The Television Commercial

From "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil Postman:

"Indeed we may go this far: The television commercial is not at all about the character of products to be consumed. It is about the character of the consumers of products. Images of movie stars and famous athletes, of serene lakes and macho fishing trips, of elegant dinners and romantic interludes, of happy families packing their station wagons for a picnic in the country—these tell nothing about the products being sold. But they tell everything about the fears, fancies and dreams of those who might buy them. What the advertiser needs to know is not what is right about the product but what is wrong about the buyer. And so, the balance of business expenditures shifts from product research to market research. The television commercial has oriented business away from making products of value and toward making consumers feel valuable, which means that the business of business has now become pseudo-therapy. The consumer is a patient assured by pseudo-dramas."

Working in the graphic design/web design/marketing/advertising industry, this hits so close to home. It's an interesting point and crucial to understanding how television commercials, in particular, have reshaped the way products are advertised, the way we see ourselves and the way businesses need to operate in order to be successful. On the one hand, realizing this can make you an amazingly effective advertiser, due to the cultural landscape that TV has influenced so deeply. On the other, it is a bit discouraged to realize, how nearly irreparable the damage is to how we do business and how our view of ourselves is constantly being attacked, undermined and distorted by the proposition put forth in commercials. We're constantly being sold the reality that we aren't enough as we are, and that a particular product on the screen can make us worthwhile and happy. That seems a dangerous state of affairs...

Interesting Article on Relationships

Here's the link to the article "How to find 'The One'" on Relevant Magazine...

And the part I thought was interesting:

If you are not in a relationship ...

We feel it’s crucial to realize that no matter whom you marry, you will most likely have the same personal issues you did before marriage. It can feel like marriage is the answer to making everything in your life right, but in our experience, marriage tends to amplify problems, not solve them.

Instead of believing in this romantic fallacy, take stock of where you are personally. Consider your emotions, past, family, talents, dreams, hobbies, struggles, spirituality, sexuality and employment. Striving to make these areas healthy will not necessarily lead to finding a husband/wife. However, exerting yourself toward wholeness brings confidence, peace and contentment. These traits are very attractive and if you do find a relationship, they will go a long way in making that relationship thrive. [emphasis mine]

I thought they struck a healthy, logical balance between the "just focus on yourself" mentality versus the "gotta-find-my-soulmate!" outlook. The goal being wholeness. The article did a good job of succinctly pointing out that wholeness doesn't equal "in a relationship", which I think is a typical mindset, that if you can just fall in love, then everything else will sort itself out. It is a sobering thought, to accept the reality that marriage isn't a magic trick, a shortcut to wholeness and godliness. It turns the attention away from what falling in love and marrying someone will do for you to what you are bringing to a relationship, to offer and give and sacrifice. Francis Chan said once, paraphrasing of course, that no divorce ever happened because a spouse was serving the other too much, that they were too selfless. The problem with relationships, it seems, is that we are looking to others to be for us something we are lacking, and that instantly puts unfair expectations on them. So, I think the article above did a great job of prescribing an understanding of relationships that will hopefully allow two single people to enter into a relationship on healthy, solid footing and not the selfish sand that plunges marriages into the sea of divorce when two imperfect humans start disappointing each other's unfair and unspoken expectations.

On The Go: Christian Sentences

I've been wrestling lately with what it means to have a relationship with God. That is a phrase that gets thrown around a lot, and I find myself constantly trying flesh out what that means and looks like. I'm curious, though, if maybe that phrase is a poor one , an inadequate one, and does more to confuse, rather than support, our pursuit of God. Because don't we all have a relationship to God as His creation? Do prayers float off to space, unheard, if they fall from the lips of someone "without a relationship with Jesus"? Or is it just semantics? Have we fallen into a trap of using a kind of religious language, "Christian sentences" if you will, of explaining our faith that cheapens or distorts what's really going on? Or, am I being too hard on the phrase, missing the idea that perhaps "You need a relationship with Jesus" is just a new way of saying, "Unless you are born again, you can't enter into the kingdom"? I'm cautious to say that analogy works, because one is scripture and the other is a fairly modern idiosyncrasy of Western Christianity that I can't objectively understand, because I've grown up with this language all around me.

Any thoughts, readers?