EXODUS 20:2-14: “You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself an image, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me, but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of those who love me and keep my commandments.
I’m fascinated by the relationship between secular and religious iconography. In particular, I have an intensely passionate emotional and intellectual relationship with one of the world’s most compelling and famous secular icons: the Empire State Building and it is through that passion that I’ve come to understand something more about religious iconography.
When it comes to religious iconography I am seriously handicapped as an agnostic, a cynic and as a Jew. This subject is particularly challenging for a Jew, secular or otherwise. Even a secular Jew grows up “understanding” that iconography is simple-minded at best, blasphemous at worst. The truth is found within our hearts and minds and to seek the truth through images is false, intellectually lazy and in opposition to the absolute word of God.
But my life long relationship with the Empire State Building has defied my Jewish perspective and seditiously lured me into the world of image worship. (Just one of the commandments I routinely break.)
Having grown up on Manhattan’s Lower East Side and in the East Village, the Empire State building quickly became one of my powerful childhood visuals. I think I instinctively bonded to her like a duckling to a mother duck. Her image stood for the complex and exhilirating promise of “uptown”. Returning from trips to other countries or the “mainland”, this dominating and majestic beacon would welcome me home and proclaim the supremacy and grandeur of my special island. I can’t speak for out-of-towners, but for a New Yorker, the Empire State Building shines with a special aura of power, wealth, stability, creativity, history, continuity, culture, majesty and pride.
I remember when She was first illuminated with lavender lights for Gay Pride. As a gay man, nothing before or since had more emotional impact for me. When she stood for gay pride, the circle felt completed.
Her commanding phallic nature is undeniable. In fact She, the Empire State Building is one of the world’s most obvious phallic symbols. I’ve often wondered why we refer to her as a she. Why do we, at least in English, refer to architectural erections in the feminine? Are we, on some primitive and ancient level, signifying the “wholeness” of divine nature, sensing both the masculine and the feminine in the world’s most famous erection (pun intended)?
In the early 70s, as the Twin Towers rose to challenge her supremacy, we learned that size isn’t everything. They were taller, they were two, but she remained New York. Her name was Manhattan and the Twin Towers stood tall because they were proud to be in Her company. And when they fell on 9/11, we all looked to Her. She was defiant; the Towers had come and gone but WE were still here, standing as tall and as proud as ever. The Twin Towers were a terrible hurt, but our heart and soul remained strong and proud on Fifth Avenue and 34th Street.
On holidays, she shines with the appropriate colors making the city Easter, Christmas, Gay Pride, Thanksgiving and Independence Day. She singularly leads the skyline in celebration.
Even King Kong understood that She was the noblest and most important place to make one’s last stand.
I have lived in this town for 58 years and no other icon fills me with such pride, satisfaction and grounding. I can be walking in any part of this city and there she’ll be, in all of her glory or just winking at me from a distance between a jumble of other non-descript buildings.
I am not a religious man and have never emotionally understood the power of religious iconography. Is the passion I feel for the Empire State Building related to the passion the devout feel for the great portraits of saints?
As a photographer, the challenge for me–a challenge I never quite feel that I’m able to meet–is to capture an image of the Empire State Building that is out of the ordinary, not a postcard, not another one of the thousands of photographs published by the New York City Visitor’s Bureau. How does one create a work of art that includes an icon and that is not overwhelmed by the icon? Was that on Warhol’s mind when he did Monroe? Was Warhol’s counter-balance to Monroe’s overwhelming iconic power, the power of repetition? I think artists mostly avoid icons because of their dominating power; even a subtle hint of a true icon commands and demands the viewer’s complete focus. How can an artist’s sense of color or composition compete with the visual dominance of a true icon.
Even as a secular man, I almost superstitiously wonder at the supernatural power this icon has over me. And as a child of the age of science and reason, I cannot fully explain her spiritual command of my psyche. And as I stand on the roof of my building, 45 stories above the city and gaze out upon this thing that is ostensibly nothing more than a pile of steel and stone, I begin to sense the overwhelming majesty and power of a Stonehenge or a Chichen Itza in a world before modern science. And I think I better understand the lost potency and supremacy of religious art and architecture.
wow…I’m in awe with your writing and photography. Both strike so many cords in me…and in some ways I feel the same about the mountains here in New Mexico….especially the Sandias in my back yard. I look to them so many times a day just for grounding, peace, reassurance.
Richard,
Nice post Richard. I’ve always liked the Empire State building, though I never new she was a she until now. I remember seeing the different colored lights on the building, looking at these from my grandparents apartment in Chelsea. I never saw the lavender though.
I’ve been wondering about this issue of photography and subject also. How much of a photographs style is inextricably linked to the subject of the photo? Your photos are quite interesting because they are not the standard post-card views. The last one is something magical. How much of your attraction to the building has to do with the architectural style itself?
Karl, you raise an interesting point. The Empire State Building is clearly an architectural masterpiece. It’s not the most beautiful example of Art Deco skyscrapers–that would be the Chrysler Building, but there’s something about the EBS that makes it the singular icon for the concept of skyscrapers. And of all the artistic and architectural styles represented in New York City, certainly none says Manhattan to me more than Art Deco. I’ve not really thought about why this is–what in the Art Deco style touches me so deeply as a New Yorker. I may babble about that next week using a bunch of photos of Art Deco details from around Manhattan–of which I have tons.
Richard,
I agree, it is a masterpiece. The World Trade Center towers were big, but aside from that, I don’t think there was much special about them. It’s true that King Kong did climb up those in a remake of the movie, but that didn’t impart the same magic. I’m keen to see a broader examination of Art Deco skyscrapers.
Richard,
We spent the last three days roaming the streets of Manhattan. I am looking forward to your pictures next week to see your view of Art Deco NYC.
I see EBS as an extended nipple.
Richard,
Your question: “How does one create a work of art that includes an icon and that is not overwhelmed by the icon?” is one that I think resonates most with me. And you’ve answered your own question, it seems to me, by showing that the “icon” changes.
We needed to see the five images and even, perhaps, to read the text to understand the resonance of the building, not just for you but for us all. The imagery and text allow the Empire State Building to remain an “icon” but to also come to be imbued with your sensibility, to be connected to time and space and position of the viewer (or viewfinder, if you will).
Icons are generally stopped in time, fixed in space, complete in themselves. But as humans and not-god, we can’t stop time, fix ourselves in space, and so forth. So in one way, you are simply yielding to your humanity, acknowledging that you can never quite capture, once and for all, stopped and complete, this image and meaning. You have to write about it linearly, you have to photograph it time and time again. I think that even the Jewish god might acknowledge that this is not another god, nor even an attempted image of a god, but rather a humble human activity attempting to expand one’s minute knowledge of the universe.
Richard,
Great writing and some good pictures – as is always your style.
For me, the Empire State building offers something at the emotional and architectural levels.
When the lights go up on the Indian Independence day, I feel that someone in NY cares a bit for a country of 1.1. billion people that rarely gets a mention in mainstream media.
Architecturally – it is breathtaking – just climb up the steps to the observation deck and the intricate design is a sign to behold – look at it rising over the silhouettes from Hoboken and the spire only thrills. Great post and enjoyed reading it…
Sunil: Thanks! I didn’t realize that you live in New York city?
Richard,
I live in New Jersey, but for the last 8 years I have been working full time in downtown Manhattan (I used to work in an investment bank for a long time, but now I have moved to a public agency). I sometimes spend more time in the city than at home – yes, in that sense I live in the city…
Hey all, I reprinted a portion of this post on my own thread in the young widows bulletin board. Well, we were having a discussion on phallic symbols and besides my own opinions, you had some good material. Please, I hope that no one here is disturbed by my borrowing of intellectual thought (I did give you credit). LOL
Many blessings for a thankful and giving thanksgiving 08 and my thoughts will remain with you because of your lovely and thought provoking messages here,
xoxo L.
Laurah,
As far as I’m concerned, we at Art & Perception are delighted to share in the way you’ve illustrated. Naturally, authors automatically have copyright on their own writing, but I doubt any would object to attributed use by others–rather the opposite. Thanks for reading and commenting.