;primarydatacollectionforsiegesstudy

36–39;scopeandframeworkofdarktourism33;siegeof31–32;StateMemorialMuseumofLeningradDefenseBlockade

35

Lennon,J.33

Levy,SidneyJ.293–295,308–309

lifestyleanalysis123–124

Lim,Ming142

liminality4,214–215,278,279

Lindner43,47–48,51

Lindridge,A.171

LiteraryDigest15,16

longevity266–269

LovedOne,The:AnAnglo-AmericanTragedy(Waugh)125

LovedOne,The(film)125

Luke,T.W.284–285

Lupton,D.203

McAlexander,J.H.270

MacInnis,D.203

McKenzie,Brent6,30–42

McManus,Ruth6,57–74,260,261,263,264,266,268

Maltby,J.111

Manceau,D.2

Mansfield,Phylis7,155–169

Manuel,Niklaus50,51

ManufacturersAssociation14

marble14,15;fallinsalesof25;VermontMarbleCompanycampaigns1927–193221–25

Marchand,R.23

marketing 2–3, 14; authenticity and dark tourism 33–34; celebrity products 109–110, 116–117; coffins, use of as a death

allegory48; dark tourism sites 30–42;Death and theMaiden (D&M) art genre 43, 49–51; of death through erotic art

43–56;eroticcalendarsofCofaniFunebri44–47;eroticcalendarsofLindner47–48;futurismconcept44,51–53;horrorof

technologyandmarketing287–288;oftheLeningrad/Sarajevosieges32–33;Leningrad/Sarajevosiegesandauthenticity

34;negotiatedauthenticity34–35;packagingof theLeningrad/Sarajevosieges39–40;primarydatacollection for sieges

study36–39;scopeandframeworkofdarktourism33;siegesofLeningradandSarajevo,backgroundto31–32

Marx,Karl259

Mason,M.198,200,207

materialityofdeath7–8,92,102

Mauss,Marcel259

Meamber,L.A.288

media57,60–61,61–62,63;andcelebrities108;para-socialrelationships110–112;socialmedia108,109,131–132,140,262

medicallyassistedsuicideseesuicide189–190

MemorialMasterpieces16

memorialization: “Eternal Flame” (Sarajevo) 35; Monument to Heroic Defenders of Leningrad 35, 36–37, 37, 38; online

memorialization 7, 117, 131–133, 137–154, 262–263; of pets 155–169; State Memorial Museum of Leningrad Defense

Blockade35

memory115–116;consumption-relatedmemories146–150,147;linkingobjects/phenomena139–140,143,144,146

MemoryStone,The24,25

Menaud,Xavier7,184–197

Messaris,P.43,51

MH370f lightdisappearance270–271

Mikhailova,A.40

Mirkes,Renee82

MirrorofProduction,The(Baudrillard)259

Mitchell,A.124

Mittford,Jessica124

modernity 69; death denial 261; deathmanagement 265–266; maintenance of the body as a machine 266–267; and the

monumenttrade1–29;andposthumanism277–278;rationalisingdeath258;andsymbolicexchange259–260

MonumenttoHeroicDefendersofLeningrad35,36–37,37,38

Mormons179

mortalitysalience3,172

mortuariesseebodydisposition

mourners/mourning 57, 58–59, 67; benefits of online memorialization 140–142; for celebrities 108–109, 112–114, 118;

conceptualizations of 118; do-it-yourself approach 132; introjection and incorporation 115; linking objects/phenomena

139–140

Muise,DelphinA.170–183

Musk,E.286

MyDeathSpace140

mythology:celebritydeaths118–119;PeeTaKohnhungryghostfestival91–107

mywonderfullife.com(website)61

NationalCatholicBioethicsQuarterly,The82

NationalFuneralDirectorsAssociation126–127

Neilson,Leighann7,170–183

Neimeyer,RobertA.309–311

NewZealand,post-mortempractices57–74

NottheFuneralforaFriend(poem,Boller)312–313

Nye,David14,23

O’Donohoe,Stephanie3,4,7,198–209

O’Guinn,T.C.111

O’Neill,B.198–199

ObservationsatMyOwnFuneral(poem,Schouten)307–308

Oestigaard,Terje8

Olson,Phillip6,75–88

Omaze.com110–111

OnlineFuneral140

onlinememorialization7,117,131–133,137–154,262–263; benefits of 140–142; as cheating death 137–138; consumption-

relatedmemories146–150,147; andemancipatory communal consumptionandcathartic escape150–152; extended self

concept 138, 143–144; introspection 145; lack of mention of products/consumption in research 142–143; linking

objects/phenomena139–140,143,144, 146, 148, 149, 150; literature review 138–143; participant netnography 144–145;

post-mortemidentityconstruction138–140;researchfindings146–150

openness58–60,62

Pakeha59,69

Panther-Yates,D.171

participantnetnography144–145

participantobservation174

Passerard,Françoise7,184–197

pathographies 7, 198–209; confronting cancer and contested control 205–206; coping with cancer treatment 206–207;

mortality and the marketplace, pathographical view of 199–200; patient empowerment, ambivalence of 203–205;

treatmentandroutesthroughthehealthcaresystem200–203

Pavia,T.198,200,207

Pee Ta Kohn hungry ghost festival 91–107; consumption practices 102; description of festival 98–99; discussion of study

findings101–103;hungryghostfestivals,backgroundinformation95–97;hungryghostsandThaiTheravā daBuddhist

tradition 94–95; Por Tor festival 96; ritual and death in consumer research 93–94; sacred/profane elements 101;

spiritual/materialelements99–100;studymethod97–98;transgression102

Peelen,Janneke59

petsseeanimals

physicianassistedsuicideseesuicide

Picardie,Ruth199,200,202–203,204–205,206–207

PiousMen(poem,Boller)311–312

Playstation3‘Baby’advertisement280–286,286–287,288

Podoshen,Jeffrey288,316–318

poetry and death consumption 292–315; Bought In (Gabel) 304; Changling (Downey) 299–300; Coal Town Hospice

(Neimeyer)309–311;ConsumingLoveandDeath(Levy)293–295;Epitaph(Downey)313;anepitaphinvokingninemuses

andnormdenzin(Sherry)313–314;FinestFlour,The(Schouten)305–307;GoodbyestoNelsonMandela(Steinfield)305;

heartattack(Sherry)308;KeepingDad(Gabel)303–304;Not theFuneral foraFriend (Boller)312–313;Observationsat

MyOwnFuneral(Schouten)307–308;PiousMen(Boller)311–312;SymbolsforSale:ACaseStudy(Levy)308–309;Tears

Apart (Gavira) 297–298; Things . . . I DoNot Ask (Gabel) 295–296; This Is It (Gabel) 301–302; Thought, The (Gabel)

300–301;WeeksPassed(Gabel)302–303

possessions 3, 4–5, 94; disposition of 213–214; and the extended self 143–144; as inalienable wealth 214; as linking

objects/phenomena139–140,143,146,147,148;placedwithbodyremains219–220

post-mortem practices 57–74; ashes 67–68, 69, 127, 219, 231; cremations 7, 64, 67; direct disposal 64–65; intimacy 67;

personalisation and the ethos of openness 58–60; private funerals 6, 64–65; realities and practicalities of funeral

arrangement 64–69; responsibility, cost and funeral options 60–64; secularization 59, 66; spirituality 68–69; study

methodologicalnote60

Poster,M.259

posthumanism 9, 276–291; abjection 277, 279–280; cyborg 246, 276, 278–279; human autonomy, abjection of 281–283;

humanembodiment,abjectionof283–285;humanemotion,abjectionof285–286;posthumanconsumerculture276–277;

and technology consumption 277–280; technology-enabled surveillance 283; technology’s domination of human life

281–283; terminal identity 286–287; thirdspace notion 278–279; tracing human death in the Playstation 3 ‘Baby’

advertisement280–286,286–287,288

Postman,N.282

power263,268;humansubjectivity278

PowersofHorror:AnEssayonAbjection(Kristeva)242

Price,LindaL.4

Printers’Ink21

projects187–188

Promession80

Pyszczynski,T.172

Radford,ScottK.6,108–122,116

Rasmussen,ShaneE.58

Rein,I.109

religioussymbolism45,46,100,101

resomation232,234–237,238–240

Resomation,Ltd85,86

Ricœur,Paul187,192

‘righttodie’268

risks271

ritualsandrites1,2,118;actorsandroles129,131;artifactelements120–121,128;audienceelements129,130;consumption

rituals’ structure and content 123, 127, 128–129; online memorialization 131–133; paper burning rituals 92, 96;

personalisedfunerals57,58–59,65–66;petloss162–164;ritualanddeathinconsumerresearch93–94;ritualconsumption

91–92;ritualeconomy3;scriptelements128,130;Thai“hungryghost”festivals6,91–107;wasteandtoxicity6–7

Roach,Mary80,81

Roberts,Pamela151

RockofAgesMagazine19–20,21

RockofAges,The(advertisingbooklet)15,16

Rook,DennisW.6–7,91,123–134

Rumble,H.69,265–266

sacralizationconcept111,113

Sade,Marquisde52

safety270

Salkind,NeilJ.155

Samuel,K.2

Sanders,George75–76

Sarajevosiege30–31;andauthenticity33–36;backgroundtothesiege31–32;cemeteries38,39;CityHall35;“EternalFlame”

35; marketing of the siege 32–33; packaging of 39–40; primary data collection for sieges study 36–39; Sarajevo War

Tunnel36;scopeandframeworkofdarktourism33

Šarcevic,E.32

Saren,M.287

SARS(SevereAcuteRespiratorySyndrome)263–264

Schaal,Steve82

Schäfer,Cyril6,57–74

Schouten,JohnW.270,305–308

Schwass,Margot59

scientificrationality257,268

Seale,C.261

secularization59,66

security269–272

self171,187;extendedselfconcept138,143–144;self-care267

separation214–215;seealsoattachment

sex2,50;andcars51;sexualarousal51,52

Sharpley,R.33,317

Sherry,Jr.,John308,313–314

Shock,The(Klein)269

siegesseedarktourism

Siegler,M.194

Silver,R.C.62

Sixdegrees.org110

socialmedia108,109,131–132,140,262

socialself-immortalization137–138;consumption-relatedmemories146–150,147;emancipatorycommunalconsumptionand

cathartic escape via consumption-laden online memorialization 150–152; extended self concept 138, 143–144;

introspection 145; lack ofmention of products/consumption in research 142–143; linking objects/phenomena 139–140,

143, 144, 146, 148, 149, 150; literature review 138–143; online memorialization 140–143; participant netnography

144–145;post-mortemidentityconstruction138–140;researchfindings146–150

Sofka,CarlaJ.141,150,151

solicitude187

Solomon,S.172

spirituality68–69,99–100,249–251

StPetersburgseeLeningrad

Stanley,L.262,263

Star,S.L.78–79

StateMemorialMuseumofLeningradDefenseBlockade35

Steinfeld,Laurel305

Stiff(Roach)80,81

Stone,Philip33,317

StoryoftheROCKOFAGES,The(Bell)20

suicide 7, 119, 161, 268; altruistic suicide 186; anomic suicide 186; anthropology of projects 187–188; classification of

(Durkheim)186,186,195;clinicalethicsmethodology194–195;componentsofphysician-assistedsuicide193;concernsof

relatives 191–192; death plans 190; definition 185–186; ethics 187; euthanasia 185, 186; fatalistic suicide 186; fear of

agony189–190,192;importanceofparenthood192;integration186;intervieweeprofiles196;interviewsforthephysician-

assisted suicide study 188–191; palliative care 189; physician assisted suicide as a project 188, 194; physician-assisted

suicide, definition 187; physician-assisted suicide legalities 186–187, 193; regulation 186; relation between physician-

assisted suicide and euthanasia 193; relationships between doctors/patients/relatives 192; selfish suicide 186; solicitude

187;asataboo192–193;vulnerability191,192

sustainability69,123

Switzerland186,190

SymbolicExchangeandDeath(Baudrillard)257,259,260

symbolic exchange concept 9, 257–275; Baudrillard and the turn to symbolic exchange 259–260; and capitalist political

economy257,259,260,271–272;deathdenial257,260–263;lifeasabiologicallinearity259;naturaldeathandlongevity

266–269; sanitisation and the hygienic culture 263–266; security and disaster capitalism 269–272; sequestration and

institutionalisationofdeath262–263;valueoflife266,268,272

SymbolsforSale:ACaseStudy(poem,Levy)308–309

Szmigin,Isabelle8,228–241

taboos2–3,61,102,198–199;suicide7,119,161,184–197

TearsApart(poem,Gavira)297–298

technology 270–271, 276–291, 279; abjection 277, 279–280; cyborg 276, 278, 278–279; human autonomy, abjection of

281–283;humanembodiment,abjectionof283–285;humanemotion,abjectionof285–286;posthumanconsumerculture

276–277; posthumanism and technology consumption 277–280; technology-enabled surveillance 283; technology’s

dominationofhumanlife281–283;terminalidentity286–287;thirdspacenotion278–279;tracinghumandeathinthe

Playstation3‘Baby’advertisement280–286,286–287,288

terminalillness7;pathographies198–209

TerrorManagementTheory(TMT)94,171–173,177–178,179

Thailand,PeeTaKohnhungryghostfestival91–107

thanatos49,52

thanatourism5,33

theoplacity34,35–36

Things…IDoNotAsk(poem,Gabel)295–296

thirdspacenotion278–279

ThisIsIt(poem,Gabel)301–302

ThisRepublicofSuffering(Faust)75

Thomas,Dylan207

Thought,The(poem,Gabel)300–301

ThreeNudeWomenandDeath(Beham)50–51

Tierney,T.F.258,263,268

time,asvalue266–269

Tissier-Desbordes,E.2

tissuedigesters78,80,81

Tomas,N.59

toxicity231

trademarks15

transcendence257

transparency58–60,62–63,63–64

TripAdvisor(website)34,40

Trompette,Pascale79

Turley,Darach3,4,7,9,198–209,258

Twitter108,109

UnitedKingdom(UK),healthcaresystem200–203

UnitedStates(US):alkalinehydrolysisstudy75–88;Americanwayofdeath124–126,126;bodydispositionstudy213–227;

cremations126–131,127,128–129;petownership158,159;physician-assistedsuicide186

Vaessen,Cathy8,228–241

ValueLine125

Vandenporpe,F.234

Venbrux,Eric59

Venkatesh,A.277–278,288

Veresiu,E.203

VermontMarbleCompany14,15,21–25

Vidal,R.44,51–53

violence33,52,53,191,268,316

Virilio,P.279,286

visitingsitesofdeathseedarktourism

Volkan,VamikD.139,143

voluntarysimplicity123–134;actorsandroles129,131;Americanwayofdeath124–126,125;artifactelements128,130–131;

audienceelements129,130;cremations126–131,127,128–129;developmentof123–124;onlinememorialization131–133;

scriptelements128,130

Wallendorf,Melanie145

Walter,Tony48,52,138,141–142,150,151,262–263

waste6–7,81,228,235,263;WasteReductionbyWasteReduction(WR)78

Watkins,Julian26

Wattanasuwan,K.93

Waugh,Evelyn125

Webhealing.com(website)140

websites61

WeeksPassed(poem,Gabel)302–303

Welch,Christina6,43–56

WhoDoYouThinkYouAre?(TVprogram)170

Wiigh-Masak,Susanne80

Wilce,James59

willtoimmortality173

Williamson,JohnB.142,150

Wilson,Joe78,81,85

Wilson,Samantha80

Winkel,H.58–59

Winslade,W.J.194

Wise,S.262,263

Wohl,R.R.110

Wood,WilliamR.142,150

Woodward,K.279

Woolgar,S.286

Wortman,C.B.62

YoungWomanattackedbyDeath;orTheRavisher(Dürer)49–50

Zhao,X.93

Zola,E.52

Zuboff,S.284