Pop, you've just touched upon a terrible truth about people photography: the model makes the shot. If you look at most David Bailey collections you find the same shot of Mick Jagger in his fur hood, of the Cray twins and so on it goes. That's not to knock Bailey, who I think is a great photographer, but that the public conception of him is all associated with characters from the 60s, regardless of the zillion shoots and commercials he's made since then.
And so with the Cunningham shot, as pointed out. The only thing it meant to me was the jewellery store across the road, and the fact that we have been pursuing street/public place shooting (railways) in another thread that concerned security and the right to violate or challenge it, depending on your point of view of these things...
On its own (the shot) it's like so many other exposures - meaningless. I have enough of my own to know. In the old days we used to get them on the first winding-on frames in the cassette; very creative angles and feet, mainly.
Rob C