You
see the signs adorning quiet corners: STOP MEANS STOP. The declaration serves
as an addendum, a gloss, on the larger sign on the same metal post sporting the
familiar white on red octagon commanding drivers to halt.
This
codicil strikes me as a suburban phenomenon, reflecting a hyperattentive
concern for propriety and rectitude. It’s hard to imagine seeing these
persnickety postscripts on the boulevards and avenues of a major city. The
thousands of add-ons would cost too much. Besides, who would have time to read
them? Move along, people. Nothing to see here.
The
ubiquitous STOP is a verb, not a noun announcing the type of action required at
the junction. STOP MEANS STOP presumably means drivers who are supposed to be
stopping are merely pausing. Or not stopping at all. If we are going to parse
propriety, let's go further. Perhaps the editorial sign commenting on STOP
should instead say: “'Stop' means stop,
not the simulation or approximation of the cessation of forward movement. Now please
leave our perfect patch of Paradise.”
What
does the law say? What is the required duration of the driver’s pause? It’s not
really a matter of duration. The answer varies for each state, but typically it
means a complete or full stop, meaning no forward
momentum, the needle on the speedometer at 0. (Speedometers don’t have needles
any more; call it Digital Zero.) It means, your car wheels can’t be moving. The popularly
believed 3 seconds required for a stop seems more myth than reality. (“Full
stop.” That’s how our British friends refer to the end punctuation we call a
period. Try using that phrase in your next argument. See if it puts a full stop
to the debate.)
The
notion of a proper duration at a stop sign invites the question: Can you stop
for too long, say, the duration of one lap around the rosary beads or malas
reciting your mantra?
Can
you be prosecuted for indulging in the full metaphysical fruits of your
quotidian caesura?
And
what about pedestrians? At the octagonal red and white sign, must pedestrians
take a deep bow and exhale? It might be the one pause in your day that
refreshes.
Buddhists
talk of the value of stopping, the reward of pausing to gaze at the
interconnectedness of all manner of things.
Is
this what we are called upon to practice when we see STOP MEANS STOP?
The
problem with STOP MEANS STOP is that it risks sending the opposite of its intended
message. You would never post such a message unless the word "stop"
were being routinely ignored. So, how does replicating the word, repeating it,
strengthen its force? Does it not weaken the word "stop"? Does it
mimic the situation of a parent remonstrating a child, perhaps loudly, as the
child clearly knows the word carries no force if not enforced?
This
invites comparisons with other reduplicative expressions, some of a more
serious nature. “No means no” surely delivers an unequivocal expression regarding
the lack of sexual consent. What about broader, societal applications of this
syntactic formula? We can explore endless variations.
Peace
means peace. War means war. Love means love. Hate means hate.
Stop
this already means stop this already!