...
Show More
I don't know. I read it to understand my own grieving. I suppose the introduction of the five stages of grief is pretty monumental and I have to give it credit for that. It's written very much as a psychologist's thesis, so it isn't always compelling. If clinical, though, it's still anything but insensitive. The writing is without flourish but the message, the research, the observations are all enlightening. I never understood where anger fit into my current and past experiences of grief, but its expression as envy made a lot of sense. The book is more about the person dying than the person losing someone. I haven't had many experiences where I feared for my life. But I have to respect that Kubler-Ross was so concerned with the care of those who don't have long to live. Her most interesting points beyond the five stages come in the beginning when she criticizes the mechanical prolonging of life when it is performed at the expense of the patient's comfort. Also, her questions of why we can't incorporate death into our daily lives are pretty challenging and very, very wise. We would be so much better off seeing death if we didn't let our fear of it dehumanize the dying.