What do you think?
Rate this book
The American Way of Death Revisited
Only the scathing wit and searching intelligence of Jessica Mitford could turn an exposé of the American funeral industry into a book that is at once deadly serious and side-splittingly funny. When first published in 1963 this landmark of investigative journalism became a runaway bestseller and resulted in legislation to protect grieving families from the unscrupulous sales practices of those in "the dismal trade."
Just before her death in 1996, Mitford thoroughly revised and updated her classic study. The American Way of Death Revisited confronts new trends, including the success of the profession's lobbyists in Washington, inflated cremation costs, the telemarketing of pay-in-advance graves, and the effects of monopolies in a death-care industry now dominated by multinational corporations. With its hard-nosed consumer activism and a satiric vision out of Evelyn Waugh's novel The Loved One, The American Way of Death Revisited will not fail to inform, delight, and disturb.
Just before her death in 1996, Mitford thoroughly revised and updated her classic study. The American Way of Death Revisited confronts new trends, including the success of the profession's lobbyists in Washington, inflated cremation costs, the telemarketing of pay-in-advance graves, and the effects of monopolies in a death-care industry now dominated by multinational corporations. With its hard-nosed consumer activism and a satiric vision out of Evelyn Waugh's novel The Loved One, The American Way of Death Revisited will not fail to inform, delight, and disturb.
296 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1963
423 people are currently reading
10004 people want to read
About the author
Jessica Mitford
43 books203 followersJessica Lucy Freeman-Mitford was an English author, journalist and political campaigner, who was one of the Mitford sisters. She gained American citizenship in later life.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 328 reviews
April 1, 2009
If you're ever going to die, you should read this book. Also good for people who like watching a diminutive englishwoman who was a former communist bitch-slap the funeral industry over the course of 30 years.
September 30, 2009
Letting Them Dig Their Own Graves: Jessica Mitford’s The American Way of Death Revisited
“You may not be able to change the world,” Jessica Mitford said, “but at least you can embarrass the guilty.”
Embarrass them she did, and the ways she did so in The American Way of Death Revisited comprise either the most forehead-slapping no-brainer approach to investigative journalism or the result of some serious immersion in/regurgitation of the scribblings/blatherings of the trade or all of the above. What’s best: Her embarrassment techniques are very funny. Quite simply, they involve letting the tradespeople dig their own graves with their own words, their own twisted logic and their own sales techniques.
Here’s one way she does it: She quotes them. She quotes funeral directors and cemetarians and vault vendors and casket hucksters in all their syrupy, saccharine humbug-isms. It’s deceptively simple, this cut-and-paste-age of quotes from trade journals and correspondence and trade show presentations. One example, with Mitford quoting a cemetery writer describing the conflict of interest between undertaker and cemetery:
Even if that were the only quote given to illustrate the undertaker vs. cemetery scenario, on its own, that’s bad. These guys are money-grubbing schlubs jostling for the biggest bite of the bereavement pie. We get that. But Mitford’s true genius is to go beyond depicting mere schlubishness, to further expose the desperate clutching of the trade, and she does that by quoting more industry sources that further clarify the operative hypocrisy, inserting this priceless footnote:
Buster Keaton used to say about humor something like this: It’s funny to see a guy get on a horse and then fall off. But for a really good routine, the guy has to try to get back on the horse and screw that up, and then the horse has to step on him, and then he has to try jumping off a haystack, at which point he has to miss the horse entirely and fall in the mud, and then he has to build a tower with a spring-loaded launch pad and paint his hands with glue, and maybe after that fails he’ll have to punch the horse. Keaton’s point was that you have to be relentless. Mitford is relentless. Not only does she let cemeterians hang themselves with their own words, she then goes on to juxtapose an outraged mortician really calling a spade a spade with the whack-attack bit, then she quotes the Concept writer in hand-wringing agony over the deplorable frankness used—i.e., even though it’s truthful to say we’re after the first whack at the family, we can’t let that fact be so blatantly revealed. The deeper she goes, the funnier it gets and the clearer the hypocrisy, and she accomplishes all that just by quoting them.
It seems as simple as log-falling-off-of, but in truth it takes a heck of a lot of subject immersion (or good research assistants, or both) to collect such an effective selection of dig-your-own-grave quotes.
Another embarrassment technique Mitford uses is Steven Colbert-esque, full-bore tongue-in-cheek endorsement of what the death industry would have people believe is beyond the pale. Here’s her doing that in a hearing room, pitted against industry spokesman Howard C. Raether in a 1975 debate over the FTC’s proposed Funeral Rule:
Well, that certainly makes sense. If it’s death aesthetics you’re concerned about, why not color-coordinate? It’s the industry’s own logic, followed to a conclusion that lays bare the silliness of the precepts from which it works—i.e., that corpses should be prettified. But what’s really interesting is to contrast a) Mitford’s killer wit when she’s speaking live and b) the lack of editorial comment needed when all she does is let the industry skewer itself with its own words. This is perhaps the most effective way in which she proves her arguments against the death industry: We clearly see how devastating her wit is against their best spokesman’s arguments when she’s one-on-one with him. This realization reflects back on the writing, which in contrast seems polite. We realize that she has barely had to get out of her chair rhetorically or comically to kick their butts. All she has to do is lift the casket lid and let the sun shine in on their wormy little lies.
“You may not be able to change the world,” Jessica Mitford said, “but at least you can embarrass the guilty.”
Embarrass them she did, and the ways she did so in The American Way of Death Revisited comprise either the most forehead-slapping no-brainer approach to investigative journalism or the result of some serious immersion in/regurgitation of the scribblings/blatherings of the trade or all of the above. What’s best: Her embarrassment techniques are very funny. Quite simply, they involve letting the tradespeople dig their own graves with their own words, their own twisted logic and their own sales techniques.
Here’s one way she does it: She quotes them. She quotes funeral directors and cemetarians and vault vendors and casket hucksters in all their syrupy, saccharine humbug-isms. It’s deceptively simple, this cut-and-paste-age of quotes from trade journals and correspondence and trade show presentations. One example, with Mitford quoting a cemetery writer describing the conflict of interest between undertaker and cemetery:
You are all familiar with the situation wherein the mortician gives a telephone order for your bare minimum, telling you to put it on his bill and not contact the family? He is trying to be a good fellow in the eyes of the family he is serving, but more than that, he is scared to death that if we see them, we’ll oversell them, and he will suffer in his sale or will have to wait for his money.* (75)
Even if that were the only quote given to illustrate the undertaker vs. cemetery scenario, on its own, that’s bad. These guys are money-grubbing schlubs jostling for the biggest bite of the bereavement pie. We get that. But Mitford’s true genius is to go beyond depicting mere schlubishness, to further expose the desperate clutching of the trade, and she does that by quoting more industry sources that further clarify the operative hypocrisy, inserting this priceless footnote:
*Mortuary Management stated editorially that it is the funeral director’s traditional prerogative to “get first whack at the family.” Concept: The Journal of Creative Ideas for Cemeteries was quick to take issue with this statement, calling it a “shocking blunder” and adding, “Regardless of the truth in the statement, isn’t it improper to talk that way?” (75)
Buster Keaton used to say about humor something like this: It’s funny to see a guy get on a horse and then fall off. But for a really good routine, the guy has to try to get back on the horse and screw that up, and then the horse has to step on him, and then he has to try jumping off a haystack, at which point he has to miss the horse entirely and fall in the mud, and then he has to build a tower with a spring-loaded launch pad and paint his hands with glue, and maybe after that fails he’ll have to punch the horse. Keaton’s point was that you have to be relentless. Mitford is relentless. Not only does she let cemeterians hang themselves with their own words, she then goes on to juxtapose an outraged mortician really calling a spade a spade with the whack-attack bit, then she quotes the Concept writer in hand-wringing agony over the deplorable frankness used—i.e., even though it’s truthful to say we’re after the first whack at the family, we can’t let that fact be so blatantly revealed. The deeper she goes, the funnier it gets and the clearer the hypocrisy, and she accomplishes all that just by quoting them.
It seems as simple as log-falling-off-of, but in truth it takes a heck of a lot of subject immersion (or good research assistants, or both) to collect such an effective selection of dig-your-own-grave quotes.
Another embarrassment technique Mitford uses is Steven Colbert-esque, full-bore tongue-in-cheek endorsement of what the death industry would have people believe is beyond the pale. Here’s her doing that in a hearing room, pitted against industry spokesman Howard C. Raether in a 1975 debate over the FTC’s proposed Funeral Rule:
RAETHER: John Jones dies of a kidney disease. He is jaundiced. His wife is looking at a casket with an interior which will bring out the jaundiced condition. Should he [funeral director:] suggest other caskets which would make a more aesthetic picture for the wife and members of the family?
MITFORD: Well, I like the idea of the matching casket, the jaundice-colored one. I mean, if I died of jaundice I would rather have a jaundice-colored casket for myself. Just so with scarlet fever, I should have a red one. (179)
Well, that certainly makes sense. If it’s death aesthetics you’re concerned about, why not color-coordinate? It’s the industry’s own logic, followed to a conclusion that lays bare the silliness of the precepts from which it works—i.e., that corpses should be prettified. But what’s really interesting is to contrast a) Mitford’s killer wit when she’s speaking live and b) the lack of editorial comment needed when all she does is let the industry skewer itself with its own words. This is perhaps the most effective way in which she proves her arguments against the death industry: We clearly see how devastating her wit is against their best spokesman’s arguments when she’s one-on-one with him. This realization reflects back on the writing, which in contrast seems polite. We realize that she has barely had to get out of her chair rhetorically or comically to kick their butts. All she has to do is lift the casket lid and let the sun shine in on their wormy little lies.
October 19, 2014
This is a patchwork of the original and it shows. You never whether she is talking about the 1960's or the 1990's, and the pricing is useless because $100 in 1960's or is over $500 in the 1990's when it was written.
I trust morticians about as much as I trust lawyers, but I came away from this book thinking Mitford can't be trusted either. She thinks the solutions all require help from politicians and government yet is constantly documenting how the regulated take control of the regulators. In fact, she doesn't even recognize this additional unintended consequence of excessive government intervention. On page 271 she states, Funeral planning and memorial societies generated public pressure for government action (The Funeral Rule) "But once members were convinced that consumers had what they needed, social activism waned." Well, yah! Why be a smart consumer if you know the government will protect you from bad decisions.
I learned about funeral societies and the local FASMA group, but I didn't need to read 300 pages of socialist blather to learn this. This group has done more to help survivors of the dead than any FTC regulation. Private organizations like this are the real solution, not politicians who I trust even less than lawyers and morticians.
I trust morticians about as much as I trust lawyers, but I came away from this book thinking Mitford can't be trusted either. She thinks the solutions all require help from politicians and government yet is constantly documenting how the regulated take control of the regulators. In fact, she doesn't even recognize this additional unintended consequence of excessive government intervention. On page 271 she states, Funeral planning and memorial societies generated public pressure for government action (The Funeral Rule) "But once members were convinced that consumers had what they needed, social activism waned." Well, yah! Why be a smart consumer if you know the government will protect you from bad decisions.
I learned about funeral societies and the local FASMA group, but I didn't need to read 300 pages of socialist blather to learn this. This group has done more to help survivors of the dead than any FTC regulation. Private organizations like this are the real solution, not politicians who I trust even less than lawyers and morticians.
May 16, 2021
I cant give a personal opinion on this book without first addressing its author..after all she was one of the (in)famous Mitford sisters.
Over the years I've read extensively and researched a good bit myself about the family and the girls, and quite frankly never liked all the anger and rage and frustration that seemed to ooze off of Jessica Mitford and ultimately led to her doing her utmost best to paint the darkest of portraits about her parents and siblings...seriously this one would have given Freud himself material for a couple of books!
I've long heard of this book and its effects on the way America dealt/deals with the funeral industry, but it wasn't until recently reading Caitlin Doughty's books that i figured i might as well give this one a try and see what the fuss is/was all about.
I found it tragically ironic that everything she seemed to hate about her family was ultimately the reason why it makes for such a compelling read...the Mitford wit is splashed all over this one, and contributes greatly for the sucess it was, given how macabre the theme then seemed.
She's sharp, razor sharp in very cleverly giving voice to he funeral industry and its main players, essentially letting them dig their own grave, jump in and covers themselves in dirt....
This particular edition was a update on the original (published in the 60's), with a couple of added chapters and prices updated...it sometimes made for a bit of a confusing read, i'm gonna guess due to poor editing, because i couldn't tell very well which decade was being addressed, but still it does still manage to be relevant and insightful.
This is without a doubt satirical writting at its best...as good as the fictional satire produced by her sister Nancy Mitford... and a fine piece of investigative journalism.
I am by no means a fan of Jessica Mitford but i do admit this is a must read...we all die someday, we might as well know what awaits our remains...
Happy Readings!
Over the years I've read extensively and researched a good bit myself about the family and the girls, and quite frankly never liked all the anger and rage and frustration that seemed to ooze off of Jessica Mitford and ultimately led to her doing her utmost best to paint the darkest of portraits about her parents and siblings...seriously this one would have given Freud himself material for a couple of books!
I've long heard of this book and its effects on the way America dealt/deals with the funeral industry, but it wasn't until recently reading Caitlin Doughty's books that i figured i might as well give this one a try and see what the fuss is/was all about.
I found it tragically ironic that everything she seemed to hate about her family was ultimately the reason why it makes for such a compelling read...the Mitford wit is splashed all over this one, and contributes greatly for the sucess it was, given how macabre the theme then seemed.
She's sharp, razor sharp in very cleverly giving voice to he funeral industry and its main players, essentially letting them dig their own grave, jump in and covers themselves in dirt....
This particular edition was a update on the original (published in the 60's), with a couple of added chapters and prices updated...it sometimes made for a bit of a confusing read, i'm gonna guess due to poor editing, because i couldn't tell very well which decade was being addressed, but still it does still manage to be relevant and insightful.
This is without a doubt satirical writting at its best...as good as the fictional satire produced by her sister Nancy Mitford... and a fine piece of investigative journalism.
I am by no means a fan of Jessica Mitford but i do admit this is a must read...we all die someday, we might as well know what awaits our remains...
Happy Readings!
November 8, 2018
The investigative journalism is top-notch and essential about an industry few of us really know about (until we have to make time-sensitive and stressful decisions). I'm not enthralled with the writing style, which for me is old-fashioned and circuitous. The blurbs describe it as hilarious and side-splitting. Um... no. It's witty and mildly amusing at best. Nevertheless, everyone should read it to understand precisely how badly you're going to get screwed by the undertaker someday.
May 1, 2013
A very important book in several regards.
1) It made me confront my own inevitable mortality like few others.
2) It shows how seemingly innocuous, mutually beneficial, capitalistic transactions (like arranging a funeral) can be and are corrupted by hard-selling, manipulation of guilt and covetousness, grief, greed, and monopolies. It also shows how good free-market, macro-economic principles are twisted to destructive purposes in micro-economic situations.
3) It serves an important lesson: do-goodism seems most effective by exposing injustice and not by government lobbying. The author and her fellow funeral reform advocates did everything right as regards lobbying for government intervention. Despite their good will, hard work, persistence, and likability (at least from this book), little by way of government regulation has been effective. I'd hazard to guess that their exposure of the funeral industry has made at least some dent in the unrighteous practices.
It's a very unique book. I don't think I've every read anything that felt so important and good while at the same time hating and having to get done to get it over with. I was in a rotten mood the whole time I was reading it, but I feel it's made me a wiser and better person.
"Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery." Hebrews 2:14-15.
1) It made me confront my own inevitable mortality like few others.
2) It shows how seemingly innocuous, mutually beneficial, capitalistic transactions (like arranging a funeral) can be and are corrupted by hard-selling, manipulation of guilt and covetousness, grief, greed, and monopolies. It also shows how good free-market, macro-economic principles are twisted to destructive purposes in micro-economic situations.
3) It serves an important lesson: do-goodism seems most effective by exposing injustice and not by government lobbying. The author and her fellow funeral reform advocates did everything right as regards lobbying for government intervention. Despite their good will, hard work, persistence, and likability (at least from this book), little by way of government regulation has been effective. I'd hazard to guess that their exposure of the funeral industry has made at least some dent in the unrighteous practices.
It's a very unique book. I don't think I've every read anything that felt so important and good while at the same time hating and having to get done to get it over with. I was in a rotten mood the whole time I was reading it, but I feel it's made me a wiser and better person.
"Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery." Hebrews 2:14-15.
October 23, 2014
I just have to say...
Jessica Mitford is insane. It is horribly obvious that never in her life did she work with an honest funeral director and all of her opinions are based on the stories of people she knows who hit the crappy mortician jackpot. While I am not denying that some funeral directors are awfully shady, there are a lot of honest ones who don't take advantage of those in grief and don't push for them to buy a lot of pointless crap that isn't needed, just to make another dollar. In fact, had she done a little more research, she would find that the funeral directors who sit down to make arrangements with those who have lost a loved one don't even SEE the money that they collect. The payment from funeral expenses goes to things such as overhead and keeping the funeral home running and as for salaries, it's spread out through a large group of employees. It doesn't go in the funeral director's pocket.
Let's just say it, she's a nutjob. But it was nice to see an explanation of what a lot of people believe about the death are industry, no matter how wrong it is.
Jessica Mitford is insane. It is horribly obvious that never in her life did she work with an honest funeral director and all of her opinions are based on the stories of people she knows who hit the crappy mortician jackpot. While I am not denying that some funeral directors are awfully shady, there are a lot of honest ones who don't take advantage of those in grief and don't push for them to buy a lot of pointless crap that isn't needed, just to make another dollar. In fact, had she done a little more research, she would find that the funeral directors who sit down to make arrangements with those who have lost a loved one don't even SEE the money that they collect. The payment from funeral expenses goes to things such as overhead and keeping the funeral home running and as for salaries, it's spread out through a large group of employees. It doesn't go in the funeral director's pocket.
Let's just say it, she's a nutjob. But it was nice to see an explanation of what a lot of people believe about the death are industry, no matter how wrong it is.
June 20, 2017
I knew I was going to enjoy this book, but I really enjoyed this book. I've always been anti-fancy: anti-fancy weddings, anti-fancy showers, anti-fancy funerals, and Mitford really helped cement that for me. I was also shocked and amused to find that this was the one area (okay, maybe not the one area, but let's go with that for humor purposes) where I found myself vehemently standing on the side of religion - but then again, I never really stand on the side of business, and when there are only two sides, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
End soapbox.
What I wasn't expecting was Mitford's enormously warm and witty writing style. At points that I found myself skimming (and there were a few, I'll admit) I would almost immediately get pulled back in with a wonderful joke or turn of phrase.
If you're fascinated by death or curious about funerary practices, or you just enjoy a good, well-written piece of non-fiction, boy have I got a deal for you.
End soapbox.
What I wasn't expecting was Mitford's enormously warm and witty writing style. At points that I found myself skimming (and there were a few, I'll admit) I would almost immediately get pulled back in with a wonderful joke or turn of phrase.
If you're fascinated by death or curious about funerary practices, or you just enjoy a good, well-written piece of non-fiction, boy have I got a deal for you.
February 21, 2014
It's pretty shocking just how funny this book is. And it's not even written in a jokey "Mary Roach" kind of way. The funniest passages are lifted right from mortician's professional literature. I already knew some of the abuses and distortions put out by American morticians but this book really laid it all out (no pun intended). I even personally know people who were hoodwinked into believing that certain things were required "by law by the state". The level of lying in that profession is astounding. Kudos to Jessica Mitford for exposing many of the lies in a way that made you chuckle while simultaneously seething.
I was dismayed to know how little has changed (except for the worse) since she first wrote this almost 50 years ago.
I was dismayed to know how little has changed (except for the worse) since she first wrote this almost 50 years ago.
June 6, 2015
Though the subject matter is dry and depressing, I was fascinated with this exposé of the funeral industry. Not a "page turner" by any means, but I was interested from beginning to end.
July 29, 2020
[3.75 stars] An investigative exploration into the overwhelmingly white male-run US death care industry, updated from the original edition published more than thirty years prior. Jessica Mitford’s research on exploitative funeral practices was excellent, though it was often hard to tell if the prices and profits were given in 1963 or 1998 dollars. Her focus on corporate cemetery and funeral home owners was expected, given her well-known communist and socialist beliefs. But even with her anti-corporate muckracking approach, I wish there had been a stronger (or any?) analysis on race, gender, or class, more along the lines of Pushed, Jennifer Block’s deep dive into the harms of unnecessarily medicalized birth. (Not coincidentally, both birth and death care were historically under the purview of midwives before being taken over, standardized, and industrialized by men.) The final chapter offered a bit of what I’d been hoping for throughout, touching on shifts in practice and culture during the height of the HIV/AIDS epidemic during the 80’s and 90’s (my introduction to death care and grief work a decade later) but I was still left wanting more on what was (at the time, in the late 90’s) possible for funeral reform. Recommended if you’re curious about the corporate US funeral and death care industries and a historical overview of attempts at reform, or if you’ve read or watched Caitlin Doughty and want to learn more about some of what makes her current cultural critiques of death care possible.
Goodreads Challenge: 56/72
Femibooks Nonfiction Challenge: a book from the 20th century
Goodreads Challenge: 56/72
Femibooks Nonfiction Challenge: a book from the 20th century
September 1, 2022
oh boy. this was wild. slightly disorganized and at times confusing but an unimaginably important expose. the american funeral industry is in many ways the embodiment of this nation: it’s privatized ownership, it’s price gouging, it’s exploitative, it’s cruel in times of extreme vulnerability.
i’d be interested in seeing someone do a revisited version of this revisited version. (rip queen milton). i’m sure a lot has changed since 1996.
anyway. bury me in a shroud and don’t let them embalm me. that’s so scary and weird.
i’d be interested in seeing someone do a revisited version of this revisited version. (rip queen milton). i’m sure a lot has changed since 1996.
anyway. bury me in a shroud and don’t let them embalm me. that’s so scary and weird.
September 17, 2017
I've read this before, but reading it a second time you get to really savor just how funny Mitford is reporting on this topic.
October 29, 2022
When this book was originally published in 1963, it caused quite a scandal, pulling back the curtain on the rapacious practices of the funeral industry. I chose to read the 1998 updated version although it was rather frustrating, uncertain of when I was reading 'refreshed' vs original material. Nonetheless, it was an interesting read although not much of it surprised me in the least.
As a college freshman, I attended "mixers", events that threw young men and women together in different settings to accelerate getting acquainted. As wild as it sounds, one of the most popular mixers took place in a funeral home. We were young, death the furthest thing from our minds, and our curiosity was intensely piqued. I've never forgotten that evening, because it set my mind firmly on my desires at the end of my life, or more accurately, what I did Not want at the end.
Fast forward to 2015 and mortician Caitlin Doughty's outstanding book, Smoke Gets In Your Eyes: And Other Lessons from the Crematory. Reading that book further cemented my dim view of the funeral industry in general. I made certain that my end-of-life wishes were written, signed and dated, and in the hands of at least two family members (not in a safety deposit box, hello weekend? Death doesn't strike at convenient times).
So back to Jessica Mitford's book. While it is a bit dated from facts and figures perspective, it still cleanly makes its point about the mark-up of "services rendered" in a "non-profit" (cough, cough) industry, and demonstrates how death-averse American society has become. Even the vocabulary has been euphemized so as not to offend our delicate sensibilities. The coffin has become "casket"; morticians are now known as funeral directors. Vaults are sold to unsuspecting clients, whether they're needed or not (spoiler: they are NOT required by law in most states). The main purpose that a vault serves is keeping the cemetery ground from sinking in as the coffin decomposes. (It does not keep a body from decomposing. What, you thought you'd last forever?)
120 years ago, death was a natural part of living. Families took care of their dead, cleaning and dressing the body and holding a gathering in their home. I can remember stories about my great-grandparents being "laid out in the parlor.”
Jessica Mitford writes, "it was still a far cry from these early, hesitant steps of the emerging funeral industry to the full-fledged burlesque it has become." In 1963, both Robert Kennedy and Jacqueline Kennedy had read Jessica Mitford's book. Chapter 11 'What the Public Wants' (in this 1998 book) makes reference to the absolutely botched fiasco of getting President Kennedy's body from Dallas, TX back to Washington, DC. For the details of the fascinating story, go to Caitlin Doughty's youtube channel (Ask a Mortician). The 40 minute video is titled, "Why JFK's Casket Stayed Closed." My empathy and respect for Jacqueline Kennedy grew tenfold after watching that.
A final comment on the Mitford book. One area that did surprise me was chapter 17, 'Funerals in England Then and Now.' According to the book, the English have left the funeral spectacle to us gauche Americans and have retained the dignity of death. Characterized by their "no-nonsense, humbug-free attitude", undertakers (yes, they use that word! Reminds me of the old saying 'yours till the undertaker undertakes to take you under') see no need to rush in at all hours of the night to scoop up the dead within minutes of expiring. Vaults are considered "quite unnecessary." Funerals are generally private affairs in the cemetery chapel for the family and perhaps some close friends or neighbors. An open-casket funeral is practically unheard of, as is selling a grave "pre-need." Undertakers don't believe in the hard sell. "Absolute rubbish," is the quote in the book.
Jessica Mitford cites England as being at least 50 years behind the U.S. in funerary practices, but to my thinking, they're far ahead of us. Keep calm and carry on indeed.
As a college freshman, I attended "mixers", events that threw young men and women together in different settings to accelerate getting acquainted. As wild as it sounds, one of the most popular mixers took place in a funeral home. We were young, death the furthest thing from our minds, and our curiosity was intensely piqued. I've never forgotten that evening, because it set my mind firmly on my desires at the end of my life, or more accurately, what I did Not want at the end.
Fast forward to 2015 and mortician Caitlin Doughty's outstanding book, Smoke Gets In Your Eyes: And Other Lessons from the Crematory. Reading that book further cemented my dim view of the funeral industry in general. I made certain that my end-of-life wishes were written, signed and dated, and in the hands of at least two family members (not in a safety deposit box, hello weekend? Death doesn't strike at convenient times).
So back to Jessica Mitford's book. While it is a bit dated from facts and figures perspective, it still cleanly makes its point about the mark-up of "services rendered" in a "non-profit" (cough, cough) industry, and demonstrates how death-averse American society has become. Even the vocabulary has been euphemized so as not to offend our delicate sensibilities. The coffin has become "casket"; morticians are now known as funeral directors. Vaults are sold to unsuspecting clients, whether they're needed or not (spoiler: they are NOT required by law in most states). The main purpose that a vault serves is keeping the cemetery ground from sinking in as the coffin decomposes. (It does not keep a body from decomposing. What, you thought you'd last forever?)
120 years ago, death was a natural part of living. Families took care of their dead, cleaning and dressing the body and holding a gathering in their home. I can remember stories about my great-grandparents being "laid out in the parlor.”
Jessica Mitford writes, "it was still a far cry from these early, hesitant steps of the emerging funeral industry to the full-fledged burlesque it has become." In 1963, both Robert Kennedy and Jacqueline Kennedy had read Jessica Mitford's book. Chapter 11 'What the Public Wants' (in this 1998 book) makes reference to the absolutely botched fiasco of getting President Kennedy's body from Dallas, TX back to Washington, DC. For the details of the fascinating story, go to Caitlin Doughty's youtube channel (Ask a Mortician). The 40 minute video is titled, "Why JFK's Casket Stayed Closed." My empathy and respect for Jacqueline Kennedy grew tenfold after watching that.
A final comment on the Mitford book. One area that did surprise me was chapter 17, 'Funerals in England Then and Now.' According to the book, the English have left the funeral spectacle to us gauche Americans and have retained the dignity of death. Characterized by their "no-nonsense, humbug-free attitude", undertakers (yes, they use that word! Reminds me of the old saying 'yours till the undertaker undertakes to take you under') see no need to rush in at all hours of the night to scoop up the dead within minutes of expiring. Vaults are considered "quite unnecessary." Funerals are generally private affairs in the cemetery chapel for the family and perhaps some close friends or neighbors. An open-casket funeral is practically unheard of, as is selling a grave "pre-need." Undertakers don't believe in the hard sell. "Absolute rubbish," is the quote in the book.
Jessica Mitford cites England as being at least 50 years behind the U.S. in funerary practices, but to my thinking, they're far ahead of us. Keep calm and carry on indeed.
March 24, 2016
I ended up reading this book because it's a book I'd hear of about the funeral business and my grandfather recently died. Difficult situation? Read a semi-related book about it!
It was really funny, in a morbid way. Mitford doesn't even have to say much, the undertakers' own words are adept at tripping them up, although she's very good with her words. Fine piece of mud-racking, and it's not surprising it got the attention it did on its first release.
I liked the chapter on funerals in England too - no idea if the rural funerals she describes are still a thing, however, being one of those bloody city dwellers, but reading about how to die in Clapham in the 1960s was interesting.
It was really funny, in a morbid way. Mitford doesn't even have to say much, the undertakers' own words are adept at tripping them up, although she's very good with her words. Fine piece of mud-racking, and it's not surprising it got the attention it did on its first release.
I liked the chapter on funerals in England too - no idea if the rural funerals she describes are still a thing, however, being one of those bloody city dwellers, but reading about how to die in Clapham in the 1960s was interesting.
February 6, 2014
Eh? After reading The American Way of Death some time ago, I found this book a bit redundant. Dated. As I wend my own way closer to the grim reaper and my loved ones are dropping over like flies, my dealings with undertakers and graveyards are becoming increasingly commonplace. Cremation seems to be the primary choice these days. Certainly is practical.
January 13, 2022
Just throw me in a hole in the ground when I die
October 15, 2021
Guys, we’re all screwed. Everyone’s going to die, and the surviving family members are going to get their pockets picked clean by the unscrupulous funeral industry. Many have already been taken advantage of through the option of buying their funeral “pre-need.” How so? By the time the person actually dies (in full confidence that they’ve pre-paid for all the funeral arrangements), the funeral home states that the pre-paid casket is out of stock and a more expensive option is all that’s available; same with every other aspect of the funeral. They even got a law passed in some states (Alabama being one of them) that you MUST use a funeral director, even if you don’t require their services for embalming (unnecessary if buried within 48 hours of death), transportation of the body, purchasing a casket (make your own, or buy from someone not corporately owned), acquiring the death certificate (attending physician can handle this), etc. No, if I die in Alabama, my survivors will still have to pay $2,000+ to a funeral director because he’s “available 24/7.”
Ways to minimize their thievery:
1. Get informed. Read this book!
2. Opt for a green burial in a green cemetery; caskets not usually required (just a shroud), and grave liners not usually necessary (by the way, many of the cemetery owners are also out to rob you, often because they’re also owned by the Big 3).
3. Shop around. Phone different funeral homes and find out which one is cheapest. You HAVE to comparison shop, or you absolutely are going to be taken advantage of. Try not to buy from a funeral home owned by the Big 3 corporations: SCI, Loewen, or Stewart Enterprises Inc. The prices will be through the roof.
4. If you do get a casket, push for a CHEAP, butt-ugly one. Ask them to take you to the cellar, or closet, or garage where they keep the ones that aren’t marked up thousands of dollars. Most funeral homes have a “no-walk” policy; they’ll break and sell you something cheap rather than let you walk out the door.
5. Nail the funeral director to the wall (use a coffin nail if you have to) and make them show you where in the law it states you have to do x, y, or z. Many will lie and say embalming and/or refrigeration (they’ll charge the same price for each, in some cases) are always required by law for health purposes. To my knowledge neither is required if you bury within 48 hours of death. If you can’t bury in that time frame, press them to lower the price for refrigeration. They make other false claims about what’s legally required, too (must have a casket for cremation, only they can transport the body, cremains can only be scattered by them, etc.).
6. Don’t embalm! That leads to pressure to have an open-casket viewing, which leads to extra charges: embalming itself, of course, but also dressing the body in expensive (and useless) fancy clothes, makeup so the body doesn’t look dead (why are we trying to kid ourselves? it keeps us from moving forward in our grief!), and further pressure to buy a fancy casket to “show how much you loved your family member.” Why?! All they’re going to do is rot away in it! Want to show how much you loved the deceased? Plan a memorial service on your own, without the help of the funeral industry; ask your local church to help, or do it yourself at a local park. Make it informal and easy; ask those invited to bring pictures of the deceased, and spend the time sharing stories—funny, sad, heartwarming—talk about their life and celebrate it!
Can you tell this book made me angry? But I’m so glad I read it. I’ll find a way around the funeral industry and put it in my will (along with all the reasons why I’ve chosen as I have); it’ll then be up to my survivors to listen to my post-mortem wisdom and get a death-grip on their wallets.
Ways to minimize their thievery:
1. Get informed. Read this book!
2. Opt for a green burial in a green cemetery; caskets not usually required (just a shroud), and grave liners not usually necessary (by the way, many of the cemetery owners are also out to rob you, often because they’re also owned by the Big 3).
3. Shop around. Phone different funeral homes and find out which one is cheapest. You HAVE to comparison shop, or you absolutely are going to be taken advantage of. Try not to buy from a funeral home owned by the Big 3 corporations: SCI, Loewen, or Stewart Enterprises Inc. The prices will be through the roof.
4. If you do get a casket, push for a CHEAP, butt-ugly one. Ask them to take you to the cellar, or closet, or garage where they keep the ones that aren’t marked up thousands of dollars. Most funeral homes have a “no-walk” policy; they’ll break and sell you something cheap rather than let you walk out the door.
5. Nail the funeral director to the wall (use a coffin nail if you have to) and make them show you where in the law it states you have to do x, y, or z. Many will lie and say embalming and/or refrigeration (they’ll charge the same price for each, in some cases) are always required by law for health purposes. To my knowledge neither is required if you bury within 48 hours of death. If you can’t bury in that time frame, press them to lower the price for refrigeration. They make other false claims about what’s legally required, too (must have a casket for cremation, only they can transport the body, cremains can only be scattered by them, etc.).
6. Don’t embalm! That leads to pressure to have an open-casket viewing, which leads to extra charges: embalming itself, of course, but also dressing the body in expensive (and useless) fancy clothes, makeup so the body doesn’t look dead (why are we trying to kid ourselves? it keeps us from moving forward in our grief!), and further pressure to buy a fancy casket to “show how much you loved your family member.” Why?! All they’re going to do is rot away in it! Want to show how much you loved the deceased? Plan a memorial service on your own, without the help of the funeral industry; ask your local church to help, or do it yourself at a local park. Make it informal and easy; ask those invited to bring pictures of the deceased, and spend the time sharing stories—funny, sad, heartwarming—talk about their life and celebrate it!
Can you tell this book made me angry? But I’m so glad I read it. I’ll find a way around the funeral industry and put it in my will (along with all the reasons why I’ve chosen as I have); it’ll then be up to my survivors to listen to my post-mortem wisdom and get a death-grip on their wallets.
October 22, 2017
When Jessica Mitford first wrote this expose, it was a shocking book. That was in 1963; I read the updated 1998 version. Sadly, she died just as they were finishing up the book. I would have loved to have read what she thought about the funeral industry today!
While Mitford is careful to point out that there are honest and caring funeral professionals, she takes aim at the ones who are in it strictly for the money. While *any* business is in it for money, people seeking funeral services are in a very vulnerable position; they are both emotionally wrung out and racing against the clock to get things done. Few people are in the position to shop around, so when a funeral professional engages in some of the practices advocated in some of the professional magazines, they are very apt to get away with them. Strategic placement of less expensive coffins (“Caskets” these days) so they look cheaper than they are, provoking guilt feelings if the family doesn’t buy the most expensive everything, lying about laws concerning embalming, burial vaults, and more are all on the menu. And as more and more family owned funeral parlors get bought up by mega-corporations, which own not just the funeral parlor but the cemetery and the flower shop, choices are disappearing.
What makes this peculiarly American? In 1998, America was about the only place where open casket funerals were common. Having the corpse in view, there was a great opportunity to sell the family on embalming, cosmetics, clothing, and a fancy coffin interior, all of which are unneeded if we’re not looking at Uncle John or Aunt Edith. Embalming was nearly unheard of in other countries. (Mortuaries have been known to lie and tell families that embalming was required by law. It wasn’t. Anywhere.) Having a big funeral at the mortuary, with lots of flowers, was mostly an American thing. Cremation was not in big use, although it’s gotten much more used today. (That was another selling point: they wanted to sell a place in the cemetery to bury the ashes in, so they said that if the ashes were scattered, there would be no place for the family to visit the loved one)
The book is well researched. Mitford managed to get hold of lots of professional magazine, went to funeral profession conferences, and talked with many both in the industry and close to it. The story is horrifying, but Mitford’s wit is biting and the book is an amusing read. She is even handed where it’s called for. I feel it’s a very important book, one that should be read early in life, before one is likely to have to deal with the industry, so that one doesn’t end up railroaded into spending every penny giving Grandpa the send-off the mortuary feels he deserves, marble angles, super mattress in the coffin, shoes for in the coffin advertised as ‘comfortable’, and all.
April 16, 2020
I wonder what it would cost to have my cremated remains put into a rocket that is then launched and set on a trajectory for the sun. The American Way of Death makes it clear that there will be two costs: the real cost with a reasonable profit built in and the cost most of the funeral homes will charge.
Funeral homes are businesses, I get it. At some level, every business has a right to claim some profits for jobs well done and this includes morticians and funeral directors. At another level, industry discussions about effective coffin placement and how best to guide families through the coffin gallery for maximum sales are odious. Seriously, it's like pondering whether you want a death panel or an insurance board to decide your treatment options as opposed to your doctor. And then there are all the BS jobs that the death industry feeds: burial footwear (completely serious), burial neglige, silk casket linings, vaults (a box to put your box in as if uncle Joe were some sort of nesting doll). This is just a sampling and the activity has only become more deceptive and pronounced as giant conglomerates have started gobbling up the smaller, local funeral homes.
The death industry has invented its own traditions: embalming (only done in the US and ancient Egypt), the memory picture (how seeing your loved one "restored" and placed as if in slumber is helpful in assuaging worry), grief therapy (they will help you through with their lack of degree/licensing in psychotherapy). As Mitford notes "over the years, the funeral men have constructed their own grotesque cloud-cuckoo-land where the trappings of Gracious Living are transformed, as in a nightmare, into the trappings of Gracious Dying."
They want the world to think of them as dedicated professionals if only to more easily convince the grief-stricken that they don't really love their dearly departed unless they purchase the Batesville Royal model burping casket at a 300% markup.
The idea that we need to have some sort of grand send off is a fallacy that has been created by the industry itself. In most of the rest of the world funerals are simple affairs attended only by the closest family members. When the conglomerates have tried to push the American way in other countries they have been shut down.
Mitford takes you through the entire process and points out the misinformation spread by the industry along the way. Topics include: sales tactics, services, embalming, burial, and cremation. Her advice can be summed up as follows:
If you have to arrange a preneed funeral to qualify for government assistance do so by setting up a Totten trust through your bank. Name a friend or family member as beneficiary, not the mortuary.
Contact a funeral and memorial society or a funeral consumers alliance. A small lifetime membership fee could save you thousands at the funeral home.
Plan ahead and make sure you share your plans with the people who will need to carry things out. Don't let the mortuary dictate the terms.
Now, does anybody know someone who can make me a rocket?
Funeral homes are businesses, I get it. At some level, every business has a right to claim some profits for jobs well done and this includes morticians and funeral directors. At another level, industry discussions about effective coffin placement and how best to guide families through the coffin gallery for maximum sales are odious. Seriously, it's like pondering whether you want a death panel or an insurance board to decide your treatment options as opposed to your doctor. And then there are all the BS jobs that the death industry feeds: burial footwear (completely serious), burial neglige, silk casket linings, vaults (a box to put your box in as if uncle Joe were some sort of nesting doll). This is just a sampling and the activity has only become more deceptive and pronounced as giant conglomerates have started gobbling up the smaller, local funeral homes.
The death industry has invented its own traditions: embalming (only done in the US and ancient Egypt), the memory picture (how seeing your loved one "restored" and placed as if in slumber is helpful in assuaging worry), grief therapy (they will help you through with their lack of degree/licensing in psychotherapy). As Mitford notes "over the years, the funeral men have constructed their own grotesque cloud-cuckoo-land where the trappings of Gracious Living are transformed, as in a nightmare, into the trappings of Gracious Dying."
They want the world to think of them as dedicated professionals if only to more easily convince the grief-stricken that they don't really love their dearly departed unless they purchase the Batesville Royal model burping casket at a 300% markup.
The idea that we need to have some sort of grand send off is a fallacy that has been created by the industry itself. In most of the rest of the world funerals are simple affairs attended only by the closest family members. When the conglomerates have tried to push the American way in other countries they have been shut down.
Mitford takes you through the entire process and points out the misinformation spread by the industry along the way. Topics include: sales tactics, services, embalming, burial, and cremation. Her advice can be summed up as follows:
If you have to arrange a preneed funeral to qualify for government assistance do so by setting up a Totten trust through your bank. Name a friend or family member as beneficiary, not the mortuary.
Contact a funeral and memorial society or a funeral consumers alliance. A small lifetime membership fee could save you thousands at the funeral home.
Plan ahead and make sure you share your plans with the people who will need to carry things out. Don't let the mortuary dictate the terms.
Now, does anybody know someone who can make me a rocket?
July 16, 2022
THE AMERICAN WAY OF DEATH, although originally published in 1963, was revised in 1996. The information provided seems most relevant with the exception of pricing.
It is fascinating to me to learn the practices funeral homes push into consumers, especially in an extreme time of grief. I understand there are funeral directors who are honorable, but how do you know unless you are in the state of loss?
I was also surprised to learn how American funerals differ from those of Europe, or which some American practices (and businesses) have made their way across the pond.
I learned of this book when watching a YouTube video presented by Ask a Mortician, Caitlin Doughty (seems weird, but also very informative). They were presenting on why the Kennedys refused to have an open casket and no funeral director for the JFK funeral. Jacqueline and Robert Kennedy had both read this book and were very much included by the content and exploitation.
Again, this book was published many decades ago, but still very relevant in most instances. If/ when you are in a position of having to prepare for a funeral, be weary of prices and manipulation.
It is fascinating to me to learn the practices funeral homes push into consumers, especially in an extreme time of grief. I understand there are funeral directors who are honorable, but how do you know unless you are in the state of loss?
I was also surprised to learn how American funerals differ from those of Europe, or which some American practices (and businesses) have made their way across the pond.
I learned of this book when watching a YouTube video presented by Ask a Mortician, Caitlin Doughty (seems weird, but also very informative). They were presenting on why the Kennedys refused to have an open casket and no funeral director for the JFK funeral. Jacqueline and Robert Kennedy had both read this book and were very much included by the content and exploitation.
Again, this book was published many decades ago, but still very relevant in most instances. If/ when you are in a position of having to prepare for a funeral, be weary of prices and manipulation.
May 29, 2018
I can't believe I liked this book. I actually read it all. Originally published in 1963 and then an updated version in 1998, it exposes the funeral industry. I was educated and enlightened about the practices of that institution and will never look at funerals the same way. Like all industries, they can rip off the public but pretend not to be doing so. Taking advantage of people in times of bereavement is not okay with me! I found the topic fascinating but I realize that I might be an oddity in that interest!
August 25, 2018
Even considering the age of the original and revisted versions, Mitford's work holds value in that the funeral industry has likely changed little since and that corporations with enough money invested in pr. Add to that the obvious capitalization on one's grief in what appears to be one of the best scenarios for high pressure sales.
June 3, 2021
A 5 second flash of this book on Mad Men was all the product placement needed to pique my interest. After finishing the book I agree with Jim Cutler's quip, "We can all learn something from the funeral business." Some parts were dry and slow, others infuriating and shocking. So much of the shopping process and burial arrangements are, even today, done in hurried moments, in whispered tones, heavy with grief and clouded by uncertainty. Death is an enormous money making racket, especially in America where bigger & better is sold as the ultimate display of love & respect. I can appreciate why this book was so groundbreaking in the 1960s and why it is still relevant today. I know this is just scratching the surface but I feel more enlightened for having read it, and will be a better advocate for myself and a better consumer in the future for having read this.
January 6, 2023
Fuck capitalism.
It prevents people from being able to grieve properly by industrializing death, economically screws people over when they are vulnerable, and encourages negative environmental impact.
This book was the intersection of boring and interesting.
It prevents people from being able to grieve properly by industrializing death, economically screws people over when they are vulnerable, and encourages negative environmental impact.
This book was the intersection of boring and interesting.
January 7, 2023
It may be a little outdated but I loved this informational book. So many issues still ring true today for the funeral industry and the big business it actually is. I now need to look for a ‘Revisited Revisited’ edition😂
November 25, 2023
I found this so boring. It is very easy to understand why the funeral market is uncompetitive and after that it's just 250 pages of the bad and extremely predictable ways in which that manifests. Can't remember ever skipping so many paragraphs in a book, whole thing could've been an email
April 4, 2022
Quite droll in my personal opinion, but informative and honest.
February 22, 2024
As John Mortimer says on the dust jacket " Jessica Mitford believed in social justice, love, the absurdities of power and the vital importance of jokes "
So true
So true
February 21, 2017
This was a fascinating book about how funeral practices in the United States have evolved. It is mainly a scathing critique of the industry. I found it to be very educational. The author can also be humorous with her wit. Her sarcasm made me laugh a few times. After reading this book, I believe that there are more funeral homes in the country than needed. And instead of having a free market that naturally winnows the number to a sustainable amount and necessitates morticians to compete and offer lower, better prices, the funeral homes band together to simply raise prices so they can continue to exist even with so much competition for a limited amount of clientele. The government has been too influenced by funeral director lobbys to protect the general populace from being taken advantage of during a time of intense emotional trauma. I have also learned the current American embalming process does not actually preserve bodies for all that long. The process is designed to make the corpse look as restored as possible for the viewing, and thus different chemicals are used than what would be used if the goal were the longest possible preservation. I have also learned that the embalming process has not been proven to be more hygienic than simply leaving the corpse be. Cemeterians are also not innocent in this industry. It is amazing how they have managed to make so much money on the land that is exempt from so many taxes and fees. Also, pre-need sales can be traps.
Here are some excerpts I want to remember.
From the National Funeral Service Journal: "A funeral is not an occasion for a display of cheapness. It is, in fact, an opportunity for the display of a status symbol which, by bolstering family pride, does much to assuage grief. A funeral is also an occasion when feelings of guilt and remorse are satisfied to a large extent by the purchase of a fine funeral. It seems highly probable that the most satisfactory funeral service for the average family is one in which the cost has necessitated some degree of sacrifice. This permits the survivors to atone for any real or fancied neglect of the deceased prior to his death."
"The great majority of funeral buyers, as they are led through their paces at the mortuary—whether shaken and grief-stricken or merely looking forward with pleasurable anticipation to the reading of the will—are assailed by many a nagging question: What's the right thing to do? I am arranging a funeral, but surely this is no time to indulge in my own preferences in taste and style; I feel I know what she would have preferred, but what will her family and friends expect? How can I avoid criticism for inadvertently doing the wrong thing? And, above all, it should be a nice, decent funeral—but what is a nice, decent funeral?
Which leads us to the second special aspect of the funeral transaction: the buyer's almost total ignorance of what to expect when he enters the undertaker's parlor. What to look for, what to avoid, how much to spend. The funeral industry estimates that the average individual has to arrange for a funeral only once in fifteen years. The cost of the funeral is the third-largest expenditure, after a house and a car, in the life of the ordinary American family. Yet even in the case of the old relative whose death may have been fully expected and even welcomed, it is most unlikely the buyer will have discussed the funeral with anybody in advance. It just would not seem right to go around saying, 'By the way, my uncle is very ill and he's not expected to live; do you happen to know a good, reliable undertaker?'
Because of the nature of funerals, the buyer is in a quite different position from the one who is, for example, in the market for a car. Visualize the approach. The man of prudence and common sense who is about to buy a car consults a Consumers' Research bulletin or seeks the advice of friends; he knows in advance the dangers of rushing into a deal blindly.
In the funeral home, the man of prudence is completely at sea, without a recognizable landmark or bearing to guide him. It would be an unusual person who would examine the various offerings and then inquire around about the relative advantages of the Keystone casket by York and the Valley Forge by Batesville. In the matter of cost, a like difference in manifest. The funeral buyer is generally not in the mood to compare prices here, examine and appraise quality there. He is anxious to get the whole thing over with—not only is he anxious for this, but the exigencies of the situation demand it."
"Popular ignorance about the law as it relates to the disposal of the dead is a factor that sometimes affects the funeral transaction. People are often astonished to learn that in no state is embalming required by law except in certain special circumstances, such as when the body is to be shipped by common carrier.
The funeral men foster these misconceptions, sometimes by coolly misstating the law to the funeral buyer and sometimes by inferentially investing with the authority of law certain trade practices which they find it convenient or profitable to follow. This free and easy attitude to the law is even to be found in those institutions of higher learning, the colleges of mortuary science, where the fledgling undertaker receives his training. For example, it is the law in most states that when a decedent bequeaths his body for use in medical research, his survivors are bound to carry out his directions. Nonetheless, an embalming textbook, Modern Mortuary Science, disposes of the whole distasteful subject in a few misleading words: 'Q: Will the provisions in the will of a decedent that his body be given to a medical college for dissection be upheld over his widow?' A: No. . . . No one owns or controls his own body to the extent that he may dispose of the same in a manner which would bring humiliation and grief to the immediate members of his family."
"The fifth unusual factor in the funeral transaction is the availability to the buyer of relatively large sums of cash. The family accustomed to buying every major item on time—car, television set, furniture—and spending to the limit of the weekly paycheck, suddenly finds itself in the possession of insurance funds and death-benefit payments, often from a number of sources. It is usually unnecessary for the undertaker to resort to crude means to ascertain the extent of insurance coverage; a few simple and perfectly natural questions put to the family while he is completing the vital statistics will serve to elicit everything he needs to know. For example, 'Occupation of the deceased?' 'Shall we bill the insurance company directly?'
The undertaker knows, better than schoolboy knows the standings of the major-league baseball teams, the death-benefit payments of every trade union in the community, the Social Security and workmen's compensation scale of death benefits . . . and so on and so on."
"How surprised he would be to see how his counterpart of today is whisked off to a funeral parlor and is in short order sprayed, sliced, pierced, pickled, trussed, trimmed, creamed, waxed, painted, rouged, and neatly dressed—transformed from a common corpse into a Beautiful Memory Picture. This process is known in the trade as embalming and restorative art, and is so universally employed in the United States and Canada that for years the funeral director did it routinely, without consulting corpse or kin. He regards as eccentric those who are hardy enough to suggest that it might be dispensed with. Yet no law requires embalming, no religious doctrine commends it, nor is it dictated by considerations of health, sanitation, or even of personal daintiness. In no part of the world but in North America is it widely used. The purpose of embalming is to make the corpse presentable for viewing in a suitably costly container."
"The object of all this attention to the corpse, it must be remembered, is to make it presentable for viewing in an attitude of healthy repose. 'Our customs require the presentation of our dead in the semblance of normality . . . unmarred by the ravages of illness, disease, or mutilation,' says Mr. J. Sheridan Mayer in his Restorative Art. This is rather a large order since few people die in full bloom of health, unravaged by illness and unmarked by some disfigurement. The funeral industry is equal to the challenge: 'In some cases the gruesome appearance of a mutilated or disease-ridden subject may be quite discouraging. The task of restoration may seem impossible and shake the confidence of the embalmer. This is the time for intestinal fortitude and determination. Once the formative work is begun and affected tissues are cleaned or removed, all doubts of success vanish. it is surprising and gratifying to discover the results which may be obtained.'"
"Consequently, well over 68 percent of all American funerals in the mid-1990s featured an open casket—a custom unknown in other parts of the world. Foreigners are astonished by it."
"The Principles and Practices of Embalming: A funeral service is a social function at which the deceased is the guest of honor and the center of attention. . . . A poorly prepared body in a beautiful casket is just an incongruous as a young lady appearing at a party in a costly gown and with her hair in curlers."
"'Grief therapy' is most commonly used by funeral men to describe the mental and emotional solace which, they claim, is achieved for the bereaved family as a result of being able to 'view' the embalmed and restored deceased."
"Explorations in Social Psychiatry, professeur Edmund H. Volkhart: I know of no evidence to support the view that 'public' viewing of an embalmed body is somehow 'therapeutic' to the bereaved. Certainly there are no statistics known to me comparing the outcomes of such a process in the United States with the outcomes of England where public viewings are seldom done. Indeed, since the public viewing of the corpse is part and parcel of a whole complex of events surrounding funerals, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain its therapeutic or contra-therapeutic effect.
The phrase 'grief therapy' is not in common usage in psychiatry, so far as I know. That the loss of any loved object frequently leads to depressions and malfunctioning of the organism is, of course, well known; what is not well known or understood are the conditions under which some kind of intervention should be made, or even the nature of the intervention.
My general feeling is that the phenomena of grief and mourning have appeared in human life long before there were 'experts' of any kind (psychiatric, clerical, etc.) and somehow most, if not all, of the bereaved managed to survive. The interesting problem to me is why it should be that so many modern Americans seem more incapable of managing loss and/or grief than other peoples, and why we have such reliance upon specialists. My own hunch is that morbid problems of grief arise only when the relevant laypersons (family members, friends, children, etc.) somehow fail to perform their normal therapeutic roles for the bereaved—or may it be that the bereaved often break down because they simply do not know how to behave under the circumstance? Very few of us, I think, would be capable of managing sustained, ambiguous situations."
"Selling the public of the 'quality' of his merchandise can tax the ingenuity of the undertaker. The costliest caskets are those built of the thickest metal. The cheaper lines of metal caskets, constructed of thin sheet metal over a wooden frame, achieve the same look of massive elegance, and can hardly be distinguished (except by grateful pallbearers) from the heavyweights that weigh hundreds of pounds more and sell for thousands of dollars more. . . .
The method hit upon by the casket makers to solve this knotty problem is essential the method used by furniture makers (whose direct descendants they are): that is, to make the cheaper lines so hideous that only customers who can afford the barest minimum will buy them. Mr. John Beck, then president of the Balanced Line Casket Company and of Elgin Associates, carefully explained the position:
'In most cases where funeral directors are not showing enough profit, they are showing too many low price metal caskets that look too good, are embellished up entirely too much for their price position. . . . We call the items "profit robbers." For right in the area where people do have money to buy better funerals and will do so when given the proper selection and opportunity, the better sale is lost. The second area is where opportunity is lost is in the sealer area. If the lowest price sealer looks as good as the best one, of course most people will buy the lower price one. . . . This is the region where greater profits can be made as this is the one where people who have the money to buy will do so if they are given the proper incentive.'"
"And Mr. Leroy R. Derr, president of the Boyertown Casket Company: 'We can maker cheaper caskets, certainly. You can make them and so can I. However, each one helps underwrite the failure of our funeral directors. Too many "cheapie" will ruin the funeral directors completely.'"
"The family visit also gives the cemetery personnel an opportunity to 'describe its other services, such as bronze memorials, flowers, mausoleum crypts and cremation facilities.' If the family does not buy a memorial then and there, chances are they will do so in the very near future; for Cedar Memorial Park has a 'carefully planned program to provide counsel and assistance for lot owners after the at-need sale has been made.' The program works like this: first a letter is sent to the family announcing that the Cedar Park memorial counselor and director of the Family Counseling Service will call upon them shortly 'to secure the information necessary for the Historical Record and present you with a photographic record of the services at Cedar Memorial.' Three days later, the counselor arrives at the home and 'suggests the purchase of a bronze memorial.' But that is not all, in the middle of the month following the service, the counselor is after the family again, this time to invite them to a 'counseling program' at the cemetery chapel. This in turn is followed up by yet another personal visit; 'Dr. Dill always visits them in a memorial has not been selected.'"
"The cemetery as a moneymaking proposition is new in this century. The earliest type of burial ground in America was the churchyard. This gave way in the nineteenth century to graveyards at the town limits, largely municipally owned and operated. Whether owned by church or municipality, the burial grounds were considered a community facility; charges for graves were nominal, and the burial ground was generally not expected to show profit.
Prevailing sentiment that there was something special and sacred about cemetery land, that it deserved special consideration and should not be subjected to such temporal regulation as taxation, was reflected in court decisions and state laws. A cemetery company is an association formed for 'a pious and public use,' the United States Supreme Court said in 1882, and more recently the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that a cemetery, even if privately owned, is a public burial ground 'whose operation for purposes of profit is offensive to public policy.' Other rulings have affirmed that land acquired for cemetery purposes becomes entirely exempt from real estate taxes the moment it is acquired, even before a dead body is buried in it."
"At first glance it would seem an act of purest altruism that somebody should go to all the trouble, at absolutely no profit to himself, to start a cemetery wherein his fellow man be laid to rest. A second glance discloses that the nonprofit aspect removes the necessity of pay income tax on grave sales. And a really close look discloses that the profits that are now routinely extracted by the promoters of 'nonprofit' cemeteries are spectacular beyond the dreams of the most avaricious real estate subdivider."
"From colonial days until the nineteenth century, the American funeral was almost exclusively a family affair, in the sense that the family and close friends performed most of the duties in connection with the dead body itself. It was they who washed and laid out the body, draped it in a winding sheet, and ordered the coffin from the local carpenter. It was they who carried the coffin on foot from the home to the church and thence to the graveyard, and who frequently—unless the church sexton was available—dug the grave. Funeral services were held in the church over the pall-covered bier, and a brief committal prayer was said in the family parlor, where the mourners took turns watching over it."
The National Funeral Service Journal: "The minister is perhaps our most serious problem, but the one most easily solved. Most religious leaders avoid interference. There are some, however . . . who feel that they must protect their parishioners' financial resources and direct them to a more 'worthy' cause Some of the men, after finding more dimes than dollars in the collection plate, reach the point of frustration where they vent their unholy anger on the supposedly affluent funeral director."
"The issue boils down to this: The morticians resent the intrusion into their business of clergy who take it upon themselves to steer parishioners in the direction of moderation in choice of casket and other matters pertaining to the production of the funeral. Many of the clergy, for their part, deplore what they regard as the growing usurpation of their role as counselors in a time of grief and need, and the growing distortion of what they view as an extremely important, solemn religious rite."
"Vermont, with about five thousand deaths a year, is blessed or afflicted—depending on one's point of view—with seventy funeral homes to handle these, meaning that each 'home' averages just under 1.4 customers a week."
"The Goldman, Sachs brokerage house, analyzing their projects, predicts a rosy future: 'Aggregate deaths have increased at roughly 1.1 percent on a compound basis since 1940. . . . Going forward, the continued aging of the baby-boomers, coupled with an increasing proportion of people over age 65, should keep aggregate deaths riding. . . The aging of America should enable the death care industry to experience extremely stable demand in the future.'"
Here are some excerpts I want to remember.
From the National Funeral Service Journal: "A funeral is not an occasion for a display of cheapness. It is, in fact, an opportunity for the display of a status symbol which, by bolstering family pride, does much to assuage grief. A funeral is also an occasion when feelings of guilt and remorse are satisfied to a large extent by the purchase of a fine funeral. It seems highly probable that the most satisfactory funeral service for the average family is one in which the cost has necessitated some degree of sacrifice. This permits the survivors to atone for any real or fancied neglect of the deceased prior to his death."
"The great majority of funeral buyers, as they are led through their paces at the mortuary—whether shaken and grief-stricken or merely looking forward with pleasurable anticipation to the reading of the will—are assailed by many a nagging question: What's the right thing to do? I am arranging a funeral, but surely this is no time to indulge in my own preferences in taste and style; I feel I know what she would have preferred, but what will her family and friends expect? How can I avoid criticism for inadvertently doing the wrong thing? And, above all, it should be a nice, decent funeral—but what is a nice, decent funeral?
Which leads us to the second special aspect of the funeral transaction: the buyer's almost total ignorance of what to expect when he enters the undertaker's parlor. What to look for, what to avoid, how much to spend. The funeral industry estimates that the average individual has to arrange for a funeral only once in fifteen years. The cost of the funeral is the third-largest expenditure, after a house and a car, in the life of the ordinary American family. Yet even in the case of the old relative whose death may have been fully expected and even welcomed, it is most unlikely the buyer will have discussed the funeral with anybody in advance. It just would not seem right to go around saying, 'By the way, my uncle is very ill and he's not expected to live; do you happen to know a good, reliable undertaker?'
Because of the nature of funerals, the buyer is in a quite different position from the one who is, for example, in the market for a car. Visualize the approach. The man of prudence and common sense who is about to buy a car consults a Consumers' Research bulletin or seeks the advice of friends; he knows in advance the dangers of rushing into a deal blindly.
In the funeral home, the man of prudence is completely at sea, without a recognizable landmark or bearing to guide him. It would be an unusual person who would examine the various offerings and then inquire around about the relative advantages of the Keystone casket by York and the Valley Forge by Batesville. In the matter of cost, a like difference in manifest. The funeral buyer is generally not in the mood to compare prices here, examine and appraise quality there. He is anxious to get the whole thing over with—not only is he anxious for this, but the exigencies of the situation demand it."
"Popular ignorance about the law as it relates to the disposal of the dead is a factor that sometimes affects the funeral transaction. People are often astonished to learn that in no state is embalming required by law except in certain special circumstances, such as when the body is to be shipped by common carrier.
The funeral men foster these misconceptions, sometimes by coolly misstating the law to the funeral buyer and sometimes by inferentially investing with the authority of law certain trade practices which they find it convenient or profitable to follow. This free and easy attitude to the law is even to be found in those institutions of higher learning, the colleges of mortuary science, where the fledgling undertaker receives his training. For example, it is the law in most states that when a decedent bequeaths his body for use in medical research, his survivors are bound to carry out his directions. Nonetheless, an embalming textbook, Modern Mortuary Science, disposes of the whole distasteful subject in a few misleading words: 'Q: Will the provisions in the will of a decedent that his body be given to a medical college for dissection be upheld over his widow?' A: No. . . . No one owns or controls his own body to the extent that he may dispose of the same in a manner which would bring humiliation and grief to the immediate members of his family."
"The fifth unusual factor in the funeral transaction is the availability to the buyer of relatively large sums of cash. The family accustomed to buying every major item on time—car, television set, furniture—and spending to the limit of the weekly paycheck, suddenly finds itself in the possession of insurance funds and death-benefit payments, often from a number of sources. It is usually unnecessary for the undertaker to resort to crude means to ascertain the extent of insurance coverage; a few simple and perfectly natural questions put to the family while he is completing the vital statistics will serve to elicit everything he needs to know. For example, 'Occupation of the deceased?' 'Shall we bill the insurance company directly?'
The undertaker knows, better than schoolboy knows the standings of the major-league baseball teams, the death-benefit payments of every trade union in the community, the Social Security and workmen's compensation scale of death benefits . . . and so on and so on."
"How surprised he would be to see how his counterpart of today is whisked off to a funeral parlor and is in short order sprayed, sliced, pierced, pickled, trussed, trimmed, creamed, waxed, painted, rouged, and neatly dressed—transformed from a common corpse into a Beautiful Memory Picture. This process is known in the trade as embalming and restorative art, and is so universally employed in the United States and Canada that for years the funeral director did it routinely, without consulting corpse or kin. He regards as eccentric those who are hardy enough to suggest that it might be dispensed with. Yet no law requires embalming, no religious doctrine commends it, nor is it dictated by considerations of health, sanitation, or even of personal daintiness. In no part of the world but in North America is it widely used. The purpose of embalming is to make the corpse presentable for viewing in a suitably costly container."
"The object of all this attention to the corpse, it must be remembered, is to make it presentable for viewing in an attitude of healthy repose. 'Our customs require the presentation of our dead in the semblance of normality . . . unmarred by the ravages of illness, disease, or mutilation,' says Mr. J. Sheridan Mayer in his Restorative Art. This is rather a large order since few people die in full bloom of health, unravaged by illness and unmarked by some disfigurement. The funeral industry is equal to the challenge: 'In some cases the gruesome appearance of a mutilated or disease-ridden subject may be quite discouraging. The task of restoration may seem impossible and shake the confidence of the embalmer. This is the time for intestinal fortitude and determination. Once the formative work is begun and affected tissues are cleaned or removed, all doubts of success vanish. it is surprising and gratifying to discover the results which may be obtained.'"
"Consequently, well over 68 percent of all American funerals in the mid-1990s featured an open casket—a custom unknown in other parts of the world. Foreigners are astonished by it."
"The Principles and Practices of Embalming: A funeral service is a social function at which the deceased is the guest of honor and the center of attention. . . . A poorly prepared body in a beautiful casket is just an incongruous as a young lady appearing at a party in a costly gown and with her hair in curlers."
"'Grief therapy' is most commonly used by funeral men to describe the mental and emotional solace which, they claim, is achieved for the bereaved family as a result of being able to 'view' the embalmed and restored deceased."
"Explorations in Social Psychiatry, professeur Edmund H. Volkhart: I know of no evidence to support the view that 'public' viewing of an embalmed body is somehow 'therapeutic' to the bereaved. Certainly there are no statistics known to me comparing the outcomes of such a process in the United States with the outcomes of England where public viewings are seldom done. Indeed, since the public viewing of the corpse is part and parcel of a whole complex of events surrounding funerals, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain its therapeutic or contra-therapeutic effect.
The phrase 'grief therapy' is not in common usage in psychiatry, so far as I know. That the loss of any loved object frequently leads to depressions and malfunctioning of the organism is, of course, well known; what is not well known or understood are the conditions under which some kind of intervention should be made, or even the nature of the intervention.
My general feeling is that the phenomena of grief and mourning have appeared in human life long before there were 'experts' of any kind (psychiatric, clerical, etc.) and somehow most, if not all, of the bereaved managed to survive. The interesting problem to me is why it should be that so many modern Americans seem more incapable of managing loss and/or grief than other peoples, and why we have such reliance upon specialists. My own hunch is that morbid problems of grief arise only when the relevant laypersons (family members, friends, children, etc.) somehow fail to perform their normal therapeutic roles for the bereaved—or may it be that the bereaved often break down because they simply do not know how to behave under the circumstance? Very few of us, I think, would be capable of managing sustained, ambiguous situations."
"Selling the public of the 'quality' of his merchandise can tax the ingenuity of the undertaker. The costliest caskets are those built of the thickest metal. The cheaper lines of metal caskets, constructed of thin sheet metal over a wooden frame, achieve the same look of massive elegance, and can hardly be distinguished (except by grateful pallbearers) from the heavyweights that weigh hundreds of pounds more and sell for thousands of dollars more. . . .
The method hit upon by the casket makers to solve this knotty problem is essential the method used by furniture makers (whose direct descendants they are): that is, to make the cheaper lines so hideous that only customers who can afford the barest minimum will buy them. Mr. John Beck, then president of the Balanced Line Casket Company and of Elgin Associates, carefully explained the position:
'In most cases where funeral directors are not showing enough profit, they are showing too many low price metal caskets that look too good, are embellished up entirely too much for their price position. . . . We call the items "profit robbers." For right in the area where people do have money to buy better funerals and will do so when given the proper selection and opportunity, the better sale is lost. The second area is where opportunity is lost is in the sealer area. If the lowest price sealer looks as good as the best one, of course most people will buy the lower price one. . . . This is the region where greater profits can be made as this is the one where people who have the money to buy will do so if they are given the proper incentive.'"
"And Mr. Leroy R. Derr, president of the Boyertown Casket Company: 'We can maker cheaper caskets, certainly. You can make them and so can I. However, each one helps underwrite the failure of our funeral directors. Too many "cheapie" will ruin the funeral directors completely.'"
"The family visit also gives the cemetery personnel an opportunity to 'describe its other services, such as bronze memorials, flowers, mausoleum crypts and cremation facilities.' If the family does not buy a memorial then and there, chances are they will do so in the very near future; for Cedar Memorial Park has a 'carefully planned program to provide counsel and assistance for lot owners after the at-need sale has been made.' The program works like this: first a letter is sent to the family announcing that the Cedar Park memorial counselor and director of the Family Counseling Service will call upon them shortly 'to secure the information necessary for the Historical Record and present you with a photographic record of the services at Cedar Memorial.' Three days later, the counselor arrives at the home and 'suggests the purchase of a bronze memorial.' But that is not all, in the middle of the month following the service, the counselor is after the family again, this time to invite them to a 'counseling program' at the cemetery chapel. This in turn is followed up by yet another personal visit; 'Dr. Dill always visits them in a memorial has not been selected.'"
"The cemetery as a moneymaking proposition is new in this century. The earliest type of burial ground in America was the churchyard. This gave way in the nineteenth century to graveyards at the town limits, largely municipally owned and operated. Whether owned by church or municipality, the burial grounds were considered a community facility; charges for graves were nominal, and the burial ground was generally not expected to show profit.
Prevailing sentiment that there was something special and sacred about cemetery land, that it deserved special consideration and should not be subjected to such temporal regulation as taxation, was reflected in court decisions and state laws. A cemetery company is an association formed for 'a pious and public use,' the United States Supreme Court said in 1882, and more recently the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that a cemetery, even if privately owned, is a public burial ground 'whose operation for purposes of profit is offensive to public policy.' Other rulings have affirmed that land acquired for cemetery purposes becomes entirely exempt from real estate taxes the moment it is acquired, even before a dead body is buried in it."
"At first glance it would seem an act of purest altruism that somebody should go to all the trouble, at absolutely no profit to himself, to start a cemetery wherein his fellow man be laid to rest. A second glance discloses that the nonprofit aspect removes the necessity of pay income tax on grave sales. And a really close look discloses that the profits that are now routinely extracted by the promoters of 'nonprofit' cemeteries are spectacular beyond the dreams of the most avaricious real estate subdivider."
"From colonial days until the nineteenth century, the American funeral was almost exclusively a family affair, in the sense that the family and close friends performed most of the duties in connection with the dead body itself. It was they who washed and laid out the body, draped it in a winding sheet, and ordered the coffin from the local carpenter. It was they who carried the coffin on foot from the home to the church and thence to the graveyard, and who frequently—unless the church sexton was available—dug the grave. Funeral services were held in the church over the pall-covered bier, and a brief committal prayer was said in the family parlor, where the mourners took turns watching over it."
The National Funeral Service Journal: "The minister is perhaps our most serious problem, but the one most easily solved. Most religious leaders avoid interference. There are some, however . . . who feel that they must protect their parishioners' financial resources and direct them to a more 'worthy' cause Some of the men, after finding more dimes than dollars in the collection plate, reach the point of frustration where they vent their unholy anger on the supposedly affluent funeral director."
"The issue boils down to this: The morticians resent the intrusion into their business of clergy who take it upon themselves to steer parishioners in the direction of moderation in choice of casket and other matters pertaining to the production of the funeral. Many of the clergy, for their part, deplore what they regard as the growing usurpation of their role as counselors in a time of grief and need, and the growing distortion of what they view as an extremely important, solemn religious rite."
"Vermont, with about five thousand deaths a year, is blessed or afflicted—depending on one's point of view—with seventy funeral homes to handle these, meaning that each 'home' averages just under 1.4 customers a week."
"The Goldman, Sachs brokerage house, analyzing their projects, predicts a rosy future: 'Aggregate deaths have increased at roughly 1.1 percent on a compound basis since 1940. . . . Going forward, the continued aging of the baby-boomers, coupled with an increasing proportion of people over age 65, should keep aggregate deaths riding. . . The aging of America should enable the death care industry to experience extremely stable demand in the future.'"
Displaying 1 - 30 of 328 reviews