Throughout history, certain individuals have left indelible marks, shaped generations, redefined human efforts, and earned them the title of ‘iconic figures’. Understanding what truly constitutes such a huge influence, and how it is recognized and debated, provides a fascinating perspective for history itself, from the language we use to describe greatness to the efforts institutions make to quantify it.
Our journey begins by examining the origins and evolution of the term ‘iconic’ itself, tracing its linguistic path and observing its burgeoning presence in modern discourse. We then turn our attention to the lives of those who embody this descriptor, delving into the extraordinary leadership of Abraham Lincoln, a statesman whose actions preserved a nation and reshaped its moral compass. Following this, we explore the groundbreaking intellect of Albert Einstein, recognized as Time’s Person of the Century, and consider the immense influence of other pivotal figures from Time’s celebrated list.
This first section also navigates the intricate challenges inherent in evaluating historical influence, particularly when faced with controversial figures whose impact, though undeniable, is deeply rooted in destruction and suffering. Furthermore, we examine the debates surrounding the inclusion and exclusion of cultural giants and popular entertainers from such definitive lists, revealing the nuanced criteria that shape our understanding of lasting significance. Through these explorations, we gain a deeper appreciation for the multifaceted nature of legacy and the diverse ways in which individuals leave their indelible marks on history.
1. **The Evolving Meaning of “Iconic”: From Etymology to Modern Usage**The adjective ‘iconic’ holds a significant place in contemporary language, often invoked to describe figures, events, or objects that possess an exceptional and widely recognized symbolic importance. Its journey into common parlance, as detailed by the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), reveals a gradual but steady ascent in usage. The OED’s entry for ‘iconic,’ first published in 1899, has not yet been fully revised, indicating an ongoing scholarly effort to refine its understanding and definitions, with its last modifications recorded in July 2023.
The etymological roots of ‘iconic’ trace back to the mid-1600s, with the earliest known evidence appearing in 1656, attributed to the antiquary and lexicographer Thomas Blount. It is a borrowing from Latin, specifically from ‘īconicus.’ This lineage underscores its historical connection to the concept of an image or representation, setting the stage for its modern application to individuals who become symbols of larger ideas or movements.
Measuring the prominence of ‘iconic’ in everyday language reveals a notable upward trend. In 1770, its occurrence rate was approximately 0.012 per million words in modern written English. This frequency saw a substantial increase over the centuries, reaching 0.13 by 1950 and soaring to 1.7 occurrences per million words by 2010. This surge reflects a growing inclination in modern discourse to identify and celebrate figures or phenomena that transcend the ordinary, embodying profound cultural, historical, or intellectual significance.
While the specific four meanings listed in the OED’s entry are not explicitly detailed in the provided context, the increasing frequency of its use strongly suggests its contemporary role in describing individuals and phenomena that are emblematic, representative, and profoundly influential. It has become a concise descriptor for those who leave an enduring and recognizable mark on society, shaping perceptions and inspiring generations.
2.Abraham Lincoln, the 16th U.S. President, remains a towering figure in American history, celebrated for leading the nation through the Civil War, its most profound crisis. Serving from 1861 until his assassination in 1865, Lincoln’s unwavering leadership preserved the Union, a profound testament to his dedication to national unity.
Beyond preserving the Union, Lincoln’s presidency was transformative. He courageously moved to abolish slavery, fundamentally altering the moral landscape of the nation. His administration also strengthened the federal government, laying groundwork for a more cohesive national structure, and modernized the U.S. economy, adapting it to the demands of a rapidly changing industrial age. Born in Kentucky and raised on the frontier in modest circumstances, Lincoln’s self-education forged a path that led him from a lawyer to a Whig Party leader, an Illinois state legislator, and eventually a Congressman.
Lincoln’s return to politics in 1854, fueled by his opposition to the expansion of slavery, was a turning point. He quickly ascended within the Republican Party, gaining national attention through his 1858 debates with Stephen A. Douglas during the Illinois Senate campaign, and his 1860 presidential victory, which swept the North, ultimately led Southern states to secede.
Throughout the Civil War, Lincoln displayed remarkable political skill, expertly managing warring factions and confronting various opposition groups. He skillfully navigated the complex political landscape by pitting factions against each other, strategically distributing political patronage, and consistently appealing directly to the American people.
His leadership was marked by significant policy decisions, including the suspension of habeas corpus and the deft handling of the Trent Affair to prevent British intervention. Lincoln meticulously oversaw the war effort, from selecting generals to implementing a naval blockade, and crucially, he orchestrated the end of slavery through the Emancipation Proclamation and the push for the Thirteenth Amendment, with his Gettysburg Address becoming an ‘iconic call for nationalism, republicanism, equal rights, liberty, and democracy.’ Tragically, his assassination on April 14, 1865, cemented his legacy as a martyr hero, consistently ranked among the greatest presidents.
3. **Albert Einstein: Time’s Person of the Century and the Dawn of Scientific Dominance**The close of the 20th century prompted a monumental reflection on the figures who had most profoundly shaped the preceding hundred years, culminating in Time magazine’s influential “Time 100: The Most Important People of the Century” compilation. Published across five issues in 1998 and 1999, this list was born from extensive debate, beginning with a symposium in Hanoi, Vietnam, on February 1, 1998, featuring prominent voices like Dan Rather, Doris Kearns Goodwin, and Walter Isaacson.
Among the diverse array of leaders, artists, builders, scientists, and heroes, one figure emerged as the undisputed “Person of the Century”: Albert Einstein. Announced in a separate issue on December 31, 1999, Einstein’s selection underscored the profound impact of science and technology on the 20th century. The editors of Time articulated their rationale, stating that the 20th century “will be remembered foremost for its science and technology,” and Einstein “serves as a symbol of all the scientists—such as Fermi, Heisenberg, Bohr, Richard Feynman, …who built upon his work.”
Einstein’s preeminence as a scientist, whose theories of relativity fundamentally reshaped our understanding of the universe, made him a natural choice to represent an era defined by unprecedented scientific advancement. His intellectual breakthroughs provided the foundational insights that paved the way for numerous technological innovations and further scientific exploration, making him a singularly fitting emblem for a century that witnessed the atomic age, space exploration, and the digital revolution. His influence extended far beyond theoretical physics, inspiring generations of thinkers and symbolizing the power of human intellect.
The iconic status of Albert Einstein was visually affirmed on the magazine’s cover, which featured the renowned image of him captured in 1947 by American portrait photographer Philippe Halsman. This widely recognized photograph, depicting Einstein with his famously disheveled hair and contemplative gaze, perfectly encapsulated the image of a visionary whose mind transcended conventional thought, solidifying his place not just as a scientific giant but also as a cultural icon of profound influence.
4. **The Influence of Runners-Up: Gandhi and Roosevelt’s Enduring Impact**While Albert Einstein was ultimately recognized as Time magazine’s Person of the Century, the selection process acknowledged other figures of immense global significance through the designation of runners-up. Mahatma Gandhi and Franklin D. Roosevelt were notably singled out for this distinction, signaling their profound and widespread impact on the 20th century. Their inclusion underscores the diverse forms that influence can take, from moral leadership to political statesmanship, and the varied criteria considered in assessing a historical figure’s legacy.
Mahatma Gandhi, though not explicitly detailed in this context regarding the specifics of his influence for the Time list, is universally recognized for his pioneering role in leading India to independence through nonviolent civil disobedience. His philosophy of Satyagraha inspired civil rights movements and leaders across the globe, transcending geographical and cultural boundaries. The fact that he was a runner-up for such a prestigious title highlights his monumental moral authority and his enduring legacy as a proponent of peaceful resistance and social justice, fundamentally altering the landscape of international relations and human rights.
Similarly, Franklin D. Roosevelt, the only American president to serve more than two terms, also earned the distinction of being a runner-up. While the context does not elaborate on the specific reasons for his high ranking, his presidency spanned the Great Depression and most of World War II, periods that demanded unprecedented leadership and ushered in significant governmental and social reforms in the United States. His presence among the top contenders for Person of the Century attests to his formidable political influence and his capacity to steer a nation through extraordinary crises, shaping its economic future and its role on the global stage.
The recognition of Gandhi and Roosevelt as runners-up alongside Einstein emphasizes the multi-faceted nature of influence that defined the 20th century. It suggests that while scientific advancement was paramount, the century was also shaped by profound moral courage and decisive political leadership. Their enduring legacies, though different in nature from Einstein’s, were deemed equally critical in shaping the course of history, meriting their place at the apex of Time’s comprehensive evaluation of the century’s most important people.
5.Compiling lists of influential figures often sparks debate, especially when considering individuals whose impact, like Hitler and Mussolini, is tied to immense suffering. Their potential inclusion as Persons of the Century on the Time 100 list sparked controversy, centering on whether these architects of global conflict should be recognized for their ‘influence in politics,’ as per Time’s criterion of ‘greatest impact on this century, for better or worse.’
The fundamental tension lay in reconciling the concept of influence with moral rectitude. While Hitler was unequivocally “responsible for World War II and the Holocaust,” and Mussolini for the “Second Italo-Ethiopian War,” their catastrophic actions undeniably reshaped the 20th century. This presented a profound ethical quandary: can one acknowledge their historical impact without implicitly validating their abhorrent ideologies and crimes? The discussion forced a reckoning with the definition of ‘influence’ itself, pushing it beyond purely positive connotations.
Essayist Nancy Gibbs, in her Time article ‘The Necessary Evil?’, argued that Hitler and Mussolini were merely the latest in a long line of destructive figures, stating, ‘The only difference was technology: Both Hitler and Mussolini went about their cynical carnage with all the efficiency that modern industry had perfected.’ This highlights how 20th-century evil was amplified by technological advancements.
Gibbs’s analysis further deepened the ethical considerations by posing rhetorical questions that challenged readers to weigh different forms of influence. She asked whether “Evil may be a powerful force, a seductive idea, but is it more powerful than genius, creativity, courage or generosity?” This line of questioning underscored the difficulty in comparing the destructive influence of figures like Hitler and Mussolini with the transformative, positive impacts of individuals like Einstein, Gandhi, or Roosevelt. The debate highlighted that influence, in its rawest form, is simply the capacity to effect change, regardless of its moral implications, yet acknowledging it for a historical list still requires a sensitive and thoughtful approach.
6. **The Omissions: The Case of Elvis Presley in the Time 100**Beyond the controversies surrounding problematic figures, Time magazine’s “100 Most Important People of the Century” also faced criticism for certain notable omissions, particularly from its “Artists and Entertainers” list. One of the most prominent criticisms centered on the exclusion of Elvis Presley, a figure widely regarded as the “King of Rock and Roll” and a monumental force in 20th-century popular culture. This decision sparked considerable debate among critics and the public, prompting Time representatives to articulate their reasoning.
Bruce Handy, a representative for Time magazine, offered a defense of Presley’s exclusion that illuminated the nuanced criteria applied to the category. Handy explained, “One of the most important, innovative things about rock is the whole notion of songwriters singing their own works, of the immediacy of expression.” This emphasis on artistic originality and self-authorship, he suggested, was a key factor. He continued, “Since Elvis didn’t write his own material, unlike The Beatles or Bob Dylan or Robert Johnson, who’s also someone who could have been included, maybe that cut against him…”
Handy’s argument highlighted a specific philosophical stance regarding artistic contribution: that the authentic expression stemming from a musician’s own creative writing held greater innovative weight. He further elaborated on this point by contrasting Presley with other musical titans, stating, “I think the Beatles pushed the envelope a lot further. Elvis’ most original recordings were his first. The Beatles started out as imitators, then continued to grow throughout their years together.” This perspective implied that while Presley’s initial impact was groundbreaking, his later career, and his role as an interpreter rather than a creator of songs, might have been seen as less continuously innovative compared to artists who evolved their craft through original composition.
The omission of Elvis Presley, despite his unparalleled popularity and profound cultural footprint, underscores the subjective and often contentious nature of defining “most influential” in artistic realms. It revealed that for Time’s editors, the measure of influence extended beyond raw popularity or iconic status to encompass elements of continuous artistic innovation, creative authorship, and the pushing of genre boundaries, leading to a different assessment of his ultimate impact compared to other musical legends.
Even as Time magazine grappled with the definition of historical significance for figures like Elvis Presley, its ‘100 Most Important People of the Century’ compilation continued to spark lively debate across diverse cultural landscapes. The challenges of assessing influence extended beyond political leaders and artistic giants, delving into areas that often blurred the lines between popular culture and profound societal impact, or even between illicit activities and undeniable historical consequence. These further controversies offer a revealing look at the subjective nature of evaluating a century’s most defining individuals.
7. **The Contentious Selection: Lucky Luciano and the ‘Modernized’ Mafia**The debates surrounding Time’s choices reached a different, more ethically charged crescendo with the inclusion of Lucky Luciano, a notorious organized crime figure. Luciano was selected in part because, as Time stated, “he modernized the Mafia, shaping it into a smoothly run national crime syndicate focused on the bottom line.” This justification, while acknowledging his significant impact on an illicit but economically powerful sector, immediately drew fierce criticism and ignited a public outcry.
New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani emerged as a prominent voice of opposition, accusing Time of “romanticizing” gangsters and distorting historical realities. Giuliani unequivocally stated, “The idea that he civilized the Mafia is absurd. He murdered in order to get the position that he had, and then he authorized hundreds and hundreds of murders.” His critique highlighted the moral implications of recognizing such a figure for his efficiency in crime, arguing that it overlooked the profound violence and human cost associated with his actions.
Further criticism emanated from academic and community circles. Philip Cannistraro, a Queens College professor of Italian-American studies, publicly denounced the selection as an “outrage,” emphasizing the detrimental impact of perpetuating stereotypes. Thomas Vitale, the New York State vice president of Fieri, an Italian-American charitable organization, echoed these sentiments, criticizing Time for “perpetuating myths” about Italian-Americans and suggesting that such an inclusion was insensitive and misleading.
In defense of the controversial choice, Time business editor Bill Saporito maintained that the magazine’s objective was to identify individuals who had a “deep impact on the underground economy” and “influenced our lives,” rather than to “heap glory on these people.” Saporito described Luciano as “kind of an evil genius,” further noting that “every piece of merchandise that came out of the Garment District had a little extra cost in it because of organized crime.” This defense underscored Time’s consistent criterion of impact, “for better or worse,” extending even to figures whose influence was undeniably destructive.
8. **The Power of Final Utterances: Presidential Last Words as Legacies**Shifting from the public deliberations over historical influence, a different, more intimate window into the lives and legacies of prominent figures can be found in their final spoken words. While no official office certifies the last utterances of presidents, and accounts can sometimes be apocryphal or secondhand, these parting thoughts frequently offer profound insights into their character, their priorities, and their enduring place in the nation’s narrative. They are whispers of history, often revealing a final distillation of a life lived in the public eye.
The inherent challenges in accurately reconstructing these last moments are considerable. Some presidents, like Ronald Reagan in his final throes of Alzheimer’s, or the centenarian Jimmy Carter, were no longer able to communicate coherently from their deathbeds. For others from the early American Republic, the details are often gleaned from family members or attendants, sometimes decades later, introducing an element of historical guesswork. This makes the interpretation of these powerful statements a delicate yet rewarding endeavor.
Despite the varying degrees of verification, there remains an undeniable value in interpreting these parting thoughts for future generations to ponder. These final words, whether profound or seemingly mundane, can encapsulate elements of a president’s enduring legacy, reflecting their deepest convictions, their final concerns, or even a moment of peace. They provide a humanizing glimpse into the individuals who bore the immense responsibility of leading a nation, reminding us that behind the titles and historical narratives were people facing their ultimate moment.
Across the spectrum of presidential departures—from sudden, tragic ends to peaceful, long-awaited finales—their last words offer a unique form of historical testament. Some expressed regrets, others contentment, and many held an expectation of a different chapter beyond this life. None, as far as records indicate, anticipated a darker afterlife, though the weight of their decisions might have suggested otherwise for some. The following are a few examples that stand as poignant reflections on lives of unparalleled service.
9. **George Washington: The Dignity of a Founding Father’s Farewell**George Washington, the revered first President of the United States, concluded his extraordinary life with a remarkably concise and resonant statement. His final words, steeped in the quiet dignity that characterized his leadership, offer a glimpse into the composure of a man who had guided a fledgling nation through its most precarious formative years.
On December 14, 1799, as George Washington’s life neared its end at Mount Vernon, surrounded by loved ones and physicians, his final confirmed words were simply, ‘Tis well,’ reflecting his lifelong commitment to duty and order.
This succinct declaration has been widely interpreted as a testament to Washington’s characteristic composure and acceptance. In its brevity, the phrase conveyed a sense of completion, a final acknowledgment that his earthly duties were fulfilled and that he was prepared for what lay beyond. It underscored the image of a leader who faced his mortality with the same unwavering resolve he demonstrated on the battlefield and in the halls of governance, leaving behind a legacy of profound stability and foundational leadership.
10. **George H.W. Bush: A Final Exchange of Love**George H.W. Bush, the 41st President of the United States, passed away in 2018 at the age of 94, leaving behind a legacy of distinguished service. His final moments were characterized by a deeply personal and emotionally resonant exchange with his eldest son, former President George W. Bush, highlighting the enduring bonds of family and affection that shaped his life.
In the final minutes before his death, as he lay in his Texas home, a telephone call was placed to his son, George W. Bush. This intimate conversation allowed for a last farewell between a father and his son, a poignant moment in a relationship that had spanned decades of public service and private life.
During this call, the younger Bush conveyed a message of profound love and affirmation to his ailing father. He told his father that he loved him and that he had been a “wonderful Dad,” expressing the deep admiration and gratitude of a son for his father’s lifetime of guidance and affection.
George H.W. Bush’s reply was simple, immediate, and utterly heartfelt, encapsulating the essence of their bond. His last words, spoken with clarity and warmth, were: “I love you, too.” This direct affirmation of reciprocal love served as his final communication, a powerful testament to the central role of family in his life.
This final exchange provides a moving capstone to a life defined by public duty, illustrating that even for a global statesman, the most powerful and enduring messages are often those of personal connection and affection. His last words underscored a legacy that, alongside geopolitical achievements, valued the profound human ties of family and love, offering a touching insight into the man behind the presidency.
Exploring heritage is a multifaceted journey, from a detailed analysis of the composition of “iconic” figures, to complex debates surrounding historical influences and the poignant final words of leaders. It emphasizes how influence can manifest in different forms – scientific breakthroughs, political leadership, cultural phenomena, or a final quiet farewell – providing valuable lessons and shaping our understanding of history and human experience.
