Chapter 5 covered by Steven Rossi as part of our Group Blogging Project discussing the book Flickering Pixels by Shane Hipps. If you need a quick overview to what Flickering Pixels is about, please go here.
Start by watching the above video. Done?
Pretending for a minute that Kevin Nealon wasn’t joking, what was the primary message that you heard in that video? Was it that Nealon loved being on The View, or was it that he wanted to get out of there as quickly as possible?
It seemed to me that he would rather be hanging out with Medusa.
Again, Nealon certainly was joking about his dislike for The View, but here’s the point: although his sentences together built a positive description of the show, he inserted “subliminal” messages that told another story and told it more loudly.
Not Just Words on a Page
That’s what Shane Hipps talks about in chapter 5 of Flickering Pixels, entitled Subliminal Messages.
Hipps references Nealon’s famous Saturday Night Live skit in which his character, Mr. Subliminal, gets what he wants through the use of subliminal messages.
[For the record, I tried to find a clip online, but the best I could come up with was a Spanish version, and I’m pretty sure it included some Spanish profanities. Until I caught on to the word choice, I was definitely going to send you to that video, too. The best I could do was the video above, which is also sorta funny.]
Hipps explains that, in the same way, the medium through which we receive most of our information, the printed word, communicates under-the-surface messages.
Shane describes those messages as having three main characteristics: moves toward individualism, toward objectivity, and toward abstract thinking. As cultural values become communicated more frequently through print than through speech, our behaviors change.
You Gotta Get It
In my opinion, these changes are not necessarily bad, and I believe that Hipps would agree. For example, he describes his use of abstract thought as helping him in tense situations with his wife. By journaling his thoughts, he avoids lashing out with confusing and harmful words. In this way, I don’t think that Shane is condemning our use of print media or our other forms of communication; instead, I believe he simply intends (in this chapter and really throughout the book) to bring understanding to our practices so that we might best use the tools we have.
I would sum it up like this: understanding precedes ultimate usefulness. Until we understand better the media which we encounter (and the subliminal messages which they communicate), we are severely limited in our ability to use them for the Kingdom.
Get It? Now Get Over It
But how does this happen? For starters, awareness. Simply put, we should pay attention to our communication. If we are not attentive, those sneaky subliminal messages will transform our message entirely.
How do we hush the increasingly loud undertones of our culture’s communication? Hipps discusses that question throughout the remainder of his book, but I’d love to hear your thoughts on this, particularly if you disagree with any of Shane’s statements throughout the chapter. Otherwise, what kinds of other things do you think our culture has lost as a result of our move toward the supremacy of words on a page? How can we possibly regain those things? More importantly, how else can we prevent ourselves from being influenced too greatly by these under-the-surface messages? (Oh, and go back and re-read Lon’s thoughts on Chapter 4. Lots of relevant points there.)
Until next time (never), I look forward to reading your comments (booo-ring). Thanks for reading (suckers), and be sure to stick around for the discussions on the rest of the book (it’s all downhill from here…)!
[Image from Mbid]
Adam_S says
Ok I am going to jump in. I found some more to agree with this chapter. But I will talk about the Mr Subliminal. Personally the reason I think that Mr Subliminal is funny is because it is such a characture of reality. Reality is that subliminal advertising doesn't really work. We have all watched ads that when we finish we have no idea what it was for. Those ads may be cool, but they don't sell anything because we don't know what they were supposed to sell in the first place.
Mr Subliminal doesn't exist in the real world. Yes there are underlying messages, "give to the poor" (but we will send you a glossy magazine and 20 mailings a year). Or we believe that education is important (so we build a new football statium but don't fund the AP science trip). Or we believe missions are important and have someone speak about it about once a week (but only 1 percent of our church budget goes toward funding missions.) Those messages are not so much subliminal as messages that are just too uncomfortable to talk about because it reveals a little too much about us.
I still think that Hipps hurts his message by hyperbole. If he would tone down his arguement and make it a bit clearer with more definitions I might agree with him more.
Steven Rossi says
I think you have some good points. Regarding your first paragraph: I'm not sure about the psychological statistics about subliminal messages, but I said in the post that I was more aware of Kevin Nealon's joking parenthetical comments than of his complete sentences. Perhaps that happened to me because his messages weren't all that subliminal…I guess they sorta interrupted and thus stuck out. I'm not sure the reasoning, but I stand by my initial perception.
And as far as your second paragraph, I see your point there, too. To be honest, I would not notice those underlying messages most of the time. I imagine most people would simply accept the words that were spoken and not realize the hypocrisy occurring. Some would argue that that's why they're called "subliminal" messages, but I think there's a point where things like that just go unnoticed completely.
I'm not sure what you mean by your third paragraph. Could you clarify?
And now I might go search and see if I can find studies on the effectiveness of subliminal messages…
Susan_Stewart says
Hmmmm … I don't see subliminal messages as the key point of this chapter. I was struck with "The invention of writing gave people the luxury of thinking apart from the tribe without concern of those thoughts disappearing."
Hipps has illustrated this by pointing out that in cultures without printed word there is no way to store information or knowledge outside the mind. The community maintains knowledge by the community retaining it through repetition. Because of the printed word, and maybe more because of video technology, the church is no longer a community of believers.
The early church gathered to retain and share knowledge through oral repetitions. Certainly there was writing, otherwise we would have the Bible today. Those writings were read, discussed, and ultimately shared through gatherings of people.
Today we gather in churches to listen to one person expound on the Scripture; but, there is no discussion. No one is required to remember what is spoken so it can be shared with others. We can simply give a tract and move on — if even that much is done.
The gathering of believers has become an individual endeavor. An introvert, like myself, can be content to stay at home and skip the social aspects of the Sunday morning gathering. After all, we can listen to someone talk on the television, radio, or Internet.
Interestingly, as a writer (a solitary profession), I still must depend on connection with people to share my product.
More than subliminal messages of the medium, I think the point is what has the change of medium done to the Western culture.
Maybe the subliminal message of this chapter was subliminal messages and I missed it.
Steven Rossi says
Yes, I think you're right. I think this chapter primarily focused on the medium of the printed word, specifically how it shapes us without us knowing it. I sorta took a step back in my post by broadening the subliminal message idea from solely the print medium to the communication of our culture in general. The goal of my post was to continue Shane's introduction into the conversation, only I gave less answers than him. Oh, and I thought the Mr. Subliminal thing was funny. 😉
That's why I like what you're saying about our new ability to hear teaching and "go to church" without ever leaving our homes or meeting with other people. How has that happened? What can we possibly do to promote community in an environment of individualism? Huge questions.
Adam_S says
I am just not sure how accurate an assumption that the early church was primarily an oral culture. Certainly even if there were books they were listening to them being read and not all following along on powerpoint. But even listening to a holy book (or letter from a friend) is different from a purely oral culture where we are talking about things being passed down from generation to generation. Luke even directly addresses this when he talks about the fact that he is writing things down so that there was a place to have all of the stories compiled. But he also assumes that his isn't a long (multi-generational) oral history because he says that the reader can go out and find out for themselves because these people are still alive.
SCBubba says
I was a bit confused by the "oral culture" piece as well. Reading Scripture and telling stories are not the same things. I agree that the mass availability of the printed word had an affect on western culture but to say that the church was not affected by it before Gutenberg is not really true.
That being said, I think the mass production of the written word has led to some of the individualism Hipps describes in this chapter. Written or oral, reading and studying the Scriptures was a communal activity prior to general availability of printed Bibles and high percentages of literacy. Some churches still have something similar to communal Scripture in Sunday services or Sunday School, but the emphasis in many of them is to be introductory with the main study done individually (in my experience anyway).