October 3, 2001

9:41 AM

Here's your box of dirt.The families of the more than 5,000 victims of the World Trade Center attack will each receive a wooden urn with dirt from the mass graveyard. I know, I know... another story involving the WTC bombings. But this one is struck me as odd.
posted by bradth27 (13 comments total)

Um...I assume there's on opt-out for this? Personally, if I had lost someone in the thing, I wouldn't want a reminder, or money wasted on making something I'd want to rapidly get rid of.
posted by Su at 9:47 AM on October 3, 2001

I think the idea is that these people don't have any bodies to bury. People are used to either having 1. a corpse in the ground or 2. an urn with cremated remains. I think this box is supposed to take the place of the lack of remains. You need to keep in mind that this debris from the WTC is the closest available thing to 'their loved one'.
posted by QrysDonnell at 10:16 AM on October 3, 2001

According to the NY Times (registration required, etc.), people are attempting to sell WTC debris to the families. Giuliani is just trying to pull the plug on some of the profiteers.
posted by stefanie at 10:16 AM on October 3, 2001

In some cases, that box of dirt IS their loved one's ashes, or at least a few particles of it, which is sadly the most they're ever going to get back. Thousands of those dead people were literally pulverized and/or cremated in the fire and collapse, and all that dust is as much them as it is concrete.
posted by aaron at 1:23 PM on October 3, 2001

"Um...I assume there's on opt-out for this? Personally, if I had lost someone in the thing, I wouldn't want a reminder, or money wasted on making something I'd want to rapidly get rid of."

Um, if your loved one was pulverized and burned beyond recovery in the WTC wreckage, having something phsyical to bury/represent their loved ones is perfectly acceptable.

Death of a loved one is horrible. Not having a body or confirmation is hellish.

It might seem like a waste for some, but then it's equally a waste for families to pots hundreds and thousands of fliers looking for their loved ones all over NYC.
posted by RoyalJack at 1:58 PM on October 3, 2001

Today's New York Post headline was one for the ages: ASH-HOLES.

I really don't get how something like this can offer closure. Seems wierd.
posted by ParisParamus at 2:05 PM on October 3, 2001

Reminds me of that scene in Swing Kids where the protagonist has to deliver these little boxes full of the ashes and the wedding ring of political prisoners to unsuspecting widows. Creepy.
posted by skallas at 2:46 PM on October 3, 2001

RoyalJack: If they want the thing, yes, it's very nice. I wouldn't. In that position, I would greatly appreciate the ability to say, "No thanks," rather than be the asshole who refuses it or is seen tossing it immediately. And I would.
I'm too practical for this. I would be at terms with the fact there's no body to be found, and this would be, to me, improper and displaced sentimentality of the highest order. It's not confirmation, it's a bad replacement for one.
posted by Su at 3:38 PM on October 3, 2001

Well, geez, Su... it's not a freakin' summons. They're not going to go flitting around town delivering urns to grieving widows; they send a letter and tell you where you can pick up your urn. If you don't want it you simply don't go get it.
I seriously doubt anybody is going to be shoving urns into unwelcoming hands.
posted by stefanie at 4:16 PM on October 3, 2001

Where was anything said about a letter?

So...what happens to the urns that aren't picked up? Do they get tossed, or is it going to be like an assembly line deal where you walk over, they pick one up and you get a scoop of dirt lunchlady-style?
I dunno. I'm obviously coming from a very different perspective here that simply isn't going to go over. All I'm saying is this is pointless.
posted by Su at 4:30 PM on October 3, 2001

I'm old. I'm cynical. I regret to say that I can think of a reason the city might do this.... That's prime real estate in the middle of the financial district of NY city. If, by offering each family an urn full of---debris---, the city and the lots' owners can avoid having the real estate turned into a (non-paying) memorial to the victims, it's cheap at the price. The grieving widow who turns *down* such an offer will only be told, later, Hey, you didn't *want* the urn with your *husband's ashes* in it, so you obviously don't need a memorial on the site, you heartless b*tch. *sigh* I told you I was cynical. And I'm years older than I was last month at this time. My apologies for foisting my nightmares on you gentle folk.
posted by realjanetkagan at 4:47 PM on October 3, 2001

That prime real estate is owned by a private company. It isn't like OKC where it was a federal office building. The company has already said it's going to rebuild in some form, and it will include some sort of memorial.
posted by aaron at 5:40 PM on October 3, 2001

What I find really difficult to comprehend about this, is that those who are prepared to take advantage of people when they are particularly vulnerable, by trying to sell them "mementos'" from the site. That's incredibly sad.
posted by lucien at 6:58 PM on October 4, 2001