Wednesday, May 16, 2012
How creepy is this?
"I want to carry your ashes close to my...larynx?"
Is this so you can channel Aunt Rose, especially the endearing way she would cough smoke on the baby?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Being an experiment in comparing our culture with what it HAS BEEN, and what it SHOULD BE.
10 comments:
There are some people I would LOVE to have in ashes around my neck, actually. Just to make absolute and damn sure. The cross would just be good backup. As for Aunt Rose? I'd hit that. I have no choice. Hmm, maybe even get her in the ash can... It's been a while. :p
On a serious note though? Yeah, creepy. I just took that thought and extended it. The interesting thing about Catholicism is that it allows for cremations, but not of separation of the remnants. I don't think the necklace would hold it all. Hmm, though if it had been a big gal it could be her final girdle? Some small women... compress things too though, so... Women are weird that way.
The mind IS a wonderful thing to waste.
HA!!! Love it.
There is a company that will take your ashes (or a portion)and compress them into a diamond. It would be droll to give one's next intended an engagement ring made of one's dearly departed wife.
"There is a company that will take your ashes (or a portion)and compress them into a diamond. It would be droll to give one's next intended an engagement ring made of one's dearly departed wife."
Sounds like something the villain in a James Bond film would do.
@Doom --- Yeah, I'm also rather creeped out at this. If I had the time and space here I'd relate a story I heard back in Texas from a neighbor lady who was a German war bride, and which sort of relates to this topic.
I'm a registered organ donor so, when I kick over I'm supposed to have any useful parts whacked off of me (a process which shouldn't take too long by my reckoning). As for the leftovers, I wouldn't mind them ending up the same way Gram Parsons' remains did. And if there were any ashes left, I'd prefer they were hidden within the Austin Public Library. If the container has to be marked, then just have it read DON'T WORRY, I'VE JUST MADE AN ASH OF MYSELF AGAIN.
"No Mr. Bond...I want you to SHINE!"
Michael,
I was in the Navy (never again volunteer yourself). I will not be an auto-organ donor... heard too many bad things that away. But my mother has been told, if she thinks it's up and up, to give away whatever someone may use. That is allowed. Find some time, the story sounds... intriguing.
Oh, have you noticed some of Nightwish's music has strong Christian ties? Not all of it, but... Some of it downright... nearly dogma, if I see it right.
Aardvark,
I hoped you would... see it as funny. Some places could see me to being booed and tossed.
@Doom --- Nightwish's music: as a rule I tend to avoid what I collectively call "agenda art" (e.g. I become suspicious of female authors who refer to themselves as "feminist authors"). I can put up with some of it when it's delivered cleverly or subtly. On the basis of songs like "Nemo", "Phantom Of The Opera" and "Riddler" I tend to cut Nightwish some slack.
Organ donorship: if anyone can make use of anything I've got after I'm dead then Hey: go crazy. I just need to be dead first, OK? (Thoughts of Larry Niven's "The Jigsaw Man").
OK, I'll try to get my neighbor's story to you guys somehow.
Hmm? Agenda art? Well, I think I know what you mean by that, just... I think Nightwish is less agenda driven than typical rock, if their style is basic, like rock, jazz, etc., within their genre. Siouxsie, for example, gets stuck in "Punk", but she has done so much it is almost impossible to nail her down (and foolish to try).
Perhaps I am missing something though. Just trying to make sense of what you wrote.
@Doom -- "Just trying to make sense of what you wrote".
Yeah, a lot of people have that problem (including me on occasions).
I'll try again. Some people write books. They are writers. But that's not enough for them. They want to be known as "Christian" writers or "Feminist" writers or "Insert Name Of Ethnic/Nationality" writers. I'm not referring to people who write (or sing or paint or make films, etc.) for a particular genre. I'm referring to people whose main goal is not to tell an effective story, but to promote a particular social agenda. In my experience such people have been, almost without exception, the BIGGEST DAMN BORES ON THE PLANET!
(An author declares that he wants to be the Great American Gay Writer! To which I say: sorry, love chunks . . . the Great American Gay Writer was Truman Capote. And he didn't accomplish this distinction by constantly putting his personal orientation on the front page, but by writing incredibly good novels and short stories.)
I hope it's a bit more clear now.
"Organ donorship: if anyone can make use of anything I've got after I'm dead then Hey: go crazy. I just need to be dead first, OK? "
And herein lies the issue. It is more-than-rumored that ER's and paramedics in some areas have a tacit understanding to use a...lighter touch...on organ donors. This from my nephew who trained as an EMT.
------------------
@Doom - As a libertarian soul, I allow a fairly wide latitude here, as long as abusive language is not the norm. You have no fear, here.
As I understand Michael, agenda music is a pointy stick for your ears. Some, like contemporary Christian, is unabashed in its purpose, to tell people about the gospel. Other music is more subtle in its political or other agenda. Larry Norman was a leader in the "Jesus music" of the '70s, and wrote some righteous tunes. As his faith matured, he came to the Reformed understanding that excellence in his music reflected Christ as surely as beating someone over the head with a ten pound King James in 3/4 time. (Norman caught enormous grief for having "left the fold") The current crop of 7/11 "worship music" (seven words repeated eleven times) is by my lights an inferior reflection to, say, Bach or Handel. Not trying to be elitist, and recognizing that emotion has a part to play, but the Gospel is an appeal to reason. Brain must be engaged.
Michael,
Okay, then I did understand perfectly, as I thought. The thing is, Nightwish isn't agenda driven from what I can tell. Out of... many songs, three had a Christian theme (and in a very obtuse way, I just... stumbled on the meanings and blinked and thought before I was sure (or, sure for my own belief)).
As for agenda driven? It depends on whether they are internally driven, or simply labeled (often wrongly). As I suggested, Siouxsie and the Banshees is labeled as punk, which initially kept me from listening to her stuff. Glad I took the dip. But I truly despise 99.99432253025% of punk (Ramones, yeah, yeah, but I... just... can't... stand it). But I definitely have problems with even much Christian music.
I might check out Larry Norman's newer stuff then. I do believe all things, even (especially?) agenda driven, should be obtuse. Like those visual illusions, you come to them. Plays or movies that explain everything are just as annoying. Make sure the thing makes sense, make it good and complicated, and let the people figure it out!
Post a Comment