Re: 'Curtain call' (Artha Beed, #149). As there is no planning for life in Nepal, how does the author expect us to plan for death? When basic needs like health care, education, transportation, human rights are not taken care of in Nepal, it is absurd to talk about death. How will a farmer set aside money for his funeral when he doesn't have enough for the education and food for his children when he is alive?

Kiran Nakarmi,
email


. I cannot say that Artha Beed's comparison between death rites in Nepali and American cultures is completely illogical. But the arguments are flawed because he compares apples and oranges. The death rites in the two cultures stem from, at the most fundamental level, different beliefs. True, there may be numerous things that we have to review or that we can do away within our rites, but the Beed umambiguously praises the 'American' way of doing things while calling into attention only the negative aspects of our culture. There are problems associated with the 'American' way of handling death and the dead which we are all aware of. The article smacks of cultural denigration, a lop-sided view that exalts the 'American' way. Our traditions are not so sacrosanct that they do not require review. But these can be done without incomplete and biased reference to other cultures. Cultural hegemony is a very real threat and that monster does not need any blind abetting from our part.

Sujan Rajbhandary,
email