Colombian deathscapes: Social practices and policy responses

ABSTRACT

This article analyzes social practices in Colombian deathscapes in light of cemetery modernization plans, based on fieldwork in Bogotá and Medellín. Using a performative approach it analyzes the antagonistic aspects of 2 sets of events articulating social inequality and violence: sanctification rituals and conflict-prone funerals. The case studies suggest that social practices enacted in sanctification rituals and “hot services” are simultaneously constructive and destructive; they mediate vulnerable populations’ urban realities while limiting the public character of cemeteries. I conclude that deathscape studies should pay equal attention to positive and negative sentiments in place-making. Additionally, I conclude that the current Colombian policy paradigm, which centers on attractive and ordered public cemeteries, fails to acknowledge the relevance of existing social practices. Evaluation of performances at cemeteries could contribute to the construction of more socially inclusive public spaces. Such planning considerations are relevant for unequal societies and public deathscapes more generally.

Acknowledgments

The author thanks all managers and employees of the UAESP, Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá; Monte Sacro, Bogotá; and Cementerio San Pedro and Cementerio El Universal, Medellín, for their valuable contributions to this research. She is specifically grateful to Alexandra Ordóñez, Oswaldo Otalora, and Oscar Darío Velásquez for sharing their knowledge on sanctification rituals and hot services. This study would not have been possible without the help of research assistant Camilo Martínez.

Funding

This study was financially supported by the Van Eesteren-Fluck & Van Lohuizen Foundation in The Hague, The Netherlands.

Notes

1. The Colombian government uses real estate values as a proxy for the socioeconomic position of the population. There are six strata, with stratum 1 being “low–low” and 6 being “high.” The lowest three indicate the presence of residents eligible for subsidized basic services. Stratum 4 is not eligible to receive subsidies but is not charged extra. People in the upper two strata are charged extra for those services (DANE, n.d., p. 3).

2. PMCSF stands for Plan Maestro de Cementerios y Servicios Funerarios, Master Plan for Cemeteries and Funerary Services, defined as a planning instrument for the short term, midterm, and long term up to 2020.

3. UAESP stands for Unidad Administrativa Especial de Servicios Públicos, Special Administrative Unit for Public Services. One subdirector heads the division for Public Lighting and Cemeteries.

Additional information

Funding

This study was financially supported by the Van Eesteren-Fluck & Van Lohuizen Foundation in The Hague, The Netherlands.

Notes on contributors

Christien Klaufus

Christien Klaufus is an assistant professor of Human Geography at the Centre for Latin American Research and Documentation, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. She holds a PhD in cultural anthropology and an MSc in architecture and urbanism. Her research addresses Latin American urban development, particularly in the Andean region. She is the coordinator of the CEDLA research group Deathscape Urbanism, editor and book review editor of the European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, and an affiliated researcher to The Netherlands Land Academy LANDac. Christien is the author of Construir la Ciudad Andina [Building the Andean City] (FLACSO, 2009), which appeared in an updated version in English as Urban Residence (Berghahn, 2012); she is coeditor of Housing and Belonging (Berghahn, 2015) and has published widely on urban development in secondary cities, housing policies, local effects of transnational migration, and, since 2014, deathscape governance and planning in metropolises.