Images

The Greek word εἰκόνα, as well as many other ancient Greek words, has many meanings. In it’s classical sense however, it means "image". Any image. Only since the 4th century it started being used mainly to describe sacral art. For young Christianity, icons were an innovation. But not for the converts themselves. From time immemorial, devotees were convinced that the shape of an idol contains original essence, its force, and that through continuous contact with it, it is possible to connect with a deity.

People burned incense in front of statues, reliefs and images of their gods. They decorated them with flowers and garlands and carried them along the streets during holidays, accompanying processions with music and dancing. In Asclepius's temple, patients slept on the floor, made sacrifices and prayed for recovery. Ladies of the house decorated family altars. All these rituals carried out only one function - to give people the feeling of security. To make them feel that they are not alone in this huge terrible world, and that if they ever needed help, they will be able to receive it, they just needed to ask.

The images of pagan gods painted in levkas relief- a wax layer mixed with paint and applied onto wooden plates were predecessors of icons. All of them have huge eyes, with the dark expanded pupils directed on one from any aspect. We are watching over you always, they seem to say. We are here for you. Don’t be afraid, have hope. A comforting feeling.

I am interested in parallels between different types of devotion and worship, of which there are infinite amounts, and reasons for opposition in some religions to these images, including early Christianity. It is interesting that the iconoclasm is observed generally in systems of Semitic religions, in which women traditionally play only a supporting role in worship and decision-making. In Byzantium, opponents of icons were mainly men, admirers on the contrary - women. The most colourful examples were the Byzantine empresses - Irina and Feodora. In the first millennium AD, the widowed empresses governed on behalf of their young sons - and every time overturned the iconoclasm, approved by their husbands and sons. From this point of view, development of the Byzantine Empire can be considered as follows - men saved the Empire from it’s enemies, and the women from intellectual impoverishment, by upkeeping tradition of iconography, sculpture, illumination of manuscripts, mosaics and frescos and creating for posterity, what we know and appreciate today, as typically Byzantine style of sacral art.

Despite great value of an iconography in art, I don’t believe that iconoclasm was directed against artists or art as such. Mankind has a very old tradition of looking for protection from above. With arrival of Christianity a lot of things have changed, except this archaic need. The monotheism simply had replaced one picture with another and called it by another name to avoid herd losses. Fathers of Christianity knew very well, that if they will take away the nurturing mother or father figures, no new religion will stand a chance. But why such opposition to images? How should a simple, uneducated person think, without using any physical catalysts? Almost everything that draws our attention has its beginning in the seen. Did not God himself order Moses to make handles of the Arch in the form of gold angels? To imagine anything, most people either need and example or a whole arsenal of auxiliary levers.

Imagine that you watching a horror film without a soundtrack. I am sure that even if it features fountains of blood, without the gloomy music and startling sound effects, like sudden increase of tone at a strategic moment, most likely you will be disgusted but not frightened. Try to tie your eyes with a scarf and ask one of your friends to give you a number of things to smell. I imagine that smell of a rose will cause you to think of a velvety petal with a solitary drop of dew sliding from it. This petal will probably be of your favourite hue and will be connected with a certain moment in your life. The smell of cheese will cause either an association of a cosy dinner with friends, or an allergic reaction. You can connect these things because you know and are able to imagine them. Thus, visual activators generally increase concentration of thinking. It can be confirmed by the use of Yantras. Yantra is a geometric image of a deity using that, a person saying a prayer (mantra), can concentrate on 3-dimentional non- corporal perception of this deity - its (purest) mathematical embodiment. In classical Sanskrit, the generic meaning of yantra is "instrument, contrivance, apparatus", something to trigger your thoughts. While mantras, the Sanskrit syllables inscribed on yantras, are essentially "thought forms". Those are tools, combined with colorful imagery, meant to help a person to connect.

So why forbid these tools? In general, the older the religion, the more diverse it’s planes of worship, the less it tries to force the devotees to adhere to strict rituals and prefers quiet meditation (thinking) to zealous self-torture and indoctrination. To me this is the essence of difference between organized religion and spiritual belief. The belief itself is an axis, which a person can hold on, to at a difficilt moment. Religion, is a structure purely hierarchical by design, in which apriory due to a human element, there is a huge potential for manipulation. It is a system, which allows creation of a power pyramid, and in which there is no place for sublime thought, if only for need of creation in this system of political, economic and social structures.

Religions forbidding art are disposing of auxiliary for imagination, thus ensuring that the devotees find themselves in a situation where they are dependant on the religious organism for devotion and protection. This forces the masses, who are partly still at the archaic levels for lack of education, into complete dependence and respectively, into obedience.

There are uncountable studies connecting certain visual factors to the feeling of contentment, even if it takes place in our imagination. Like children lying in bed at night, squeezing their blanky to fall asleep. After all it helps them think that all will be good - terrible demons won't creep out from under the bed, bad guys will remain on the street and monsters will stay in their crevices. Take away this blanket from the child - he will look for a replacement. And one can consider himself lucky if they do it at home and by traditional methods. The only way to throw away the blanky is to nurture Belief. Independent, powerful mind tool. Ever questioning, strong and supporting. And it makes no difference whether it is a Belief in a deity or in the power of own mind. In the end, it is the same thing.