After Tears parties: to have or not to have

The concept of an ‘After Tears’ party is one which makes some people cringe. Another lot do not see a problem with it. Their common justification is that as you should not put your life on hold. Probably another excuse just to down the liquor?

The party after the funeral provides attendants with an opportunity to catch up with old friends and family members who we see only at funerals and weddings. It’s also an excuse to drink, not that one really needs an excuse for anything they wish to do. Basically, it’s a social gathering with plenty of hugs accompanied with the cliché ‘long time, no chat’.

Mourning takes the backseat. If you miss your chance to mourn during the service and when the casket is released, you might have missed your chance to mourn on that day. The party must go on, right? Let’s just remember that mourning is generally defined as ‘a state of sorrow after the death of a loved one’. If sorrow and dancing go hand in hand together…

After Tears parties are normally characterized by the presence of cases of alcohol and a beat to get down to. At times, transport is even organized for the partygoers to be ‘shuffled’ home. It is probably not as extravagant as a wedding reception, however. Just like any other place which involves alcohol, it can get rather rowdy, causing attendants to forget the reason they gathered in the first instance.

A letter of the Kwazulu-Natal Christian Council dated October 2008 rightfully states that holding after tears parties is becoming customary after the burial. The Council goes on to say that not only is an after tears party an unnecessary expense but that it also disregards the family’s need to mourn. Fair enough, families themselves do sit down over a few bottles.
A term which refers to an after tears party which I find somewhat funny is ‘funeral bereavement function’. In any case, these parties are normally so informal that the word ‘function’ almost sounds as if it dignifies them.

Generally speaking, people no longer observe customs as far as funerals are concerned. Not that I am advocating customs, not that I am not. The older generations mostly wore black to funerals, had a no-pants policy for women who were also prohibited from entering the burial site, should their heads not be covered. And you best believe they took these strict laws seriously. They were not funeral dressing guidelines, they were the ‘funeral dressing laws’. Men have more room to breathe, though to this day, in some cultures they are required to wear jerseys (or something akin to that). Though, as those who frequent funerals may have observed, nothing is set in stone. Nowadays there are exceptions with just about anything. It’s this thing they call freedom, neh?

Just what does these after tears parties achieve? Are they meant to celebrate the lives and achievements of the deceased? Well, can’t you atleast wait for the anniversary of the death to celebrate! If it’s a question of ‘honour’, why not drink only at the parties of people who consume alcohol? Perhaps the deceased must even sign a letter of consent that allows an after party. After all, some say that an after tears party is not there to ridicule the memory of the person who has just been told to ‘rest in peace’ just before funeral attendants get ready change into more comfortable clothes (ladies) and to pump loud music we intoxicate themselves. These parties have ‘gatecrashers’ too, but nobody really sees them as outsiders. A party for one is a party for all. I wonder if people compete to see whose relative’s after tears party attract the most ‘happy mourners’. You could be forgiven for thinking that they do, the way they go on about them.

Disclaimer: As much as I don’t want an after tears party for myself, I bear no grudges against the celebrating of my life, should those in my circle deem it necessary. Though, I must stress that unless it is humanly impossible, I will turn very badly in my grave if people gather in memory for the sole purpose of an After Tears. With that in mind, should you deem it necessary to hold an After Tears for your loved ones I might consider honouring an ‘invitation’.

Death? No thanks!

So, my man described me as ‘strange’ for asking him if he would die for me. As you can imagine, I did not quite get the pleasant response I was hoping for: yes. Well, let me rather contextualize the brief conversation for you. My exact question to him was whether or not he would willingly get run over by a runaway bus for me. Not only was I referred to as strange, the word crazy was also used.

My understanding is that his response was triggered by the proposed method of death – or is it suicide! I think that that is the case, since he shouted the words ‘runaway bus!’ I assume that he was pondering on the idea and could not, for the life of me, comprehend being hit by a runaway truck - deliberately. To be quite frank, I understand his reasoning, completely…

Nevertheless, how many people would consider giving their lives for someone else or a cause or their country? Do you think most of today’s politicians would die for South Africa? Not just politicians – you too. Think about this thoroughly, it is death we are talking about, after all. It would be interesting to see exactly how much this patriotism some people claim to have can actually stretch. Nevermind the manner of death, imagine something painless if you dare. I suppose the one I mentioned is rather drastic.

How many of us can echo the words of late American soldier Nathan Hale whose last words before he was hanged are reported to be: “I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country”? Who even remembers late Indian political and spiritual leader Mahatma Gandhi, who was prepared to die for his religious beliefs? Rather than die for our country, some (if not most) of us would much rather be happy just dying in our country. But to die for it!

While dying for a cause (or country or person) might be daunting, killing for it sounds slightly less unbearable. Presented with a dilemma to “kill or be killed”, the average person would probably choose the former over the latter. That possibly includes me, possibly. That is partially why we strike back when provoked. Gandhi famously said the following words: "There are many causes that I am prepared to die for but no causes that I am prepared to kill for." I’m still thinking about this one.

Let me put it this way: we are not a world of selfless people, the majority of us that is. I’m speaking from personal observation here. Feel free to disagree, if you must.