The image of the dead lion with bees swarming from its stomach is to be dropped from a few of Lyle’s Golden Syrup packaging. This has created quite a fuss – being discussed widely within the media including on the BBC and GB News. The reactions within the Christian community – reflecting once more the culture’s way of reacting – is to push to 2 extremes.
At the one end are those that appear to see it as an indication of the top times, yet one more indicator that Britain’s businesses are opposing Christianity in every part they do. On the opposite side are those that think it will not be only completely irrelevant but that anyone who brings up the difficulty is admittedly culturally irrelevant and fighting the flawed battles. It’s all the time amusing when someone says that ‘life is just too short to put in writing about this sort of stuff’ – of their latest piece writing about this sort of stuff!
In a world which incorporates major wars in Gaza and Ukraine, unrest in Congo and Myanmar, and mobs threatening the UK Parliament, my sympathy is instinctively with those that think the entire issue is overblown and ridiculous. This seems such a trivial matter. And yet, perhaps it’s indicative of something more?
The lion with the bees comes from the Old Testament story of Samson killing a lion and noticing that a swarm of bees has produced a comb of honey within the carcass. He later uses the phrase in a riddle “out of the strong comes forth sweetness” (Judges 14:14). Both the text and the image have been used on Lyon’s Golden Syrup since 1888, making it the oldest branded image on the planet based on the Guinness Book of Records.
Why was this used? Because the founding father of Lyle’s (later Tate & Lyle Sugars) was a Scottish businessman called Abram Lyle, who was also a Presbyterian elder – and who took his faith really seriously. Doubtless there have been many in Victorian times who would have known and appreciated the biblical reference. I think that will not be true today, but would that be reason enough to drop it? Let’s consider why it has been done and the way it shows changes inside British society.
According to the corporate’s brand director James Whiteley, the changes are being made because the corporate needs to indicate its customers it’s moving with the times and meeting their current needs: “Our fresh, contemporary design brings Lyle’s into the trendy day, appealing to the on a regular basis British household while still feeling nostalgic and authentically Lyle’s.”
It really is a component of contemporary life that corporations think that rebranding actually means something. Will any British household be encouraged to purchase more syrup by the change in design? It’s what’s within the tin that basically matters. Only someone who has to justify a level in marketing from the London Business School would think otherwise. But Branded Britain goes strong.
Although some would argue it’s a superbly logical marketing decision, in marketing terms it doesn’t make an incredible deal of difference and indeed may even be negative, because loyal customers do not like change to the things they enjoy. Replacing the ‘real’ lion with a cute cuddly lion’s head may sound great to a marketing generation reared on Disney, nevertheless it’s so boring. I note in passing that when real Christianity thrives, so does real creativity. But Bland Britain can also be going strong too. We cannot have any real diversity here. Everything must fit into the design mantras the marketing people tell us work – all inside the bounds of the present ideology.
Because of the fuss Gerald Mason, Senior Vice President of Tate & Lyle Sugars, apologised for the upset caused. “We are very pleased with the history and biblical link to our Lyle’s tin, and have absolutely no intention to vary it in any way,” he said.
This seemed somewhat contradictory provided that they’d just announced that they do intend to vary it for many of their syrup packaging, although apparently not the tin – which again begs the query: why have two different brands for a similar product?
He also suggested that, “Religion played absolutely no part in our decision to try something different on our syrup bottles”. But Helen Edwards, the adjunct associate professor of selling at London Business School, doesn’t appear to agree. She explained why the rebranding must be done. As she told the BBC, “The story of it coming from religious belief could put the brand in an exclusionary space, especially if it was to go viral on X or TikTok.” You should stop and skim that again after which take into consideration what it means. Apparently modern corporate Britain and its marketing gurus think that anything coming from religious belief is perhaps seen as ‘exclusionary’ especially if someone ran a campaign on social media!
I think that there are caveats to this recommendation. For example, if something was Islamic or Buddhist that will little doubt be seen as ‘inclusionary’, but when it were Christian or Jewish that will be ‘exclusionary’. So in that wonderful postmodern illogicality we’ve to exclude something in an effort to be exclusive. Suddenly the story doesn’t appear so trivial in spite of everything.
Of course it’s a storm in a syrup cup. And after all Christians shouldn’t be ‘fighting battles’ to vary branding. But we must always pause and ask how we’ve gone from a culture where a biblical verse and story on a product was normal, to at least one where no such thing can be even considered feasible. It seems the one biblical symbol permitted in modern Britain is the culturally misappropriated rainbow!
It is straightforward to mock and indicate that nobody got here to faith due to seeing an obscure Bible verse on a syrup tin, but that misses the purpose. This story is only one piece in a thousand-piece jigsaw which illustrates how branded, bland and unbiblical Britain is becoming. Revive us Lord … and restore to us the years the locusts have eaten” (Joel 2:25).
David Robertson is the minister of Scots Kirk Presbyterian Church in Newcastle, New South Wales. He blogs at The Wee Flea.
