Slogans are a different matter, one supposes. They do have to be snappy and short. The exclamation mark might, therefore, come in useful. Alternatively, it might be totally redundant. But as a rule of thumb, the exclamation mark should be used only sparingly, if at all. It betrays either the creator's insecurity in highlighting an inability to adequately convey what is intended to be conveyed or his or her syntactical idleness, or both. It is also often a lazy shorthand for, for instance, pointing out that a joke has been made, when, had a joke really been made, it wouldn't require the use of an exclamation mark. It's that insecurity again. The exclamation mark is a punctuational comfort blanket.
We now have, or Palma has, not one but two exclamation marks. Why two? Why not just one? What do two exclamation marks represent that one by itself doesn't? Indeed, why is there one at all? Palma is exclaiming a "passion for enjoying!!". OMG!! I must get so passionate!! I must get enjoying!! OMG!!!!!!!!!!
There is insecurity in this slogan. The exclamation marks say much. They are there to attempt to convince that there is both passion and "enjoying". But the slogan begs a question of what it is that someone is supposed to enjoy. Rather like Turespaña's "I Need Spain" invited a game of filling in the missing words ("I Need Spain" like I need a massive public finance deficit), so does this one: "passion for enjoying getting drunk", for example.
It's not all bad. The use of the gerund form - and "enjoying" is a gerund - is lifted straight from the copywriter's manual of how to motivate through text. The alternative of "enjoyment" would give a closed statement. Enjoying is open, so in this respect the slogan does at least conform to accepted practice.
But the problem is with the exclamation marks. They serve no purpose other than more as a visual aid as opposed to one that aids meaning. If you removed them, would there be any loss? Personally, I don't think so, and I'm more inclined to think that they are there because the exclamation mark has become so overused that to not have one (or two) would lead to it being conspicuous by its absence. Or they are there because the copywriter simply isn't convinced by the slogan on its own.
The slogan and the logo are all part of Palma's 365 campaign. A competition for the logo's design was announced in December, and this is the result.
A problem that Palma town hall created when it announced the competition was that, whatever the winning design was, it was going to be subject to close scrutiny. This was as a consequence of the San Sebastià poster debacle last year; the design for this had been lifted, and so everyone's trying to find if the 365 one has been as well. To this end, a favourite for having acted as a model is the Eurovision logo. Its heart for its "v" is reckoned to be like the heart of the "m" in Palma. I suppose that there is some similarity, but there may be some clutching at straws in making this comparison. More problematic perhaps is if you turn the logo upside down and the "m" begins to look like different parts of the anatomy rather than the heart it is meant to be.
To come back to the slogan, though, it doesn't just have a problem because of the overused exclamation marks, there is also the issue of the P-word. This has sparked off its own debate in marketing land, as it has become so ubiquitous: passion for this, passion for that, passion for everything. Nancy Friedman**, who has made a career out of how to use words in all manner of contexts, such as marketing, has pointed out that "passion" can be both lazy and uncreative but that what it attempts to convey is emotion. It is passé, but it isn't always easy to find an alternative, especially when, as one presumes to be the case, Palma wants to get all emotional.
Ultimately, though, the slogan and the logo are about what it might mean to the consumer. And does the slogan mean anything? Will people be quoting it? I somewhat doubt that they will be.
** Nancy Friedman blog
No comments:
Post a Comment