The Queen/Prince Philip

[viii]

9 minutes ago, adidas said:

Not in the UK but I have only ever seen coffins at funerals here. I’ve never personally seen a casket.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a coffin before. It’s nothing but caskets here and even those are becoming less common. Cremation is what I typically see these days. 

[hoipolloi]

24 minutes ago, Antimony said:

I do mean the literally difference of four-sides vs six-sided boxes and the different between something that is anthropoid and something that is not.

I think that's a distinction without a difference. There are obvious historical and stylistic trends in the shapes & construction of coffins/caskets but the words themselves are synonymous, much as the American funeral industry would like to pretend otherwise. They are both containers for the dead. That's it.

Re: Air-tight seals & lead-lined coffins. I agree with you. There are some rare cases where historic burials in lead-lined coffins have been encountered and the individuals within them are so well-preserved they're mistaken for modern decedents. Those are exceptions though. 

ETA: This recent Pro Publica article show how little regulation is still imposed on the funeral industry in the US. 

 

Edited September 14, 2022 by hoipolloi

[Antimony]

14 minutes ago, hoipolloi said:

I think that's a distinction without a difference. There are obvious historical and stylistic trends in the shapes & construction of coffins/caskets but the words themselves are synonymous, much as the American funeral industry would like to pretend otherwise. They are both containers for the dead. That's it.

...but the difference is the number of sides. I agree they're both containers for corpses but...they're shaped differently.

 I don't understand how this isn't a difference. 

The popularization of caskets in the United States was accompanied by writings and commentary that pointed out specifically the change in number of sides and how one was more anthropoid than the other. I believe it's a small difference, but I believe it's a difference that's interesting and there's clearly a difference in where which shape is popular or not, and that's interesting. I think it's interesting that I've never seen in my real life a six-sided box used, but I've seen many four-sided boxes used, and that the opposite is true for people in other parts of the world. It's a tiny difference, and it's purely cultural and not practical, but I love tiny little differences in funeral practices and methods. 

The most notably well-preserved body that comes to mind is Lady Dai but that seemed more of a matter of...somewhere between mummification and pickling and luck. There is something to be said for water seals (to anaerobic fermentation) being way more effective than dry seals and that seems to be least what partially occurred in her case. [Insider Trivia: I grow anaerobic bacteria for work and getting a nice container that has a good oxygen seal for 12hr+ always sucks, you can never trust them, I keep making myself oxygen sensors just to double check the quality of each of these, and extra oxygen scrubbers are a lifesaver.]

[hoipolloi]

8 minutes ago, Antimony said:

I don't understand how this isn't a difference. 

I guess I see it as a reflection of historical trends in the materials and methods of burial rather than a major difference in the fundamental actions being carried out. To me, the shape of a burial container is a minor component of funerary practices that are determined by community standards, religious beliefs, fashion (like many other things), and -- last but not least -- money. Caskets are more elaborate containers so they cost more. 

Etymology: The OED says that "coffin" was first used to signify a chest or container for burial in 1525 although its earlier use simply meant chest or box, and goes back to about 1330. The word "casket" was first used about 1440 and meant a chest or container for valuables, especially jewels. It wasn't used to mean a container for burial until 1849, and the OED indicates this usage was found in the US. 

Probably more than anyone wanted to know!

[Coconut Flan]

3 hours ago, Antimony said:

b) If Louis generated this sentiment by himself (instead of repeating what somebody had told him), he's a little developmentally ahead the standard curve of children's understandings of death. Age four is a little bit of an interesting time in children's understanding of mortality because they tend to know that "dead" and "alive" are different states but they usually haven't grasped the fact that dead is a permanent state until about 5 or 6 (sometimes as late as seven). 

Four is in the range especially if they've had a pet die.  My four year old wanted to perform a necropsy to see why the neighborhood cat died.  

[tabitha2]

I would think farm kids learn things pretty early as well. 

[SassyPants]

1 hour ago, Coconut Flan said:

Four is in the range especially if they've had a pet die.  My four year old wanted to perform a necropsy to see why the neighborhood cat died.  

My SIL’s aunt passed earlier this week. This was my 8YO GD’s first wake and funeral. They live in SA where the entire process (embalming, wake…) happens at home. My GD asked my daughter when they would wrap her up as a mummy-

[Antimony]

2 hours ago, hoipolloi said:

I guess I see it as a reflection of historical trends in the materials and methods of burial rather than a major difference in the fundamental actions being carried out. To me, the shape of a burial container is a minor component of funerary practices that are determined by community standards, religious beliefs, fashion (like many other things), and -- last but not least -- money. Caskets are more elaborate containers so they cost more. 

Etymology: The OED says that "coffin" was first used to signify a chest or container for burial in 1525 although its earlier use simply meant chest or box, and goes back to about 1330. The word "casket" was first used about 1440 and meant a chest or container for valuables, especially jewels. It wasn't used to mean a container for burial until 1849, and the OED indicates this usage was found in the US. 

Probably more than anyone wanted to know!

Oh, I agree it's not fundamental but I'm interested in it. There are totally aspects of funerary custom that are more important, for sure. But I do think it's interesting that "number of sides of box" shows up with such clear delineation at all. I guess you could start ranking things by how anthropoid they are or aren't, with shrouds and some sarcophagi being the most, and caskets being very much one of the least. 

The course I designed is coming from a chemistry perspective, so it touches less on cultural things but on things like embalming, embalming materials safety, questions like "What concerns do we have about embalming fluids and soil health in burial grounds?" and deep dives into the release of mercury (from tooth fillings) into the environment from cremation. (Those are fascinating papers.) The whole idea is to talk about the chemistry and impact of our death practices in an open way, but of course, there are tons of cultural discussions that intersect with the science of it. 

And these details are the exact kind of thing I want to know. I love the etymology. The 1849 year lines up, and that's just ahead of the time where the US funeral industry is about to get Truly Buck Wild (because of Civil War Reasons). 

[hoipolloi]

1 hour ago, Antimony said:

The course I designed is coming from a chemistry perspective, so it touches less on cultural things but on things like embalming, embalming materials safety, questions like "What concerns do we have about embalming fluids and soil health in burial grounds?" and deep dives into the release of mercury (from tooth fillings) into the environment from cremation. (Those are fascinating papers.) The whole idea is to talk about the chemistry and impact of our death practices in an open way, but of course, there are tons of cultural discussions that intersect with the science of it. 

This sounds like a fantastic and fascinating course.

Embalming is a whole 'nother thing in the American funeral industry. It can certainly have its uses in contexts where viewing the deceased is customary, especially if there will be some time between death and burial. The funeral industry worked very hard to enshrine this practice in many state laws where you were required to have a deceased family member embalmed no matter what, even with cremations. Fortunately, that has changed for the most part. 

 

Edited September 15, 2022 by hoipolloi
Clarity

[Antimony]

1 minute ago, hoipolloi said:

This sounds like a fantastic and fascinating course.

Embalming is a whole 'nother thing in the American funeral industry. It can certainly have its uses in contexts where viewing the deceased is customary, especially if there will be some time between death and burial. The funeral industry worked very hard to enshrine this practice in many state laws where you were required to have a deceased family embalmed no matter what, even with cremations. Fortunately, that has changed for the most part. 

 

Douhgty and myself are certified Embalming Haterz. (Like, personally I don't care about people's personal choice but...exactly everything you said.) I'm also big on home death, home funerals, preparing bodies by the family, the whole shebang of more Classic Death Rituals Stolen from us by the Industry. (Those who know me in meatspace can't get me to shuuuushhh about it. )

[KnittingOwl]

2 hours ago, Antimony said:

The course I designed is coming from a chemistry perspective, so it touches less on cultural things but on things like embalming, embalming materials safety, questions like "What concerns do we have about embalming fluids and soil health in burial grounds?" and deep dives into the release of mercury (from tooth fillings) into the environment from cremation. (Those are fascinating papers.) The whole idea is to talk about the chemistry and impact of our death practices in an open way, but of course, there are tons of cultural discussions that intersect with the science of it. 

As a fellow biochemist, can I please audit your course?

I had similar questions about the sealed nature of a coffin/casket and anaerobic bacteria. They don’t really care. @Antimony you’d know better than I, but aren’t they mostly facultative anaerobes rather than obligate anaerobes responsible for decomposition?

[Antimony]

2 minutes ago, KnittingOwl said:

As a fellow biochemist, can I please audit your course?

I had similar questions about the sealed nature of a coffin/casket and anaerobic bacteria. They don’t really care. @Antimony you’d know better than I, but aren’t they mostly facultative anaerobes rather than obligate anaerobes responsible for decomposition?

This feels like a toss-up, and it might depend on conditions? We're host to more obligate anaerobes than I thought (wow! weird! scary!) but if you have some oxygen access and then a number of micro-aerobic to anaerobic environments, I'd be the facultative would be doing a load more effective work, especially as the breakdown leads to fewer and fewer unexposed places to the obligates to hide.

This paper might be useful (it's in the syllabus, but I haven't looked at it in a while) but it has some soil specific notes. 

[EmCatlyn]

Quote

Visitors have left marmalade sandwiches and Paddington Bear stuffed animals at Green Park to memorialize a special moment Queen Elizabeth shared with the fictional character. In a sketch that was produced for this year's Platinum Jubilee, Queen Elizabeth and Paddington bonded over their mutual love of marmalade sandwiches.

"Unfortunately, it turns out that the sandwiches have a negative impact on the inhabitants of the park," the Royal Parks shared with Yahoo! News UK. “We are asking people not to leave marmalade sandwiches because of the negative impact on the park’s wildlife...”

Marmalade Sandwiches Left to Honor Queen Hurt Park Wildlife

It seems Elizabeth II will be remembered for her love of marmalade sandwiches. 

[adidas]

3 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

It seems Elizabeth II will be remembered for her love of marmalade sandwiches. 

I was reading today that she very carefully chose her three brooches that she wore during Trump’s visit. And I love her for it.

Copied from Australian media:

***

98. That’s the number, at least, of brooches that were owned by Her Majesty The Queen, pieces that she deployed with a UN-worthy sort of diplomatic dexterity. Time and again, Her Majesty, a woman who never gave a single, solitary interview, communicated to the world just what she was thinking by her choice of brooch. 

There can be no greater example than when, in 2018, during the State visit of tangerine porn star payer-offer and far-right-apologist, Donald Trump.

During the trip, she wore three pieces: A brooch given to her by Barack and Michelle Obama, two people Trump clearly dislikes immensely; one that was a gift from Canada, a country Trump clearly dislikes intensely; and one the Queen Mother had worn to her husband George VI’s funeral, whose grim connotations need no explanation. 

Well played Ma’am.

I will not only remember the marmalade sandwiches, but her brooches.

[Destiny]

I have to say, watching @Antimony and @hoipolloi science at each other from two very different disciplines' perspective has been a delightful, fascinating conversation and part of the reason I love FJ.

Edited September 15, 2022 by Destiny

[47of74]

Today was my in office day this week.  I stopped at a British pub on my way home. Some fuckfornicate called her in the book of condolence the pub put out a racist b—-h.  This really angered me because this overriding need to prove one’s liberal street cred overrides all human decency and makes us in Minnesota look like SHIT. 

[Loveday]

49 minutes ago, 47of74 said:

Today was my in office day this week.  I stopped at a British pub on my way home. Some fuckfornicate called her in the book of condolence the pub put out a racist b—-h.  This really angered me because this overriding need to prove one’s liberal street cred overrides all human decency and makes us in Minnesota look like SHIT. 

Unfortunately, there are people like that everywhere, not just in Minnesota, so try not to let it get to you too much. Having said that, I'd have been pretty pissed off, too. 😕 

[Jackie3]

19 hours ago, adidas said:

During the trip, she wore three pieces: A brooch given to her by Barack and Michelle Obama, two people Trump clearly dislikes immensely; one that was a gift from Canada, a country Trump clearly dislikes intensely; and one the Queen Mother had worn to her husband George VI’s funeral, whose grim connotations need no explanation. 

 

The Queen received so many valuable gifts that there was hardly room to store them all. Whenever she traveled, she was given costly gifts. They overwhelmed the closets and shelves of the Palace, and still do.

Gifts are things that are yours to keep or give away. She was free to do what she liked with them. There was no rule she had to hold onto them forever, even if the giver expected her to.

Did she ever think of selling them to help others in her country?  What good, exactly, are these valuables doing in her closets? They are now the property of her children, who also have a huge amount of costly gifts.

(Who in the world needs 98 brooches? Just say what you think, you can't be fired! You don't need a brooch to do your job.)

[EmCatlyn]

7 hours ago, 47of74 said:

Today was my in office day this week.  I stopped at a British pub on my way home. Some fuckfornicate called her in the book of condolence the pub put out a racist b—-h.  This really angered me because this overriding need to prove one’s liberal street cred overrides all human decency and makes us in Minnesota look like SHIT. 

There are rude people everywhere.  I don’t see this as someone’s “overriding need to prove one’s liberal street cred.” I see this as someone wanting to shock and annoy.  This is plain old trolling.

It doesn’t make Minnesota look bad.  It just shows a rude person (who may not even be from Minnesota) wrote something stupid.

[adidas]

This is a long article but so worth the read. As a dog lover it made me smile and shed some tears at the same time. 

https://www.news.com.au/world/beautiful-story-behind-wills-raw-admission/news-story/e7a48592c8fcc31621656db4372220b9

My beautiful soul dog died recently and someone told me at the time: “always remember that between hello and goodbye there was love. So much love.”

This is a family who truly loves and treasures their dogs.

The problem is, I didn’t know where to post it haha. It starts with William, speaks about HM, the King Charles, and talks about Harry too. I could have posted it in any of the threads. 

[Jackie3]

27 minutes ago, EmCatlyn said:

 I stopped at a British pub on my way home. Some fuckfornicate called her in the book of condolence the pub put out a racist b—-h.  

The Queen was on the throne during the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya, where the British horribly tortured and detained Kenyans, both civilians and those fighting for independence. 

The Queen was on the throne when the British supported the Nigerian suppression of the Biafran, which led to a million --1,000,000--children starving to death.

The Queen was exempt from all racial equality laws for her entire life. Until the 60's, the Palace would not hire black or brown workers in their offices.

You are angry because someone spoke the truth?

There are a lot of people, particularly BIPOC, who are very angry about this racism. I get it--you are not. But don't try to silence others. Not everyone wants to pretend she was a deity.

Edited September 16, 2022 by Jackie3

[TN-peach]

David Beckham waited 12 hours in The Queue to pay his respects to the Queen.  He looked very emotional. Of course, he also was standing and waiting for 12 hours and that would make anyone look bleary eyed.

 

Speaking of "The Queue" there are some very funny Twitter threads about the queue and someone actually predicted that there would be a queue for "The Queue." 

[formergothardite]

1 hour ago, TN-peach said:

David Beckham waited 12 hours in The Queue to pay his respects to the Queen.  He looked very emotional. Of course, he also was standing and waiting for 12 hours and that would make anyone look bleary eyed.

 

Speaking of "The Queue" there are some very funny Twitter threads about the queue and someone actually predicted that there would be a queue for "The Queue." 

What do people do about food, water and bathroom breaks when they are waiting that long? 

[adidas]

Whenever we have lined up in a long queue we have packed food and water - but the queue to see The Queen has a wrist band issued so that people can leave it and return without losing their place.

It is now more than 7km long and the wait is currently 22 hours.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/queen-queue-how-long-lying-state-coffin-london-135943716.html

[hoipolloi]

4 minutes ago, formergothardite said:

What do people do about food, water and bathroom breaks when they are waiting that long? 

BYO water & food to be consumed while in the queue, and there are portapotties along the route. From the BBC: