Dangerous? How so? How are they really any different than a Polaroid moment, having someone else take your photo to record the events in your life. I think people who rail against selfies are secretly jealous of others’ activities. But to call them dangerous is a paranoid stretch. Even calling them narcissism is quite judgmental.
Last year, when my only brother died I did take pictures at the wake,( before anyone arrived ), to take back with me to South America and also to send to friends in the States ( at their request ) who were unable to attend. No selfies !I cherish those pictures, as a final memorial to a wonderful man.
Wonder what the deceased survivors think of the ‘conductor’. As if there was really no need for a coffin and it’s inhabitant while the joker performs his ‘oh whatever’. That is the most abusive use of a selfie.
Photos with the deceased (or even looking at the deceased) don’t ring my bell, and photos at the actual service are probably tacky, but a funeral (afterward) is a perfect occasion for getting a family photo. It’s axiomatic that a lot more family members turn up for a funeral than for a wedding (not to mention that the guest of honor is not in a position to hog the spotlight), so funerals end up being great family reunion occasions.
Photographs of the deceased and mourners go back to the very invention of photography. There were pictures of the dead, usually, but not always, in the casket. Pictures were aslo made of close relatives at the grave. When I was young taking photos of the deceased and grave were usual. No cameras at the funeral, though, as that was a solemn ritual. It wasn’t anything except a momento of a loved one’s passing. Yes, of course, when the pictures were viewed, it was a sad remembrance, but it also was a celebration of lives, past and present. With that all said and done, wedding pictures were made after the ceremony, and not during the wedding itself. The wedding was also a solemn ritual. In those days a solemn ritual was just that, a solemn ritual of a life event and it wasn’t interrupted with a flash going off.
There is a big, big difference between taking pictures of those attending the funeral and pics of the deceased, and taking your own picture posed in front of a casket or memorial flowers.
The first type of pictures provides a record of a memorial, especially helpful for family members who weren’t able to attend (serving in the military, in the hospital, not born yet, etc.)
The second type of picture, a picture of the self posed in front of the deceased or a memorial to the deceased, IS an example of narcissism, a deep obsession with oneself that is not healthy for society as a whole, and has nothing to do with mourning the lost loved one…
NeedaChuckle: No, he got a three-gun salute from seven in the group. 21-gun salutes are strictly for heads of state and more for the office than the perrson.
I clicked on one of those boxes that now accompanies every article. It turned out in the 19th century, people frequently took pictures of deceased children, not in the coffin, but posed with the family as if they were still alive. It was sad, and also a little (?) creepy. But photography was new, and expensive, and they wanted to remember the child as they were. So I can’t blame them.
I was in a Veterans Honor Guard. Don’t know how many times I saw people taking pictures, and not just standing in one spot shooting them. They would move around, get pictures of the flag line, the flag on the coffin, and the flag folding. They didn’t care what was going on, they would move around during the eulogy, sometimes they got in the way of us as we performed the military honors.
It used to be, when traveling that the turistas would ask you to take their picture in front of some significant landmark and many interesting conversations and sometimes acquaintances developed in the process. Now, we not only have the self-absorbed “selfies” but the “groufies” which eliminates the need for contact outside the clique. Sad…
Dtroutma almost 9 years ago
AND there’s a stick in the box.
Wallythe2 almost 9 years ago
I’ve been to a fair amount of funerals in my life (63 yrs.) and never once did I see a camera at the viewing, wake or the burial.
Varnes almost 9 years ago
Surprised one of those things isn’t sticking out of the coffin….
Varnes almost 9 years ago
Selfies are a most human type of behavior…
Arianne almost 9 years ago
Only a matter of time, I have no doubt. An excellent new toon.
ladykat almost 9 years ago
Very tasteless.
Beleck3 almost 9 years ago
well Americans are “exceptional”. any surprise here?
dsom8 almost 9 years ago
Dangerous? How so? How are they really any different than a Polaroid moment, having someone else take your photo to record the events in your life. I think people who rail against selfies are secretly jealous of others’ activities. But to call them dangerous is a paranoid stretch. Even calling them narcissism is quite judgmental.
nmcconnell almost 9 years ago
Give a listen to Weird Al’s “Tacky” off his new album.
Linguist almost 9 years ago
Last year, when my only brother died I did take pictures at the wake,( before anyone arrived ), to take back with me to South America and also to send to friends in the States ( at their request ) who were unable to attend. No selfies !I cherish those pictures, as a final memorial to a wonderful man.
dabugger almost 9 years ago
Wonder what the deceased survivors think of the ‘conductor’. As if there was really no need for a coffin and it’s inhabitant while the joker performs his ‘oh whatever’. That is the most abusive use of a selfie.
sarah413 Premium Member almost 9 years ago
How many remember the Bill Cosby funeral routine? “Don’t I look like myself?” Fast forward to today and it becomes “Don’t I look like my selfie?”
Suzanne S Barnhill Premium Member almost 9 years ago
Photos with the deceased (or even looking at the deceased) don’t ring my bell, and photos at the actual service are probably tacky, but a funeral (afterward) is a perfect occasion for getting a family photo. It’s axiomatic that a lot more family members turn up for a funeral than for a wedding (not to mention that the guest of honor is not in a position to hog the spotlight), so funerals end up being great family reunion occasions.
Old Texan75 almost 9 years ago
Photographs of the deceased and mourners go back to the very invention of photography. There were pictures of the dead, usually, but not always, in the casket. Pictures were aslo made of close relatives at the grave. When I was young taking photos of the deceased and grave were usual. No cameras at the funeral, though, as that was a solemn ritual. It wasn’t anything except a momento of a loved one’s passing. Yes, of course, when the pictures were viewed, it was a sad remembrance, but it also was a celebration of lives, past and present. With that all said and done, wedding pictures were made after the ceremony, and not during the wedding itself. The wedding was also a solemn ritual. In those days a solemn ritual was just that, a solemn ritual of a life event and it wasn’t interrupted with a flash going off.
Argy.Bargy2 almost 9 years ago
There is a big, big difference between taking pictures of those attending the funeral and pics of the deceased, and taking your own picture posed in front of a casket or memorial flowers.
The first type of pictures provides a record of a memorial, especially helpful for family members who weren’t able to attend (serving in the military, in the hospital, not born yet, etc.)
The second type of picture, a picture of the self posed in front of the deceased or a memorial to the deceased, IS an example of narcissism, a deep obsession with oneself that is not healthy for society as a whole, and has nothing to do with mourning the lost loved one…
mr_sherman Premium Member almost 9 years ago
I have seen published pictures of Abraham Lincoln in his casket as the train made the trip from Washington DC to Illinois.
hippogriff almost 9 years ago
NeedaChuckle: No, he got a three-gun salute from seven in the group. 21-gun salutes are strictly for heads of state and more for the office than the perrson.
kaffekup almost 9 years ago
I clicked on one of those boxes that now accompanies every article. It turned out in the 19th century, people frequently took pictures of deceased children, not in the coffin, but posed with the family as if they were still alive. It was sad, and also a little (?) creepy. But photography was new, and expensive, and they wanted to remember the child as they were. So I can’t blame them.
Nuclear Nemesis almost 9 years ago
I was in a Veterans Honor Guard. Don’t know how many times I saw people taking pictures, and not just standing in one spot shooting them. They would move around, get pictures of the flag line, the flag on the coffin, and the flag folding. They didn’t care what was going on, they would move around during the eulogy, sometimes they got in the way of us as we performed the military honors.
Linguist almost 9 years ago
It used to be, when traveling that the turistas would ask you to take their picture in front of some significant landmark and many interesting conversations and sometimes acquaintances developed in the process. Now, we not only have the self-absorbed “selfies” but the “groufies” which eliminates the need for contact outside the clique. Sad…
route66paul almost 9 years ago
Closed casket or an urn and a picture over it are the way to go. Why do I want to support a true blood sucking industry with my surviviors’ $?
cdward almost 9 years ago
Actually, taking your own picture has been around since cameras. Taking your picture with dead loved ones has been around nearly as long.
hippogriff almost 9 years ago
Daniel Quilp: And there are many patents awarded for the interred to communicate, “Hey, I’m not dead yet!”
water_moon almost 9 years ago
Wierd Al hit this one in “Tacky”