Comments on: Selection of obit subjects reveals hidden prejudices of a culture http://obitresearch.com/2009/10/11/selection-of-obit-subjects-reveals-hidden-prejudices-of-a-culture/ Exploring the American obituary Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:02:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: steve miller http://obitresearch.com/2009/10/11/selection-of-obit-subjects-reveals-hidden-prejudices-of-a-culture/comment-page-1/#comment-9 steve miller Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:17:02 +0000 http://obitresearch.com/?p=89#comment-9 You don't have to be some kind of social theorist to note these things. Although editors may be "unconsciouisly affected" they are certainly _consciously_ affected and striving to find elite stiffs to put in the paper. Also, within the profession (a dramatically shrinking profession) there is a healthy debate over who makes the most interesting obits. Some contend it is people of high cultural achievement. Others are more interested in chronicling the lumpen. Jim Sheeler, who won a Pulitzer last year though not for obits, wrote long tear-jerking obits of nobodies for the Rocky Mountain Post before it went under. It is oversimplified and mechanistic (ie ignoring the human factors) to say that obit pages somehow simply reflect the cultural norms. You don’t have to be some kind of social theorist to note these things. Although editors may be “unconsciouisly affected” they are certainly _consciously_ affected and striving to find elite stiffs to put in the paper.

Also, within the profession (a dramatically shrinking profession) there is a healthy debate over who makes the most interesting obits. Some contend it is people of high cultural achievement. Others are more interested in chronicling the lumpen. Jim Sheeler, who won a Pulitzer last year though not for obits, wrote long tear-jerking obits of nobodies for the Rocky Mountain Post before it went under.

It is oversimplified and mechanistic (ie ignoring the human factors) to say that obit pages somehow simply reflect the cultural norms.

]]>