From the Tribune guest column archives on July 30, 2009, an examination of the pathology of "no" as compared with "yes," not just when erecting signs, but all of the time.
---
BEER MONEY: Sign o’ the rabid times. By ROGER BAYLOR Local Columnist
This is the year my family reunion came to town.
Annual hosting privileges rotate between the cousins, who are the sons and daughters of my mother and her seven brothers and sisters, five of whom now have passed on. With my oldest cousin nearing seventy, and only a handful younger than me, it appears that a passing of the torch is imminent. Until then, we soldier on.
Roughly 40 people turned out for Saturday’s picnic-style finale at our house on East Spring in New Albany. Visitors came from as far away as Boston, El Paso and South Florida. A half dozen massive pizzas were trucked in, group photos were taken on the porch, and then we held the annual family meeting, catching up on events of the past year and previewing the reunion to come in 2010.
When the formal program ended, a few attendees indicated interest in checking out the Bank Street Brewhouse, which is only nine short blocks west of the house. It was between afternoon rain storms, and with skies sunny, we decided to go by foot. I asked them to meet me on the sidewalk, and we set off down Spring. After about four blocks, it occurred to me to look back and see who else had decided to come, and to my shock I saw that the small group had grown to more than twenty. Only the teetotalers stayed behind. My hunch is they weren’t very happy about it, but then again, teetotalers never are.
Feeling variously like the Pied Piper of beer and the helpful fellow on the Verizon Wireless commercials, I duly escorted this huge group of family members of all ages to the corner of Spring and Bank, made the northern turn, and presently we were examining the shiny new brewing equipment and indulging in scientific sampling. The pitchers were lined up on the counter, sweaty and beckoning, and everyone had a beer in hand. I have to admit that it made me proud.
Only a handful of those attending the reunion live in Floyd County, and throughout the brewhouse visit there were many questions about life and times in New Albany: What’s that building, and why’s the roof gone? Where’s the Greenway? Is your city council as loopy as ours? Why doesn’t someone make them clean that mess up?
And, perhaps my favorite: Isn’t there a rule against those tacky signs?
---
They’re not exactly yellow ribbons tied ‘round the old oak tree, those white yard signs scattered around town with the big red “NO” in screaming caps. I see them, and I shrug. To me, they’re the plaintive wail of the inarticulate and congenitally disaffected, those unable to describe what they’re “for” in the sense of a positive contribution to the community, only to squawk about what they’re “against” as a negation of unity.
What they’re really against is the whole of modernity, although they express it in terms of money. I find that unspeakably sad.
Since the overwhelming percentage of temporary signage posted hereabouts falls into categories of plainly illegal or trespassing, with handwritten day-care touts duct-taped to city-owned traffic signal stanchions, absentee slum lord solicitations stapled to wooden utility poles and political signs never removed after last year’s fall election, I tend to regard them as little more than obtrusive garbage.
Not only do I believe they should be removed; I’m perfectly willing to remove them myself, and will continue to do so whenever the mood strikes me. Nationwide, this blizzard of ugliness is known as “street spam,” and those who volunteer to remove it are “street spam sharks.”
But In the case of the raggedy, pestilential, malice-laden “NO” placards, most of them seem to be located quite properly in the yards of obstructionists. These are safe havens, perfectly legal, and the signs should be permitted to stand where they are as an indicator of bile within.
Several of us in the progressive bloc have concluded that matching “YES” placards should be created, although we’re mindful that describing what you’re “for” is sometimes more difficult than just screaming “NO” and holding your breath until you’re properly purple.
Among the “YES” suggestions that were made last week at the NA Confidential blog were these, in no particular order:
Rule of Law
Education
Fairness
Affordable health care
Sustainability
Code enforcement
Preservation
Green buildings
Friendly streets
Neighborhood schools
Craft beer
Bicycles
Gay Bars
Neighborhoods
Craftsmanship
Human-centered design
Communitas
Democracy here, now
Downtown
Native hardwoods
Participation
Redistricting
Two way streets
Locally owned businesses
“YES” signs currently are being printed and will mimic the design of the “NO” ones, except that green is used instead of red. Some will have items we’re “for” already printed in the spaces, while others will be left blank to encourage public participation. If you’d like to have one, and support the notion of positive participation in the community, let me know.
---
Two hours after the group left to walk to the brewhouse, we ambled back home, and the reunion began winding down just before the rainfall at 8:00 p.m. I smoked a cigar to celebrate a successful conclusion to a familial obligation that I'll not be revisiting until some time around 2017, when I'll be ... a bit older than I am now. Who'll be coming then, and who will not?
There's no way to know, and that's why we play the game, same as with life in downtown New Albany.
Showing posts with label doing nothing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label doing nothing. Show all posts
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Friday, January 09, 2009
Here's why it's funny ... or pathetic.
(backposting)
Before relaxing our grip on Dan Coffey’s New Year’s coronation, otherwise known as Monday’s city council meeting, a respectful but nuanced nod is due at-large councilman John Gonder, who took time during the PUB-OFF-COMM of the conclave to share a newspaper story about deaths in a tragic fire in Anderson, Indiana.
Apparently the fire was set by children playing with a cigarette lighter, and although the precise make and model of the lighter could not be gleaned from the media coverage, CM Gonder was moved to ruminate on the council’s much maligned “novelty lighter” ordinance of 2008.
He defended the council’s good intentions in approving the ordinance, observed that there had yet to be any discernable sign of enforcement stemming from it, and noted that if the ordinance was fated to be ignored, it would be better to remove it from the code book entirely.
Before I proceed, allow me to offer clarification. I continue to regard John Gonder and Jack Messer as my de facto council representatives, given the absence of diplomatic (or undiplomatic) recognition – or, for that matter, a pulse – from those representing the 3rd and 6th districts, these being my home and work areas, respectively.
Accordingly, I appreciate Gonder’s remarks on Monday, and remarkably, Gonder’s sincerity prompted a brief discussion of how the council might better monitor enforcement of the laws it passes, and perhaps more importantly, it led to another in a series of confessions from the city attorney to the effect that in the absence of time and money, such violations will have to be reported to his office, and will be investigated accordingly.
Somewhere, Jim "Gomer Pyle" Nabors’ ears are burning, but we’ll take what we can get, while hoping that indications of conscience are harbingers of better things to come. Later in the meeting, preliminary ordinance enforcement plans were previewed. Later in the week, a rumor went around to the effect that the city attorney would become full time. All well and good, assuming anything actually happens.
Now for the promised nuance.
Obviously, some members of the council remain in abject denial when it comes to the power of the symbolism attached to what they do … and don’t do, and in this context, CM Coffey’s Monday semantics about the importance of what doesn’t happen when it isn’t seen deserves placement in the dumpster, and fast.
In itself, a novelty lighter ordinance is perfectly rational and incontestably well-meaning, and yet it is unmistakably inconsequential in the larger legislative scheme of things. After all, kids were setting houses on fire with matches long before lighters were invented.
A novelty lighter ordinance becomes symbolic fodder for satire, and worthy of at least a slight measure of regular derision, when it can be clearly contrasted with an accompanying absence of sustained, quantifiable action in far more important areas.
Presenting the Gahan Gambit: Look, ma – following in the footsteps of our conniving council predecessors, we’ve once again refused our Constitutional duty to maintain fair legislative districts, but check it out: We’re protecting children from the evil Chinese!
I know, I know … when you have to explain the joke, it isn’t nearly as funny. The problem remains that more of “us” than “them” get it the message … if not the joke.
Before relaxing our grip on Dan Coffey’s New Year’s coronation, otherwise known as Monday’s city council meeting, a respectful but nuanced nod is due at-large councilman John Gonder, who took time during the PUB-OFF-COMM of the conclave to share a newspaper story about deaths in a tragic fire in Anderson, Indiana.
Apparently the fire was set by children playing with a cigarette lighter, and although the precise make and model of the lighter could not be gleaned from the media coverage, CM Gonder was moved to ruminate on the council’s much maligned “novelty lighter” ordinance of 2008.
He defended the council’s good intentions in approving the ordinance, observed that there had yet to be any discernable sign of enforcement stemming from it, and noted that if the ordinance was fated to be ignored, it would be better to remove it from the code book entirely.
Before I proceed, allow me to offer clarification. I continue to regard John Gonder and Jack Messer as my de facto council representatives, given the absence of diplomatic (or undiplomatic) recognition – or, for that matter, a pulse – from those representing the 3rd and 6th districts, these being my home and work areas, respectively.
Accordingly, I appreciate Gonder’s remarks on Monday, and remarkably, Gonder’s sincerity prompted a brief discussion of how the council might better monitor enforcement of the laws it passes, and perhaps more importantly, it led to another in a series of confessions from the city attorney to the effect that in the absence of time and money, such violations will have to be reported to his office, and will be investigated accordingly.
Somewhere, Jim "Gomer Pyle" Nabors’ ears are burning, but we’ll take what we can get, while hoping that indications of conscience are harbingers of better things to come. Later in the meeting, preliminary ordinance enforcement plans were previewed. Later in the week, a rumor went around to the effect that the city attorney would become full time. All well and good, assuming anything actually happens.
Now for the promised nuance.
Obviously, some members of the council remain in abject denial when it comes to the power of the symbolism attached to what they do … and don’t do, and in this context, CM Coffey’s Monday semantics about the importance of what doesn’t happen when it isn’t seen deserves placement in the dumpster, and fast.
In itself, a novelty lighter ordinance is perfectly rational and incontestably well-meaning, and yet it is unmistakably inconsequential in the larger legislative scheme of things. After all, kids were setting houses on fire with matches long before lighters were invented.
A novelty lighter ordinance becomes symbolic fodder for satire, and worthy of at least a slight measure of regular derision, when it can be clearly contrasted with an accompanying absence of sustained, quantifiable action in far more important areas.
Presenting the Gahan Gambit: Look, ma – following in the footsteps of our conniving council predecessors, we’ve once again refused our Constitutional duty to maintain fair legislative districts, but check it out: We’re protecting children from the evil Chinese!
I know, I know … when you have to explain the joke, it isn’t nearly as funny. The problem remains that more of “us” than “them” get it the message … if not the joke.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
