Anna Haverinen

Facebook, Ritual and Community – Memorialising in Social Media

Introduction bols of emotions (Walter 1994, 77), which are in- tended to keep the community, friends and fam- Social networking websites and applications have ily of the deceased together at the time of loss become the defi ning factor of online social inter- (Bell 1992; Sumiala 2010; see also Durkheim action in the 2010s. Th e ir popularity and addic- 1980 [1912] and van Gennep (1960 [1909]). For tiveness are based on their ability to convey all example, the Finnish phrase ‘I’m sorry for your aspects of human emotions, from love to hate, loss’ essentially means ‘I take part in your loss’, from envy to happiness, from humour to sad- which symbolically refers to a way of taking on ness, from life to . However, all social net- some of the and sharing the loss together working sites, especially (abbreviated with the bereaved. Flower wreaths, candles and FB), have been facing the fact that some of their other mementos are also familiar ways of express- users have been dying and other people want to ing grief, especially at memorials — both online use the websites to reminisce about and mourn and offl ine. rituals in Web environ- their loved ones. In a study on virtual memorials ments, however, are mediated by digital multi- conducted already more than a decade ago, com- media: images, video and text. munication theorists de Vries and Rutherford ar- Th e analytical terms existential or spontaneous gued that online memorials are ‘the postmodern communitas were coined by ritual theorist and opportunity for ritual and remembrance’ (2004, anthropologist Victor Turner (1995, 132–136), 2). More recent studies have suggested that the who links existential/spontaneous communitas to internet ‘brings death back into everyday life’ immediacy and spontaneity, where two individ- (Walter et al. 2011, 295), since death and mourn- uals experience ‘the being of the other’ through ing cultures have undergone signifi cant changes instant mutuality. In other words, they share an during the 20th century (Ariès1981 [1977], 1974; experience that binds them together for a spe- Pentikäinen 1990; Walter 1994). cifi c amount of time and they actively seek out In this article, I will examine how commemo- togetherness from each other during that time. ration and bereavement rituals (i.e. mourning Ritualised communication enhances the experi- rituals) are practiced on the Facebook social net- ence of communitas and binds people together at working website,1 and how they build and main- a deeper symbolical level. tain existential or spontaneous communitas2, the Th e research material used for this article was transient personal experience of togetherness, gathered through ethnographical fi eldwork and at a time of loss (Turner 1995 [1969], 130–133). consists of both Finnish and American memorials By mourning rituals, I am referring to the sym- on Facebook. Th ere are several ways to mourn and bolised manner of communicating bereavement, honour a loved one on the Web, but here I will fo- care, love and aff ection at a time of loss. Th ey are cus on the importance of FB as paving the way for practices that function as socially approved sym- online mourning rituals since it is the only web-

7 site that I have been constantly observing since anniversaries and calendar holidays. (Haverinen 2007. Digital media, such as FB, enables the ar- 2014.) Ritual theorist Catherine Bell highlights, ticulation of everyday selves and the aff ordanc- however, that not all communication is necessary es of sharing care and aff ection for one another ritual; when the core and the aim of the commu- (Giaxoglou 2014, 13), especially at a time of loss. nication is culturally and socially shared ways of In the following sections, I will introduce ritual expressivity and symbolism (such as how to off er and communitas as theoretical concepts as well condolences, when and to whom), it is still con- as the empirical research material and methods. sidered ritualistic (Bell 1992, 73). After that, I will examine how Facebook has been According to art researcher Liisa Lindgren, appropriated for mourning and honouring ritu- memorials are designed to construct a sense of als, both from the perspective of users and the community and they serve as symbols of collec- service provider. Th en, I will continue analysing tive history as well as symbolical spaces of re- digitalised rituals and how they convey commu- membrance (Lindgren 2000, 220). In social me- nitas. Finally, I will discuss the notion of authen- dia applications, these spatial notions are only ticity in Web environments and how it aff ects the refl ected at an abstract level, since Facebook as an experience of communitas and rituals. application is very two dimensional. Nonetheless, Facebook as a space is quite porous and hetero- geneous, since it is linked to other Web environ- Ritual and communitas (on Facebook) ments and applications that are shared within and through FB. Th is porousness is further applied in In this section, I will briefl y refl ect upon the no- memorialised spaces, since people share a great tions of ritual and community, both offl ine and amount of external content (i.e. links to videos, online, in the context of Facebook memorials. A images) at memorial spaces. sense of community plays an important role in Th e feeling of co-presence, speed and accessi- death rituals — whether they are practiced in bility are also factors that diff erentiate the digital either the digital or analogue world. According from the analogue. A digital community is often Turner (1995 [1969], 130–133), ritual is the af- a real-time community, one that binds together a fi rmation community, one which binds it togeth- much larger body of people than through in-per- er and strengthens the feeling of togetherness.3 son communication and also contains extended Ritual channels communitas (the sense of exis- networks, the people who are not considered the tential togetherness) and institutionalised so- closest of intimates, but who nevertheless are im- cial order, and it serves as the arena where social portant to keep in contact with via the technology changes (such as death) lead to a new social or- (see also Refslund Christensen & Sandvik 2013). der (such as widowhood or the dead moving on But most importantly, Web technology creates to the ). and enables the feeling of co-presence, especially Social media applications, especially Facebook, for those who consider themselves ‘always online’. are designed to thrive on a sense of community, Smart phone technology has brought the inter- since they create networks of individuals who net to our pockets and made it more ubiquitous share the same interests and social relationships and portable than ever. together in real-time. Mourning rituals on Face- Social media scholar danah boyd (2012, 71) book manifest themselves in the form of sharing writes that, ‘the online is always around the cor- poems and bible quotes, R.I.P. status updates, ner. I look up information, multitask by surfi ng uploading photos and sharing links to YouTube the web, and backchannel with friends. I’m not content (music, mostly) for a memorialised Fa- really online, in that my activities are not centered cebook account, profi le group or page. Th ese rit- on the digital bits of the Internet, but I’m not re- uals also consist of off ering condolences to the ally offl ine either. I’m where those concepts break grieving family and regular visits to the memori- down.’ boyd also notes that being always-on does alised Facebook page or profi le, especially during not necessarily mean the person is always accessi-

8 ble for others (2012, 72). Th is is where the notion non in question and aspires to collect a contextu- of co-presence, sharing imagined spaces, comes in. ally rich set of ethnographic data on what is hap- Social scientist Sherry Turkle has discussed the pening, why, by whom, when and where. notion of co-presence as a social and psychologi- In practice, I have been using Facebook since cal GPS (2011, 67), although she criticises it as a 2007 on a daily basis for my personal work and means of detaching people from the advantages until 2014 for research as well. When searching of in-person communication and of even creat- for research material, I used the search func- ing social awkwardness. However, the results of tion and several Finnish and English keywords my doctoral study indicate that the feeling of co- (‘muistolle’, ‘in memoriam’, ‘rip’) to fi nd memo- presence, real-time community, especially for a rial groups and pages. Despite many of them be- bereaved individual, is highly empowering, since ing public and publicly visible, I requested per- the individual knows that she or he can always mission from every single of them, and in most connect with someone in their time of need de- cases the permission was declined. Many people spite the time and place. declined my research requests since they felt their mourning on Facebook was not ‘something for research’. Also, many groups and pages do not Research material and methods realise the full public nature of their content, es- pecially on Facebook, where the user must reg- Th e overall research material is derived from my ister fi rst. However, many groups and pages are doctoral research conducted in 2007–2014, which nevertheless accessible via Google.5 (Haverinen consists of three online surveys, 153 survey an- 2014; see also Kuula 2011 [2006]; Östman & swers and 38 online interviews, ethnographic Turtiainen 2013.) observations (both participant and autoethno- Eventually, I observed six Finnish memorial graphic) of several memorial groups and memori- pages and fi ve pages from the United States (in alised profi les (both private and public). Only one addition to other material derived from the Web). of the surveys concentrated on Facebook, where- I was also invited to participate in a private me- as the others concentrated on mourning online morial group, where I observed how the group in general as well as on online gaming communi- functioned as a memorial and resource for peer ties. Nonetheless, many of the answers on the support. I interviewed the group’s founder via other surveys also refl ected on the importance email and he also replied to my online survey. of or else just mentioned Facebook as a place of In 2008, I had the (unfortunate) opportunity to mourning online. conduct an autoethnography when one of my As mentioned above, the work is also based on Facebook friends committed . After some long-term ethnography. Ethnographic research ethical struggles, and after asking for permis- on the Web is (currently) called online ethnogra- sion from her family, I decided to analyse my own phy (see, e.g. Hine 2015, 2005; Boellstorff et al. mourning experience and observed her (later me- 2012), but it also known as netnography (Koz- morialised) Facebook profi le as well. inets 2010) and virtual/digital anthropology Creating an ethnographic viewpoint for on- (Haverinen 2009; Escobar 1994; Budka 2011).4 line spaces also requires a deep understanding of Ethnography itself is both a method as well as a the multiple contextualities that each space pro- written description of the people and phenome- vides, or, in other words, a certain level of digi- non being studied, where the researcher collects tal nativeness. Anthropologists Tom Boellstorff , data (in this case screenshots and research notes), Bonnie Nardi, Celia Pearce and T.L. Taylor (2012, observes and/or participates intimately in the 101) describe this approach as textual listening, lives of his or her informants and conducts inter- which is ‘unique to online research and requires views with respect to the research subject (Geertz the understanding of the nuance and conven- 1973). In Web environments, the researcher tions of online communication’. In other words, equally participates and observes the phenome- the researcher needs to be able to detect diff erent

9 meanings from the languages being used (in this reminiscing and sharing stories with one another. case, Finnish and English) as well as the diff er- In 2009,7 Facebook enabled users to request ent aspects of ‘net-language’, such as the usage of the memorialisation of the profi le of a deceased emoticons (Haverinen 2014). Understanding con- individual, which essentially sets the profi le as a texts (which in online environments can be over- dormant account and as a place for remembrance. lapping and even contradictory) is crucial when Before the advent that particular feature, users carrying out ethnographic fi eldwork. Within this had been experiencing diffi culties with managing research framework, an understanding of death departed friends’ and family members’ profi les, cultures, customs, rituals and symbols is also of since Facebook is designed to maintain and in- crucial importance when it comes to understand- crease social interaction between its users. How- ing discourses on death and mourning.6 ever, notifi cations to contact a departed friend Th us, the material for this particular article has might feel disturbing for the bereaved. Now, a been selected from the above-mentioned reper- profi le can be memorialised with a specifi c re- toire. I will use quotes especially from the survey quest form, which is sent to Facebook offi cials answers and the in-depth online interviews that I to notify them about the passing away of a user conducted with several of the respondents. Since and whether the account is set to be a memorial many of the public memorial group posts can be or deactivated. In addition to memorialised pro- found via Google, I promised full anonymity to fi les, users can create memorial pages and groups group members if I chose to quote them. I will re- as well. A memorial page or group can be created fer to my interviewees either as anonymised or by anyone on Facebook, and they can be set as else by their fi rst names, according to their wish- private (the group can be found by others, but the es, and the direct URL’s of the memorials will not content is hidden), public (the content is visible to be disclosed for anonymisation purposes. When all) or secret (the group is hidden from searches taking screenshots, I kept in mind copyright law and new members are added only by the admin- in both the United States and Finland, which pro- istrators of the group) in order to determine who hibits any commercial use of the material but does can view the content and who can participate. allow for non-commercial, scientifi c and respect- Th ese restrictions play a signifi cant role in the ful use of it. (FINLEX 2005; Kuula 2011 [2006], way people feel intimacy and create a sense of 172.) Th e article focuses on the geographical area community, especially when the group’s creator of Finland, but the overall research is based in sets the visibility of the group as private or secret the United States and United Kingdom as well. and personally invites people to attend. A memo- rialised profi le can be viewed by all the friends of the deceased, but new friends and acquaintanc- Appropriating Facebook for mourning es cannot send friend requests in order to view and honouring the profi le. Th e profi le is set as a passive account and FB avoids referencing it in notifi cations, tag Death breaks a digital connection between peo- requests (such as birthday notifi cations and sug- ple, but the network itself, the application, can gesting photo tagging) or suggestions that people maintain the connection in an unbroken and contact that particular person. online form, since the data remain within the Social networking websites enable real-time technology. Facebook realised a few years after communication among a large number of peo- its worldwide launch that its users will eventu- ple, which is why they are excellent for creating ally die and that the remaining intimates of the existential communitas immediately after the deceased would mourn and honour their loved death of a loved one. People want to connect with one(s) on FB in unforeseen ways, since users at others who are experiencing the same grief, and the time were already adapting the application social media provides an immediate channel for features (such as pages and communities) to en- such connections. Th ey can share details about able either private or public memorial groups for the death of their peer, inform others about the

10 upcoming memorial service and create a sense the respondents claimed that witnessing online of community at a time of loss. People often vis- mourning on Facebook (or elsewhere on the Web) it the profi le page of the deceased since it is the became more acceptable the more they encoun- only common item connecting people with one tered it. Lighting a virtual candle was the most another. Some people choose, however, to create common form of an online mourning ritual (80% private and secret Facebook groups for this pur- of the respondents had lit a virtual candle). pose. In this way, the group’s founder can limit For Reima, creating the group was also an ac- what they share, with whom and when without tive way to determine what kind of support he needing to worry about somewhat confusing sta- wanted to have, for example before and after the tus update settings. . In fact, Reima was very pragmatic about Reima, a 51-year-old father of two who lost the purpose and stated three diff erent objectives his wife to a sudden stroke, was one of my inter- for the group: it was a) a way to inform others and viewees who had created a private group to see share information, b) a way to help his wife reha- him through his loss. His wife did not die imme- bilitate, and eventually, since his wife ultimately diately because of the stroke, but was kept in hos- passed away, c) a way to express grief and receive pital care for some time. During that time, Reima condolences (replacing a greeting card). sought solace from his Facebook network. But Facebook memorials are often places for the he wanted be very specifi c about the content he family of the deceased to inform others about shared. One option would have been to limit his their wellbeing, either directly with the com- status update audience to specifi c friend groups, munity, or by communicating with the deceased but he wanted to have a shared space for all to ex- through an imagined dialogue. press their thoughts, especially because he want- ed his wife to be able to read the messages during The son of my friend died, and the son’s FB page her recovery — or so he hoped. worked as a place for paying respects and offering condolences; also the mother participated in the When I created the page, it was supposed to be discussion several times. She also wrote on her just a tool to inform people during the crisis and personal profi le constant updates about the loss. share information straight from the hospital. I did Personally, I found this somewhat alien, although not want to think about anything else, aside from I was familiar with online environments, since her later deleting the group as unnecessary after it would require me to have a ‘modern relation- reading all the messages. I also thought it would ship’ with the Web, maybe this is a question of have been a great way to help her rehabilitate, when personalities, I can share my joy, hide my sorrow. she would see all the people caring and supporting (female, 48 years old, italicised section altered for her. The role of the forum changed naturally when anonymisation purposes) [she] died. Friends had the opportunity to express their sorrow and condolences. […] it worked as a I still visit her on her facebook page when I miss commemoration or a greeting card. (Reima, 51 her. She’s gone, but part of her remains for me (and years old, quote anonymised) others) to visit with. (female, 24 years old?)

Unfortunately, his wife did not survive and the However, some of the participants in the study purpose of the support group changed to that of reported that they felt strange about the idea of a memorial group. Reima had already had previ- communicating personal grief and intimate feel- ous experience with mourning on Facebook from ings, such as hopelessness, in an environment a memorial group created for a friend, which is such as FB, which actually contradict the expect- why he knew exactly what kind of space he want- ed codes of conduct. In the same newsfeed, it is ed to create and how he wanting others to par- possible to read updates about family trips, see ticipate in remembering his wife. Th is point was selfi es and other pictures, advertisements with also repeated in several survey answers, where funny Google translation errors, and in the mid-

11 dle of all this daily chatter, an update about a grief and death: people off ering condolences and grieving person who misses their loved one. For prayers, sharing memories, links to comforting some, this can feel quite unpleasant. Th e woman songs on YouTube, uploading images of angels quoted above also states that it is a question of or other imagery thought to provide solace and personalities as well: grief is individual. Commu- hope (teddy bears, fl owers, sunsets, etc.). Th ese nities on Facebook — as with other Web environ- uploaded materials at the memorial site reveal ments — are often fragmented and unaware of personal tastes and religious beliefs and the rela- each other. A person can have connections across tionship between the uploader and the bereaved the globe and their loved ones might not be aware as well as the uploader and the deceased. Also, the of the full fabric of their social network. family of the deceased can have new information In a Turnerian sense, Facebook is designed about the personality and life of the deceased, to build and maintain existential or spontaneous about their interests and about relationships communitas, a transient personal experience of they had no knowledge of, such as the number of togetherness (Turner 1995 [1969], 130–133). It people aff ected by the loss. Sharing these stories manifests its potential especially at a time of cri- and content also helps memorialise the relation- sis, such as death. However, the way in which one ships, since they are further documented by the interprets this feeling of togetherness depends application itself. on age, gender, the social relationship with the Facebook’s ability to connect diff erent net- deceased and the extent to which the bereaved works of people can sometimes surprise the is accustomed to online communication, or to founders of the memorial, since they often im- having ‘a modern relationship with the Web’, as agine that the people joining the memorial are in the survey answer quoted above. the ones they also personally know — at least at some level. I received a request to join the [memorial] group from two of my relatives, my cousin and my cousin’s I have received a great deal of help and peer kid (15 years old), and I wanted to join. One reason support; one knows that one is not alone. Even for wanting to join was that the request from my surprising people have written their condolences; cousin’s child was so moving. How could I refuse? memories, not so much […]. (Meri, 21 years old) Another reason was that part of our family lives in Sweden and the other part in Finland. This is why it Initially, the memorial group was intended for close could even be diffi cult to share thoughts about the friends only (at least in my own mind), and it was passing away of a mutual relative without Facebook. quite a surprise when the member count climbed (Salla, 42 years old) past 400, if my memory serves me correctly, in under two weeks. Of course, it somehow feels good My daughters gained signifi cant help and solace when you know that others miss him too. (Mika 24 from the FB site dedicated to the boy. This was years old, quote altered for anonymisation) probably also because they had no other opportu- nity to connect with people experiencing the same Although bereavement is experienced indi- grief since we lived [abroad] and the other people vidually, it is the community or a sense of com- lived in Finland. The texts and expressions of grief munity that matters at the time of loss: sharing by others on the site helped them to move on and the loss together. On Facebook, a sense of com- gave them permission to grieve and cry. (female, munity and a feeling of co-presence at the time of 48 years old?, country anonymised) death are manifested through ritualistic symbols of off ering condolences and sharing thoughts and Existential communitas enables social co- memories of the deceased. Th ey take the form hesion in communities that are experiencing a of digitalised versions of offl ine fl ower wreaths, crisis, and the bereaved has a sense of belong- memorabilias, a book of condolences and other ing through the ritualised communication of signs of grief rituals.

12 I have received help from the memorial page for my the memorial event. After the fi rst anniversary of the friend on Facebook. Through the page, I have been accident, we will place a candle in the lantern on able to share my feelings and hear about the feelings [his] birthdays, name day and other days that were of others. The song links that have been shared have important to him. With his friend, we also planted been very important, partly because in that way I his favourites, rugosa roses, in our yard, 15 of them will know other people are feeling the same thing. (one for each year we had with him) and a lantern The importance of the memorial group is great for will light [the roses] from morning until night […]. me because it enables me to remember my friend (Seija, 46 years old, anonymised) with their* loved ones, although I do not meet them that often. (Nora, 17 years old, quote anonymised In Web environments, receiving and giving sym- since *his/hers in Finnish does not specify gender) bols of aff ection and condolences are mediated in multiple ways. Words are often felt by many to be Th e feeling of co-presence is enabled by smart- empty or insuffi cient for expressing the full mean- phone technology as well. One can connect and ing of the gesture, which is why many people have communicate with their loved ones whenever invented other ways to express their intentions. and where ever regardless of geographic or time Also, social pressure or articulating something, such distances. Families can live in diff erent countries, as condolences, can be heightened in a virtual con- such as in the case of Salla quoted above, and text, where facial expressions, tones of voice and share a feeling of togetherness when communi- bodily movements cannot be seen. In the Finnish cating through an online space — often affi liated context, many people have appropriated words fa- with the presence of the deceased, such as their miliar from other Web spaces, such as tsemppihali profi le page or digital images of them. Th e profi le (power hug), jaksuhali (comfort hug), voimia ([I wish of the deceased invokes memories, but it also en- you] strength) to express their aff ection for some- capsulates the relationship built online. By click- one in need. Web communication also enables the ing on the ‘See friendship’ icon from the profi le use of smileys and other emoticons,8 such as a heart of a Facebook friend, you can see a list of mutual symbol (<3). Th e heart symbol is most frequently friends, a timeline of your posts on his/her wall, used to comment on a post that would be socially posts in which either of you have tagged the other, inappropriate to ‘like’. Th ese words and other sym- mutual likes (i.e. shared interests and when the bols are used as a way of ritualised communication, Facebook friendship had begun). one which aff ects the way language is used and how diff erent expressions are signifi ed (Bell 1992, 113). Th ese types of posts and the reactions to them Digitalised rituals are also visual proofs of communitas. Turner (1995 [1969], 137) has argued that communitas Bringing fl owers to the bereaved is a common way can emerge in unstructured and unpredictable of expressing condolences. Th ey are symbols of forms, in situations where people share a mutual life, but they are also social and cultural symbols feeling of togetherness as members of a specifi c of greeting and aff ection. Withering fl owers are social group — in this case, the friends and family often used as symbols of aging and the end of hu- of the deceased. Facebook is designed to empha- man life, since the lifespan of fl owers is short just sise this aspect of communitas, since it notifi es as with human life. (Sumiala 2013, 47.) Flowers others about new comments and likes for a post and plants can be used as memorabilias when, for and it also elevates popular content on the users example, one is planted in memory of someone News Feed, where it can attract more interaction. else, as in the case of Seija, who is quoted below. Sharing music and images and commenting on the posts of others can be viewed as a ritualized […] for us, a good way to remember [him], in addi- act of solidarity (Walter 1994, 174, 178), where tion to talking about him, has been lighting a candle the content being shared acts as symbols of love, [in a lantern] by the road at the end of our yard after memory and aff ection. Th ey are off ered both to

13 Image 1. An example from a Finnish memorial group, where one of the group members posted in English (the group and its members were Finn- ish) and other members responded to the sadness of the post with hearts (screenshot by the author, 9/8/2012, anonymised).

Image 2. Joona drew a picture of a truck on the memorial page for his fa- ther (screenshot by the author, 8/9/2011, an- onymised).

Image 3. Tuukka shares a link to a YouTube vid- eo, to which others com- ment ‘I was just listening to this [song] the other week and it reminded me of [him], beautiful song!’ and ‘thank you Tuukka!’ (screenshot by the author, 8/9/2011, anonymised).

Image 4. Susanna pro- vided a link to a Scorpions video entitled ‘Send me an Angel’ on her sister’s memorialised profi le. She further commented on her post by saying, ‘long- ing for you surprises all the time all of a sudden’ and adding a sad smiley (screenshot by the author, 8/9/2011, anonymised).

the bereaving community as well as to the de- the sacred: ‘acting ritually is fi rst and foremost ceased. Also, joining a memorial group or liking a a matter of nuanced contrasts and the evocation memorial cause on Facebook are acts of solidarity. of strategic, value-laden distinctions’ (Bell 1992, 90). Linked content from YouTube becomes ritu- The deceased was not very close to me. Joining the alised when the context in which such content is [memorial] group was a gesture to the friends of the being used has to do with remembering, honour- deceased. (Petri, 28 years old) ing and off ering condolences. In this way, ritual- ised content is symbolically separated from oth- According to sociologist Catherine Bell, ritu- erwise ordinary content on Facebook. alisation diff erentiates sacred and profane acts Linking YouTube videos to a memorialised from each other and gives more importance to Facebook account also provides a multi-senso-

14 ry experience when viewing the multi-mediated Despite the negative responses of some FB content of audio, text and video. According to users, the Look Back video montage was a huge Bell, this is the power of ritualisation and ritu- success from the outset; a few months later, in alistic performance, since the multi-sensory ex- spring of 2015, Facebook announced another perience provides a sense of being in the situation memory feature: On Th is Day. It describes the fea- instead of just ‘being told or shown something’ ture as follows: ‘On Th is Day shows content from (Bell 1997, 160). In this sense, audio and video this date in the past. For example, you might see create a sense of participation, especially in the past status updates, photos, posts from friends case of memorial videos. Memorial videos can and other things you’ve shared or been tagged be a montage of digital images with background in – from one year ago, two years ago, and so on’ music and some text, but often they also contain (Facebook Newsroom 2015). Th e feature can be video footage from diff erent situations where a delight for some, but add a signifi cant amount the deceased was alive and well. Th ese videos of negative stress for others. and images become especially signifi cant for the bereaved, and the online spaces presenting the content become signifi cant places during ‘But is it real?’ Appropriating new anniversaries. modes of mourning rituals According to Johanna Sumiala, these types of videos also create a sense of ‘ritual time’, which is Online mourning and honouring as cultural ‘experienced in new, multi-temporal ways’ (Sumi- practices are currently in the process of being ala 2013, 87). Videos archive cultural and social appropriated globally (see, e.g. Fearon 2011; Ha- norms of the time, which serve as ways of reliv- verinen 2014; Lagerkvist 2013; Roberts & Vidal ing experiences in the present and create a feel- 2000). Despite the increasing number of social ing of co-presence for others. Online spaces me- media users and online mourners, it is still an diate this experience in multiple ways, since they alien way for some to remember a loved one and both store and display the reactions of others as reach out to their community. For these individu- comments, shares and likes. In addition, they als, FB mourning rituals do not enable a sense of also enable a feeling of ritualised togetherness, existential communitas. Instead, the rituals may since they are often viewed during anniversaries even disrupt the mourning experience by creating or other signifi cant dates. a disturbing experience with the technology, such Facebook wanted to make use of the content as already mentioned with respect to the Look provided by its users, and so it created a Look Back feature in the previous section. Back video option for users in 2014 as a ten-year Many interviewees discussed the appropriate- anniversary feature. Th e application creates a ness of holding online mourning and virtual me- video slideshow of users’ photos, the most liked morials.11 Some claimed that they at fi rst felt that and commented on status updates, and other it was inappropriate and strange to mourn some- life events, and it even adds background music one on Facebook, but others also stated that after for it. Friends of a deceased Facebook user can experiencing the loss of a loved one themselves, also request a memorial Look Back video; the they changed their minds. video can only be viewed by confi rmed friends of the deceased (Facebook Help Center 2015). At fi rst I felt it was strange, because I believe sor- However, this feature did not exist at the time of row and mourning to be an intimate and personal the survey, which mostly dates back to the years matter. Nowadays, I am more understanding. Yet, 2010–2011. Some users fi nd the Look Back video I still do not know how I would act when it comes to be an emotional experience when witnessing to mourning. Honouring a memory is easier, al- the video montage, if the content is available for though dignity and authenticity must be present. the mourners.9 For others, it serves as a painful Sometimes I have felt that in this case, the Web reminder of the death of a loved one.10 can also provide a place for performance, which

15 is why it has not always felt very correct. (female, memorial brings up good positive memories, but not 48 years old) all people, like the deceased themselves, express real emotions there. (Riitta, 47 years old) Th e internet is still a liminal place that is too new to be entirely culturally and socially appro- In my opinion, remembering [someone] virtually is priated as a place for mourning and honouring not as authentic as lighting a candle in real life or a loved one. In order to culturally appropriate visiting the grave. I think remembering should take a new technology, such as the internet, entire some effort. (Nora, 17 years old) social, cultural and communal infrastructures need to change (Suominen 2009, 10). Technol- As stated above, the virtual environment it- ogy researcher Mika Pantzar (1996) has chosen self has an ‘unreal’ connotation, since it is too to use the term ‘taming technology’.12 Th e term easy to click a button or open a webpage. Emo- implies that learning to use new technology re- tions are also sometimes experienced as ‘less real’ quires fi rst ‘taming’ or ‘domesticating’ it before when mediated from the Web, as Riitta states. In it can be entirely (socially and culturally) appro- Nora’s opinion, there should be some eff ort in re- priated as something normal, regular and every membering and honouring someone, and merely day. It also implies that the technology being used clicking a virtual candle is thus too eff ortless to must equally learn from its users. Web 2.0 repre- be truly authentic. Are online rituals, then, too sents a specifi c example of how technology learns ‘thin’ to be real? Th e context matters. from its users, since the development agenda was Th e notion of authenticity also extends to how to make the internet more intuitive, more social one can express condolences or even practice an and always one step ahead of its users.13 Th e us- online ritual, such as lighting a virtual candle. ers themselves become producers of content when Writing ‘I’m sorry for your loss’ is a socially rec- they mix, recreate and create their own material ognised practice, but according to the survey an- based on what others have uploaded already in swers, it can sometimes seem empty and mean- order to create a cumulative social experience. ingless, especially when written in a comment (O’Reilly 2007.) box. In the previous section, I mentioned how Th e aesthetic and symbolical norms of the people write hearts, musical lyrics and poems on community also aff ect the (online) memorial. a site and link images and songs in order to pro- Th ese norms are not as deterministic and restric- vide more content and context when they are off er- tive on the Web as they are offl ine (for example, ing condolences or communicating with the de- who is invited to the funeral service). Nonethe- ceased. Th ese types of content also provide added less, since virtual memorials as objects of memo- authenticity precisely because they require more rialisation are conceptualised based on previous eff ort than merely writing ‘I’m sorry for your loss’, experiences with mourning and honouring, they but they are also used to add more ritual, more also refl ect the rituals and behaviours of the of- signifi cance, to the message. fl ine world. Questions such as who is allowed to Also, the myth of online users that are socially grieve, when and where, with whom, and especial- awkward, lonely or otherwise unable to maintain ly how it is displayed for others (see, e.g. Pine 1989, social interaction offl ine is deeply rooted, espe- 3; Doka 1989; de Vries & Rutherford 2004, 7), are cially in Finnish technology discourse. only a few of the aspects that aff ect activity on a memorial site. Th e greater the number of people The Web serves best those who ‘do not have any- participating in the memorial, the more the me- body’ or those who do not know how to talk about morial refl ects social norms of appropriateness. their feelings in front of other people. (Taina, 48 years old) It is important to have good manners. The downside is that internet content is diffi cult to moderate. Not Nowadays, it is perfectly normal and there is noth- all have access to it either. Facebook or a virtual ing wrong with it, as long as the remembering and

16 virtual mourning is genuine and does not offend Experiences of authenticity and appropriate- anybody. For many people, the internet is an easier ness vary, since all spaces — whether online or of- way to express themselves, since the expression of fl ine — are intensely contextualised, and experi- emotions does not matter during the writing [pro- ences are built both a priori and a posteriori (Kant cess] and the encouraging support received from 1997 [1783]; Tilley 1994), or, in other words, both others can help a lot, unless the bereaved does not before and after, by referring to previous similar have anyone close to talk to. (Sonja, 18 years old) experiences and connecting them to new experi- ences. Kari describes below how he was asked to As already noted, ritualisation diff erentiates take pictures at the funeral of his friend’s grand- sacred and profane acts from each other and parent, which is a typical Finnish custom; at fi rst, gives more importance to the sacred (Bell 1992, it had felt odd, though, since he did not know 91). Th e interviewees and survey respondents the grandparents. But his attitude then changed: highlighted the importance of ‘authentic sup- port’, which implies that a person must mean I have photographed one of my friends’ grandpar- what they write/say online. Otherwise, the di- ents’ funeral. […] The idea of photographing grief vision between the sacred and the profane does fi rst awoke strong feelings inside of me. At fi rst, not exist (although, consequentially, these types the instinctive reaction was to be against the whole of ‘authentic gestures’ cannot be verifi ed by an- idea. […] Recently, I have seen pictures of friends other person). If the message is considered to be on Facebook, where they stand by the side of a cof- inauthentic by the viewers, it also breaks the exis- fi n with their loved ones. The publication of such an tential communitas in the online space. Further- event on such a networking service made me think more, if the person being mourned was person- about my own opinions. The previous reaction I had ally known to someone or only familiar because [about photographing grief] would have made me of the media (see, e.g. Sumiala 2013), then the assume that I would judge the publication of such appropriateness and authenticity of the mourn- photos [as bad], but that didn’t happen. (Kari, 29 ing process was separated by importance and, as years old) in the following quote, whether it is ‘corny’ to mourn them or not. Th ere are many social and cultural regulations on how mourning should be expressed and prac- The appropriateness of mourning and honouring ticed. As a result, many bereaved claim that they depends, in my opinion, on the context; a memorial feel pressured to fulfi l a certain role as a mourner. made for a loved one is touching, but mourning an ‘Suff ering in silence’ is valued highly, especially unknown person (for example, Karoliina Kesti14 or in Finland, and one should not express strong the people killed in Norway several years ago15) can emotions in front of other people. (Walter 1994, sometimes be corny. (Anna, [age not disclosed]) 32–34.) Crying in public is considered distressing and improper, whereas stoic silence is valued as Anna in the quote above argues that mourning emotional strength. Showing excessive sorrow or an unknown person publicly on social media ‘can ‘’ (Maddrell 2010, 131) is con- sometimes be corny’. Th e dictionary defi nition of sidered a feminine practice and, as such, distaste- corny is ‘mawkishly sentimental’ (Merriam Web- ful. At the same time, the mourner should cry at ster 2014), which seems to be regarded as unde- least a little to show his/her feelings of loss and sired and inappropriate behaviour in online envi- despair in order to not appear emotionally cold ronments. However, what is corny to some might (Vingerhoets 2013, 131–132). be beautifully sentimental to others. Whereas one person might be overcome with emotion, the It was a female neurologist whom I visited in 1986 other, the viewer, does necessarily not read it this because of my headaches. Well, she fi rst asked way. Th e Web creates an emotional barrier both if something particular had happened, since I in the best and worst sense. had more headaches than normal. I told her that

17 my husband had passed away recently. Well, she immediacy and the volume of communication that replied that grief must be lived through and that I takes place on Facebook. Communication reach- was good-looking enough to fi nd a new man soon. es a vast number of individuals instantly. For a That was it. (Anne, 56 years old) bereaved person, this sense of immediacy with a great number of people who are (often) sharing Similar situations as the one described above the same sense of loss is empowering and healing were often reported in the various survey an- since it creates as sense of community. swers: inconsiderate comments, undermining When grieving the loss of a loved one, FB be- grief and an expectancy that one would soon comes a medium for channelling mourning ritu- recover from bereavement were the experienc- als: off ering condolences, sharing memories and es most often received from others outside the photos, remembering loved ones during anniver- online world. Anne’s husband had died only few saries. Mourning rituals turn Facebook spaces months earlier and she was expected to recover into meaningful places. Th ey become more than quickly because she could ‘fi nd a new man’. How- just profi le pages or groups; they become shared ever, she described the peer support received on spaces of care and love. Memorialisations on Fa- the Web as healing and helpful since it was pos- cebook are constructed through language and sible to communicate with others who were go- discourse to create an intentional meaning for ing through the same range of emotions associ- a digitalised and abstract object and to symboli- ated with bereavement: disbelief, anger, intense cally represent the honouring of an individual. grief and emotional pain. In this case, the inter- In the offl ine world, mourning rituals often net creates a safe emotional barrier, one which are expressed through material objects, such as enables the bereaved to feel secure enough to ex- photographs, candles, stuff ed animals, fl ower ar- press their emotions to others without the fear rangements and even food. On the Web, the ex- being judged. pressions are bound to texts, images, audio and video. People share stories about the deceased as well as religious quotes and poems, images, You- Conclusion Tube videos and song lyrics. All of these ways of sharing are intended to serve as ritualised sym- In this article, I have analysed how Facebook has bols of aff ection and care, and they make it pos- been appropriated for these mourning rituals and sible for people to build and maintain existential how the rituals build and maintain a type of exis- communitas at a time of loss. Such mourning ritu- tential or spontaneous communitas, the transient als diff er from everyday communication via their personal experience of togetherness, at a time of symbolical intentions, since they are bound to of- loss. Existential communitas is deeply linked to fl ine rituals of grief. ‘I’m sorry for your loss’ is a immediacy and spontaneity, where individuals ritualised phrase for off ering one’s condolences, feel ‘the being of the other’ through instant mu- but on Facebook it can often be viewed by the tuality (Turner 1995 [1969], 132– 36). Current entire community of the bereaved, and people social media applications, especially FB, has been can express their condolences in the comment constructed around the idea of communities shar- section of the same message. People have also ing, caring and being connected to one another found ways to deal with the problem of express- more extensively and more in real-time than in ing the fact that they care without the need for comparable offl ine contexts. FB enables real-time words by writing heart symbols (<3) for the be- communication by connecting people despite reaved person. Heart symbols are also used when geographical distances, and it has been designed ‘liking’ a post or posting a comment would seem to maintain that sense of connectivity by imme- inappropriate or somehow incorrect in light of diately notifying people about new comments, the information being shared. likes and shares. But what is remarkable and dis- Appropriateness is also important on Web tinctive compared to offl ine communication is its spaces since death is also linked to the notion of

18 honour. A person can join a memorial group out & Jacobs 2001). Th e bereaved most often reach- of a sense of honour, as a gesture towards the es out for solace and peer support in the acute bereaved. Honour itself is a culturally informed phase of loss, but after some time the need for notion of value, one which usually provides a community changes. positive status for the individual or community Time is, in fact, an interesting notion when in question. Mourning rituals are carried out be- it comes to researching online technologies. At cause of and in order to honour a person as well the beginning of this research project, in 2007, as to preserve one’s own sense of honour. If you Facebook had just started to become popular in are a family member or otherwise close to the de- Finland and the application itself was quite dif- ceased, you are expected to honour the memory of ferent than what it is today in the year 2015. Ex- your loved one in one way or another. However, istential communitas in this sense is either ena- not all people consider mourning on Facebook to bled or disabled by the design processes of social be appropriate or honourable, since FB is mostly media applications, since they are designed for viewed as an arena for fun and play. Some people a specifi c purpose: to be social. A grieving per- also believe that expressing grief or condolences son often seeks out others and this is why death on social media is somehow ‘less real’, too eff ort- and mourning rituals are currently becoming less and inauthentic compared to expressing the increasingly digitalised. People use the appli- same sentiments offl ine. Th ese sentiments natu- cations and websites in unforeseen ways when rally run counter to the sense of communitas cre- they want to fi nd a way to memorialise and re- ated online, since such people believe that a sense member their loved ones through online com- of online communitas does not really exist in the munities. Since 2004, Facebook has been one of context of mourning and honouring a loved one. the leaders in paving the way for how people can Further research on this subject is defi nitely need- mourn and honour their loved ones. It is, after ed and would also help shed light on how people all, the most popular global website with 1.5 bil- perceive the act of communicating intimate emo- lion users, and it has been one of the fi rst social tions and experiences on social media. media websites to acknowledge the importance Later in the article I also asked whether or not of mourning and memorialising a loved one by online rituals are then too ‘thin’ to be real, since off ering people the option to memorialise a pro- people feel that expressing condolences or grief fi le or create specifi c memorial groups. Other online is sometimes inappropriate. Th e answer social media applications have since followed is that the context matters. If the person is com- FB’s lead and now off er various ways to memo- municating with people that they feel already rialise or delete the accounts and materials of connected to or who knew their importance in deceased individuals. the social network of the deceased, then they will These developments speak volumes about immediately understand the existential feeling of how death and mourning are being valued and togetherness, of communitas, when witnessing expressed in contemporary society and what their posts, comments and likes. Mourning is al- people consider to be a socially and culturally ap- ways very subjective and the depth of the emo- propriate way to communicate grief and honour tion is bound to the personality of the individual the memory of a loved one. It is also important as well as to their relationship with the deceased to document these processes since they change and — most importantly — how accustomed rapidly and leave no trace of how the websites the person is to sharing about their life and in- were previously used. Scholars are also becoming timate feelings on social media. Th e importance increasingly interested in digital legacies and how of an online memorial is also not static; rather, to govern the digital material we leave behind. it changes constantly depending on the technol- Th ese issues are only a few of the aspects that it ogy being used and the way in which grief is being would be worthwhile to explore in future research shared (Haverinen 2009, 77; see also Prigerson on rituals, bereavement and social media.

19 NOTES

1 Facebook was established in 2004 as a social network- Ethical research is, thus, always the responsibility of ing website for students, but it has since grown into the researcher, who must continually refl ect upon the the most popular website globally, with a constantly possible harm of her or his research, how vulnerable the increasing user-base of 1.3. billion monthly active researched community/individual is and the ethicality users in 2014. of his or her research throughout the entire process 2 For Turner (ibid., 132), there are three types of com- from data gathering to analysis and fi nal publication. munitas: a) existential or spontaneous communitas, the (AOIR 2012, italicising added.) transient personal experience of togetherness during a 6 Interestingly, thanatologist Tony Walter has argued that specifi c period of time (such as during a crisis or other the current death culture is actually more concentrated atypical event); b) normative communitas, communitas on expressive talking than ritual itself and that ritual organised into a permanent social system (such as has been replaced by discourse (Walter 1994, 34–35). societies and cultures); c) ideological communitas 7 In 2015, Facebook published a new featured called (which can be applied to many utopian social models Legacy Contact, which enables Facebook users to and to politics). select a trusted ‘posthumous’ contact who can take 3 Despite the fact that I highlight the importance of control of the deceased person’s account and down- community and communal support, and that the load content, such as photos and status updates, but importance of community in rituals is indisputable, not private messages. Currently, in March 2015, the expressions of honour and grief on a Web memorial feature is available only in the United States. (Guardian can also be entirely private as well (Haverinen 2014, 12.2.2015; Facebook 12.2.2015). 24). Some people choose to create a privately accessed 8 An emoticon is a visual expression, usually a yellow memorial for their personal coping strategy and as a smiley face, expressing a particular facial expression means of claiming authority in terms of how, where and and feeling, such as anger, amazement, laughter or when they grieve and express their emotions, without embarrassment (Frehner 2008). the pressure of other people viewing their content. 9 The Daily Dot published an article about the efforts of 4 In order to analyse all the research environments, a father who wanted to gain access to his deceased from social media to shared virtual worlds and online son’s Facebook account in order to see the Look Back gaming environments, from blogs to offi cial memo- video (Hathaway 2014.) rial websites, I have not aspired to draw conclusions 10 For Eric Meyer, the Look Back feature was a painful about each particular environment. The results do not reminder of the very recent loss of his daughter (Meyer indicate that there are substantial differences in the 2014). social behaviour and systems of meaning being created 11 During my fi eldwork in the years 2007–2014, the most in each environment; rather, the differences lie in the negative attitudes and objection was found in Finland, details of each website and in what the application in which is due to the differences between death cultures. question allows the user to do in the environment. It 12 Also known as domestication; see, e.g. Uotinen 2005. is not possible to ‘like’ a status in Second Life, nor is 13 The Google suggestion box is one example, where the it possible to move an avatar on a blog page, but the program ‘guesses’ based on the typed word what the social behaviour conducted in these environments is next word will be and suggests different combinations derived from the same motivation: to seek solace at a of words that are the most likely to be searched. time of loss. 14 Karoliina Kesti was a teenage Finnish girl who went 5 The Association of Internet Researchers (AOIR) has missing in 2011 and was eventually found dead at a made an extensive step-by-step list for researchers local pond in the city of Tampere. The incident received who are determining whether they are or will be con- massive media coverage and several search parties were ducting ethical research. AOIR also emphasises the formed aided by social media. (Wikipedia 2011.) possible new technologies and/or new innovations of 15 The respondent is referring to the Utoya island mas- old technology, which may raise new ethical questions. sacre in 2011.

SOURCES

All of the interviews and surveys used here were conducted Email interviews by the author in Finnish and are translated without Reima, 51 years old, 4/12/2011 altering the original message. Respondents have also Seija, 46 years old, Finland, 9/20/2010 been anonymised based on their wishes. Permission to use the fi rst name of the respondent was granted Facebook live chat interview during the surveys and interviews. Anne, 56 years old, 12/15/2010

20 Survey answers Boellstorff, Tom, Nardi, Bonnie, Pearce, Celia & Taylor, T.L. female, 48 years old, 10/26/2010 2012. Ethnography and Virtual Worlds: A Handbook of female, 24 years old, 8/11/2011 Method. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Salla, 42 years old, 2/25/2010 boyd, danah 2012. Participating in the Always-On Life- Meri, 21 years old, 8/27/2010 style. In Michael Mandiberg (ed.) The Social Media Mika, 24 years old, 10/13/2010 Reader, 71–76. New York: New York University Press. Nora, 17 years old, 11/30/2010 Budka, Philip 2011. From Cyber to Digital Anthropology Petri, 28 years old, 8/3/2011 to an Anthropology of the Contemporary? Paper at the woman, 48 years old, 10/26/2010 DGV (German Anthropological Association) conference Riitta, 47 years old, 8/3/2011 in Vienna, 14-17 September 2011. http://www.philbu. Nora, 17 years old, 11/30/2010 net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/budka_dgv_cy- Taina, 48 years old, 10/22/2010 berculture_paper3.pdf [accessed 2.2.2014.] Sonja, 18 years old, 11/14/2010 Doka, Kenneth 1989. Disenfranchised Grief: Recogniz- Anna, (age not disclosed), 10/9/2011 ing Hidden Sorrow. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Kari, 29 years old, 9/9/2011 Durkheim, Émile 1980 [1912]. Uskontoelämän alkeismuo- dot: australialainen toteemijärjestelmä. Helsinki: Tammi. Facebook sources Escobar, Arturo 1994. Welcome to Cyberia: Notes on the Facebook 12.2.2015. Adding a Legacy Contact. Facebook Anthropology of Cyberculture. Current Anthropology 35 Newsroom. http://newsroom.fb.com/news/2015/02/ (3), 211–231. http://anthro.vancouver.wsu.edu/media/ adding-a-legacy-contact/ [accessed 16.3.2015.] Course_fi les/anth-490-edward-h-hagen/escobar-et-al- Facebook Help Center 2015. How can I request a Look 1994-welcome-to-cyberia-notes-on-the-anthropology- Back movie for someone who has passed away? of-cyberculture.pdf [accessed 27.3.2015.] Facebook Help Center. https://www.facebook.com/ Fearon, Jordan 2011. The Technology of Grief: Social Net- help/501833273270804 [accessed 16.3.2015.] working Sites as a Modern Death Ritual. PhD thesis. England: Antioch University New England. http://rave. Internet sources ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=antioch1307539596 AOIR 2012. Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research. [accessed 27.3.2013.] Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Com- FINLEX 2005. Teosten käyttäminen opetuksessa ja tieteel- mittee (Version 2.0). AOIR Online Report. http://aoir.org/ lisessä tutkimuksessa. (14.10.2005/821) 14 §. http:// reports/ethics2.pdf [accessed 19.3.2015.] www.fi nlex.fi /fi /laki/ajantasa/1961/19610404?search Guardian 12.2.2015. Facebook ‘legacy contact’ can take %5Btype%5D=pika&search%5Bpika%5D=tekijänoik over your account when you die. The Guardian. Online. euslaki [accessed 29.5.2012.] http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/12/ Frehner, Carmen 2008. Email, SMS, MMS: The Linguistic facebook-legacy-contact-can-take-over-your-account- Creativity of Asynchronous Discourse in the New Media when-you-die [accessed 16.3.2015.] Age. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Hathaway, Jay 2014. Grieving dad begs Facebook to let Geertz, Clifford 1973. The Interpretation of Cultures. New him see son’s ‘Look Back’ video. The Daily Dot. http:// York: Basic Books. www.dailydot.com/news/grieving-dad-sons-facebook- van Gennep, Arnold 1960[1909]. The Rites of Passage. video-look-back/ [accessed 19.7.2015.] Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press/Routledge Merriam Webster 2014. Online Dictionary. http://www. & Kegan Paul. merriam-webster.com/dictionary/corny [accessed Giaxoglou, Korina 2014. “R.I.P. man…u are missed and 11.1.2014.] loved by many”: entextualising moments of mourning Statista 2014. Number of monthly active Facebook us- on a Facebook Rest In Peace group site. Thanatos 3 ers worldwide. Online statistics website. http://www. (1), 10–28. https://thanatosjournal.fi les.wordpress. statista.com/statistics/264810/number-of-monthly-ac- com/2012/12/giaxoglou_fb-memorials5.pdf [accessed tive-facebook-users-worldwide/ [accessed 6.3.2015]. 22.10.2015.] Wikipedia 2011. Karoliina Kestin katoamistapaus. http:// Haverinen, Anna 2009. Trobriand-saarilta internetiin – fi .wikipedia.org/wiki/Karoliina_Kestin_katoamistapaus antropologisen kenttätyön haasteita virtuaalisessa [accessed 13.4.2015.]. ympäristössä. Jargonia 7 (16), 1–24. http://urn.fi/ URN:NBN:fi :jyu-201411133247 [accessed 10.3.2012.] Bibliography Haverinen, Anna 2011. Bittihautakiviä ja pikselimuistomerk- Ariès, Philippe 1974. Western Attitudes towards Death: kejä – kuolema- ja sururituaalien virtualisaatio in- From the Middle Ages to the Present. Baltimore: Johns ternetissä. Elore 18 (1), 49–70. http://www.elore.fi / Hopkins University Press. arkisto/1_11/art_haverinen.pdf [accessed 1.4.2015.] Ariès, Philippe 1981 [1977]. The Hour of Our Death. New Haverinen, Anna 2014. Memoria Virtualis – death and York: Vintage Books. mourning rituals in online environments. PhD thesis. Bell, Catherine 1997[1992]. Ritual Theory, Ritual Prac- Turku: University of Turku. http://urn.fi /URN:%20 tice. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN:%20978-951-29-5773-6

21 Hine, Christine 2005. Virtual Methods. Issues in Social Prigerson, Holly, & Jacobs, Selby 2001. Traumatic Grief Research on the Internet. Oxford: Berg Publications. as a Distinct Disorder: A Rationale, Consensus Criteria, Hine, Christine 2015. Ethnography for the Internet: Em- and a Preliminary Empirical Test. In Margaret Stroebe, bedded, Embodied and Everyday. London: Bloomsbury. Wolfgang Stroebe, Robert Hansson & Schut Henk Kant, Immanuel 1997 [1783]. Prolegomena: eli Johdatus (eds.) Handbook of Bereavement Research, 613–645. mihin tahansa metafysiikkaan, joka vastaisuudessa voi Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. käydä tieteestä. Helsinki: Gaudeamus. Refslund Christensen, Dorthe & Sandvik, Kjetil 2013. Kozinets, Robert 2010. Netnography – Doing Ethnographic Sharing Death: Conceptions of Time at a Danish Online Research Online. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Memorial Site. In Dorthe Refl slund Christensen & Rane Kuula, Arja 2011 [2006]. Tutkimusetiikka. Aineistojen Willerslev (eds.) Taming Time, Timing Death. Social hankinta, käyttö ja säilytys. Tampere: Vastapaino. Technologies and Ritual, 99–118. Farnham: Ashgate. Lagerkvist, Amanda 2013. New Memory Cultures and Roberts, Pamela & Vidal, Lourdes 2000. Perpetual Care Death: Existential Security in the Digital Memory in Cyberspace: A Portrait of Memorials on the Web. Ecology. The Finnish Death Studies Association, OMEGA – Journal of Death and Dying 40 (4), 525–545. Thanatos 2 (2), 8–24. http://thanatosjournal.fi les. Sumiala, Johanna 2010. Median rituaalit. Johdatus media- wordpress.com/2012/12/lagerkvist_newmemorycul- antropologiaan. Tampere: Vastapaino. tures_than2220133.pdf [accessed 11.1.2014.] Sumiala, Johanna 2013. Media and Ritual. London: Lindgren, Liisa 2000. Monumentum – muistomerkkien Routledge. aatteita ja aikaa. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Suominen, Jaakko 2009. Johdannoksi: netin kulttuurihis- Seura. toriaa. In Petri Saarikoski, Jaakko Suominen, Riikka Maddrell, Avril 2010. Memory, Mourning and Landscape Turtiainen & Sari Östman (eds.) Funetista Facebookiin. in the Scottish Mountains. In Elizabeth Anderson, Avril Internetin kulttuurihistoria, 7–22. Helsinki: Gaude- Maddrell, Kate McLoughlin & Alana Vincent (eds.) amus. Memory, Mourning, Landscape, 123–146. New York/ Tilley, Christopher 1994. A Phenomenology of Landscape: Amsterdam: Rodopi. Places, Paths and Monuments. Oxford: Berg. Meyer, Eric 2014. My Year Was Tragic. Facebook Am- Turkle, Sherry 2011. Alone together: Why We Expect More bushed Me With a Painful Reminder. Slate.com. http:// from Technology and Less from Each Other. New York: www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/12/29/face- Basic Books. book_year_in_review_my_tragic_year_was_the_wrong_ Turner, Victor 1995 [1969]. The Ritual Process: Structure fodder_for_facebook.html [accessed 19.7.2015.] and Anti-Structure. New York: Aldine Transaction. O’Reilly, Tim 2007. What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Uotinen, Johanna 2005. Merkillinen kone. Informaatiote- Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. knologia, kokemus ja kertomus. Joensuu University hu- Communications & Strategies 1 (17), 17–38. http:// manistic publications 40. Joensuu: Joensuu University. ssrn.com/abstract=1008839 [accessed 19.3.2015.] Vingerhoets, Ad 2013. Why Only Humans Weep: Unravel- Östman, Sari & Turtiainen, Riikka 2013. Verkkotutkimuk- ling the Mysteries of Tears. Oxford: Oxford University sen eettiset haasteet: Armi ja anoreksia. In Salla-Maaria Press. Laaksonen, Janne Matikainen & Minttu Tikka (eds.) de Vries, Brian & Rutherford, Judy 2004. Memorial- Otteita verkosta. Verkon ja sosiaalisen median tutki- izing Loved Ones on the World Wide Web. Omega musmenetelmät, 49–67. Tampere: Vastapaino. – Journal of Death & Dying 49 (1), 5–26. http://www. Pantzar, Mika 1996. Kuinka teknologia kesytetään: ku- ualberta.ca/~jennyy/PDFs/13867811.pdf [accessed lutuksen tieteestä kulutuksen taiteeseen. Helsinki: 13.2.2014.] Hanki ja jää. Walter, Tony 1994. The Revival of Death. London: Rout- Pentikäinen, Juha 1990. Suomalaisen lähtö: kirjoituksia ledge. pohjoisesta kuolemankulttuurista. Helsinki: Suoma- Walter, Tony, Hourizi, Rachid, Moncur, Wendy & Pitsillides, laisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. Stacey 2011. Does the Internet Change how We Die Pine, Vanderlyn 1989. Death, Loss, and Disenfranchised and Mourn? Omega: Journal of Death & Dying 64 (4), Grief. In Kenneth Doka (ed.) Disenfranchised Grief: 275–302. https://www.academia.edu/798905/Does_ Recognizing Hidden Sorrow, 13–24. Lexington, MA: the_internet_change_how_we_die_and_mourn_A_re- Lexington Books. view_article._2011-12_ [accessed 12.7.2012.]

KEYWORDS

Facebook, social media, virtual memorials, ritual, communitas, death rituals, bereavemen

22