The Staying Power of Analytical Distance: Lyn Lofland's Contribution to the Sociology of Death, Dying, and Bereavement

Ara Francis

Symbolic Interaction2025https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.1233article
AJG 2
Weight
0.37

What the paper says

Lyn Lofland's The Craft of Dying remains integral to the small canon of texts that sociologists have written in death studies. This article uses her work to consider how we approach the politics of knowledge production in our own scholarship today. Lofland wrote at an “analytical distance,” which to say that she resisted adopting the taken‐for‐granted assumptions that underpin everyday meanings. Her refusal to adopt in her work popular understandings of what it means to “die well,” I contend, laid the groundwork for an intersectional feminist critique of the contemporary death positive movement. Despite yielding observations that have remained trenchant more than 40 years after publication, Lofland's analytical distance risked flattening the humanity of the people she wrote about. Here I weigh the dangers and dividends of her approach and, in the end, make an argument for its ongoing utility.

1 citation

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.1233

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{ara2025,
  title        = {{The Staying Power of Analytical Distance: Lyn Lofland's Contribution to the Sociology of Death, Dying, and Bereavement}},
  author       = {Ara Francis},
  journal      = {Symbolic Interaction},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.1233},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

The Staying Power of Analytical Distance: Lyn Lofland's Contribution to the Sociology of Death, Dying, and Bereavement

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.