Kenneth Allan's Question About Icons

Wed May 27 14:37:15 UTC 2009

May I report from my teaching experience:
    the icon is a window opened into the heavenly world: through it we see 
its holy dwellers: Christ, the Virgin Mary, the saints, the history of 
salvation. And conversely through the same window they look at us: hence the 
need to avoid any unproper or undecent behavior: drinking, sexual 
intercourse, obscene language, violence and the like.
I remember drawing this approach from the following book: Ernst Benz, The 
Eastern Orthodox Church. Its Thought and Life (translated from the German), 
Anchor Books edition, 1963.
    Outstanding  for its clearness and depth.
Best regards to all
        Giampaolo Gandolfo

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Daniel Rancour-Laferriere" <darancourlaferriere at COMCAST.NET>
To: <SEELANGS at bama.ua.edu>
Sent: Monday, May 25, 2009 9:19 PM
Subject: [SEELANGS] Kenneth Allan's Question About Icons

Dear colleagues,
Regarding Kenneth Allan's question about the "symbolic and functional
operations of icons," I would add something to the effect that "icons
are people too."  They "function" as very important people:

Among the traditional Russian peasantry great respect was indeed
accorded to icons.  Each peasant hut had at least one icon.  As a
rule, the more wealthy the peasant, the more icons in his home.[i]
The space where icons were kept was sacred, and was in some respects
analogous to the space of the altar in a church.[ii]  It was called
the “red corner” or “beautiful corner” (“krasnyi ugol”; in gentry or
middle-class homes there was a “prayer room” [“molel’nia”] [iii]).
When one entered the hut one was supposed to pay respects to the
icon(s), even before greeting the inhabitants of the hut.  Icons were
– and for many Russians still are today – high-ranking personages.
For someone not to show the proper respect for icons was considered an
offense.  For example, a visitor to a peasant’s hut was expected to
doff his hat in the presence of the icons: “Why aren’t you taking your
cap off, there are gods in this hut after all?”, or “This is no
tavern, your cap is not a [kolpak], there’s the images.”[iv]  Kira
Tsekhanskaia observes:

The absence or poor maintenance of icons in a home were signs of
disorder, godlessness even.  One not only always removed one’s hat in
the presence of icons, one also refrained from smoking, or at least
smoked in such a way that the smoke did not go into the red corner.
One also endeavored to avoid saying swear words there.  You might be
interrupted with something like “You have no fear of God!” or “I’d
give you a piece of my mind if it weren’t for those. . .” – while the
other person was pointing at the icons.  Icons were treated with
respect.  Whenever people started talking about them, they would try
to use the most decorous expressions.  If you took an icon in your
hands, you would cross yourself.  New images, or images brought from
another home were put into the red corner only after a priest blessed
them with holy water.  You didn’t sit down with your back to the
icons, and you tried not to let little children into the red corner,
where they might be naughty.[v]

Generally speaking, one was supposed to be on one’s best behavior in
the presence of icons.  They were regarded as very important people
who must not witness any untoward behavior.  For example, they were
(supposed to be) curtained off when sexual intercourse took place.
[vi]  The customary personification of icons is clear in the very
wording of Tsekhanskaia’s scholarly text:

The presence of icons in the home supported a moral order which people
were afraid of violating in the view of such witnesses.  If there were
quarrels, or scenes, or other squabbling, somebody would say “At least
take the saints away!” – that is, take the icons out of the house.[vii]

Psychoanalytically speaking, icons served as a kind of supplementary
superego within the context of the of the peasant hut.  To sin in
their presence was to experience a greater sense of guilt, or shame,
than to sin in their absence.

[i] .  Tsekhanskaia  2001, 304.

[ii] .  Tul’tseva 2001, 138.

[iii].  Other Russian terms that were used among the peasantry
include: “perednii ugol,” “sutnii ugol,” “pochetnyi ugol,” “bol’shoi
ugol,” “kniazhoi ugol.” “kut,” “tiablo” (“ziablo”), “chasovnia,”
“bozhnitsa,” “kiot” (“kivot”).  See: Tsekhanskaia 1998, 124; Tul’tseva
2001, 141.  Other terms for the icon room among the more wealthy, in
addition to “molel’nia,” were “obraznaia” and “krestovaia” (Snegirev
1993 [1862], 105).  Nowadays in rural Russia the most common
designation for the icon corner or icon case seems to be
“bozhnitsa” (Moroz 1998, 114).

[iv].  Tsekhanskaia 1998, 155.

[v].  Tsekhanskaia 1998, 156.  The prohibition against smoking in the
presence of icons still applies: “Pered ikonami ne kurit’” – read a
recent sign at an icon-kiosk in Moscow (author’s field notes, 12 Sept.
1999).

[vi] .  Belova 1999, 400; Olearius 1967 (1656), 255.

[vii].  Tsekhanskaia 1998, 159 (emphasis added).  Cf. Belova 1999, 400.

From: THE JOY OF ALL WHO SORROW, 200-201.

With regards to the list -

Daniel Rancour-Laferriere

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------