I was talking to someone the other day and made a reference to swine flu in explaining something. This was a full week-and-a-half after the news media exploded over it. Person had no idea what I was talking about. Had never heard of swine flu.

Last year when things were going crazy in Myanmar, I was teaching a class and mentioned it. Only one person out of twelve (small class) had even heard of the governmental abuses and people dying. Some didn’t even know what Myanmar was. These were all adults between 25 and 55 and this stuff was all over the news. Fortunately, I wasn’t using it to make a point.

Once, when I was preaching in Romania, I was talking about the worst that humanity has to offer. I mentioned Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot. My translator said, “Hitler, Stalin, and some other guy.”

I do my best to keep my illustrations few and far between now. And when I do resort to them, I talk about common experiences rather than pop-cultural expressions that I think people should be familiar with. And if I can’t clearly communicate my point using an illustration from common experiences, then I don’t use an illustration. They’re rarely better than just explaining something anyway.

The Danes last blog post..20090417.teaParty

I would caution you, however, about assuming to know the motivations of those who reference pop-culture. It seems unwise at best to suggest that those who quote popular culture are simply after the appearance of “coolness.” In some cases that may be true, but I would imagine that for many it’s simply a reference from their own interests and familiarity that seemed like a good example. If you disagree with the approach that’s fine, but I hardly think it an attempt at self-promotion on the part of the user. And while it may be true that “growing up” is a better field from which to mine examples, there simply may be better examples in other areas of life than just this one. So the question, then, is do you choose a weak example that communicates the point, though in a diminished form, or do you choose a strong example that may not register with as many people? There are obvious weaknesses and strengths to each approach.

The Danes last blog post..20090417.teaParty

Oprah is extremely popular in America and yet I don’t know if I know a single person who watches her program. And yet everybody has been a kid and has a common set of experiences that while differing in nuance are all shared unanimously under the heading Growing Up. So which source would be the better choice to pull from purely in terms of effective communication? Answer: not Oprah.

I think that for most people who pull illustrations from uncommon sources like literature or music or film or other expressions of pop culture, effective communication is a secondary concern. It’s still a concern and they try to do as good a job with the handicap they’ve chosen, but it’s still second fiddle to their main reason for choosing a pop-culture illustration: i.e., to look cool.

Pastors who reference the kinds of things they imagine their congregants think are cool are trying to get some of that cool-stink to rub off on their own image. They want to be seen as engaging what’s cool. They want congregants to thing that they are as cool and hip and with-it and popular as the popular culture they reference.

And this often works because as I said in the youth ministry post, adults suck at detecting a phony. Also, because the coolness of their pastor reflects on them. His imagined cool-stink might rub off on his congregants and they can be cool because their pastor is quote-unquote cool.

cf. Saddleback Church and Rick Warren.

The Danes last blog post..20090417.teaParty

If I’m relying upon people’s knowledge of LOTR in order for my point to be understood, I’m not making my point very well. I’m adding an unnecessary complication. My audience is looking for Scripture to be explained; they don’t also need an explanation of a movie so that they can understand why I’m making reference to the movie in order to help them understand Scripture.

The thing is: that rare, out-of-touch person is not really all that rare.

Using LOST as an example, I may wait for them to come out on DVD to watch them, but at least I’m watching them. I know a ton of people who either aren’t interested in watching, who are waiting for the whole thing to finish before they start, or who watched the first two-and-a-half seasons and refused to ever watch another episode because it was just a big, confusing mess.

My pastor uses illustrations from football fairly often and though I understand the rules of the game fine, I don’t know any of the personalities to whom he refers. Nor does more than half the congregation. When he cites movies, he has to spend time explaining the whole set-up for the movie in order for us to have the slightest idea what he’s talking about. And oftentimes the best illustrations come out of a film’s conclusion—I can’t count the number of times I’ve been pissed off during a sermon because a movie I was interested in seeing was just ruined.

I’m not saying that illustrations can’t be used well, just that when relying on the produce of pop-culture to explain your point, more often than not, your obfuscating and the thing you think everybody knows about isn’t nearly as well known as you believe.

The Danes last blog post..20090417.teaParty

Now it’s okay that you do it here because this is an online magazine and we expect that.

The Danes last blog post..20090417.teaParty

The Danes last blog post..20090417.teaParty

And besides, let’s not forget that Ben was deceived, more or less, into killing Jacob by someone that he thought was Locke. Sure, Ben had plenty of grievances with Jacob, but it was only after “fake” Locke twisted and emphasized them that Ben resolved to kill Jacob.

I wouldn’t be surprised, given how twist-y and turn-y Lost is, that this sets the stage for Ben’s redemption, among other things.