THE ICONIC AND INDEXICAL

An excerpt from a piece of my writing - A poetic exploration of an iconic motif.

We are constantly influenced by architecture as we walk the streets; the shape, size and proportion of technical architecture and enquire into the purpose or history. Nonetheless, the water tower is seen in the eyes; not of architectural merit, or of technical advance but for its purpose and functionality alone.

It is the preconceptions and precedent lives of the water towers that date back to early settlements across rural America, having always held a certain agricultural feel, stripped back to their bare essentials and have remained the same through the centuries. The minimal steel structure looks too delicate and insubstantial to support the shape, size and share mass of the cylinder carrying the load of liquid. Yet their proportion from the cylindrical roof, body and structure is rhythmic.

So what then is stopping water towers from being objects of beauty or structural ingenuity? Is it the exact purpose or history of these towers that obscure the view? Can these objects become anything other than their primitive purpose? Or are these objects already something other?

In search for the relationship between people and their interactions with the built environment one finds the theoretical side of water towers, ephemeral and in the form of positive and negative space.

What do people actually see when they look into the sky? Is it of the skyline with silhouetted building facades, void of water towers? Or is it of the sky itself void of the objects in the foreground? When people gaze into the sky do they even wonder what it is they are searching for? No one looks at the skyline and sees the in between. The in between is where the water towers reside. Their minimal structural supports the void of positive and negative space. This notion of positive and negative brings with it an intrigue, which the water tower hinges on. The solid mass to which you can never see inside is juxtaposed to the emptiness of the structure below it, which is never looked at. Instead, people only see the inverse of what the buildings produce; a kind of greyscale outline of the objects, the skyline. A world of grey tones is a kind of lifeless city to which we are subjects of.

What is it about water towers that capture in us a sense of interest and intrigue? As you stride the streets, aware of the surroundings and chance encounters of interesting facades and voids, you are confronted by the warmth of the blue sky, and the cold hard steel standing alone. Gazing into the sky, one cannot help but notice the simple architectural forms surrounding you. The notion of verticality is sliced by the hustle and bustle of the busy streets. However, no one stops to pause, and appreciate the architecture, forms and silhouetted objects standing alone in the sky, alienated from this world, as though they were never meant to be seen atop such structures. The sun passes across the city from one side to the next; like the people of the city, the lingering shadows do not stop for anyone. As sun departs the skyline and night blend into one, no longer the motif, yet these objects still stand alone, silent.

To find a clear direction and in search for an identity I have been using the term ‘object’ to describe the water towers, as they are objects in the sky to which they serve a purpose and function. This is not to say that this is their only identity, as expressed earlier, this is the way most people identify with water towers. They therefore will not be branded as a motif; however, their presence is nonetheless symbolic to each of the selected areas.

Water towers stand in abundance on the Upper West Side. The density of buildings and the necessity for water; due to water pressure restrictions on plumbing, determines a constant mirage of water towers, ducking in and out of street facades, while the rhythmic pattern of the towers informs the skyline. Sadly this abundance of towers can be seen as a downfall in the iconic sense of the object, merging into the varying rooftops and facades. In Tribeca; where it has become a prerequisite to build a water tower whether it is needed or not - forms an important link toward a search for identity. This sense of identity that is being shaped around a utilitarian object, suggests that an abundance of towers can be seen not as a downfall in the iconic sense, as stated above, but instead the exact opposite. One can speculate that the iconic object is valued for its intriguing history and architectural proportion.
In Williamsburg and Brooklyn the towers are more sporadic and less typical in shape and form. This is due to the change in height of the archetypal building. One only needs to walk the street of Williamsburg to notice the difference, as the water towers are seen as blank canvases for aspiring street artists to create a new masterpiece. This once minimal, wooden, functional and beautiful object is now transformed into something that is intriguing, yet less aesthetic. For this exact reason many of the water towers around Brooklyn have been disassembled.

Steel structures perched high above the Brooklyn heights, stand proud yet alone in the skyline. Obscured somewhat by the gnarled tree branches and gloomy skies, these objects with no purpose, wait.

All work displayed was undertaken by David Sullivan for individual research and field studies.