Lunch+A-top+a+Skyscraper

=Category I: The Power of the Image= =a. Understanding the power of a photograph through analysis of technical aspects, connotations, implications, narrative and emotional impact.= =Lunch A-top A Skyscraper=



__**//Lunch atop a Skyscraper (New York Construction Workers Lunching on a Crossbeam//**__) is a famous photograph taken by Charles C. Ebbets during construction of the GE Building at Rockefeller Center in 1932. The photograph depicts 11 men eating lunch, seated on a girder with their feet dangling hundreds of feet above the New York City streets. Ebbets took the photo on September 29, 1932, and it appeared in the New York Herald Tribune in its Sunday photo supplement on October 2. [Ebbets shot this photo] on the 69th floor of the GE Building during the last several months of construction. (wikipedia)

Now what is interesting about this picture is the way it has melded with American pop culture over time. According to the "[|Rockefeller Archive in Sleepy Hollows, NY, this is the center’s most requested image]". Many people may not know what building it is or the name of the photographer, but once they see it, they remember it. This picture has come to represent many different things. Among them are the best of the American //**can-do**// spirit, the idea that against all odds we have stood up to be counted as a people, erecting buildings into the stratosphere, high above the clouds! But also the contradictory notions of the risk and danger to common, ordinary, and every-day man. How and why this particular image has come to stand for so much is a question open to debate. By dissecting the picture itself, we can gain insight into the reasons why this shot, one among the many Ebbets took that September day eighty years ago, has stood the test of time and lives on in the public imagination.

Looking at Jerving's "Thirteen ways of looking at a black-and-white photograph" lends some insight into some of the reasons why this particular picture has become iconic. What immediately leaps out is the apparent height above New York City and the fact that the workers are unconcerned about what is surely a dangerous and deadly situation right below their feet. One false move and kaput! So, with respect to Jerving's analysis, we see immediately that the photograph was constructed to give __visual cues__ including a quite-obvious Z-eye pattern top left, across the city skyline to the bottom of the beam, as well as a sharp color contrast between the backgrounds above the line of men on the girder (cloud-like and dreamy) with that below the beam (sharply focused vertical buildings). This view has also been __cropped__ in slightly on each side to heighten the effect of the horizontal beam. Ebbets uses effective __characterization__ - blending his subjects with their surrounding environment and successfully establishing that the figures //belong// in this shot, in this particular time and place. Their __costumes__, of course, would be the next thing to focus on; after all, none of them is wearing a tuxedo or a priest frock-coat! Their overalls, their shoes, the cigarettes hanging from their lips, all contribute to the rightness of these workers appearing where they appear, comfortable in their own time and place. Surely this must say something lasting to the viewer. As seen in the following [|You-tube tribute], the footwear also figures prominently into the interpretation of the picture. We next observe what Jerving calls the __framing__ detail, or simply, the //people placement// within the shot. The question arises: would this be a more effective shot if it had been taken with [|one worker at center stage]rather than all eleven given equal billing. Yes, this would, in fact, matter. The significance here is that //THE// worker is of importance, not a particular worker. It is the overall job, the cohesive group, that is being elevated here. And the comaradiere is evident with the placement of the individual sub-groups, two by two and three by three; even the single figure at far right is significant in that he appears to be drinking alone, within and yet out of the group. As Jarvis says "__staging__ works as a kind of metaphor", so it stands to reason that Ebbets deliberately shot from this angle to intentionally place the workers in sharp contrast with the buildings below, their legs suspended helplessly hundreds of feet above the safety of the ground!

Charles Ebbets uses his camera lens like an author uses his pen, carefully crafting exactly the story he wants to share and to tell. Although probably unknown to the Sunday readers of the Herald Tribune that far-away October, Ebbets deliberately shot the photograph from above, purposefully making it appear that the men on the steel beam were in more danger than they actually were; for due to the way the Rockefeller building is designed, if one of these guys did fall, he would only fall four or five floors, not all sixty-nine. But by manipulating the __camera angle__, the __distance from the subjects__ and using the gloomy __lighting__ he contrasts the scene above and below the bar cantilevered out over the city and the psychological effect of apparent height, combined with the shadows and clouds, may explain why we remember this shot so well. Ebbets has been able to create what Jerving refers to as __camera as narrator__.

Moving on to the more traditional analysis used in most Freshman 101 Art History classes, we discover that //Lunch a-top a Skyscraper// contains all the elements of a good piece of art, tried and true characteristics that appear universally in many of the best-know works throughout the ages. The Getty Museum offers four aspects of __line__: vertical, horizontal, diagonal and curved that appear in one way or another in artistic design. Ebbets nails the horizontal with the cross-beam, the vertical with the skyscrapers reaching from below and even takes a stab at curving body part lines. __Shape__ - two-dimensional height and width - is apparent, but __form__ is also present with the addition of depth in the fact that what makes this photograph memorable for many people IS the depth of field, the sense that with one slip-up these casually lunching men can - and do - fall to their deaths. One must next consider __space__, both __positive__ in the form of the people and buildings, and the __negative space__ in the form of the shadows and clouds. __Color__ is a characteristic that can be overlooked in a black and white photograph, but careful observation leads us to see that a lot is going on here: the lights and darks have __value__ and __intensity__ as the contrasts between various parts of the photo cause some things to stand out and others to fade into the background. While it may be difficult to see the subtle contrasts in the flat photo, someone has taken the time to play around with this iconic image, along with four others, and post an interesting almost [|3-D clip]on you-tube which makes this aspect of our analysis very clear. And finally we come to the __texture__ of a photograph, again a somewhat obscure distinction for a flat image. Unless it is shot the way Ebbets shot his //Lunch//, texture can be lost to the viewer. In this case we see loads of movement going on, from the apparent whiskey flask in the right hand guy's hand, to the newspapers spread across laps to the body language as friends gather for lunch, even in such an unlikely place as this. These are all the technical aspects that make up the photograph. Moving on to the more emotional and implicit elements of the picture, there are several ways of interpreting this image.

=C. Understanding how remix and/or parody operate on an image: Lunch A-top A Skyscraper=

Many iconic images are remixed for a variety of purposes. Most people think of songs when they hear the word remix but really it can refer to various forms of media. Over the years this photograph has been remixed many times. Some are fun and humorous and have entertainment value. There are a couple however that twist some of the implicit meanings of //Lunch a-top a Skyscraper// to bring the viewer's attention to something in American culture. As has already been mentioned this photograph has a wonderfully immediate emotional impact. Some aspects of why this photograph has such a strong emotional affect are due to the more subtle ideas we can glean from thinking critically about the picture's meaning. The literal interpretation of this picture is a snap shot of eleven men eating lunch on a steel beam while it is lifted above a city. However, it is the implicit meaning that is open for interpretation and fun to consider.

The first connotations are positive and associate the reader with triumph and success. The men are literally on top of the city, not just any city, arguably the most famous city in the world, New York. The time period when this was taken was marked by great economic depression, yet this picture stands in contrast to that because these men are taking a break from creating something that will tower and soar and reach new heights. Despite all the hard times and shattered dreams, America and New York city are still building, still moving up. The implication is that America will not be held down or defeated. The men are seen as brave and adventurous. They spend all day building this tower and work unafraid of the dangers inherent in their position.

In contrast are the negative connotations of this picture. These men are on their lunch break yet they also seem to be risking their lives. When first looking at this picture the viewer is more than likely unaware of the reality that they are only a few floors from another rooftop. So one of the lasting emotional impacts when looking at this photo is fear for the men and an awareness of danger. Thinking more critically of the time setting of this photo raises many questions about the regulations on safety in the work place. As stated before when analyzing the costuming of this picture, the men are not in tuxedos. These are working class men, who have probably been greatly affected by the economic situation. They are not the ones who created the plan or payed for the construction of the building. Nor will they be the ones recognized and applauded when it is finished. The connotations here are more negative, that America was built by people who were exploited and worked in conditions that put their lives in jeopardy. Instead of the positive, "American cannot be held back", the interpretation is there for the negative, "America will build no matter the human cost."

Understanding the subtle message or story this photograph has the power to tell helps us better understand remix and parody. If remix is the re-imaging or altering of an image then parody uses these alterations to comment on the original or society at large.

1. The second shot is the remixed version. While the artist may simply be showing what the soles of the shoes would look like if Ebbets had shot his photograph from below it radically changes the feeling of the image. Much of the negative connotation is gone, the city is no longer visible, so the feeling of danger is not present. The men are elevated and seem to be reaching for the clouds. Without the frame of the city, the viewer has no idea how high they are and one gets a sense of reaching great heights when viewing this photograph.

2. The Legos remix is also a play on the more triumphant connotations of the picture. The lego men are all smiling and do no seem to be in any danger at all. This is further emphasized by the fuzzy background. Lego is all about building and constructing and the more industrious implications of "Lunch A-top A Skyscraper" make it the perfect picture for them to parody.

3. The first remix to parody more of the negative connotations involve the Peeps marshmallow chicks. The creator of this picture put the candy in a similar situation to the original, on a steel beam, high above a city, and they have lunch boxes. However, some changes have been made that impact the story of this picture. First, the peeps are not in NYC but Washington D.C. and they are not all eating, some are reading the newspaper, "The Washington Post." This picture could be considered a parody that is associating reading the Washington Post with danger, recklessness, and fluff. By connecting the viewer with the negative connotations of the original and associating them with the Post and the capital, it takes what at first seems a silly use of Peeps and twists it into a controversial view of Washington.

4. This drawing replaces the original workers with famous actors and/or characters. There are several interesting characteristics of this remix. Unlike in the original the characters do not interact with each other. Also, the specific selection of each iconic person seem to be carefully thought out. Many of these characters and some of the actors themselves led difficult lives and came to tragic endings. One idea that could be inferred is the notion that to be an icon is a precarious or dangerous thing.



Images are powerful in many regards but perhaps nowhere else is this better understood than in the idea that a picture really can be worth a 1,000 words. A picture has the power to convey a whole story in an instant.

(If you would like to see more examples of remixes and parodies visit amy's blog page)