To See Oneself
July 16 2026
In the autopsy suite, death is sanitized
on stainless steel gurneys
under cold harsh light.
As is the name
— not morgue, but Suite,
as in Presidential
or Honeymoon.
The bodies are not just still, but inert,
their skin
waxy and pale.
The eyes are either closed
or stare blankly
at the white tiled ceiling
that looks impassively back.
The light has gone out of them
and the bodies have taken on weight
as if some buoyant force had leaked away,
the blood
had pooled and thickened
like in a ship’s turbid bilge.
Autopsy,
from the Greek “to see oneself”.
Because we are all rough copies,
and because we can see in them
our future selves.
They are here to answer
how and when
and sometimes who.
But the why is never questioned;
best left
to theologians and philosophers
and godless scientists.
But mostly, because of paperwork
— insurance,
certificates of death,
issues with inheritance.
So before they’re put to rest
there is bureaucracy;
as has always been said
the only sure things in life
are death and taxes.
Instead of putrefaction
it smells of disinfectant
and starched hospital sheets.
The air is chilly,
the light unflattering,
the sound
respectful and subdued.
You’ll hear the usual collegial chat
in matter-of-fact tones,
the pronouncement of findings
in a brisk clinical voice,
and the occasional laugh
work friends naturally share.
There’s the clang of stainless steel
on bright metallic bowls,
the squelch of organs plopped
on long suspended scales,
the squeak of rubber soles
on buffed terrazzo floor.
And in the background
country music plays
to help time pass.
Which it has
for all who end up here
in the city morgue
under a crisp white sheet.
Where questions are asked and answered
but not the big one I have.
I wrote this after listening to the following podcast (see the link). Even though I don’t read crime novels or mysteries, and don’t know her work, I found it fascinating.
(Btw, I do have my own answer to the “why” of death. A godlessly scientific one. It also answers the “how”. It has to do with evolutionary biology. Which is — to simplify it — that survival ultimately applies not to the individual but to a species, and that this species-wide survival is a function of the carrying capacity of the environment: exceeding the upper limit of population puts the species’ existence into peril, and the same if the adult population lives so long it outcompetes its offspring for limited resources. So the end result is that a successful species is, by selection of suitable individuals, programmed by evolution for death. And that the remorseless arithmetic of evolution dictates that each species that has so far not gone extinct will have eventually landed on its optimal lifespan. …Optimal, that is, until its environment changes and it either fails or succeeds in adapting in time.
This makes more sense if you consider the opposite: if we all could tweak our genes and become as immortal as we’d wish to be, just imagine what would soon be the exponentially vast burden of human beings trying to live side by side on this already highly stressed planet. The individual conceit of eternal life is incompatible with the survival of the species.
There is a philosophical corollary to this: we are not autonomous individuals; we are collective and communal, and only exist in relation to others. So much for libertarianism and the cherished American myth of the rugged individual.)
https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/what-nobody-tells-you-about-the-morgue-with/id809264944?i=1000774077233&l=fr-CA


