Skip to content(if available)orjump to list(if available)

Read the Obits

Read the Obits

82 comments

·April 27, 2025

jawns

There is a real danger that obituaries of people in the early 21st century will become inaccessible to future generations due to obituary rot:

https://shaungallagher.pressbin.com/blog/obituary-rot.html

> An unfortunate side effect of this move to digital-only obits will likely only become apparent a few decades from now, and it will likely frustrate the next few generations of genealogists hunting for records of early 21st century ancestors.

> Print newspapers were well suited for both the distribution and preservation of obituaries. Distribution isn’t a problem for digital obituaries, and in many ways the web is better than print in this respect. But when it comes to preservation, there are many factors that make digital obits in their current state particularly susceptible to rot.

detourdog

What we have already lost is the process of reading the newspapers that birthed the obituary.

Newspaper's used to have strong local coverage and a collection of vignettes into the outside world. The way the author uses the obituaries is the way I used to use the newspapers. Getting multiple newspapers (and magazines) from all over the world was a fixture for New York City creative offices pre-internet.

jayknight

When in doing genealogy, I tend to save obituaries in archive.org and archive.ph and sometimes paste the content into the wikitree profile.

None of those are guaranteed to be around in 50 years, but hopefully it helps a little.

nsenifty

The bigger danger is that all obituaries will be written by an AI.

rat87

Non famous obituaries are written by family members or friends. It's possible they'll use AI to clean up the wording

toomuchtodo

Obits should intentionally be committed to the Internet Archive for longevity and preservation, but I digress.

DoingIsLearning

The Internet Archive is massive force for good and a huge not-for profit effort.

However in certain aspects of preservation of History (for example if deemed high value at a national level) we should also expect national archives to duplicate the effort to preserve this and other information with historic value.

null

[deleted]

inglor_cz

I wonder how much would such national digital archives resist rewriting of history.

It is much harder to doctor hard copies of newspapers or books. You can burn them, but altering them is a complicated challenge, and someone may own another copy of the originals.

With digital records, the temptation is stronger because the editing is easier, and other "unofficial" copies that diverge from the officially archived version may be declared to be fake/misinformation etc.

immibis

The Internet Archive is constantly under attack for daring to preserve pressure waves. One of these days the destruction will be successful. Probably right now, under a Republican landslide government.

null

[deleted]

KerrAvon

It wasn't a landslide by any definition except the Trump campaign's; Trump won by an extremely narrow margin. It's important to be accurate about this to try to preempt despair.

speckx

When my mother-in-law died, I immediately registered a domain for her name and created a website and added the obituary, eulogy, and a photo gallery and shared that with friends and family for exactly this reason.

pabs3

Which domain? I'll send it to archive.org using ArchiveBot.

https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/ArchiveBot

hdjrudni

That's cool, but doesn't it have the same problem? When you die or decide to stop paying, the website dies too.

nightfly

Archive.org

Jaygles

Companies that aggregate and sell data suck up all of the obituaries as they are public record and unburdened by regulations on sharing and selling it. Although it may not be in its original form (as far as I know), info from obituaries may actually be positioned to survive a very long time.

dleeftink

There's a danger, but also a natural way of things. Why should we default to records being accessible in perpetuity?

Mind I can get behind the genealogy argument, yet feel that our post-life records being accessible by default is not an assumption we can make unilaterally.

globnomulous

> Why should we default to records being accessible in perpetuity?

The historical record is important and we don't know what will be useful to future generations.

Take Carlo Ginzburg's The Cheese and the Worms as an example. It briefly recounts the multiple legal proceedings that the Roman Catholic Church brought against a humble Italian Renaissance-era miller who spread strange, heretical ideas about the cosmos (involving the cheese that was apparently the moon's substance and the worms that ate it). Ginzburg draws on Church records, including the man's own written defense, and builds a fascinating picture of his mental world, intellect, and disposition.

If I remember correctly, these small, cloudy windows into the Early Modern past even let Ginzburg identify likely traces of pre-Christian, or folk, traditions largely hidden from the written record.

This is a funny example, I suppose, because in all likelihood the miller would have been tickled to know that his ideas survived and found an audience not just despite but because of Church persecution.

Still, his case nicely illustrates the importance and unpredictable value of the historical record.

smartmic

I think the idea from the original article is great! But although I'm a fan of printed newspapers and even subscribe to a renowned one, I unfortunately can't take part in it, simply because in my cultural circle (Germany) there are no detailed obituaries of ordinary people in the newspaper, only death notices. But that's always been the case here - at least that's how I know it.

dredmorbius

Obits are among my idea-stirring hacks. Some thoughts on why they work, and some similar ones.

Obits are written long in advance. I noticed following Jorge Bergoglio's death that NPR's obit was written (and voiced, in the newscast / headlines) by Silvia Poggioli, though she'd retired from the network in 2023 (here: <https://www.npr.org/2025/04/21/1013050313/pope-francis-dead>). This means that they're both well-researched and polished writing, unlike most breaking news coverage. They also compress a lifetime into a few paragraphs (~75 in the case of Poggioli's article), which tends to bring out highlights.

Another format that often brings out interesting ideas, outside my own area of expertise: interviews. Especially with those not from the worlds of politics or mainstream business. All the better, historical interviews, from earlier times. These often give either perspectives on a different world, or a perspective on circumstances which presage the world we find ourselves in now.

Terry Gross's "Fresh Air" and the Studs Terkel archive are two particularly excellent examples. As I'm expanding my language comprehension, interviews and histories in foreign languages are another excellent option.

A third option: academic author interviews. The New Books Network has poor production values (bonus: well-produced audio is almost certainly a skippable ad) and a large number of duds, but where it hits the topics are almost always well outside the mainstream but at the same time the product of expertise. There's a huge back-catalogue:

<https://newbooksnetwork.com/>

qubex

An old Russian joke:

A guy keeps going to the newsagent: he scans the headlines and then leaves.

The newsagent sees him do this a few days in a row and finds it to be strange behaviour, so one day he asks him:

“Comrade, what are you doing? Can I help you?”

“Thank you comrade, but I’m only interested in the obituaries.”

“But comrade, the obituaries are at the back!”

“Not the ones I am looking for, comrade!”

pavlov

This joke has its origins in the days when Soviet leadership was a series of men in their seventies who kept dying on the job.

It has acquired a certain acuity in today’s America where the leaders are a series of unpopular men approaching their eighties.

There is a widespread “Is He Dead Yet?” meme that’s the contemporary direct equivalent of the Soviet joke.

piyh

All I ask for are leaders born in the 1950s

jfengel

We just had a chance at one born in the 1960s. People decided that they wanted someone born in the 1940s.

dredmorbius

It refers specifically to Stalin.

And a time when the Chairmanship was not a revolving door, though it became more of one immediately afterward.

maximilianburke

What's old is new again.

null

[deleted]

gwern

> It’s not just about learning new facts, of course — it’s about asking questions. Why was a British mystic in Mexico City? How did Spanish-language television evolve in the U.S.? What led someone to invent PLAX or build search tools for financial news decades before Google? Even if you don’t find all the answers, just posing the questions helps you flex the creative muscle that thrives on curiosity and connection.

Maybe wait until you have at least 1 anecdote, anywhere in the history of the world, of major creativity from reading an obituary, before recommending it?

flufluflufluffy

Goddang, it’s not like they’re giving medical advice or anything, it’s simply about being exposed to novel concepts and ideas, which fosters creativity. You don’t really need “evidence” for this, but even if somehow it’s wrong and reading obituaries either somehow does not increase or decreases creativity, is not like there’s harm in saying “Hey, try reading some obituaries, you might learn some interesting stuff”

crazygringo

But that's not what they're saying. They're claiming it's a creativity hack, not that you might learn some interesting stuff. That's the entire thesis of the post... which isn't backed up at all.

kenjackson

Does there exist anything related to creativity that is backed up with clear data? This article is as convincing as anything else I’ve ever read about increasing creativity.

crazygringo

Completely agreed. It's just irresponsibly bad writing to claim "this can boost your creativity!" without even a single example of how it has boosted yours or someone else's. I don't need a scientific study, but surely you can give at least a single anecdotal example? Because if you can't, you honestly shouldn't be writing this in the first place.

codingdave

If it helps them, that seems sufficient reason to share what works for them. I'd say that a more kind critique would be that their advice could be expanded to: "Read anything" in order to get creativity going. But gatekeeping advice unless they can cite "major creativity" that came from it seems harsh.

crazygringo

When they claim up front that it's a "creativity hack", yes I expect would expect them to back it up. That's not gatekeeping or harsh, it's literally the one job of an article to back up its claim.

null

[deleted]

almostgotcaught

deeply ironic counsel coming from a guy that has produced reams and reams of unfiltered blather...

hammock

Huh?

Obits are mini bios, but better than living bios, and more accessible than bestselling bios that make you think you have to be Rockefeller or Lincoln

billfruit

I think its hardly that much of an interesting idea. Reading wide ofcourse is useful and interesting. But I doubt reading obituaries are the best way to go about that.

One approach that I often do, is to go to fivebooks.com when an any random subject or topic strikes me and then try to read the books their interviewees have recommended on that topic. I have found many interesting books in this way.

Like their lists about the Spanish Civil war lead me to 'Forging of a Rebel' by Arturo Barea.

Another source is to look into famous/interesting peoples reading lists. Many famous people including Gandhi, Tolstoy and others kept lists of all books that they read.

kristianp

What a great website fivebooks is! But as you say, you need to make an effort to find something different on there. A randomiser might be good there.

kayo_20211030

I like obits as much as the next person, maybe more. But the premise of the piece very much depends on a particular definition of creativity; and then tries, and fails, to extend it to reading obits. If it's defined as something novel, then a priori it can't be obvious and therefore is likely to be an association between distant concepts - a statement of the obvious. Mednick might be right; but an extrapolation to obits, as in the original piece, is unjustified, and definitely unproven. Velcro wasn't invented because someone read an obit; it's good, impressive, but just regular creativity. Gentner posits an obvious truism, but its relationship to obits is tenuous at best, again unjustified, and just probably wrong.

The whole piece would be begging the question were there a question. It's a statement of faith.

Wistar

I have a lifelong friend who is a very successful investor and who has been habitually reading obits since his high school days. I recall his explaining that obits served as an opportunity radar.

djeastm

Can you elaborate on how? Besides the obvious of seeking out a bereaved family member and purchasing their home/belongings on the cheap, of course

eru

You can also look for companies with leadership transition.

kazinator

Whenever I see a "X has died" subject on the front page of HN, I invoke a personal rule that if I haven't heard of the person, I skip it. You dying shouldn't be what gets my attention.

Of course, there are long dead historic figures that we know about. But being dead is rarely the very first thing you learn about them.

bix6

Related, new era obits and celebrations (I am affiliated): https://www.chptr.com/

My father unexpectedly passed away a few years ago so this stuff is especially close to my heart.

I’ve learned a lot from lives of others so think this is wonderful advice for finding gems and remembering the normal goodness that exists in this world.

ChrisMarshallNY

> one popular piece of advice for boosting creativity is to learn something new every day. But here’s the catch: This only works if that new information is very different from what’s already in your head.

This is a good distinction.

I make it a point to hang with folks from vastly different backgrounds from me.

I can get some very good (and bad) ideas from them.

ghaff

The Economist obits are especially worth reading.

dcminter

ycombinatrix

damn, can't believe i outlived Benson

DangerousPie

They are also available as part of their excellent (and free) The Intelligence podcast. Always worth a listen.

androng

i like this advice. when trying to come up with new characters for fiction its very difficult to come up with something you don't already know but with this you have real people with their entire life story summarized for free.

Animats

There are biographies, of course.

One striking thing about reading biographies is that real people are seldom "chosen ones". That's a literature and movie trope.