It’s that time of year, when celebrities and artists engage in self-promotional campaigning and play dress-up in hopes of snaring a nomination for a critic’s award or a guild award or an “arts and sciences” trophy celebrating their excellence, and the rest of us watch them do it. We watch them for the fashions and for the foibles; it is mildly entertaining to observe the bejeweled denizens of Hollywood betray uncertainty when someone like Ricky Gervais begins his banquet-hosting duties by insulting them.
We watch because we like glamour, and there is so little of it in our “work-casual” world, where looking like an unmade bed has become so acceptable in some parts of the country that teenagers go to school in their pajamas.
And we watch because, to an extent that perhaps we do not even realize, we’ve grown accustomed to having idols abuzz in our awareness. They’re not real idols, after all; we don’t actually worship our celebrities, or for that matter our politicians. Not if we are sane.
We remember the story of Moses and the Golden Calf, though, so we know human beings have always created idols. If, some decades ago, we were smart enough to be a little embarrassed about fainting for Sinatra, or screaming for John, Paul, George, and Ringo, we called it adolescent silliness, and considered that idol-making was a rare and harmless pastime.
It was never so rare, or harmless. And as our post-modern society becomes increasingly post-faith, our instincts to raise up entertainers as idols become more frequently indulged, and perhaps we manufacture more of these idols now. Is there a nation that does not have a slew of “Idol-creating” television shows, where celebrity magazines don't cover the newsstands? Even our “serious” newspapers carry pages of social or celebrity profiles.
We construct these godlettes, carry them about on chairs of untoward affirmation, and then resurrect them when they die. We place them in our tin-ceilinged firmaments, and then—if they were in a film that added a catchy phrase to the lexicon, or they posed for a poster that came to define an era, or they influenced fashion in some way, or somehow came to represent some ideal we hold dear—we call them “icons.”
That, however, is where things get dicey, and where we should perhaps pay attention to our words, and our meanings. An Icon is a holy thing, meant to be a reverenced focal point for prayer and contemplation; it is a “window” to the divine. An Icon is as distinct from an idol as is a positive from a negative:
An Icon looks out from an Intrinsic light and points to its Source; there are no shadows in which to hide. An idol looks out from man-created light, and points to no one but himself; then walks into the shadows.
An Icon looks you straight in the eye and invites you to pursue truth. An idol wears shades and has his spokesperson tell you what you want to hear.
An Icon teaches you how to focus; how to quiet down, collect oneself and hear the small, still voice. An idol throws noise, images, and issues at you, non-stop—scatters your thinking and deafens you to any voice but his.
An Icon whispers wisdom. An idol shouts sound-bites and mindless trendspeak.
An Icon inspires you to chant to the Most High. An idol inspires you to chant to him.
One Icon currently gracing my prayer space is called “Lord, Save Me." It is a richly colored image recounting the moment in the Gospel of Matthew, when Peter begins to walk toward Christ, on the water:
When the disciples saw [Jesus] walking on the sea they were terrified. “It is a ghost,” they said, and they cried out in fear. At once (Jesus) spoke to them, “Take courage, it is I; do not be afraid.” Peter said to him in reply, “Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water.” He said, “Come.”
Peter got out of the boat and began to walk on the water toward Jesus. But when he saw how (strong) the wind was he became frightened; and, beginning to sink, he cried out, “Lord, save me!” Immediately Jesus stretched out his hand and caught him, and said to him, “O you of little faith, why did you doubt?” (Matthew 14:26-31)
As long as he kept his eyes on Jesus, Peter had been able to do the impossible, the unimaginable. It was when he looked away—focused instead on the tumult surrounding him—that he doubted, and as soon as he doubted, he began to sink.
As soon as he thought of himself, focused on his perceived reality, Peter was pulled under.
“Lord Save Me” is a particularly restful Icon. The colors are lush, the waves in foreground and background are wonderfully hypnotic, and the shore invites a trek into the wilderness. But it is the beautifully-rendered, compassionate, and loving face of Christ that holds my attention. He reaches out to Peter, whose own face is open with a dawn of understanding, and meeting his eyes, uplifts him.
This Icon contains the whole of the Gospel—lessons of reverence, trust, divinity, openness, vulnerability, kindness, wonder, mystery, human potential, miracles, and yes, limitations and boundaries. That is what an Icon does; bestows positive instruction on The Way, tells the Gospel within the borders of an image.
Perhaps there are some who can look at an “iconic” photograph of Michael Jackson on his toes, or Marilyn Monroe with her skirt blowing about her, or Frank Sinatra with his tilted porkpie hat, and read those same lessons, find the Good News. But I suspect that a snapshot rendered in noise, by humans, of humans, for humans, does little to point the viewer toward anything greater than the self, even if that self is projected upon others, so that the more adept we become at worshiping our idols, the more we worship nothing but ourselves.
Elizabeth Scalia is the Managing Editor of the Catholic Portal at Patheos and blogs as The Anchoress. Her previous articles for "On the Square" can be found here
Comments:
with a dark side. Perhaps partly because people today find that the "white knight"
with all his perfect attributes was really unattainable, that the 99% of audiences
found it was easier to identify with a grey Knight. I may even venture to say that Christianity has lost some of its followers because the challenge towards spiritual 'perfection' seems too great. Insiduously, but not totally responsible for this
was the cultic surge towards secular individualism.
Today you see vampires as the good guys whereas during lugosi's time it was the the other way around. Today you do not see in these vamp shows, holy water or the
effects of a crucifix. The wooden stakes are still there, wolf's bane etc. But God is
not in the story, go figure. Maybe the aclu holds a stock position or two in the production company, who knows.
The funny thing about this development, if left unchallenged, is our children will end
up in a society which believes in bad supernaturals as good guys and fear them, so
much like pagan on aboriginal societies that ascribed to their subdeities, the only
difference is that the folklore is in living color or better still in 3D HD!
I loathe celebrities, "reality shows" where people do anything for their 15 minutes of fame, "Bridezillas" and all the other symptoms of a society sick with fame and their own image in the mirror.
In the incident on the golden calf we read how the Israelites had thrown in the golden ornaments and the calf 'came out ' of the fire - possibly indicating the power of the lustful hearts that they still had , after their 400years of life with the pagan powers !
Yet, we do not hear much against such , after the Incarnation !
Could it be that our Lord knew that with His coming , the Holy Spirit would lead His children away from such false images so that we no longer would feel the need to 'carve idols for yourself ' - that having been given the true knowledge of the Father , we would now know how to worship and paint or carve , only to give glory to The Father , in His Son , in His friends , not for 'ourselves' or the false powers that then could claim us !
We read how those who paint icons live holy lives and thus imparting same to the icons - a reverse also very likey so that pagan icons and such carry powers that could be set against the truth The Father has revealed - thus the caution needed about such objects or places !
One of the best known icon of our times has to be the Divine Mercy icon - the original is at this site - http://www.faustina-message.com/index.htm
The compassionate Fatherly gaze from this image has to be a remedy for what ails much in our culture - even the effects of staring at or coveting the empty , passing seductions of the world promoted by the stars !
By way of exposing my predilections, you may have noticed that I said "referred to", not "referenced", which is a "catchy" word much in fashion for at least ten years now, stolen - it would seem - from the more important sounding, glamorous lexicon of the legal world.
Although I cannot claim that "reverenced" is entirely inappropriate for a focal point, it is my unauthoritative opinion that "revered", or regarding with reverential respect and admiring deference, might have been a better fit in this context, which implies dedication to awe inspiring divinity and wisdom. Or "venerated" would have worked very nicely, implying as it does honoring what is holy.
In a fashion-driven world where a perfectly clear pair of words like "referred to" is replaced by a particularized usage mainly from the legal lexicon, I agree that it really is better that we pay attention to our words. And whereas I cannot say that you have made an error in your use of "reverenced", it is perhaps acceptable to offer that "revered" or "venerated" would have flowed more smoothly into my ears than the former, which sounds far too much like what I have heard from the mouths of - well - celebrities.
The main thrust of your piece is excellent. Except for the suspiciously fashionable reference to "human potential". But then, remember the snails.
New reader.
Wondering about the celebrity status of someone who calls herself the Anchoress.
One gains a connatural knowledge of an object through repeated exposure, an instinctive attraction that often lies under the surface of consciousness (as Maritain might say). We have, through repeated exposure in television, magazines, and internet, developed a connatural knowledge of these celebrities. We are attracted to them somewhat irrationally because in some real way, we have become united to them. Building off what Elizabeth notes so beautifully, it is a perversion of the unity we are supposed to experience with God through charity (a unity which is also a form of connatural knowledge).
The most effective way to remedy ourselves of this perversion of connatural knowledge is by abstaining, to the best of our abilities, from media exposure. The less we are exposed to these media "icons," the less likely we are to see them as icons.


