When Don Shell first sent me his piece, Don Shell Shares “A Monumental ‘Undertaking’?”, I thought it was a highly-intelligent, well-reasoned reaction to the way funeral professionals were portrayed in the PBS program.

When I received Michelle Carter’s response, published here as Michelle Carter Responds to “A Monumental ‘Undertaking’?”, I thought her words were also reasoned and represented her opinion well.

I still think that each has valid points.

I also love the fact that this blog allows all of us to share reasoned, respectful opinions without fear of personal attacks.

So here’s my two cents:

I think that Don has a point, as I also felt the “time warp” while watching the show.  I felt like we were watching funerals from fifty years ago, when the only funeral director in town sat behind a huge desk and dictated to the family what services they would have.

I also believe that Michelle’s point, that we don’t have the whole story and didn’t get to see the full funerals involved, is important.  It’s hard to know exactly how these services were planned, as the only portion of the arrangements we see is the least interesting:  vital statistics gathering.

I also know an important fact:  some funeral homes still operate the old way.  In fact, some communities still want the old-time mortician, the guy who seems so different from them and whose aloof air adds to the macabre charm of his profession.

But the reality for so many other funeral professionals is the funeral director as demystified businessperson, the undervalued service and the pointless ritual.  In so many communities, those who experience a death push it away by relegating the deceased to an immediate burial, a direct cremation or a closed casket, thereby keeping “face time” with death to a minimum.

And learning to let go of a loved one who has moved across the country is much easier than making peace with the finality of death.  By reducing the amount of time spent contemplating a still, lifeless body, folks are able to believe “she just went away” rather than “death happens and she died.”

I get frustrated when I hear funeral directors claim that their clients don’t buy big caskets or splurge on elaborate services because they can’t afford it.  I know (and so do you) that most Americans spend money on the most frivolous things imaginable.  The same folks who squeal “I can’t afford it!” have cellphones (hardly a necessity), drink bottled water and enjoy high-speed Internet access at home when they’re not driving their late-model car.

The truth is, people don’t spend big on funerals anymore because they see no value in them.  And if you happen to be in a community like Mr. Lynch’s, where the majority sees value in traditional services (including traditional cremation) then you’ve got it made.  But don’t expect it to last.  The national trends are against you.

To steal an idea from Democratic candidate John Edwards, how do we reconcile these “two Americas”?

First, those nurturing more traditional communities need to be aware of the realities facing the rest of us, in order to better battle the changes yet to come.  And those of us dealing with folks who don’t value the services we offer?  Get out there and educate your community.

I don’t think many families choose your firm because you can embalm the body, put it in a casket and get it from viewing to church to cemetery without dropping it on the ground.  Anyone can be trained to accomplish those tasks.  If that was the only requirement, clients would always choose the least expensive firm.

So there must be something else that enters into the equation.  An “X” factor, to use a worn-out phrase.

For Mr. Lynch, I think X = Tradition.  For the budding nationwide group, Veterans Funeral Care, X = Veteran.  For the high-volume, low price firm in your neighborhood, X = rock bottom pricing.

What is your “X”?