TheByzantineLiturgyasAsceticSpectacle:

RethinkingByzantineImageInstallationinLightofModernMedia

byGlebSidorkin

1.Introduction

TheChurchoftheHolySophiainKiev,builtbyByzantineandlocalartistsinthe11thcentury,is
oneofthegreatestextantexamplesofmiddleByzantinechurcharchitectureanddecoration,but
withaRusiantwist:aprofusionofornamentwhichisnotasabundantinByzantinechurches.1
ThevastnumberofmedievalfrescoesandmosaicspreservedonthewallsoftheSophiaare
consideredtobemasterpiecesofsuchornament,orofmonumentalpainting,2orofthe
classicalsystemofmiddleByzantinechurchdecoration,asOttoDemusphraseditinhis
landmark1948study.3WhileIdonotwishtodetractinanywayfromthebrilliantworkdoneby
Demus,Iwanttosuggestthattheterminologyheandothercriticshaveusedthusfaris
insufficientforafullaccountingoftheformandfunctionofaByzantineorpostByzantine
church.Tofullyunderstandcomplexworksofmedialikethegrandliturgiesthattookplacein
theKievSophia,onemustleavebehindlimitingarchitecturalcategorieslikeornamentand
decorationandengagewiththechurchasaunifiedmultimediaspectacle.Onemustshift
perspectivefromthetraditionalviewpointofarchitecture,inwhichoneexperiencesspaceasa
visualobject,totheviewpointofcontemporaryinstallationart,inwhichspaceisdesignedto
presentvisualobjectstothespectator.
GiventheflatnessandimmersivequalityofthevisualobjectsintheSophia,Iwould
prefertocallthemscreensratherthanelementsofdecorationorornament.Inaspacesuch
asamovietheateroragallerywithmultichannelvideoinstallation,thespectatorsexperience
oftheaudiovisualeffectsbeingpresentedonscreenareprimary,whereasspecificarchitectural
solutionsproceedfromthedemandsofthespectacle.WhileOttoDemushasgonefarinthe
purelyaestheticdescriptionofthevisualeffectsproducedinaByzantinetemple,scholarly
developmentsofthepastfourdecadesinthestudyofscreens,installationspaces,and
multisensorymediahavecreatedavocabularythatallowsustoanalyzetheSophiasicons
morefully,aspartofaspectacular

GesamtkunstwerkaworkoftotalartlikeaWagnerian
operaoracontemporarymuseuminstallation.Ifarthistoriansaretofullydescribetheaesthetic
experienceofthefrescoesintheKievSophia,ourobjectofstudymustnotbethevisual
experienceofstandinginarichlydecoratedbuilding,butratherthespectatorialexperienceof
theworshipperparticipatinginaliturgy.TheOrthodoxworshipperhasacloserkinshiptowith
theexperienceofthecontemporaryfilmviewerormuseumgoerthanwithanythingsofar
HrihoryLogvin,KievsHagiaSophia,(Kiev:MistetstvoPublishers,1971)p.9.

Cf.DoulaMouriki,StylisticTrendsinMonumentalPaintingofGreeceduringtheEleventhandTwelfth

CenturiesinDumbartonOaksPapersVol.34/35(1980/1981),pp.77124
3
OttoDemus.ByzantineMosaicDecoration:AspectsofMonumentalArtinByzantium

(NewYork:ACLS,
2008)p.4

proposedintraditionalscholarlyaccounts,andweshouldadjustourterminologyaccordingly.
Mythesisisthissimplemethodologicalpoint,andthemaingoalofthisessayistolaythe
groundworkforanew,ModernistekphrasisoftheByzantinetemple,usingthefilmandmedia
studiesterminologyofinstallationandscreen,whileresituatingtheKievSophiainitsproper
placewithinagenealogyofspectacle.

2.Method

Theimageaboveisapartialviewofthehippodromecycleoffrescoesinthesouthtowerofthe
KievSophia,showingtheByzantineemperorandhisretinuestandingintheRoyalbox,flanked
byfellowspectators,allengrossedinthespectacleofchariotracing.Thislargeandbrightly
coloredfrescohasbeendescribedasatwodimensionalversionoftheHippodromein
Constantinople,commissionedbythechurchspatron,IaroslavtheWise,sothathe,too,might
haveahippodromeinhiscapitalcity.Scholarswhohavewrittenaboutthisimageinvariably
arriveatapoliticalreadingofthissetoffrescoes,andrightlyso.ThehippodromeandtheHagia
SophiainConstantinoplewerekeysymbolsofImperialpower,aswellassiteswherethe
Emperormethissubjectsandpubliclyperformedhisorheroffice.Sofar,Iaroslavs
appropriationofthissymbolismforhisownpoliticalprojecthasbeenthefocusofscholars
readingthehippodromeimages:

Iaroslavsucceededinhis"speculation"withByzantinesigns...InSt.Sophia,the
processofcompressingandreconfiguringConstantinopolitanlociofpowershowed
anunderstandingoftheleversofByzantineimperialpower.Thecompressionand
simulationoftheConstantinopolitanimperialtopography,includingtheshrineof
Blachernaeandthehippodrome,aswellasthelavishdisplayofexotica(mosaics,
2

Greekinscriptions),createdagrandstageforIaroslav'sownspectacleofpower,
wheretheprincehimself(ortheprincelydonorportraitsinhisabsence)wouldbe
suitablyframed...Acquisitionofahippodromewasintegraltoacomprehensive
programofelevatingobscureKievontothestageofworldpolitics.TheKievan
hippodrome,auniquepossessionofitsRus'owner,wasinstrumentalinthecreation
ofIaroslav'smythologyofpower.4

Questionsofpowerandtherepresentationofauthorityare,ofcourse,centraltoByzantineart,
andthelineofanalysisaboveisperhapsthemostinterestingwayoftalkingabouttheKiev
Sophia,giventhehugepoliticalstakesinvolvedinIaroslavsactivityasapatronofthearts.
Indeed,itwouldbeimpossibletocompletelyavoiddiscussionsofpoliticalpowerinmyanalysis,
sincecontemporaryspectaclestowhichIcomparetheByzantinechurch,suchasthecinema
andthemuseum,mayalsobeimplicatedintheselfrepresentationofauthority.Astheaesthetic
philosopherMarieJoseMondzainhasshowninherbreakthroughworkonthepoliticaleconomy
ofByzantineimagery,

Thereisnoalternativesystemofthoughtconcerningtheimagecapableof
competingwiththetheoreticalandpoliticalpoweroftheonethatthechurch
developedduringitsfirsttencenturies.Wehavealwaysbeen,andarestilltoday,
heirstoaChristianiconocracy5

Mondzainstermiconocracynicelyencapsulatestheplayofdivineandearthlypowerthatisso
centraltotheByzantinevisualsystem,whichwasappropriatedbyIaroslavforhis
ConstantinopleontheDniepranditscrownjewel,theHolySophia,withitsunique
combinationofsacredandsecularimperialimagery.Forthepurposesofthisessay,however,I
wouldliketobracketoffasmuchaspossibleanydirectlypoliticalcontentofOrthodox
spectacle,andfocusinsteadontheformsandtechniquesusedtomakethespectaclea
powerfulexperiencefortheparticipant.
WhilethepoliticaluseofByzantinespectaclehasbeenwellestablished,thepractical
mattersinvolvedincreatingaspectaclepowerfulenoughtoinspireloyaltyarerarelydiscussed.
Forexample,itiswellknownthatthesplendoroftheImperialcourtwasanindispensable
diplomatictoolforamilitarilylaggingEmpire.Buthow,exactly,didtheByzantineliturgy
celebratedintheHagiaSophiainConstantinoplecausetheenvoysofVladimirtodesiremoreof
thesame,andultimatelyrecommendanalliancewiththeEast?HowdidaByzantineedifice
createthespecifictypeofspectacularsensoryimpactthatresultedinthefollowingwordsfrom
theaccountofthemissioninPrimaryChronicle?

ThenwewentontoGreece,andtheGreeksledustotheedificeswherethey

worshiptheirGod,andweknewnotwhetherwewereinheavenoronearth.For
ElenaBoeck,SimulatingtheHippodrome:ThePerformanceofPowerinKiev'sSt.Sophia.inArtBulletin,
Sep2009,Vol.91Issue3,pp.283301,p.295
4

MarieJosMondzain,Image,Icon,Economy(PaloAlto:StanfordUniversityPress,2005)pp.173174
3

onearththereisnosuchsplendororsuchbeauty,andweareatalosshowto
describeit.WeknowonlythatGoddwellsthereamongmenforwecannot
forgetthatbeauty.6

ThevocabularyhereidentifiessomeofthespecificeffectsatwhichByzantinetechniquesof
spectacleweremostsuccessful.Thesplendoroftheshimmeringgoldmosaics,thebeautyof
theharmoniousinteriorspacesarefollowedbymorecomplexeffects,suchasthesublime,
wordlessfeelingcreatedbythehierarchicaldisplayofsacredfiguresarrayedinamicrocosmof
universaltotality.Andfinally,thefeelingofdirectconnectiontothedivine,ofdwellinginthe
presenceofGod,whichissocentraltoByzantineaestheticshowdidtheiconographers,
architects,andliturgistsachievetheseeffects?
IfoneleavesasidethepoliticalaspectsofmonumentalartintheByzantinehinterlands
oftheeleventhcentury,thehistoricalrecordbeginstorevealafascinatingpictureofaculture
whichinvestedalargeportionofitsresourcesintotheproductionofspectacularvisual
experiences.InKiev,theDesiatinnaiachurchcommissionedbyVladimirtookupatenthofhis
wealthatatimewhenhewasprinceofoneofEuropeslargestcommercialcities.InByzantium,
anobservercouldtracktherelativehealthoftheEmperorscoffersbasedonhowoftenliturgy
washeldintheHagiaSophiapooreremperorspreferredsmallervenuesforweeklyservices,
giventhecostofthevastquantityofcandlesrequiredtoilluminatetheSophiasmosaicsintheir
fullglory.ImagetechnologywasamongthemostadvancedsectorofByzantineknowhow,and
MonasticschoolsofartsuchastheBlanchernaemonasteryinConstantinople,whichlikely
suppliedthemosaicmastersofKievsSophia,musthavebeenprestigiousinstitutionsintheir
ownright.Blanchernae,whichisdepictedintheKievSophiasfrescoversionConstantinople,
wasanimportantpoliticallocusofpopularsupportforimagesduringtheIconoclaststruggle,
andmanagedtomaintainthecontinuityofByzantinemosaiccraftsmanship.7 Withoutthis
continuityoftechnicalknowhow,brilliantpostIconoclasteffortsledbyBlanchernaeanmonks
suchasthemosaiccyclesofHosiosLoukasinGreeceandHagiaSophiainKievcouldnever
havecomeabout.
Iftheimportanceofimagesfortheexerciseofimperialpowerhasnotbeen
overestimated,theEmperorsandaspiringGrandPrincesoftheeleventhcenturymusthave
resembledcontemporaryimpresarios,findingandrecruitingthegreatestartistsoftheirtimein
ordertostayinbusinessandbeatthecompetition.Topushthisproductiveanachronismfurther,
onecouldcompareByzantinecraftsmentocontemporaryfilmmakersorinstallationartists,
constantlypushingthecuttingedgeofimagetechnologyandofferingtheirskillstothepatrons
theproducersandcuratorsoftheirtime.Asstrangeasthesecomparisonssound,theycontain
themethodologicalleapthatisatthecoreofthispaper:toseetheworldofeleventhcentury
churchbuildingthroughtheeyesofanambitiousartistlookingtobringtheworldsmost
PrimaryChronicle,translatedbySamuelH.Cross
http://web.ku.edu/~russcult/culture/handouts/chronicle_all.html,accessed2012.
6

OttoDemus,DevelopmentandDisseminationoftheMiddleByzantineMosaicStyle,inByzantine
MosaicsinGreece:HosiosLucas&Daphni(Cambridge,Ma:HarvardUniversityPress,1931)pp.95107,
p.99.
7

powerfulspectacletoahungryaudience.
WhiletheByzantineandRusianartistswhocollaboratedontheKievSophiadidnotsign
theirnames,theywerejustasinnovativeandsophisticatedintheirownwayasanyofthevisual
gurusofmodernity.AndIwouldarguethatiftheycamebacktolifeandexperienced
contemporaryspectacle,theywouldbeunimpressedbyourobsessionwithflat,inhuman
screensandourcoldperspectivalillusionism.TheOrthodoxliturgyatthepeakofitssplendor
andsophisticationasasynthesisoftheartswasamorerichlytexturedmediaexperiencethan
almostanythingavailabletousincontemporarylife.Givingduecredittotheanonymousartists
whoachievedtheseancientwondersofscreentechnologyisoneofthehiddengoalsofmy
approach.
AsaninitialgestureofrespecttothedesignersoftheKievSophia,Inowofferan
alternate,apoliticalreadingofthehippodromefrescointhesouthtower.Thepoliticalreading
citedabovedoesnotgrantartisticagencytothecreatorsofthefresco,butrathertothepatron,
whodemandeda2DversionofthehippodromeintheSophiatocompensatefortheabsenceof
areal,3DversioninKiev.Amuchmoreinteresting(ifproblematic)wayofreadingthispainting
inthecontextoftheHagiaSophiawouldbetoseeitasaselfreflexivecommentaryonthe
ascensionofthechurchasthenew,dominantformofmassspectacle.Byincludingthe
hippodromewithinthechurchtheartistsarecelebratingtheirownachievement,claimingtobe
theheirsofbothsacredandsecularformsofspectacle.Ifmyreadingiscorrect,thiswouldbea
conceptualgestureworthyofthegreatestModernists:theKievartistsbothappropriatedthe
architecturalgenealogyofthehippodromethecircus,thetheater,theodeon,thearenaand
announceditsdeathasamedium,transcendingandincorporatingitintothenew,ascetic,yet
utterlycaptivatingvisualsystemoftheHolySophia.

3.Genealogy

Architecturally,theByzantinecrossinsquarebuildingplanexemplifiedintheKiev
SophiaistheproductofalongprocessofelaborationupontheancientmodeloftheRoman
basilica.ThissimplebuildingplanwasusedforofficialgatheringsinRomancitiessincethefirst
centuryAD,andfeaturedalong,rectangularhallwithanapseatoneend.Theinteriorofthe
hallwassometimesdividedbycolumnsintoseparatenaves,orbracketedbyaisles,which
couldbeusedasstallsforcommercialpurposes.Themagistrate,ruler,or,bishopcouldsitona
daisintheapse.Scholarshavetracedtheslowevolutionfromthissimpleadministrative
buildingtotheornatecrossinsquaredesign,fromtheChristianremodellingofsecular
basilicasunderConstantine,toaprofusionofvariationsonthethemeofbasilicainthefourth
andfifthcenturies,8tothedevelopmentofthedomedcrossinsquarepatternfromits
conceptioninthesixthcenturytoitsstabilizationintheninthcentury.9Thepathfromthebasilica
tothefinalformwas,accordingtoDemus,analmostteleologicalone,resultingintheshapeof
RichardKrautheimer,EarlyChristianandByzantineArchitecture(NewYork:YaleUniversityPress,1987)
p.43
9
OttoDemus.ByzantineMosaicDecoration:AspectsofMonumentalArtinByzantium(NewYork:ACLS,
2008)p.11
8

acruciformspaceformedbythevaultedsuperstructureoftranseptsarrangedcrosswiseand
crownedinthecenterbyahighercupola,whichwastheidealreceptacleforahierarchical
systemoficons.10
WhileitisrelativelyeasytofollowtheformalcharacteristicsoftheKievSophias
constructionbackthroughacenturieslongChrisianizationofthebasilica,tracingthegenealogy
oftheChristiantempletofinditsfunctionalantecedentsismorecomplicated.Oneobvious
antecedentmightbetheoldRomantemples,butthesewereshunnedfortheirpaganlegacy,as
wellastheirincongruencewiththedevelopmentsinChristianworship.WhereasChristian
liturgiesdevelopedintheconfinesofthecatacombsandearlyhousechurches,pagan
sacrificesweregenerallydoneoutdoors,inthesightoftheGods,withatemplecontainingthe
cultfiguresservingasabackdrop.11 Inthiscase,thefunctionofthebasilicaasasimple
meetingplacemayhavebeenclosertothefunctionofearlyChristianhousesofworshipthan
werethepagantemples.
AmorefruitfulsearchfortheprehistoryofthechurchwouldtolookintotheJewish
traditionoftempleworship,asKathleenMcVeyhasdone,andfollowthemodelsofsacred
spaceandritualastheywereadaptedbyearlyChristians.Shefindsthebasicelementsof
Christianliturgicalpracticewithinanabstracted,PlatonicconceptionoftheancientJewish
constellationofsacredspace:ark,tabernacle,andTemple.LiketheJews,Christiansfound
bothroyalandcosmicdimensionsinthetabernacleandthepriestlycult,butaddedaChristian
typologicallayerofinterpretationasNewTestamenttheologybecameasourcefornew
liturgicalparadigms.12 Alackofarcheologicalrecordpreventsusfromknowingtowhatextent
theearliestChristianbuildingsresembledtheTempleinJerusalem,orthesynagoguesthat
followeditsdestructionin70AD,butmanyofthoseintheJesusmovementsupportedthe
restorationofthetempleandjourneyedtothesiteaspilgrims.13
ThespiritualandeschatologicallegacyofJewishworshipnodoubtimprintedstronglyon
thestructureoftheChristianritualsperformedintheKievSophia.Buttheradicallyaniconic
streakwithinJudaismimpliestoogreatacontrastwiththedenselypopulatedvisual
environmentoftheSophiafortheTempletobethesolecontributortoitsgeneticcode.
UponwalkingintotheKievSophia,oneimmediatelynoticesthatthechurchisavisual
text,communicatingtoyouwithbothimagesandwords.Onealsoisimmediatelytakenbythe
sheervisualpleasureoftheplayofimages,whichareanimatedbyamobilespectator,
revealingthemselvesandduckingoutofsightasonemovesthroughthegalleries.Onone
hand,wearedealingwiththecommunicativepowerofaudiovisualmedia,capableofconveying
ideasthroughcharacter,narrative,andsymbolism.Ontheotherhand,weareexperiencethe
sheerpowerofthevisualeffect,whichtemporarilyaltersourexperienceoftheworld.Thesetwo
functionsofmedia,thecommunicativeandtheparticipatory,formthepolesofadialecticwithin
10

ibid.,p.12

11

"BasilicaPlanChurches".Cartage.org.lb.Retrieved20120210.

12

KathleenE.McVey,SpiritEmbodied:TheEmergenceofSymbolicInterpretationsofEarlyChristianand
ByzantineArchitectureinArchitectureasIcon:PerceptionandRepresentationofArchitecturein
ByzantineArt(NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress,2010),p.43
13
Ibid.,p.42
6

whichtheByzantinechurchseekstofindaneternalbalance.
InLeonidOuspenskysTheologyoftheIconhewrites,

Whatisthebasisofsymbolisminchurches?Christianlifeisbasedontwoessential
realities.OneistheredeemingsacrificeofChrist,theneedtoparticipateinthis
sacrifice,topartakeofcommunioninitinordertobesaved.Theotheressentialtruth
isthegoalandtheresultofthissacrifice:thetransfigurationofman,andwithhim,of
thewholevisibleworld,resultinginpeacebetweenGodandtheworld.Thissecond
truthisthemainsubjectofchurchsymbolism:theforthcominguniversalKingdomof
God.

Thisformulationrevealstherelationshipbetweenvisualeffectandcommunicationinthe
fakturaoftheHagiaSophia.Theiconsfunctioncommunicativelyaspartofatextualsystem
whichbringsthespectatorintoclosercommunionwithGodbygivinghimknowledgeofthe
cosmicorderandallowinghimtoexperienceGodthroughthecharacterofChristandthe
narrativeoftheNewTestament.Thistextualcommunioniscoupledwithafuturisticprojectionof
thecomingtransfigurationofmanandhisvisualfield.Byradicallyrealigningthespectators
vision,thevisualeffectelementofthechurchplaysakeyrolebyperformingthetransfiguration
ofhumanvisionpromisedinthecontentofthedidacticvisualsystem.
HavingisolatedtwoformalfeaturesoftheHagiaSophiawhicharenotpresentineither
thebasilicaortheJewishtemple,Icanlookfortheirantecedentsinotherformsofancient
spectacle,andaddtwomoreelementstomygenealogyoftheOrthodoxtemple:Roman
theatricalspectaculaandRomanmonumentalstatuary.IntheformerIseetheancestryofthe
communicative,didactic,ornarrativeelementoftheKievSophia,whilethelatterwasthepurest
formofpurevisualeffectintheancientworld.
Fromthepointofviewofmediahistory,theOrthodoxtemplecanbeviewedasa
synthesisofthemonumentalandtheatricaltraditionsofRomanart.Afterdescribingthespatial
visualeffectsoftheByzantinemosaic,OttoDemuswrites:

ThisfeelingoftherealityofspacedevelopedinByzantinepaintingatthetime
whenByzantinesculpturedied,asaresultoftheIconoclasticcontroversy.Muchof
thespatialqualityofsculptureintheround,whichmaybesaidtoexistinthesame
spaceasthebeholder,wentintothedevelopmentofByzantinepainting.Byzantine
monumentalpaintingwas,indeed,thelegitimatesuccessorofmonumental
sculpture.14

Thebestexamplefordefiningthecorrespondencebetweenthespatialeffectsofthemosaicsin
anOrthodoxchurchandthoseofmonumentalsculptureistoconsideramonumentlikeTrajans
column:

OttoDemus.ByzantineMosaicDecoration:AspectsofMonumentalArtinByzantium(NewYork:ACLS,
2008)p.11
14

Theformaldeviceofwrappinganarrativesequenceofimagesinaspiralpatternarounda
circularcolumnhastheeffectofleadingaspectatorincirclesaroundasquarewhilelookingata
centralpointinthatsquare.Thenarrativeelementhereisimportant,butitisimpossibleto
actuallymakeoutthecontentofthedetailedreliefsatthetopofthecolumn.Instead,theeffect
hereisavisualone,typicalofmonumentalsculpture:thechoreographyofamobilespectatorin
relationtoanobjectcreatesashiftintheusualhumanviewpoint,givingtheimpressionofan
altered,perfectedexperienceofvisuality.
ThemonumentalByzantinechurchcanalsobeseenasacontinuationandsublimation
oftheRomanspectacula,whichisacatchallphraseusedbyhostileChristianwritersto
describethepublicentertainmentsonofferinthevariousvenuesofaRomancity.Theseevents
couldincludeanythingfrombloodygladiatorialcombatandepichistoricalreenactmentto
melodramaticstageplaysorcomedicsongs,butmostofthemfunctionedinthecommunicative
mode.Eventhosethatseemedtoprovidemerelyspectacle,suchasgladiatorialcombat,were
oftencouchedinnarrative,andthetheaterwasaplacewherestories,narratives,ideas,and
emotionswereconsumed.
St.AugustinearrivedinCarthagetofindacitybrimmingwithentertainmentvenuesof
everyvariety,andhewritesaboutthespectaculafrombothsidesofhisconversionexperience.
Atfirst,heisdrawntothetheateranditsdramas,andlovestogrieve,seekingoutactorsthat
bestportrayedmiseryanddrewfromhimthemosttears.Later,heseesthisdesiretovicariously
livethesorrowsofothersasathefouldiseasepickedupbyanunhappysheepasitstrays
fromthemastersflock.15 OtherChristianwritersofthefirstthreecenturiesC.E.,suchas
Tertullian,wereevenmorevehementintheirdenouncementofthespectacula,and
spearheadedaculturewarthateventuallyremadethelandscapeofRomanspectacleinthe
imageofChrist:

Whatarethepartakersinallthisnolongertheirownmasterslikelytoachievefor
themselves?Atbest,thelossoftheirselfcontrol.Theyaresaddenedbyanother's
badlucktheyrejoiceinanother'ssuccess.Whattheyhopeforandwhatthey
dreadhasnothingtodowiththemselves,andsotheiraffectionistonopurpose
15

Augustine,Confessions6,quotedin"AncientCarthage",accessed2012211
8

andtheirhatredisunjust.

Butwhatismoremercilessthanthecircus,wheretheydonotevensparetheir
rulersortheirfellowcitizens?Ifanyofthesefrenziesofthecircusbecomethe
faithfulelsewhere,thenitwillbelawfulalsointhecircusbut,ifnowhere,then
neitherinthecircus.16

TertulliansrhetoricherealludestothecommonthemesinChristiancritiquesofpagan
spectacles,whichwereespeciallyvocalaboutthecrueltyofpublicexecutionsandgladiatorial
combats.Thesecruelspectacleswereeventuallythinnedout,andgavewaytoakinder,gentler
Constantinopolitancircusanditsredandblueteamsofchariotracers.InKiev,onlyanimage
oftheHippodromeremainedtoremindChristiansofthedarkdaysofunbridledspectacleinthe
arenasofRome.
ThevictoryofChristianimageproductionovertheartoftheClassicalworldgaveriseto
arevolutionary,asceticformofvisualrepresentationtheiconwhichreplacedthepagancult
objectwithanew,asceticdevotionalobjectthatmaintainedthelegitimacyoftheimagewhile
dictatinganewwayofrelatingtoimages.Theiconrepresentednotonlyanewkindmoralityof
representationwithitslimitedsubjectmatterofsaints,angels,Christ,etc,butalsoanew
conceptofveneration,inwhichtheimagewastakenasanimage,ratherthethingitself,but
onecapableofconnectingtheviewertothesubject.Theiconisthusdirectlyrelatedtothe
Christianliturgy,thelogikelaetriaorreasonableworship,whichisseenasaparticipationin
thedivine.TheChristianiconisatamed,circumscribedversionofthepaganidol,createdwith
builtinformalbarrierstopreventanyabuseoftheimagebywouldbeidolaters.Itisa
participatoryimage,inwhichtherelationshipbetweenviewerandimageisoneofmutual
engagement.
ThesameChristianrevolutionalsotargetedtheRomanspectacula,replacingtheir
myriadmakebelievedramaswiththesingle,interlockingsetofpersonalandcosmicdramas
thatwasperformedintheliturgicalcycle.Thecycleofliturgicaleventsthatwascelebratedin
theKievSophiaweavedtogethernumerouslevelsofnarrative:thecosmiccycleofcreation,fall,
incarnation,andtheendtimesthenarrativecycleoftheGospelsandthesuspensefuldramaof
Christsdeathandresurrectionandfinally,thenarrativeoftheindividualsinner,whoisincluded
inthegreaternarrativebyvirtueofthenarrativizingsacramentsofbaptism,confession,
communion,marriage,andburial.
Therefore,theKievSophia,withitssublimatedRomanlegaciesofthenarrativeandthe
spectacular,isanasceticspectacle.Whilethecritiquesofunbridledspectaclelaunchedby
AugustineandTertullianweretakenupintheModernperiodbytheoristsoftheFrankfurt
SchoolandmanyotherartistsandthinkersfromtheSovietAvantGardetoJeanBaudrillard,
therehavebeenfewtrueattemptstocreateatrueasceticspectacle.Amongthosethathave
beencreated,theKievSophiastillstandsoutashavingitall:sheerbeautyandharmony,
combinedwithaweinspiringvisualeffects,yetbalancedbythehumble,ascetic,participatory
modeinwhichtheChristianworshipperapproachesthespectacleoftheliturgy.
16

Tertullian,onthespectacle,quotedinibid.
9


4.Gesamtkunstwerk

TheparticipatoryelementoftheOrthodoxspectacleisitscentralChristiancharacteristic,
andgroundsitsroleasanasceticimageinadeeperwaythanthemodestyofthebodies
depictedinitsvisualtrack.17However,despiteor,perhaps,becauseofthelimitations
imposedbyChristianasceticism,theKievSophiaandherliturgistsmanagedtoputonavery
powerfulshow.Evenwithoutviolence,sex,orunexpectedmomentsofdramaticsuspense,18 the
HagiaSophiawasboththeCineplexOdeonandtheMoMAofeleventhcenturyKiev.Tousea
moreprecisearthistoricalterm,onecouldsaythatthechurchanditsliturgycomprisedawork
oftotalinstallation,orGesamtkunstwerk.19
TheideaofatotalworkofartorGesamtkunstwerkwasfirsttheorizedbyWagnerand
lateradaptedtothegalleryinstallationcontextbytheMoscowconceptualistartistIlyaKabakov.
Wagnerstheoriesweretiedtohisdreamofcreatingatypeofstageproductionthatwouldbea
unityofallthearts.InWagner'stheoryofGesamtkunstwerk,theindividualartsofmusic,
painting,sculpture,designanddancearesubordinatedtodrama,whichbecomesa
supermediuminwhichasynthesisofthealltheartsisaccomplished.Asingle,unifyingvision
canthenbeappliedtothistotality,creatingthemostpowerfulharmonyofmediaimaginable.
ThisvocabularyagoodframeworkforlookingattheKievSophia,whichisessentiallya
theatricalspaceinwhichvisualart,music,architecture,andperformanceareunitedwithinthe
mediumofliturgy.
ThetermGesamtkunstwerkseemstobetheonlywaytoproperlydescribethefunction
ofornamentsordecorationsontheKievSophiaswalls.Theyarenotornaments,because
theyarenotsubordinatedtoanypurelyarchitecturalconcerns,butratherareendsin
themselves,asscreenssetupforanencounterwithanengagedspectator.Noraretheymerely
paintings,sincetheydonotfunctionasinert,independentworksofartforaesthetic
contemplation,butratheraspropswhichparticipateinacommunalperformance.Thiswasthe
samedisciplinaryBabelencounteredbyWagner,whichforcedhimtosegmentatotalworkinto
itscomponentartforms:

JustasinthebuildingoftheTowerofBabel,when[105]theirspeechwas
confoundedandmutualunderstandingmadeimpossible,thenationsseveredfrom
eachother,eachonetogoitsseveralway:so,whenallnationalsolidarityhadsplit
intoathousandegoisticseveralities,didtheseparateartbranchescutoff
17

N.B.:Theimagetrackisafilmstudiesconceptreferringtothevisualportionofamultimediawork,which
couldalsoincludenumerousaudiotracksorasubtitle/texttrack.
18
Infact,thisisonlytrueinrelationtosecularspectacle.Sex,violence,andsuspensecanallbefoundinthe
NewTestamentstoriesstagedintheOrthodoxtemple,aswellasonitswalls:Theeroticallycharged
Annunciation,thedeathsofChristandthemartyrs,andthesuspensefulmomentoftotaldarknessonthe
eveoftheResurrection,alladdtothetheatricalappealofChristianliturgy.
19

Foramoredetailedcontemporaryaccountoftheseterms,seeValeryPodoroga,NotesonIlyaKabakov's
onthetotalinstallationinThirdText,Volume17,Issue4,2003.04Jun2010
10

themselvesfromtheproudandheavensoaringtreeofDrama,whichhadlostthe
inspiringsoulofmutualunderstanding.20

Todaysdisciplinaryboundariesbetweenarchitecture,arthistory,filmandvisualstudies,and
performancestudiesarethesadlegacyoftheBabelianmomentdescribedbyWagner.Since
theKievSophiawasconceptualizedandconstructedbeforethefallfrommediaunityanevent
usuallyassociatedwithKantitisespeciallydifficulttodealwithinafragmentedmatrixof
scholarlyfields.Forexample,theusualschematicillustrationsthatarepublishedalongwith
photoreproductionsoftheSophiaspaintingslooksomethinglikethis:

AsRobertOsterhouthaspointedout,thistypeofschematicreflectsaModernistapproachto
architecturaldrawingandarchitecturalvaluesingeneral.Thisimagemaywellhavebeen
meaninglessforaByzantinearchitectwhoimmediatelythoughtinthreedimensionalforms,as
opposedtothetwodimensionalparadigmofhumanmovementwhichstructuresModernist
ideasaboutfunctionalspaces.21Sincethewallsdepictedinthedrawingabovearetreated
primarilyasbarriersforhumanmovement,itsnowonderthatthelowlymonikersornament
anddecorationaregiventothefrescoes.Instead,oneshouldlookatathewallsthroughthe
eyesofapainter,asfacetsofamassive,multidimensionalcanvas:

RichardWagner,TheArtworkoftheFuture,(TheWagnerLibrary,edition1.0.Accessedonline12/5/10)
p.33
21
RobertOsterhout,TheHolySpace:ArchitectureandtheLiturgyinL.Safran,ed.,HeavenonEarth:Art
andtheChurchinByzantium,(UniversityPark,PA:PennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress,1991).pp81121,
p.81.
20

11


ThisimageoftheceilingplanofHosiosLoukasisausefulinversionoftheModernist
groundplan,andanicevisualizationofwhatOttoDemussawwhenhewrote:
TheByzantinechurchitselfisthepicturespaceoftheicons.Itistheidealiconostasisitis
itself,asawhole,anicongivingrealitytotheconceptionofthedivineworldorder.
Unfortunately,DemussinspiredekphrasisfailstobreakthroughtheBabeliandisciplinary
boundariesimposedonhimasanarthistorianoftheModernperiod.
WhileDemusearnestlyseekstoliberatetheByzantinemosaicfromitssubordinate
statusasanornament,theveryideaofdecorationinarchitectureiscodedsonegativelyinthe
ModernistvaluesystemthataslongasonereferstoByzantinedecoration,theworkwillin
questionwillinevitablyberelegatedtoasecondtierstatusinarchitecturestudies.Thegreatest
theoristsofmodernurbandesign,MiesvanderRoheandAdolfLoos,operatedundertheless
ismoredictum,andevenwentsofarasaligningexcessornamentationwithmadnessand
criminality.22Becauseoftheseinstitutionalprejudices,theKievSophiahasyettotrulybedealt
withseriouslybyartcritics,eitheraspaintingorasarchitecture:toomuchpaintinglowersthe
statusofaworkofarchitecture,whilebeinganelementofarchitecturelowersthestatusofa
painting.
OnlythenotionoftheGesamtkunstwerk,then,seemstoofferaclearwayforwardfora
postModernistekphrasisoftheByzantineriteasaunifiedwhole.Butbeforegoingontooffer
someobservationsonthevisualandspatialeffectsofOrthodoxliturgy,Iwouldliketopause
andreframethemethodologicalissueIhavebeenlayingoutsofar,whichcouldbeconstrued
asfairlytrivial.WhatdoesitmatterifDemususeswordslikedecorationandornament,as
longasheisaccuratelydescribingwhatisgoingoninthevisualspace?Whocaresif
worshippersexperienceiconsaspartofatheatricaltotality,ifarthistoriansprefertodiscuss
themasworksofmonumentalpainting?Theanswertothesequestionsliesinthefactthat
academicarthistoryisnotjustatheoreticalendeavor,butalsogeneratestheideologiesand
industrystandardsforavastarrayofpreservationandexhibitionprofessionals.Thewayin
whichaworkofartisstudiedbyarthistorianshasimmediateramificationforitsphysical
conditionhowitisittobepreserved,restoredandexhibited?Willanicon
RobertOsterhout,TheHolySpace:ArchitectureandtheLiturgyinL.Safran,ed.,HeavenonEarth:Art
andtheChurchinByzantium,(UniversityPark,PA:PennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress,1991).pp81121,
p.83.
22

12

MycallforredefiningthemediumofOrthodoxchurchdecorationasanelementofa
liturgicalGesamtkunstwerkisaimednotjustatarthistorians,butalsoatcollectorsandcurators
ofOrthodoxart.Asidefromaquantityofshoddy18thcenturyfrescorestorationsanda
hideousBaroqueiconostasis,theKievSophiaherselfisdoingrelativelywellinhercurrentstage
ofmusealization.Thedimlighting,hushedatmosphere,andsheerabundanceofOrthodox
imageryonallsidescreateakindoffaintapproximationoftheliturgicalevent.Inanycase,the
fragilityofthemosaicsprobablyprecludeanykindofsustainedrebootoftheHagiaSophiaas
anactiveGesamtkunstwerk.Otherbodiesofwork,however,dontfareaswellinthecurrent
curatorialenvironment.Forexample,hundredsofRussianiconographicmasterpieces,mostly
paintedonwoodenpanels,havebeencollectedbyaNorthAmericanbusinessman,andplaced
inanewlyerectedmuseumbuildinginMassachusettswheretheyaredisplayedwithabsolutely
noreferencetotheirrolesintheliturgicalGesamtkunstwerk.Likethepermanentlyinstalled
imagesonthewallsandceilingoftheHagiaSophia,transportablepaneliconsarealso
inscribedintoacosmichierarchyandaliturgicalcalendar.Theycan,atanytime,bebroughtto
achurchserviceoraplacedinaprivateiconcorner,andtaketheirplaceasparticipantsina
liturgicalevent.Anditisinonlyinthissettingthattheyrevealtheirtruecolors,notonlyascult
objectsbutasworksofmedia.ThisMuseumofRussianIcons,towhichInowturn,willserve
asafoilformyprojectofresuscitatingandpreservingthetotalartoftheByzantineliturgyinits
originalform.

5.Musealization

TheMuseumofRussianIconsinClinton,Massachusettsisguiltyoffalseadvertising.
Theydo,indeed,exhibitthelargestcollectionofantiqueRussianreligiouspaintingsinNorth
America,soinsomeveryloosesensethenameisappropriate.Buttheveryideaofan"Icon
Museum"isacontradictioninterms,andthereisnotnorcantherebeasinglefunctioningicon
mountedonthosegreymuseumwalls.

RussoByzantineiconsarenotuniqueartifactsbutvisualelementsinaspatial,temporal,
andmultisensorymediainstallationwhicharticulatesanelaboratetextualsystem.Theylose
theiriconicfunctioniftakenoutofthatsystemofrepresentationandplacedintoanother,alien
systemsuchasthemuseum.TheByzantine ,strictlyspeaking,cannotfunctionassuch
outsideofthecontextofitsliturgicallife.Removedfromthesacredenvironmentsthattheywere
specificallydesignedfor,anddisplayedasunitaryartobjectsforthepurposeofaesthetic
contemplation,thesepaintedwoodenpanelsceasetobeOrthodoxiconsinthetruesenseof
theterm.Evenifadevoutbelieverweretoenterthemodernistglassandsteelinteriorofthe
museumandkneeldowninprayerbeforeanicon,thenatureofthemuseumspacewould
preventherfromtransformingitbackintoafunctioningicon.
ThespaceofamuseumisstructuredinaradicallydifferentwayfromthatofanOrthodox
church,andoneaspectofthisdifferenceisrevealedintherelationshipsthatarisebetween
bodiesandimages.Inamuseumyoucan'ttouchtheobjectsthealarmgoesoff.Icons,onthe
otherhand,aremadetobekissed,andexistinthechurchspaceasbodiesavailableforcontact
13

withotherbodies.
Theimperativetoavoidanykindofbodilyinteractionwiththeimagesisthefirstruleof
themuseumchildrenareinstructedto"respect"theartworks.Ofcourse,thewayoneshows
respecttoaniconispreciselybytouching,specificallybykissingitwithone'slips.Thesenseof
touchisanimportantcomponentofthemultimediaexperienceoficons,sincetheOrthodox
liturgyasamediumiscalibratedtointegratethebodyintothetextualsystemofthechurch.By
isolatingtheiconsinaglasscovereddisplayorbehindamotionsensingalarmthemuseum
spaceblocksthedirectphysicalcontactthatanchorstheparticipatoryeconomyofthetextual
systemofByzantineart.
Moresothanasculptureinamuseum,theiconforegroundsitsmaterialityasaliving
object:iconscanweep,secreteoil,orcatchonfirespontaneouslyallofwhichmakesthem
morevaluable.Amuseumpiecelosesvalueifitistouched,worn,orburstsintoflames.Whilea
museumpieceisauniqueobjectthatmustpersistunchangingthroughtime,aniconisan
active,functioningportal,connectingitsreferenttotheobserver.Itiscreatedforthepresent
time,forparticipatinginthenextactofvenerationintandemwithafuturebody.Thefactthatan
iconisvaluedforitsritualfunctionandnotasacommodity,meansthatitsbody,whichis
replaceable,ismoreopentointeractionwithotherbodiesthantheshelteredmuseumpiece.For
alltheirpermanenceandexhibitionvalue,whencomparedtotheliturgicallifeoficons,thefate
ofthemuseumforartworkssuchastheMonaLisaisasadone:doomedtoacoldisolation
chamberforeternity,nevertofeelthetouchofhumanlips,thewarmthofcandles,orthesmell
ofincense.
Ritualfunctionandauraareclearlystrippedfromtheiconsbythecold,dimmodernism
oftheMuseumofRussianIcons.Butthosethingsmaynotbeofinteresttothearthistorian,
sincethemuseumhasalwaysexchangedritualvalueforexhibitionvalue.Whatshouldbeof
interesttothehistorianofart,however,isthattheexhibitionvalueofaniconisdependenton
thespatial,temporal,andsensorytransformationsitundergoesinthecourseofitsrituallifeina
temple.Myaimisnottocritiquethemuseumasadesacralizinginstitution,buttopointouta
contradictioninitsdesireforanaestheticexperienceofritualartworks:ifonewantsthefull
aestheticeffect,onemustrestagethefullritual.
Anicon'sexhibitionvalueisfullyrealizedonlyinthetextualsystemofitsintendedritual
staging.AkeyformalaspectofByzantineimagesisfrontality.Thefrontalorientationofthe
saintscreatesachargedspaceofinteractionbetweentheviewerandthescreen.Anyonewho
looksataniconimmediatelyconnectswiththefigurelookingbackastrikingformaldevice.
However,

thissystemwasnotpurelyaformalisticoneitwasthetheologian'sconcernas
muchastheartist's.Itsiconographicalanditsformalsidesaredifferentaspectsof
asingleunderlyingprinciplewhichmightbedefined,crudely,perhaps,asthe
establishmentofanintimaterelationshipbetweentheworldofthebeholderandthe
worldoftheimageInByzantiumthebeholderwasnotkeptatadistancefrom
theimageheenteredwithinitsauraofsanctity,andtheimage,inturn,partookof
thespaceinwhichhemoved.Hewasnotsomucha"beholder",asa"participant".
14

23

Iconsareanintegralelementinoneofhistory'smostelaborateversionsofthe
Gesamtkunstwerk:themarriageofarchitecture,painting,music,theater,andliteraturethatis
theliturgyoftheByzantineChurch.Theyfunctionasimagesnotinisolation,norinjuxtaposition
withtheotherimagesaroundthemassubjectsofaestheticcontemplation.Rather,thetotalityof
theimagesinachurchisalivingsymbolofthechurchasawhole:

Theiconisnotjustasimpleimage,noradecoration,norevenanillustrationof
HolyScripture.Itissomethinggreater.Itisanobjectofworshipandanintegral
partoftheliturgy.TheChurchseesinitsholyimagenotsimplyoneofthe
aspectsofOrthodoxteaching,buttheexpressionofOrthodoxyinitstotality,the
expressionofOrthodoxyassuch. 24

Fewartistsandarthistorianshavebeeninterestedinthesedetailsofthephilosophicalfunction
oficons,preferringtolookattheirformalspecificitiesandaestheticachievements.Whilethereis
nothingwrongwiththisapproach,Iarguethatneglectingtheliturgicalsettingoficonsinorderto
focusontheiraestheticqualitiesisaselfdefeatingproposition.Failuretoengagetheiconas
partofatotalworkresultsinaskewedpictureoftheaestheticsoftheicon.Theliturgicallifeof
theiconsiskeynotonlytotheirculticfunction,butalsototheirpurelyvisualeffectivenessas
worksofmedia.
Evenifallonewantstodowithiconsistoexperiencethenasbeautifulobjects,the
settingoftheMuseumofRussianiconsdetractsfromtheirvisualsplendor.Forexample,
Byzantineiconographersandtheirsuccessorsappliedpaint,gold,andmosaictilesinmasterful
andingeniouswayscreatetheeffectoflightemanatingfromwithin.Sincetheologypresented
theiconasasortofportalorscreenconnectingtheviewertotherealbeingoftherepresented
figure,theartistsrespondedbytryingtocreateiconsthatappearedtoshinewiththeirownlight.
Thisformalanswertoatheologicalproblemalsohadanotherpurelyvisualeffect:sincechurch
servicesareoftenstagedunderflickeringcandlelight,objectsthatcancatchthatlightina
certainwaywillgivetheillusionoflivingvibrancy.SimplehighlightswereusedbyRussian
painterstocreatethiswonderfulilluminationeffect,buttheheightofthistechniquewas
achievedbyByzantinejewelerswhocreatedpearledchalicescutoutoftranslucentrockthat
shoneinanoutlineofwhite.
Thiseffectoflivingvibrancyandselfilluminationisjustafirst,smallexampleofwhatis
lostwhentheiconisremovedfromitstotalinstallationandhungonabarewall.The
musealizationoficonscompletelycastratestheiconsbyfailingtoactualizethemasthespatial,
temporal,andmultisensoryworkstheyareintendedtobe.Theinterplayoficonsinstalledina
churchspacecreatesspatiotemporaleffectsbasedontheprincipleofmontage,withnarrative
OttoDemus.ByzantineMosaicDecoration:AspectsofMonumentalArtinByzantium(NewYork:ACLS,
2008)p.4.
24
LeonidOuspensky.TheologyoftheIcon(Crestwood,NewYork:St.Vladimir'sSeminaryPress,1978)p.
10.
23

15

andsymbolicmeaningemergingfromtheicons'positionrelativetooneanother.Their
positioningrelativetootherimagesinthespacenotonlypresentthechurchasahierarchical
unity,butalsocreatedramatictensionandnarrativewithinthemontagespaceofthe
iconostasis.Theeconomyofgazesbetweeniconsandviewers,aswellasamongtheicons
themselves,createsenergeticallychargedpathwaysthatactontheparticipantashemoves
throughtheliturgy.Thiselegantballetofgazesthatisstagedinatempleisoneofthekeyvisual
effectsoficonographicartthatiscompletelyeffacedinthemuseumsetting.Whenarrayedina
church,nexusofparticipatoryenergythatiscreatedinthespacebetweenthepeopleandthe
imagesisakeypartofthevisualpoweroficons.Whiletheycancertainlyholdtheirownsimply
asbeautifulpaintingsinthemuseum,thespectatorwhowitnessestheminatemplecanbegin
toappreciatethemalsoaspowerfulworksofarchitecturalmontage.
Itisnotonlyspatialrelations,butalsothetemporaldimensionsofByzantineartthat
becomelostinthespaceofthemuseum.Thedurationonespendsstandingbeforethesame
iconostasiseveryweekinchurchmeansthattheiconsaredesignedinsuchawaythattheir
effectscanunfoldthroughtime.LikeBuddhistmeditationimages,iconsaremadeforamodeof
disciplinedengagementthatbecomesmoreandmorerewardingastheuserbeginstomaster
thetechniqueofprayer.Inthechurch,iconsareanimatedinvariousways:carriedin
processions,kissed,prostratedbefore,anddisplayedinprivilegedpositionsaccordingtothe
yearlyrhythmsoftheliturgicalcycle.Everyweek,adifferenticontakescenterstagewithinthe
sanctuary,andisveneratedbythecongregationuponenteringandleavingthespace.This,in
effect,createsasortoflongdurationcinematicexperience,withimagesmobilizedacrossspace
andtimeinavisualdramatizationofthenarrativearcoftheliturgicalyear.
Otherpowerfulspatiotemporaleffectsareactivatedasaresultofmovementwithinthe
churchspace.Forexample,inaRussianchurch,candlestandsaresetuparoundtheicons,so
thatasthecongregationentersparishionersplacecandlesandtherbyincreasetheillumination
oftheirfavoriteicon.Astheservicebeginsandnewarrivalslightmorecandles,thetotal
illuminationintheroomincreases,slowlyrevealingtherestoftheiconsonthewalls.Circular
processionscalled"entrances"animatelightinaroundthewallsofthechurch,highlightingthe
innerglowofeachiconasthealtarboyswalkbywithlargecandles.
Themostdramaticstagingofanimatedlightoccursduringthemidnightserviceon
EasterSunday.Atmidnight,whenthemomentoftheresurrectionmarksthehighpointofthe
liturgicalcyclefortheyear,asinglesourceoflightappearsinthealtar.Passedslowlyfrom
handtohand,candletocandle,thelightmultipliesuntilitfillsthepreviouslydarkenedchurch.
Sincethechurchhadbeenkeptintentionallydarkforthewholeprecedingfortydayperiod,the
sensationofbrightnessisallthemoreoverwhelmingforbeingtheculminationofatemporally
extendedvisualexperience.

Nomuseumlighting,nomatterhowtastefullyinstalled,couldpulloffthisstunningvisual
effectofanexplosionoflightandthesuddenawakeningoftheglowingiconicfacesarrayed
aroundthechurch.EventhegreatestRussianmuseumcollections,whicharehousedinancient
churchesandthusachieveamoresuitablemiseenscenethanthesterilehotellobby
modernismoftheMuseumofRussianIcons,doharmtotheiconsbylockingthemintostatic
spaceandconsistentlighting.Thefullvisualsplendorofanicon,oritsfullexhibitionvalue,can
onlybeachievedinaliturgicalsetting,whereitfunctionsnotasaninertobjectofaesthetic
16

contemplation,butasapowerfulGesamtkunstwerkinwhichmultisensoryspectacleis
marshaledintheserviceofideology,philosophy,andspirit.
LiketheiconsintheMuseumofRussianIcons,thestunningfivemeterMalaysian
headdressonviewattheMetropolitanMuseumofArtinNewYorkisanimpressiveobjectto
seeinamuseum.But,alsoliketheicons,itwasdesignedtobeviewedinacompletelydifferent
setting.Itstrueeffectisachievedinthecontextofaperformance,perchedontopofamoving
humanbeing,bathedinfirelightandaccompaniedbymusic.Ifseeninititsfullspectacular
glory,initsintendedexhibitionspace,suchanobjectcouldpresentanoverwhelminglypowerful
aestheticexperience.Instead,itismountednexttoasmallblackandwhitephotograph
depictingit"installed"ontheheadofanativedancer.Butthismementoofitsformerglory
merelyhighlightsthelackattheheartofthedisplay,andthemuseumprojectasawholenot
merelyalackofaura,inthiscase,butaneutralizationofspectacle,participatoryenergy,and
dramaticeffect.Lookingattheechoofitsformerlifeintheformofatinyblackandwhite
photographandseeingitmountedinadisplaycaseallwecansayis,"wow,that'sahuge
mask."Butweshouldbeseeingitgyratingoverusinafestivalatmosphere,castindramatic
firelight,andaccompaniedbyecstaticrhythms.Notevenahighqualityvideoreproductionof
suchaneventcouldbegintoapproximatethemultisensoryGesamtkunstwerkoftheobjectin
itsoriginalstagingasritual,withalltheaccompanyingsmells,tastes,sensations,and
movements.Ithasbeennotedthatmuseumsfunctionbyremovingobjectsfromculturesin
whichtheyarealiveascultobjectsandkillingthoseobjects,bringingthemintotheircryptlike
spacesanddisplayingthemasinertbodies.Butitislessoftendiscussedthatmusealizationnot
onlyeffacestheritualvalueofanitem,butalsocompletelydestroysitsexhibitionvalue
Ourculture,whichfetishizesthenew,suffersfromachronicunderestimationofthe
technologiesofthepast,especiallyinmedia.Filmloversareconvincedthatmoviesarethe
pinnacleofthearts,andfondlyrecallthequirkyprotocinematicinventionsofthe19thcentury
astheynarratetheteleologicalascendanceoftheir"syncretic"medium.Butpeoplehavealways
foundwaystocreatecompellingspectacleforthemselves,andtheHomericbard,theMalaysian
dancer,andtheByzantinearchitectallhadpowerfularsenalsofsensorystimulationavailableto
them.FilmisactuallyalotlesssyncreticthananOrthodoxliturgy,whichaddssmell,taste,
touch,andmovementtotheaudiovisualtrackstowhichthefilmmediumislimited.
Thisabsenceofhumanmovementandbodilyengagementthroughthesensesisan
originarylackthathasstructuredthesubconsciousofcinemaforitsentirehistory.Ifonedefines
spectacleasallencompassingsensorystimulation,theearlyLumirefilmsaregimmickylittle
lanternshowswithoutanysensoryintensitywhatsoever.Sincethen,cinemaengineershave
comeupwithallkindsofgimmickstoconvincetheaudiencethattheirmovingimageshowsare
thepeakofspectaclefromcolor,tosound,to3D,tosmellovision.Butasfarascinematic
exhibitionpracticeshavecome,moviesstillhaveaninferioritycomplexwhenitcomesto
immersive,pansensualGesamtkunstwerkensuchastheByzantinechurch,whichincorporates
allofthesensesincludingscent,sound,vision,andtouch,culminatingwiththeexperienceof
Communionwhichalsoengagesthatmostprimordialofthesenses,taste.
MyformalcomparisonbetweentheOrthodoxchurchandthecinemagesturesaligns
withmycallforanewmethodologyforstudyingandexhibitingByzantineart,whichshouldbe
closertovisualstudiesandmediatheorythanthetraditionallyhistoricistandformalist
17

approachesofMedievalarthistory.IwillnotgoquitesofarastosuggestthatByzantineartis
itselfmodern,butIthinkthatourwaysofthinkingaboutmodernistartcouldbeveryproductively
appliedtoanaestheticregimeassystematicandtheoreticallygroundedasByzantineiconology.
ThelackofadvancedphilosophicaldiscourseaboutByzantineartisanintriguing
phenomenon,givenitsclearsophisticationandhistoricalrelevance.WhenMarieJose
Mondzain,thefirstWesternthinkertotakeByzantinearttheoryseriously,setoutonherproject,
shesaysshemetwithseveralinstitutionalobstacles.Theseincludedthesnobberyof
theologians,thejealousprovincialismofmedievalhistorians,aswellasafaddishpopularization
oftheconceptof"iconicity"withinphilosophicaldiscourse.Shedescribesaninteresting
encounterwith"anextremelyknowledgeableByzantinist[who]declaredthatonlyhistory,
geography,andreligionexistedinByzantium,butnotphilosophy."25
Mondzainherselfdoesnotspeculateaboutthereasonsforthisstrangesuppressionof
ByzantinethoughtwithintheWesternacademy,butitisclearthatthewellknowncomplicityof
theacademyandthemuseuminmonopolizingconqueredmediaspacewithimperialnarratives
alsotookplaceinrelationtoByzantium.
Atthebirthofthemodernperiod,theEuropeankingdomssoughttoeclipseByzantiumin
wealth,prestige,andtheologicallegitimacy.Theinstitutionsofthoughtandrepresentationthat
arosewiththosekingdomsarestillinplacetoday,andhavenotonlydisplacedthe
GrecoPatristicsynthesisoftheByzantines,buthavealsocontinuedtoactivelysuppressit.The
fundamentalunitybetweenrulingandrepresentationbecomesevidentinthewaysinwhich
conqueringculturesquicklysubdueanddiscreditthespectacleproducedbythelocalcultures,
andreplacethemwiththeirown,"technicallysuperior"formsofspectacle.Ifthemediumisthe
messageandthemessageispower,thentheiconicregimeofagivensocietyisthekeytothe
controlsofpowerwithinit.Thisisafundamentalnarrativeofcolonialism,andisalsoinplayin
theWest'srelationshiptoitsByzantineheritage.
TheEasternRomanEmpire,whichcontainedthequeenofallmedievalcitiesandlasted
forathousandyearsafteritsconversiontoChristianity,isconspicuouslylackingintextbooksof
medievalhistory.Thisisnotaccidental,ofcourse,sinceafterthefalloftheacademyin
Constantinopleatthehandsofthecrusadersin1204,theonlyplacesthatremainedwhereone
couldgetaneducationwereintheWest.TherepressionofitsEasternChristianrivalby
socalled"Christendom"isstillvisibleinthefieldofarthistory,whereByzantinestudieshas
beenprovincializedasasubsetofMedievalartandisonlynowbeginningtocometotermswith
thecomplexityofthephilosophicalsystemsthatstructureByzantineaesthetics.
IconographyisassophisticatedasanyoftheperiodsofWesternart,includingModernism,that
arethefocusofmosttheoreticaldebatewithinarthistory.EarlyModern,Renaissance,
NineteenthCentury,Postmodernismarthistoriansendlesslydebatetheintricaciesofthese
shiftingrepresentationalcodesandthewaysinwhichthesecodesrelatetothephilosophyof
thetime.Byzantineart,ontheotherhand,hasmostlybeenthesubjectofhistoricizing
exhibitionsthatfetishizeluxuryobjects.RussianandGreekauthorshavecontinuedtodevelop
icontheoryinthe20thcentury,butthisworkhasbeencompletelycutofffromarthistorical
discourseintheWestuntilthelastdecade.
25

MarieJoseMondzain.Image,Icon,Economy(PaloAlto:StanfordUniversityPress,2005)p.4.
18

IwouldthusproposeadoubleremedyforthesadsituationinwhichByzantinearthas
founditself,eithercrucifieduponthestark,greywallsofarenovatedfirehouseinrural
Massachusetts,orstuckinatheoreticallychallengedwingofarthistory.Thefirststepistotake
theiconsbacktothetemple,wheretheycanbestudiedinthecontextoftheelaborate"textual
system"ofwhichtheyarethekeystone.Thewaytheyaredisplayedtoday,cutofffromtheir
multisensoryandfourdimensionalstagingintheliturgicalcycle,isdetrimentaltotheirstudy,
andisakintostagingaWagneroperabymountingthecostumesonawall.Thesecondstep
wouldbetotakeiconsoutoftraditionalmedievalistmethodologiesandbringthemintothe
Modernistbranchesofarthistorydepartments.There,indialoguewithotherphilosophicallyand
formallysophisticatedmodesofartisticproduction,theirtrueinnerlightmightshineforthand
allowthemtofullyrevealthemselvestousonthesensoryaswellastheintellectual,orspiritual
level.

19