The argument/ideology that pins down Barthes’ deconstruction of the Eiffel Tower is very Nietzchian. Much like Nietzsche’s popular argument that art is the only truth because it allows one to live in a personal abstraction and intuition, the tower being art means it surpasses our rationalization, deconstruction, and assimilation of it into one side of binary schemas. It exists to emphasize its inability to be known by us and to serve almost “mythical” purposes that transcend rational rules of the world. In other words, “Barthes’ phenomenological approach brings us to the focus of our investigation: an architectural structure’s capacity to simultaneously be understood as agent and object, a capacity we regard as a peculiar oscillation between function and symbol in the case of the Eiffel Tower” (Steiner).

There is a lot to unpack with the contradictory qualities of the “utterly useless monument”, which we actually learn is pretty useful (Barthes 5). The point that stands is that, physically, the tower is an uncontainable object that we try to domesticate. One way we do this is through “the installation of a restaurant [...or other] means of leisure” in the tower itself (Barthes 16). The fact that the tower is an open construction makes us uncomfortable when we are used to typical tourist hotspots (like museums, for instance) being enclosed for us to feel like we entered, experienced, and “owned” some of it. The tower doesn’t do that for us. So, we have to create a mini world surrounding the tower in order to make it feel normal. In our conception of the order of the world, the Eiffel tower is unique to us because it is simultaneously a representation of the inside and of the outside world. This quality, that the tower is somehow both sides of an opposite binary, is too far outside of the social contract, and Nietzche would say (and Barthes points to it) that we often try to tackle this discomfort by trying to reduce the tower. We do this by turning the tower into a sight of projection. It becomes a symbol of industrialism, of Paris, of travel, of art, of Paris itself–whatever one may choose. But it is in this choice, that we strip the tower of the other symbols it projects equally as strongly. And this is where the problem lies. We must look at the tower as the embodiment of all the opposites it may be: inside/outside, industry/art, ugly/beautiful, all at the same time.

Barthes asks us to consider why the tower makes us so uncomfortable in this binary presentation. Perhaps it is because this makes the tower oddly more powerful than us. The tower can be a spectacle and an object, useless and useful, inside and outside. We cannot be those things. If we are looking at the tower, we can't be in it, for example; but the tower can be both an empty base space outside, and an indoor restaurant as well, for example. None of our relations to the tower can come together at the same time, while the tower can be opposites at the same time. We can only perceive the tower as one of its opposite meanings at a time, and we have to kind of deal with the impossibility of bringing together two things that are true and simultaneous but also cannot co occur logically. I think one way we do this is by glossing over it all and pretending everything can occur at the same time–a comforting thought facilitated by the constructed surrounding environment.

However, by doing this, what simultaneously happens is that the tower becomes a signifier of basically an infinite sight of projection. It is reduced to a symbol of Paris, of travel, of industrialism, of some kind of focal point in France. The tower being a signifier for everything really just makes it nothing. And when we come face-to-face with this (structural and symbolic) emptiness, we rush to find ways to create more perceived “somethingness”(we add restaurants, shops, carts of food, and other community experiences all around the tower) to fit into our schemas and orders.

Barthes, Roland. The Eiffel Tower - Roland Barthes - LANTB, lantb.net/uebersicht/wp-pdf/eiffelTower.pdf. Accessed 13 May 2024. Steiner, Henriette, and Kristin Veel. “Towering invisibilities: A cultural-theoretical reading of the Eiffel Tower and the One World Trade Center.” Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 25, no. 4, 5 Aug. 2018, pp. 407–416, https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800418790297.

When picking one element of Pentadic Criticism to deconstruct the Eiffel Tower with, "scene" seems to be an influential factor: would the Eiffel Tower have become such a core part of identity, or have been so controversial, in any other city? For this we might look to the impact of monuments such as One World Trade Center, or the Leaning Tower of Piza, and compare and contrast features of the artifact. I would argue that the Eiffel Tower is only as influential as it is, and as core to the representation/identity of Paris BECAUSE it is in Paris. Its design was so different from anything popular during the time it was built, and this initial legacy seems to carry on in different interpretations throughout the years. It has turned into a display of the importance of engineering, industry and development, and turned into a display of...well, as explained through the feminist and ideological critiques... just about anything!

For the end: an excerpt from a research journal that I could not have stated better myself: "The Tower has been pro- claimed the symbol of industrial and artistic progress, the metro, electric lights, elevators, telephones, military power, centralization, the union of workers and engineers, mathematical energy, technical utopianism, mod- ern Paris, practical science, industrial and artistic progress, the union of workers and engineers, superhuman exaltation, the marriage of skill and imagination, and architectural eclecticism. It has been described as a gra- cious palm tree, mast, aging trunk, giraffe, monument and poem, tall and skinny pyramid, tragic lamppost, disgraceful skeleton, ancient god and modern beast, colossal golden Phare of industry and capital, and modern Tower of Babel. To quote Cendrars again: "Tu es tout / Tour." For Parisians it is the inevitable physical presence, while for the rest of the world it is the inevitable symbol of France"

Thompson, William. “‘The Symbol of Paris’: Writing the Eiffel Tower.” The French Review, vol. 73, no. 6, 2000, pp. 1130–40. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/399367. Accessed 14 May 2024.

It is notable that the Eiffel Tower is made of iron. Iron as the building material makes the Eiffel Tower made by man, for man, and of man. This changes how the Eiffel Tower might be seen or interpreted on the surface. In fact, it might be the very opposite of what we assume the tower to be on the surface. The Eiffel Tower is most commonly the symbol for Paris–the city of love. Just as Mars is the god of war and symbol of man, love is the symbol for women, belonging to the goddess Venus (Venus). Thus what we imagine the Eiffel Tower to be, is actually not what it is at all. It is not a feminine representation of love, but rather a towering and tough masculine force.

pentadic criticism can lead to questions like, how well did the agent/artifact use the available means to achieve their goal? With the Eiffel Tower, one might say that Gustave Eiffel is not even the agent, rather the tower itself is. And so, the tower is successful in highlighting the importance of mechanical ingenuity as well as artistic ingenuity, because it has become a universal symbol for Paris.

Pentadic criticism can be used to analyze the Eiffel Tower as well. It requires of us that we identify 5 items of the pentad: * Agent (who is performing the act) * Act (what is happening) * Scene (where and when the artifact was produced) * Purpose (why) * Agency (how/what means does the agent use) Pentadic criticism allows us to assign various different characteristics or details to each “item”, resulting in various interpretations of the same artifact. (Foss 356) Here is one possible pentad and interpretation of the Eiffel Tower * Agent: Gustave Eiffel * Act: constructing the Eiffel Tower * Scene: Paris during 1889 * Purpose: to introduce the value of engineers as creative artisans and mathematical intellectuals in a climate heavily dominated by artists only Agency: by submitting the design for the Eiffel Tower to the World Fair contest, Eiffel found a means through which he could gain extreme popularity for his cause. In construction of the tower itself, the use of metal and open structures contribute to the “engineer” aspect of the monument. Next is to analyze the artifact using some combination of these five characteristics. For instance, one might argue that agency and scene are the most important qualities of this artifact: By using the World Fair contest as a way to bring attention to his industrial artifact, Gustave Eiffel also shattered a perception of Paris as a classy and elegant city. He took attention away from the belle epoque and forced people to think of how structures could also serve useful purposes. The message behind the Eiffel Tower may not have come across this way had Eiffel, an engineer, not submitted his work to an art competition like this one.

Setting is an important element not only in pentadic criticm but provides context for a feminst critique of the Eiffel Tower as well. The Eiffel Tower is 1,083ft tall (The Official Eiffel Tower). When it was first built, it was the tallest structure in the world, briefly, until the Empire State Building was erected. Regardless, such a looming force stuck out somewhat awkwardly amidst Parisian landscapes in the 1880s, which was in the middle of their “Belle Époque”, or “beautiful era”. This era extended beyond the popular and affluent-looking terracotta and cream colored architecture, but also emphasized regional peace and prosperity, and infiltrated social practices by emphasizing female domesticity (Christiansen, 2015). Here is a link to a video that provides more context about what was going on during the Belle Epoque, the values in society, and pushes towards equality that were made. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK11U_AZCyE ](

Christiansen, Hope. “Grappling with feminism in the Belle époque: Colette Yver’s princesses de science and Les Dames du Palais.” MLN, vol. 130, no. 4, Sept. 2015, pp. 946–962, https://doi.org/10.1353/mln.2015.0054. “Time-Travelling Back to France’s ‘Belle Époque’ • France 24 English.” YouTube, YouTube, 23 Mar. 2023, www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK11U_AZCyE. “15 Essential Things to Know about the Eiffel Tower.” La Tour Eiffel, The OFFICIAL Eiffel Tower website, 27 Dec. 2023, www.toureiffel.paris/en/news/history-and-culture/15-essential-things-know-about-eiffel-tower#:~:text=For%20130%20years%2C%20the%20Eiffel,know%2Dhow%20and%20industrial%20genius.).

Background information on why the Eiffel Tower was built: When Gustave Eiffel started construction on the Eiffel Tower for the 1899 World Exhibition in Paris, it was easy to see the controversy in the fact that an engineer such as himself had won an art competition. Architects, designers, and everyday Parisians especially despised the tower for not fitting into the mold of what Parisian structures should look like. Rather than being constructed of stone, elegantly curated to nourish Parisian lavishness, the tower was a cold, bare slab of iron sprung up right in the middle of the city; it seemed unfathomable that Eiffel had somehow won Paris’ most noble art competition with this “glorified lamppost” (Sociéte d'Exploitation de la tour Eiffel) (Vukelj 2024)

Above almost all else for a feminist critique, we must look at the Eiffel Tower as a phallic symbol. The ideology of such a critique is rooted in the idea that any and all space has gender. Gender can be assigned “intentionally according to the sex of the architect, interpretive[ly] through theory, criticism and history, and through use (public toilets sexed male or female while the domestic kitchen is gendered feminine)” (Niculae). I have already discussed how building materials might associate gender, but another interpretation could come from examining the height or shape of the tower. The tower looms over 1000 ft over Paris, making it impossible to deny the power relations inscribed in the space, on many levels.

Compared to the “belle epoque” buildings, the Eiffel Tower screams masculinity, and dominates physically over them due to its height. It dominates the “building to building” comparison. It does the same in the “building to observer” comparison. It is a mystical object of force, towering over us, and seems to rule over or define Paris. Similarly, men rule over and define work spaces, social customs, and many other aspects very much aligned with the tower and its message.

Niculae, R. L. (2014). Gender analogies in architecture. Journal of Research in Gender Studies, 4(1), 474-490. Retrieved from http://proxy.wexler.hunter.cuny.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/gender-analogies-architecture/docview/1553511966/se-2

Through a feminist criticism perspective, we can establish new meaning for the Eiffel Tower based on the fact that it is made of iron. In classic literature, iron is deemed the “Metal of Mars” and has come to symbolize probably what is most idealized in humanity, or even more specifically, in masculinity: “strength, obstinacy, fortitude, honor, courage, sharpness (of body and mind), tenacity, and confidence in power”(Cabantchik). It does not take much in-depth analysis–rather, a brief examination of the structures of our society (we even have a superhero: “Iron Man”)–to see how these features are ones deeply rooted in our perception of what it means to be masculine. Iron’s durability as a metal is intertwined with that of a man. The metal’s association with Mars has male-coded connotations dating back to Ancient Rome, as Mars was an ancient Roman god, seen as the protector of Rome, and instilled nationality and pride in Romans for their army–likely one of the most raw and courageous in the world (Mars). With iron being the metal of Mars, the connection between manlihood, iron, and strength/courage, becomes almost inseparable.

Cabantchik, Zvi Ioav. “In search for symbolic qualities of iron: The Metal of Life.” Frontiers in Pharmacology, vol. 7, 3 Aug. 2016, https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2016.00220. “Mars.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, inc., www.britannica.com/topic/Mars-Roman-god. Accessed 13 May 2024. “Venus.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, inc., www.britannica.com/topic/Venus-goddess. Accessed 13 May 2024. “15 Essential Things to Know about the Eiffel Tower.” La Tour Eiffel, The OFFICIAL Eiffel Tower website, 27 Dec. 2023, www.toureiffel.paris/en/news/history-and-culture/15-essential-things-know-about-eiffel-tower#:~:text=For%20130%20years%2C%20the%20Eiffel,know%2Dhow%20and%20industrial%20genius.).