In the words of one of my fave sci-fi series: what the frell? I'd not come across this until a conversation I had today:
"You may have heard of the pictures taken of the World Trade Center while it was burning, in which the smoke formed the face of Satan."and if you go here, Devil's Face in Smoke 9-11, you'll see some of the pictures to support the idea.Now there are two things that occur to me straight away with this, maybe three, depending on how you count them.
First off, this seems a bit like those stories about images of the BVM in slices of toast, or the face of Jesus in a piece of cut fruit, or even supposed satellite images of verses of the Qur'an in pictures of trees felled by storms. In all of these cases it seems to me that it's mostly about an image that lends itself to interpretations of those kinds by being vague enough to serve as a kind of suggestive ground/base to our projections of meaningfulness.
The second thing is the meaning that can then be assigned to such a 'seeing'. In this case it seems to be conducive to a hospitality towards a particular view of the world in which the goodies and baddies are well-defined in terms of a 'clash of civilisations'. -Maybe I'm being a little too harsh there, but maybe not. Certainly I'm intrigued that other 'readings' are not so possible in the discourse generated here: for example that demonic entities are /were part of those buildings and are forced out by the destruction. This latter reading could lead on to seeing the events potentially having a positive outcome in 'exorcising' the heart of NY of evil entities -though I hasten to point out this is not my interpretation and it should not be construed as in anyway justifying the violence or the deaths involved. Indeed it is an interpretation which could be seen as implicitly critical of global finance or capitalism. The fact that this way of interpreting what is thought to be seen is not anywhere in view, is in itself interesting and should give pause for thought even if (like me) one is rather skeptical of the thing.
And another thing occurs to me: the stock images that are referenced in making these interpretive leaps. They don't come from biblical imagery which, on the whole, is rather restrained about such things. Like the 'faces of Christ' and the 'images of Mary', they are drawn from conventional and largely medieval (or later) iconography. The speculative imagery of artists down the ages have, in a sense, become canonical and serve as interpretive resources for ... well ... stuff like this.
No comments:
Post a Comment