Summary Of Saints At The River By Ron Rash

To begin with, in the book Saints at the River by Ron Rash the ongoing dilemma about the body and whether or not to retrieve it from the river or leave it in the river, was a heated one. There were many reasons to leave her body under the water as were there many for retrieving it. Due to many laws, not disturbing the wildlife, creating a precedence, and how long the body had been in the river, there were many people who backed the idea of leaving the body there. However, there were people who agreed with removing the body from the grasp of the Tamassee river, due to the excruciating mental anguish it put on the parents, the religion of the family, and that the body should be buried in ground and not left in a watery tomb with its soul imprisoned

The first reason for removing the body was that it was inflicting tremendous pain upon her parents. The people supported taking the body out of the water when the pain it was inflicting on her parents was clear to see. Secondly, there was a conflict with religion. The religion stated that the soul couldn’t move on from this world unless the body was retrieved from the bottom of the river. One of the characters in the book said “That’s what my church has said for hundreds of years—that a person is in purgatory until the body is given Last Rites” (Rash 172). Also, should a body be removed from the river just because the family wants to bury the body in earth rather than water? There were more people supporting the body being removed than there were trying to stop it. The photo in the article about the body in the Tamassee had inspired more people to support the cause of retrieving the body back from the clutches of the

One of the characters said “That law didn’t envision what’s happened to my daughter” (Rash 52). Therefore, couldn’t the law be altered to include tragedies such as these incase they were to ever happen again. Should the pain of a person outweigh the laws set in place to protect the natural state of a river, or should the laws be upheld no matter the issue. Religion was also brought up to justify retrieving the body, but is religion itself enough to justify the desecration of a river and its surrounding area to remove a body? If religion was chosen then the consequences of damaging the river could be seen physically for a small or great amount of time, but if religion was ignored there would be no damage to the river. Ignoring religion could also cause people psychological trauma. Is the right thing to do retrieve the body because so many people support the cause, or should it be left because as mentioned before it has been under the water too long and would just cause more pain for the family due to the condition of the body? Should the fact that the family wanted the body buried in earth instead of water be a factor in the decision? The family could put a grave marker by the