Roadside Memorials



S

Simonb

Guest
There is currently a fashion for marking the roads with flowers and memorials where someone died. If
someone dies in an industrial accident, we don't arrange flowers upon the piece of machinery that
caused it. If someone collapses and dies from a heart attack, we don't place his photo on the
pavement where he fell. So why do these memorials only appear at the sites of road deaths?

Is this Diana synrome in action?

I feel it's more important to remember a person's life, rather than than venerate the physical
location of her death.

Simon
 
Simonb wrote:
> There is currently a fashion for marking the roads with flowers and memorials where someone died.
> If someone dies in an industrial accident, we don't arrange flowers upon the piece of machinery
> that caused it. If someone collapses and dies from a heart attack, we don't place his photo on the
> pavement where he fell. So why do these memorials only appear at the sites of road deaths?
>
> Is this Diana synrome in action?
>
> I feel it's more important to remember a person's life, rather than than venerate the physical
> location of her death.

Some people want a policy whereby permanent black crosses are erected at the site of fatal accidents
to make others think twice. It's sold as a safety feature but it's a bit morbid.
 
>Some people want a policy whereby permanent black crosses are erected at the site of fatal
>accidents to make others think twice. It's sold as a safety feature but it's a bit morbid.

When driving in Italy, one road I remember as at periodic intervals there were cut-outs (full-size)
of coffins placed at intervals down the side of the road. A sign said each one represented a death
on that particular road. Yes, a bit morbid!

And whilst yes, it's important to remember a person's life, I do think it's important not to forget
the 3500+ who are killed on our roads each year. Currently it's very acceptable to forget that it's
*people* who are indeed killed, when those responsible seem to get away with a metaphoric slap on
the wrist of a paltry fine and a few licence points, when witnesses say the driver was driving like
a bat out of hell - such as in the recent case here in Norfolk..

That is *not* to say all drivers involved in collisions where someone is killed are always at fault,
but IMO, it seems that in the UK, it's dealt with way too leniently when the driver *is* at fault.

I'd love to know what it does take to get more drivers to take responsibility for their actions
when driving.

Cheers, helen s


--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam-- to get correct one remove dependency on fame &
fortune h*$el*$$e**nd***$o$ts***i*$*$m**m$$o*n**s@$*$a$$o**l.c**$*$om$$
 
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 10:26:21 +0000, Zog The Undeniable
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Some people want a policy whereby permanent black crosses are erected at the site of fatal
>accidents to make others think twice. It's sold as a safety feature but it's a bit morbid.

The police here have employed people to stand at known speeding areas dressed as the Grim Reaper in
an attempt to raise awareness.

http://tinyurl.com/3cyuk

Personally, I'd be well hacked off if anyone stuck a cross up at the place of my death. Another type
of less Christian memorial, yes, but not a cross, ta.

--
Matt K Dunedin, NZ
 
> There is currently a fashion for marking the roads with flowers and memorials where someone died.
> If someone dies in an industrial accident, we don't arrange flowers upon the piece of machinery
> that caused it. If someone collapses and dies from a heart attack, we don't place his photo on the
> pavement where he fell. So why do these memorials only appear at the sites of road deaths?
>
> Is this Diana synrome in action?
>
> I feel it's more important to remember a person's life, rather than than venerate the physical
> location of her death.

With the filling up of local churchyards and the greater distance of crematoriums etc from peoples
homes I guess it's impractical to get there for many people. Add to this the fact that many people
might think the family may prefer the grave kept private and personal to the family. The site of the
death thus becomes the focal point for the flowers 'cos it's easier to get to and has none of the
feelings of intrusion associated with the gravesite. Most people will also know where it is, but not
know where the grave is, and not know other members of the family to ask about it.

My friend died later in hospital, so the flowers I laid a few months ago were not even at the place
of her death. The flowers by the roadside cheer the place up a bit, are in a place where those who
knew her will see them and will be reminded of her and just maybe they might make some c*nt think
next time before he gets behind the wheel.

Flowers at the roadside are both a physical sign of our remembrance and celebration of that person's
life but not a veneration of the place of death. I wasn't thinking of a small patch of tarmac when I
laid the flowers by the roadside.

Mark.

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.596 / Virus Database: 379 - Release Date: 26/02/2004
 
"Mark Thompson" <[email protected] (change warm for
hot)> wrote in news:[email protected]:

> Flowers at the roadside are both a physical sign of our remembrance and celebration of that
> person's life but not a veneration of the place of death.

These thing are really common here in Australia. Whilst they may be a sign of rememberance and
celebration of a person's life, I still find it weird that people choose to do so at the sight of
their often violent and sudden death.

I know that if I were to be killed in such a fashion, I would much rather that if people feel like
building a wee memorial, then they did so somewhere I loved or had had good memories of, like beside
a river or on a mountain [1]. Mind you, as a canoeist and hill walker it is possible that either of
these could be where I kick the bucket, but you get the idea.

There was a thread on URC last year sometime around this subject (or at least it ended up on this
subject). I'm sure a quick Google will give you other people's views.

Graeme

[1] and if it does happen, then they make sure it is very small and unobtrusive, preferably only
visible if you know it is there [2], unlike some of the other memorials I have seen. From memory
there is a small glass/perspex dome at the base of Schiehallion that seems just not quite right.
It may be what the grieving friends/relatives want, but it imposes on other people's experiences
irrespective of the fact that they may have gone there to forget about such events.

[2] I'd prefer just my ashes to be scattered. I'm undecided between tossed of the top of Buchaille
Etive Mor or thrown in at the top of the falls at Killin.
 
marc wrote:
>
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> > The site of the death thus becomes the focal point for the flowers 'cos it's easier to get to
> >
> Apart from the muppets that have started doing it on Mways! :-(

These piles of flowers often seem to be placed just where any distraction is not required - brows of
hills, sharp bends, and the like. They may well cause further crashes. Those who place them should
be prosecuted for littering.

John B
 
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 09:12:30 -0000, "Simonb"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>There is currently a fashion for marking the roads with flowers and memorials where someone died.
>If someone dies in an industrial accident, we don't arrange flowers upon the piece of machinery
>that caused it. If someone collapses and dies from a heart attack, we don't place his photo on the
>pavement where he fell. So why do these memorials only appear at the sites of road deaths?
>
>Is this Diana synrome in action?

See http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/news/0,8363,1154031,00.html

Debbie
--

Debbie Urban Theology Unit, Sheffield Views expressed in this email are my own and are not
necessarily those of the University of Sheffield or UTU.
 
>See http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/news/0,8363,1154031,00.html
>
>Debbie

I read that article and have some disagreements with it. Firstly there is no right or wrong way to
express grief. We are all different. It's okay to be "stiff upper-lipped" about it and it's okay to
be more open with grief. One could argue, I suppose, that for so long, it's been considered
"British" to display the stiff upper-lip, and that open displays of grief were frowned upon. It is
also known that bottling things up inside can have adverse side effects on the health of the person
doing the bottling-up. So perhaps it's no bad thing that we Brits are more open about showing grief
these days?

I also listened to a Radio 4 discussion on the same - representatives of charities said that since
the "Diana syndrome", yes, people may well be more open about their grief, but they did indeed
back it up with cash to charitable causes. So the open display of grief was not, in reality, an
empty gesture.

I also listened to a representative of the organisation that produced the original report. What a
sanctimonious twit he was. He effectively slated any open display of grief as being empty and
devoid of meaning. Basically he was insisting his way was the *only* way to show grief - which was
to not show it.

There is no right or wrong way for a person to be affected by the death of another person, be that
an member of your family, friend or other loved one, or simply someone you admired. We are all
different.

Cheers, helen s

--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam-- to get correct one remove dependency on fame &
fortune h*$el*$$e**nd***$o$ts***i*$*$m**m$$o*n**s@$*$a$$o**l.c**$*$om$$
 
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 09:12:30 -0000, "Simonb"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>There is currently a fashion for marking the roads with flowers and memorials where someone died.
>If someone dies in an industrial accident, we don't arrange flowers upon the piece of machinery
>that caused it. If someone collapses and dies from a heart attack, we don't place his photo on the
>pavement where he fell. So why do these memorials only appear at the sites of road deaths?
>
>Is this Diana synrome in action?
>
>I feel it's more important to remember a person's life, rather than than venerate the physical
>location of her death.
>
>Simon
>

If some ******* runs me over (fatally, next time) I want a speed camera erected as my memorial.
 
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 16:01:25 +0000, "[Not Responding]"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>If some ******* runs me over (fatally, next time) I want a speed camera erected as my memorial.

Even if they're not speeding?
--
"We take these risks, not to escape from life, but to prevent life escaping from us."
http://www.bensales.com
 
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 10:40:45 +0000, dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:

>>Some people want a policy whereby permanent black crosses are erected at the site of fatal
>>accidents to make others think twice. It's sold as a safety feature but it's a bit morbid.
>
> When driving in Italy, one road I remember as at periodic intervals there were cut-outs (full-
> size) of coffins placed at intervals down the side of the road. A sign said each one represented a
> death on that particular road. Yes, a bit morbid!

I've seen these in France, too - and morbid or not I think they're a good idea. Perhaps they should
be put up a few hundred yards _before_ the site of the accident though, for safety + maximum effect.
 
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 09:12:30 -0000, "Simonb"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>If someone dies in an industrial accident, we don't arrange flowers upon the piece of machinery
>that caused it.

Sometimes we do.

A large brick-built block of flats in Liverpool, built some time in the '20s, had a bas-relief on
the side of a huge hod-carrier with bowed head. It was a memorial to a gang of brickies who had been
killed in building the place. When it was demolished a few years ago, I believe the memorial was
preserved (and rightly so).

--
Smert' spamionam
 
In message <[email protected]>, anonymous coward
<[email protected]> writes
>On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 10:40:45 +0000, dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:
>
>>>Some people want a policy whereby permanent black crosses are erected at the site of fatal
>>>accidents to make others think twice. It's sold as a safety feature but it's a bit morbid.
>>
>> When driving in Italy, one road I remember as at periodic intervals there were cut-outs (full-
>> size) of coffins placed at intervals down the side of the road.
>
>I've seen these in France, too - and morbid or not I think they're a good idea. Perhaps they
>should be put up a few hundred yards _before_ the site of the accident though, for safety +
>maximum effect.

There's a bit of road north of Reading that the local papers labelled "the Thirteen Bends of Death"
(they were making up the 13 bit) where the parish council put up white (more conspicuous) crosses to
mark where anyone had died lately.

Oxfordshire CC removed them on the grounds they "might distract motorists" - but without waiting to
see if the number of accidents went down or up.

Motorists make their own distractions if none are provided (radio, mobile phone, smoking, eating,
chat with passengers etc) so most people thought OCC were silly.
--
Sue ]3:))
 
"anonymous coward" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:p[email protected]...
> On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 10:40:45 +0000, dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers
wrote:
>
> >>Some people want a policy whereby permanent black crosses are erected at the site of fatal
> >>accidents to make others think twice. It's sold as a safety feature but it's a bit morbid.
> >
> > When driving in Italy, one road I remember as at periodic intervals
there were
> > cut-outs (full-size) of coffins placed at intervals down the side of the
road.
> > A sign said each one represented a death on that particular road. Yes, a
bit
> > morbid!
>
> I've seen these in France, too - and morbid or not I think they're a good idea. Perhaps they
> should be put up a few hundred yards _before_ the site of the accident though, for safety +
> maximum effect.

A lot worse in France, black cut outs with a red streak coming down from the top of the head. I
doubt that the ****** teenagers who come out of country nightclubs at 5 am in powerful cars would be
able to see them.
 
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 09:12:30 -0000, "Simonb"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Is this Diana synrome in action?
>
>I feel it's more important to remember a person's life, rather than than venerate the physical
>location of her death.
>
>Simon

I know of at least one which pre dates Diana, on the Woodhead Pass from Manchester to Sheffield,
flowers, posters and I think even some 'silverware'. to mark the spot where Jason McRoy (?)
mountainbiker died.

He was riding a motorcycle at the time.
 
>>Is this Diana synrome in action?
Probably yes.
>>

>>I feel it's more important to remember a person's life, rather than than venerate the physical
>>location of her death.
There's a big(ish) one part way up Woodhead Pass to a cyclist (Jason
Mc.Roy?) who died there about 1995. Large colour banner, life size photo of the bloke, smallish
memorial garden, bits of bike hung on the fence, don't know if they're the dead mans bits or not.
Near Longdendale Forest, on left going toward Sheffield.

>If some ******* runs me over (fatally, next time) I want a speed camera erected as my memorial.
I'd prefer a camera to record bad behaviour.

John Clayton www.ossettmouldings.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Rather OT: Odd roadside adornments
Replies
7
Views
283
UK and Europe
John Kane
J
D
Roadside/emergency bike repair photos
Replies
13
Views
478
UK and Europe
dkahn400
D
Z
roadside tool kit?
Replies
73
Views
2K
UK and Europe
C.J.Patten
C
T
tour of britain roadside view
Replies
2
Views
315
UK and Europe
wheelsgoround
W
V
TdF Roadside grafiti
Replies
13
Views
369
UK and Europe
bob watkinson
B
Top Bottom Back