Another Iconic question

RKO · Oct 21, 2014

Are all icons painted in the ancient styles of painting? Are there any that are more contemporary in terms of painting style?

I LOVE the old style of icons, I just reralized I've never seen one that looks like it was painted in the last 500 years.

Anhelyna · Oct 21, 2014

AHA - that's really a question for the Iconographers here [ that's not me

]

Basically there are rules about painting/writing them - how you do them etc

~Anastasia~ · Oct 21, 2014

RKO said:
Are all icons painted in the ancient styles of painting? Are there any that are more contemporary in terms of painting style?

I LOVE the old style of icons, I just reralized I've never seen one that looks like it was painted in the last 500 years.

I have seen "modern style icons" ... and I have heard comments from iconographers that are not ... complimentary.

Essentially what I found and asked about was a modern artist that was attempting to replicate an iconic style and incorporate it into their work. The pieces were beautiful, but canonically had all KINDS of problems.

Beyond that, yes, the iconographers should answer. I'll try to find an example of what I'm talking about.

~Anastasia~ · Oct 21, 2014

I found a couple of the ones I was talking about - not sure if this is what you meant. I have heard these criticized heavily by iconographers.

Christ and St. John the Beloved

The Anunciation

Anhelyna · Oct 21, 2014

Kylissa - may I ask where you found those ?

I'd love to hear Nutroll's comments

RKO · Oct 21, 2014

I was actually talking about something like this. (I realize it probably isn't canonical. was just talking about artistic style.)

~Anastasia~ · Oct 21, 2014

Anhelyna said:
Kylissa - may I ask where you found those ?

I'd love to hear Nutroll's comments

Well ... I found the one of St. John searching google images. I managed to track down the painter - the artist is Ann Chapman. I got the others from her website. But now I cannot find a website for her.

Here's another, btw, of the Crucifixion. It might better illustrate how icons are being "reinterpreted" in this case?

~Anastasia~ · Oct 21, 2014

My mistake. Ann Chapin. But her website does seem to be gone.

There's a short bit here: Ann Chapin

~Anastasia~ · Oct 21, 2014

RKO said:
I was actually talking about something like this. (I realize it probably isn't canonical. was just talking about artistic style.)

Sorry, RKO. Since I see this isn't what you meant. I will leave it for someone who can answer, since I have never seen icons like that.

Did not intend to derail.

SeventhValley · Oct 21, 2014

While there is a accepted way for Icons to be painted ultimately they can change because Icons are a tool to be used not a unchangeable item.

SeventhValley · Oct 21, 2014

Museum of Russian Icons :: Techniques of Icon Painting

choirfiend · Oct 21, 2014

RKO said:
Are all icons painted in the ancient styles of painting? Are there any that are more contemporary in terms of painting style?

I LOVE the old style of icons, I just reralized I've never seen one that looks like it was painted in the last 500 years.

No, because Icons don't look like that JUST because there's a particular "style" they were created in during a historical time period. Iconography is subject to the same kind of "tradition" the rest of the church is--so there's not much to change, even less so than music!

Most painting styles over the last 500 years would either: lose the theology present in form, color, composition, and subject matter, or: lose the qualities of being an icon, which include NOT specifically attempting to elicit an emotional response (although they can and do).

The example picture you showed is FULL of emotion, but not much of the divinity of God or theology, in the Orthodox view.

RKO · Oct 21, 2014

Kylissa said:
Sorry, RKO. Since I see this isn't what you meant. I will leave it for someone who can answer, since I have never seen icons like that. Did not intend to derail.

You didn't derail at all! I was trying to understand the tradition of icons and icon painting. That's all.

RKO · Oct 21, 2014

choirfiend said:
No, because Icons don't look like that JUST because there's a particular "style" they were created in during a historical time period. Iconography is subject to the same kind of "tradition" the rest of the church is--so there's not much to change, even less so than music!

Most painting styles over the last 500 years would either: lose the theology present in form, color, composition, and subject matter, or: lose the qualities of being an icon, which include NOT specifically attempting to elicit an emotional response (although they can and do).

The example picture you showed is FULL of emotion, but not much of the divinity of God or theology, in the Orthodox view.

This makes perfect sense. Thanks!

SeventhValley · Oct 21, 2014

From the Icon Museum web site I posted earlier:

What Makes an Icon an Icon?

by Dr. Anthony G. Ziagos, Sr.
The Apostle Luke was recognized as the first Iconographer. It was his recreation of the image of Holy Theotokos (Mother of God) that started early Orthodox Christians in the practice of venerating an image as a way to help the faithful become more Christian in their life, behavior and attitude.
An icon is an image created by an iconographer according to strict standards by the church. They have, in most cases been sanctified and blessed inside the church by a priest.
Icons are venerated by the faithful and help to remind us of the sacrifices made by the Saints, Martyrs and Prophets of the Church. These holy people have been canonized and passed on into the afterlife. Icons are the manifestation of this faith and include images of Christ, the Mother of God, Saints, religious and historical events. In some rare cases, usually in Monasteries, those who have not been canonized may appear in spiritual images for inspiration to the monks but will not have classic “halo” above their head. Icons allow Orthodox Christians to repent, renew their faith, and pray they have the strength to be good Christians.
What makes an Icon an Icon? An image created by an iconographer is venerated and viewed by the owner as a path to spiritual enlightenment. The veneration of an Icon helps a practicing Orthodox Christian to become a more spiritual person who not only professes but lives his life by the example set by the subject of the Icon. It is a way to connect to their religion. As an icon, age or the fact that it is a copy of an establish Icon is not relevant in any way. Each Icon is an original in it's own right. An icon owned by a non orthodox Christian and is not used in a spiritual setting can be viewed as a work of art or a historic relic. These factors are not important as an Icon, but may impact the intrinsic value as a relic or as a work of art. Century old Icons are indeed beautiful and although we may admire them as a work of art created in antiquity, they are not religious Icons unless they are used in a spiritual setting.

ArmyMatt · Oct 21, 2014

choirfiend said:
No, because Icons don't look like that JUST because there's a particular "style" they were created in during a historical time period. Iconography is subject to the same kind of "tradition" the rest of the church is--so there's not much to change, even less so than music!

Most painting styles over the last 500 years would either: lose the theology present in form, color, composition, and subject matter, or: lose the qualities of being an icon, which include NOT specifically attempting to elicit an emotional response (although they can and do).

The example picture you showed is FULL of emotion, but not much of the divinity of God or theology, in the Orthodox view.

this.

Joseph Hazen · Oct 23, 2014

Look at Icons as a 'type' or 'seal' (as in Scripture has stamped them) of Scripture: When we create a translation of a text there is some wiggle room - but not much. That's because there's a meaning to the words which are meant to convey the Gospel. So too Iconography is a language conveying a meaning and we have established a grammar and vocabulary for that language. To stray too far from it is to invite heresy - and there are definitely heretical icons; saints in incorrect positions, too-realistic portrayals which confuse or obscure the theology of a 2D image, colors which do not follow the established 'vocabulary' or which do but then convey the wrong message, individuals who should not be iconically portrayed, etc. These all can preach heresy in the same way that wrong syntax, confusing words, deleting of words, or just creative interpretation of textual scripture can.

So we can't regard Iconography as a project which we can interpret how we wish; otherwise our preaching is like the tower of Babel.

gurneyhalleck1 · Oct 23, 2014

What a beautiful description and awesome post!!!

Joseph Hazen said:
Look at Icons as a 'type' or 'seal' (as in Scripture has stamped them) of Scripture: When we create a translation of a text there is some wiggle room - but not much. That's because there's a meaning to the words which are meant to convey the Gospel. So too Iconography is a language conveying a meaning and we have established a grammar and vocabulary for that language. To stray too far from it is to invite heresy - and there are definitely heretical icons; saints in incorrect positions, too-realistic portrayals which confuse or obscure the theology of a 2D image, colors which do not follow the established 'vocabulary' or which do but then convey the wrong message, individuals who should not be iconically portrayed, etc. These all can preach heresy in the same way that wrong syntax, confusing words, deleting of words, or just creative interpretation of textual scripture can.

So we can't regard Iconography as a project which we can interpret how we wish; otherwise our preaching is like the tower of Babel.

Shieldmaiden4Christ · Oct 24, 2014

I wish I still had my paper on icons from my Anthropology of Art course. The subject was fun and as such it was probably one of the better papers I've ever written.

Another Iconic question

Member

Handmaid of God

† Handmaid of God †

† Handmaid of God †

Handmaid of God

Member

Attachments

† Handmaid of God †

† Handmaid of God †

† Handmaid of God †

SeventhValley

Guest

SeventhValley

Guest

Senior Veteran

Member

Member

SeventhValley

Guest

Regular Member

The Religious Loudmouth

Reader

Eastward bound

Similar threads