Today we got the news that some "family member"(grandfather's cousin's son) passed away. My uncle calls up early in the morning and passes the news to us and we go and have a hair bath.
I dont somehow seem to comprehend the logic behind this routine. The person who passed away was only known well to grandmother and daddy as usual doesnt remember much of him. Grandmother feels bad and says "ayyo" because he belongs to her generation and probably bcoz he knew him well but that feeling passes in a second and then she is back to her normal routine. Dad and Mom say "oh" when they hear the news and thats the end of it. Madhavi and myself, would have probably complained that we have to have an early bath on a Sunday, if we weren't prepared well enough for it. There is no trace of sadness nor even a mark of respect to be found anywhere. So why does the new of the death propagate till us who cannot feel any such emotion for the person who has lost his life?
Lets look at what exactly would have happened. The news could have reached my uncle in two ways: either the son/daughter(s) of the person who passed away might have written to him directly or he could have got the news through word of mouth. In the first case, what purpose did the people who wrote to him have in mind? Did they do this simply because they are "supposed" to pass on the news to whomever they think belong to the family or did they really want to share their grief with people they haven't probably met in a lifetime? The second possibility is blasphemous. So we can safely assume it was done purely out of a "to-do list". Purely because thats the routine to be followed. But is that really a time for routines? Has something routine-ish occurred there? Somebody just died!!! Surely not something that happens everyday!!! A person who could walk and talk a few seconds before does not exist anymore!!! This is a time when people are lost in grief and even at such a time society has a "to-do" list ready for them!!! How ridiculous can our norms get!!!
Now the other way in which he could have got the news: word of mouth. Son/daughter(s) inform some relative close enough to share their grief. That person informs somebody else and that somebody else to another somebody else and so on. Somewhere along this line the grief disappears and all that is left is a piece of news and, because of the customs that need to be followed after getting such news, may be even treated as an inconvenience. Why dont people stop propagating the news at the point where the grief disappears. Dont they realize that they are actually insulting the dead through such propagation!!!
Which human being nowadays actually wonders about the well-being of another. Who even remembers their distant relatives. Even if a person really does recall some distant relative of his in some idle moment, he will only wonder how he is and hope that he is fine. Through the propagation of such news, even this hope is lost because somebody will probably remember the "hair bath" that they had when the relative passed away. So what are such societal norms achieving? A loss of hope if at all and nothing else!!! They were initially designed so that the family which has lost a dear will have some company in their grief. But hasnt this objective become impossible and irrelevant in the situations today where people dont have enough space in their mind even for their closest relatives, forget about distant relatives?
I dont somehow seem to comprehend the logic behind this routine. The person who passed away was only known well to grandmother and daddy as usual doesnt remember much of him. Grandmother feels bad and says "ayyo" because he belongs to her generation and probably bcoz he knew him well but that feeling passes in a second and then she is back to her normal routine. Dad and Mom say "oh" when they hear the news and thats the end of it. Madhavi and myself, would have probably complained that we have to have an early bath on a Sunday, if we weren't prepared well enough for it. There is no trace of sadness nor even a mark of respect to be found anywhere. So why does the new of the death propagate till us who cannot feel any such emotion for the person who has lost his life?
Lets look at what exactly would have happened. The news could have reached my uncle in two ways: either the son/daughter(s) of the person who passed away might have written to him directly or he could have got the news through word of mouth. In the first case, what purpose did the people who wrote to him have in mind? Did they do this simply because they are "supposed" to pass on the news to whomever they think belong to the family or did they really want to share their grief with people they haven't probably met in a lifetime? The second possibility is blasphemous. So we can safely assume it was done purely out of a "to-do list". Purely because thats the routine to be followed. But is that really a time for routines? Has something routine-ish occurred there? Somebody just died!!! Surely not something that happens everyday!!! A person who could walk and talk a few seconds before does not exist anymore!!! This is a time when people are lost in grief and even at such a time society has a "to-do" list ready for them!!! How ridiculous can our norms get!!!
Now the other way in which he could have got the news: word of mouth. Son/daughter(s) inform some relative close enough to share their grief. That person informs somebody else and that somebody else to another somebody else and so on. Somewhere along this line the grief disappears and all that is left is a piece of news and, because of the customs that need to be followed after getting such news, may be even treated as an inconvenience. Why dont people stop propagating the news at the point where the grief disappears. Dont they realize that they are actually insulting the dead through such propagation!!!
Which human being nowadays actually wonders about the well-being of another. Who even remembers their distant relatives. Even if a person really does recall some distant relative of his in some idle moment, he will only wonder how he is and hope that he is fine. Through the propagation of such news, even this hope is lost because somebody will probably remember the "hair bath" that they had when the relative passed away. So what are such societal norms achieving? A loss of hope if at all and nothing else!!! They were initially designed so that the family which has lost a dear will have some company in their grief. But hasnt this objective become impossible and irrelevant in the situations today where people dont have enough space in their mind even for their closest relatives, forget about distant relatives?