Ken Bigley - The Nation Grieves

[andy hughes]

I would not for one moment wish to minimise the dreadful circomstances of this onnocent man's dreadful death, or the suffering of his family, but why is the nation involved? I find the national outpouring of Diana-esque grief and the Liverpool minute silence to be totally out of proportion for a man whom non of us knew personally. Books of condolence, candles, tears, why is everyone treating this incident, dreadful though it is, as though this man is some sort of national martyr? Sympathy and thoughts, fine, but this OTT outpouring seems slightly creepy. Where are we going to draw the line? If every soldier or civilian who dies in Irao is to be treated in a similar fashion, the notion of appropriate dignified response will be diluted beyond repair. Any thoughts?

[el duerino]

media circus/grief by proxy/social sheep/do gooder losers/indicative of a morally bankrupt society that we only mourn those in the spotlight. take your pick or add a few. see thread below also.

[rja211077]

i haven't seen much evidence of this - certainly not on the scale of Diana or Soham or Queen Mum, but i'll take your word for it. And I agree totally. It started with Diana, when i think it just snowballed out of control and a precedent was set.

[FP]

I agree with you wholeheartedly Andy. I can say no more than this. What el duerino has added is just so accurate. We seem to have lost all perspective.

[Greedyfly]

What bothers me is that no one seemed willing to help (no one with any power) and now he is dead they are all 'devestated' by his death. It was tragic and should never have happened and I offer condolences. But I also feel because this man was killed the way he was an where he was it seems more important than say the little girl who has just been shot dead in Nottingham?!

[Alej]

i agree with all said. This 'spotlight' grieving seems to be more and more present. I feel that victims are turning into heroes nowadays.

[bernardo]

The questionner is rather tempting fate by refering to Mr Bigley as "a man whom none of us knew personally". I did not know Mr Bigley, but I did know someone whose head was cut off. It is perfectly possible that there may be an AB reader who knew him.

[LeedsRhinos]

I agree totally Andy, I believe it all started with Diana with all those people on the street saying how they loved her & how much they will miss her when clearly none of them knew her.

[tartanwiz]

To Andy and all of you who agree with him. Basically what you are saying is: 'It didn't happen to anyone I know so why should I give a sh*t?'. And I bet you consider yourself enlightened and humanitarian.

[andy hughes]

Tartanwiz - you know me better than that. I'm not saying that I, or anyone else should not care. What i am saying is that the knee-jerk reaction of OTT grief generated by the media is inappropriate, and it devalues the notion of respect for the grief of those close to Mr Bigley if the world and his wife launch into cliched gestures which become more meaningless the more they are used. That is a world away from suggesting that I do not care because I didn't know Mr Bigley personally. Grief is a necessary human emotion - inappropriate formulaic hang-wringing helps no-one.

[LeMarchand]

Maybe it's because our society increasingly becoming an "I'm alright Jack, so **** everyone else" one, and so when someone we don't really know but who the media tells us it is proper to mourn for dies, the sheep among us feel it is safe to show their feelings. Also there are usually cameras at the gatherings of the grieved - Hey! We might get on the telly!

[cruthinboy]

I think certain deaths have a particular resonance with the public for special reasons: in Mr Bigley's case, thes heer barbarity of his death, his degradation at the hands of his captors, his elderly mother, the fact that he may have escaped before his murder, the fact that his family had already suffered tragedy through the death of his son, the fact that everybody lived in hope for 3 weeks, the fact that over 50% of the country probably blame the PM for his being there in the first place ... really there are a lot of things that make his death unique in its savagery and tragedy. I personally findabsolutely nothing wrong in expressing our horror at his death ... and our disgust at the subhuamn scum (I make no aplolgies for calling them that) who took his life so barbarically and with such a complete absence of compassion.

[Hgrove]

This is the first time I have ever disagreed with Andy Hughes but I do not consider that it is possible to dilute the notion of appropriate dignified response beyond repair. (Incidentally I have not seen any evidence of mass mourning where I live.) If it were possible to dilute it, it would be already diluted beyond repair following what happened to Diana, P. of W. The reaction to Diana's death (which was mercifully sudden) was (as far as I can see) far more extreme than that to Ken Bigley's death which was far more drawn out and horrific. Hence I do not find the reaction to Ken Bigley's death OTT. I also do not consider that such gestures of mass mourning become meaningless. People have short memories. Next time such a tragedy happens (though I hope it does not) it will all happen again and it will all be as genuinely felt.

[el duerino]

Thats not the point. the point is people are only making a fuss because it was such a high profile case that NOT to show an overflow of emotion is almost considered 'bad form', when in actual fact noone DOES give a **** about the faceless corpses because they do not have to and cannot be bothered. Do you see? The grief is inappropriate because its not genuine, its forced out through social pressure and the media spotlight. People who feel compassion when its expected or needed to conform, never to go the extra step. Its like some kind of Pavlovian response now, instead of a bell we have a high profile death, instead of drool we have gushing and false sentiment with some kind of peverse competition to see who can appear most upset. I reiterate, such frenzies as Diana and Bigley are indicative of a morally bankrupt society where people are told even when to feel sorrow.

[FP]

I must say el duerino, you do echo exactly how I feel. I felt no grief when Diana died. It was sad, but no sadder for me than any other death of a young mother in a car crash out on the tiles with her boyfriend. However, I did not know her and felt no personal loss. I was called hard and unfeeling by no end of my friends and colleagues, but I could not pretend to feel grief stricken.

[el duerino]

Exactly. How many sheep out there are willing to risk approbation from friends and colleagues merely to state they do not feel any special emotion for a high profile death. I was quite vocal in my opposition for any ceremonies for an adultering fashion princess. What made me laugh was when they were lauding her fashion work as a positive factor, instead of contrasting it with her charity work. As you say, it is all about perspective, British society needs a big wake up call to shake itself out of this malaise of forced sentiment.

[cruthinboy]

el duerino, how do you know people's sentiments are "gushing and false". How can you presume to know people's reasons for "making a fuss"? I felt nothing when Diana died, but feel a great deal about this savage murder - I'm not a sort of "communal" person who gravitates towards crowds and public displays of emotion, but a lot of people do - and that's up to them. You talk about people never going the "next step" - and what would that step be? People feel helpless and are doing the only thing they can do: I'm sure many, like me, would rather chance upon the killers one dark night whilst we happened to have a length of rope, a gag, and a Black and Decker if you take that my meaning - but that isn't going to happen.

[Fat Boy]

I take it that everybody that held a minutes silence for KB also held a minutes silence for the two Americans that were kidnapped with him & then beheaded? thought not. in fact how many people here can even name them without searching google? (I know some can but I bet not many). If you didn't hold a minutes silence after they were killed why not? cos they were american? or cos the papers didnt tell you to?

[cruthinboy]

For one thing Fat Boy, the American's deaths were not dragged out over 3 weeks with hopes being raised and dashed, visits by British muslims etc. Also the thing the scumbags were demanding (the release of the 2 women) was outwith the British PM's hands. Why can't you all just let people do what they want to do -attend public ceremonies, pray quietly, not give a toss - whatever.

[Fat Boy]

oh I get it. we had to have a minutes silence cos it took 3 weeks to cut his head off instead of a few days like with the Americans. guess thats ok then - no hypocrisy there

[cruthinboy]

No, Fat Boy, but it made the whole business more "emotive". And I think "hypocrisy" is going too far - in this instance, hypocrisy could be said to occur when one of the public mourners went home and proceeded to cut off someone's head on video.