PostModern Iconography - Fr. Stamatis Skliris

[angelosgabriel]

His Grace Bishop Maxim was the guest keynote speaker at the Parish Life Conference for the Antiochian Archdiocese of the West, and during his presentations there was a slideshow with iconography by Fr. Stamatis Skliris. His iconography attempts to blend the Byzantine and Aesthetic with bright colors, different expressions, etc. I was wondering if anyone else was familiar with Fr. Stamatis and had any opinions on his work. He also has a book "In the Mirror" which is a combination of articles he has written, and a plethora of his work. Some of his stuff can be seen on his website: www stamatis-skliris com

 

[Protoevangel]

Some of the stuff on that site are clearly not icons. The ones that may be... I don't know. I'll have to let a real Iconographer comment on them. Personally, I don't like his use of color, or his style. I don't think I'd buy even a cheap print of anything I saw on the site.

 

[choirfiend]

Bright colors are definitely not outlawed in Iconography. During times when few icons were painted, many people erroneously came to believe that icons should be dark and dull. The reality is that icons that are dark are dark because of time and soot, not because the original colors were necessarily dark. Today, you may find some iconographers painting dark icons in imitation of antiquities.

I don't offer an opinion on his icons since I leave it up to the bishops/priests to apply the canons of acceptable practice in iconography, but I do like his paintings.

 

[nutroll]

I don't care for it at all. It really isn't in keeping with any style I have seen before. While I think it is possible for there to be a distinctly American style which would be different than that of other schools, I find his work to be really cheesy looking, like bad art mixed with iconography. On top of that, his expression of emotion is completely out of keeping with iconography. Icons are supposed to be expressionless. They are not supposed to be showing human emotion because our emotions are incapable of expressing the reality of the Kingdom of Heaven. I'm disappointed that the Antiochian Archdiocese would showcase his work...

 

[Michael G]

I have to agree with Protoevangel and Matt in their opinions on the paintings on that site. Only half of the paintings on that site qualify as being icons. His taste in colors is pathetic, and his lack of knowledge of classical iconographic themes and technique puzzles me. Whoever payed him to paint their church was an utter fool. I am sorry, but the page really offends me, especially after spending a week with a woman who was classically trained in Russian iconography and who takes great pride in making sure every line is where it is supposed to be and every color is as it ought to be in iconography. There is a reason why the church has set standards for what icons are to look like, and this man clearly falls short. I am surprised an Orthodox Bishop would use his work in a slideshow in a presentation. Perhaps Vladyka himself needs an education in what is and what is not good iconography?!

 

[Michael G]

I don't care for it at all. It really isn't in keeping with any style I have seen before. While I think it is possible for there to be a distinctly American style which would be different than that of other schools, I find his work to be really cheesy looking, like bad art mixed with iconography. On top of that, his expression of emotion is completely out of keeping with iconography. Icons are supposed to be expressionless. They are not supposed to be showing human emotion because our emotions are incapable of expressing the reality of the Kingdom of Heaven. I'm disappointed that the Antiochian Archdiocese would showcase his work...

Cheesy? If we are putting it on the level of cheese, then I would call it cottage cheese, or even ricotta (not solid at all).

Yes, there can be American iconography but to break the canons of iconography to achieve and American style is not at all called for.

 

[Michael G]

Bright colors are definitely not outlawed in Iconography. During times when few icons were painted, many people erroneously came to believe that icons should be dark and dull. The reality is that icons that are dark are dark because of time and soot, not because the original colors were necessarily dark. Today, you may find some iconographers painting dark icons in imitation of antiquities.

I don't offer an opinion on his icons since I leave it up to the bishops/priests to apply the canons of acceptable practice in iconography, but I do like his paintings.

There is nothing wrong with bright colors, but there is something intrinsically wrong with icons having expressions that are anything other than pondering the still silence of Heaven!

 

[Michael G]

To quote a popular song from a few years ago, my reaction to his work is as follows: my stomach turns and I exhale!

 

[AureateDawn]

I don't mind the colors. But the style.. that can't be iconography! I appreciate his work as art, but not as icons.

But just as art, I really like this one.

 

[AureateDawn]

"The Serbian Orthodox Diocese of Western America is pleased to announce the publication of an outstanding book by Fr. Stamatis Skliris, a disciple of the great twentieth-century theologians Archimandrite Justin Popovich and Bishop Athanasius Yevtich. Fr. Stamatis is a parish priest in Athens and is renowned as an iconographer and as a writer and lecturer on Byzantine iconography." [italics mine]

http://www.westsrbdio.org/ads/Stamatis_Skliris.html
http://www.westsrbdio.org/Visit_Bp._Atanasije/bp_Atanasije.html

 

[Matrona]

Some of the stuff on that site are clearly not icons. The ones that may be... I don't know. I'll have to let a real Iconographer comment on them. Personally, I don't like his use of color, or his style. I don't think I'd buy even a cheap print of anything I saw on the site.

That's just it, though, I'm not sure all those paintings are meant to be icons anyway.

I think they're kinda cool looking, but I've seen better.

 

[Michael G]

My fiance's reaction was "He looks like he has the ability to write icons in the way the Church directs us to, but he clearly does not want to follow the Churches teaching on the matter."

 

[Anhelyna]

From what I have seen - they do not 'speak' to me

Not for me

 

[Michael G]

From what I have seen - they do not 'speak' to me

Not for me

Very well said!

 

[Orthocat]

I dunno...

It's my understanding there's been a debate about modern vs classical in iconography but....hmmm...to me there's something like...missing...

guess I'll always be old-school

 

[Orthocat]

To quote a popular song from a few years ago, my reaction to his work is as follows: my stomach turns and I exhale!

I think sick like ginger ale...

 

[AureateDawn]

It's like the saying goes... If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

 

[Michael G]

I dunno...

It's my understanding there's been a debate about modern vs classical in iconography but....hmmm...to me there's something like...missing...

guess I'll always be old-school

The way the Church sees it there really is no debate. The canons have not changed. Thus paintings like these fall outself the realm of accepted iconography.

 

[Michael G]

I think sick like ginger ale...

 

[Komnenos]

My kind of Iconography.