The death of obituaries

BY Aloke Thakore| IN Opinion | 26/02/2007

Hammer and Tongs

ALOKE THAKORE

The death of Sham Lal, former editor of The Times of India, drew a rather unique response from that newspaper. While there was a brief single column mention on page one with a postage photograph, the edit page was turned into a tribute to the departed editor (Times of India, New Delhi, Late City, February 24, 2007). As a special homage to Lal, his former colleague, Mr Dileep Padgaonkar, edited that page. There were reminiscences from his colleagues, from a paying guest who had spent some time at Lal’s home, a note by a literary critic on Lal’s understanding of Adi Shankara, an excerpt from Lal’s review of a book, quotes taken from Lal’s writings, an interesting editorial, and even Mr Padgaonkar’s reflective recollection of Lal’s contribution to the Times of India. But what was missing was an obituary.

It is indeed sad that someone at the newspaper that Lal graced could not put together an obituary. But that reflects the apathy of editorial departments towards the obituary. Obituaries are among the most read parts of a newspaper because they speak of a human life, how it was spent, how it was shaped, what accomplishments, regrets, and defeats it experienced. Since personalities never fail to attract the attention of the readers, obituaries are read with particular interest. The well-written obituary is a craft that demands great care, precision, wit, and sympathy. It is a task of the specialist. And that specialist is missing from most newspapers in the country, if not all.

Just look at the sorry enumeration that passes off for obituaries in newspapers. Typically, it is put together from the wire copy with some minor additions or alternations. The practice of maintaining files on prominent people whose deaths would merit an obituary notice is missing in most organizations. In many cases, either age or illness would demand that information be put together in advance or that a rough obit would be prepared, which could then be suitably amended for publication. Photographs would also be a necessary part of such preparation. But this would call for a person who would be charged with the function of writing obituaries.

Obituaries serve as short biographies and when written well can enlighten the reader with not just details, but a short elucidation of a life well- or ill-lived, as the case may be. While it was interesting to read the different pieces on Lal, there was none that provided the readers with what the career of a former editor of the paper entailed. How edifying it may have been for young journalists to read what the life of such an editor was like, what were the journalistic principles that he brought to bear upon the business of writing and editing, what was the ‘tapas’ (I choose this word because Mr Padgaonkar likens him to a rishi) that he was engaged in that led him to be the kind of journalist that he was, what were the steps that finally led to his professional ascension as editor at the age of 55.

Come to think of it, the reader, were her appetite be whetted by the full page devoted to Lal, would have come to know all the kinds of authors that he read and loved, but would be unaware of the name of Lal’s own collection of writings, "A Hundred Encounters". Lal is quoted as having said, "Every philosophy and every religion has its dialectic of growth and decay and it is helpful to understand the circumstances" (June 22, 1956). The same is true of an interesting and eventful life. Would it not have been useful, certainly helpful, to understand the circumstances of the birth, life, and death of a man such as him? These are not merely biographical details. The obituary, in this case, could have become both a biography of a man and a profession, and even perhaps, of an organization. What the reader got was none of that.

One wonders what it would take editors to notice this severe lacuna in their organizations and to ensure that an obit specialist is present in the newsroom. A person without necessary resources like an excellent library would be of no use. Thankfully, old organizations like The Times of India can always rely on their archival material. But if one looks at the obit treatment that some recent deaths have received even in newspapers with extensive archives, it becomes amply clear that this special craft needs urgent attention. The glaring omission in Lal’s case, a journalist who more than deserved it, is a sad reminder of the disregard of the obituary and obituary writer.

Aloke Thakore is a media consultant, journalist, and teacher. He can be reached at hammerntongs@fastmail.in