21 June, 2006

on a car or in the grass - there is no real difference

Recently, while driving through the glorious, pristine, and captivating avenues of upper Price Hill (Cincinnati); I came across an informational sign/marguee in front of the St. Peter & St. Paul United Church of Christ that brought a smile to my face. The smile was not induced because of the deeply moving message placed upon the sign, nor was it stimulated because of the potentially rewarding events advertised as taking place at the church. No, the smile was created because a twofold conviction was affirmed the very moment I read the sign: 1) church billboards, for the most part, hardly ever offer anything deeper than an espresso spoon;* and 2) church billboards, when attempting to offer something insightful, tend to fail miserably in their pursuit.

(Incidentally, the best bilboard signs that I have seen thus far come from Tire Discounters).

The particular sign that I encountered that day carried an element of self-defeat, for it simply read: "Actions speak louder than bumper stickers". (The self-defeating nature of this sign was the ultimate reason I had to smile). The question must, therefore, be asked: how is that sign any different -- in intent -- than a bumper sticker? If the primary criticism against bumper stickers is that they are nothing more than pithy sayings with no life in them (which I'm assuming is the underlying argument of this church); then the same criticism could be placed at the feet of SPSPUCC, for their sign functions in a highly similar way. Since there is no real difference between the two -- other than the fact that one is on a car and the other is in the grass -- a further question must be asked: is the sign actually accomplishing what it set out to accomplish -- i.e., to be better than a bumper sticker? I hope and assume that their intent was to place life (or, actions) in the message set upon the sign, thus making it better than a bumper sticker; the difficulty, however, is that the message does not convey this intent -- it merely falls victim to its own criticism.

* For those unaware, espresso spoons hold far less than teaspoons

No comments: