A civilized society is defined not by its celebrations but by its mourning. The way a society embraces grief, the dignity and sensitivity with which it expresses it—this is the measure of its human maturity. Unfortunately, today our society seems to fall short of this standard. Mourning ceremonies, once a natural medium for sharing grief and offering support to the bereaved family, are gradually becoming platforms for pomp, display, and social competition.
Today, in many parts of the country, when flipping through the pages of major newspapers, it’s common to see ten, twenty, or even fifty condolence messages published on a single day for a single person. And not simple ones, but colorful, in bold font, sometimes occupying entire pages. Condolence messages are no longer information, but rather advertisements. Once, a six- or seven-line black-and-white condolence message was enough to announce the passing of a certain person and the condolence gathering being held at a certain location. Relatives and acquaintances would arrive without any fanfare. At that time, expressions of grief were characterized by simplicity, silence, and intimacy.
Over time, this simplicity has been lost. Today, the size, color, location, and cost of a condolence message—everything has become a symbol of social status. It’s unfortunate that we’ve turned even the ultimate truth of death into a status symbol. Now, we’re focused on which family sent the largest condolence message, which sent it in color, and whose message appeared on the front page.
The format of condolence meetings has also become a reflection of this trend. The practice of expressing condolences in a simple living room or courtyard is fading away. They have been replaced by grand pavilions, elaborately decorated pandals, white curtains, carpets, and lavish decorations. Often, condolence meetings are held in large banquet halls or wedding gardens, where the atmosphere feels more like a social gathering than a mourning one.
A large, decorated portrait of the deceased is placed on a stage, surrounded by garlands and decorative lighting. The bereaved family members also arrive fully dressed. Their attire, their body language, and their behavior do not convey any deep sorrow. It’s not that they are not grieving, but the natural simplicity of grief, the silent pain, is drowned out by this grandeur.
The number of people present at a condolence meeting has now become a measure of prestige, not sympathy. The number of people, the number of vehicles, the number of leaders, the number of officials—all of these are counted and discussed. Even after the condolence meeting is over, the assessment continues: “So and so didn’t come” or “So and so important person also attended.” As if the condolence meeting is not a tribute to the deceased, but an occasion for displaying social power.
This trend isn’t limited to the so-called upper class. Even lower- and middle-class families are now joining the fray. They know that such an event is beyond their financial means, yet social pressure prevents them from backing out. As a result, a condolence meeting, which should be an opportunity for mental solace, turns into a financial burden. Many families find it difficult to bear this burden, but are forced to do so out of fear of what people will say.
Food and beverages have become an important element of this grand event. Tea, coffee, mineral water, snacks, and sometimes even meals are provided. Attention is paid to the quality and variety of these arrangements. This scenario is completely contrary to the original spirit behind the condolence meeting. The purpose of a condolence meeting is not to feed people, but to share in the grief of the bereaved family.
Even those attending mourning ceremonies are often left confused. The atmosphere makes it impossible to truly feel like they’re attending a mourning service. New customs have been created, while old, simple, and dignified ones are gradually disappearing.
Another worrying aspect is that even deeply personal sentiments like memorials and death anniversaries are now becoming a means of public display. Remembering a loved one is a personal experience. Their memory should live on in the mind, among family, and with simplicity. So why is there a need to spend year after year in large newspaper advertisements to inform the entire society that you still remember your loved one? Does the value of remembrance lie in its publicity?
This is not just a question of tradition, but also of sensitivity. When private grief becomes a public display, its soul is lost. Grief, which should be an occasion for introspection and humility, becomes a tool for ego and display.
It’s time for society to seriously address this trend. We must understand that death doesn’t dictate one’s social status. It makes everyone equal. Therefore, expressions of grief should be equal, simple, and dignified. The purpose of a condolence meeting is to pay tribute to the deceased and comfort the living, not to display one’s power to society.
The media, social leadership, and society itself must collectively exercise self-restraint in this regard. Newspapers should also consider whether promoting condolence messages as advertisements is further fueling this trend. Social standing should be determined not by the size of condolence messages, but by human compassion.
Ultimately, the most beautiful form of mourning is one with fewer words, less ostentation, and more compassion. What is said in silence is far more profound than a grand speech delivered from a grand stage.
Condolence ceremonies should be extremely simple. This is the truest tribute to the deceased and the hallmark of a sensitive society.
