OrthodoxChristianity.net

Moderated Forums => Free-For-All => Religious Topics => Topic started by: Nephi on November 04, 2012, 06:53:36 PM

Title: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 04, 2012, 06:53:36 PM
Yes, I based the title off the folder that LBK refers to. :P

Post your schlock icons in this thread! Orthodox and non-Orthodox alike are more than welcome. I'll start.

(http://www.bridgebuilding.com/images/gsunx.jpg)

(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Amulet-Ladanka-NY-Towers-09-11-/12/!B-JF6Kg!2k~$(KGrHqZ,!mEEy+jCzGFUBM72dl!M5g~~0_12.JPG)

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLJRT.jpg)

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLLOD.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on November 04, 2012, 06:56:33 PM
Second one is abominable.

At least it's not as bad as the ones with Christ holding the (aborted?) anatomically correct fetus.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: converted viking on November 04, 2012, 07:18:42 PM
Yikessssssssssss !!!!!!!!!!   I am running awayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.. ;D

Seraphim
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: neon_knights on November 04, 2012, 07:19:57 PM
The "Lord of the Dance" one is horrendous.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: neon_knights on November 04, 2012, 07:21:21 PM
(http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/45029027/John+Coltrane+saintjohncoltraneenthronedmark.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 04, 2012, 10:14:01 PM
Is someone trying to tempt me into posting my archive of schlock?   :o ;)  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

What's truly disturbing is that a good chunk of what I have on file has been produced by people who are Orthodox, and only some of it is in honest ignorance.  :P :P :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 04, 2012, 10:19:58 PM
Is someone trying to tempt me into posting my archive of schlock?   :o ;)  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Come now and spiritually edify all of us with this treasury! ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 04, 2012, 10:43:32 PM
Is someone trying to tempt me into posting my archive of schlock?   :o ;)  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Come now and spiritually edify all of us with this treasury! ;)

Be careful what you wish for, my friend.  ;) :laugh:

Here are a couple of links to get you started:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,11209.0/all.html

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,44810.0/all.html



Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 05, 2012, 12:23:57 AM
... and another:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,47230.msg814178.html#msg814178
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on November 05, 2012, 12:55:16 AM
I am not sure what a Schlock icon is???

But maybe this is one:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8f/SerBac.jpg)

It is by the homosexual francisican Robert Lentz

It is even used on the wikipedia page for Saints Sergius and Bacchus (see link below)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saints_Sergius_and_Bacchus

Many keep going to the article insisting that the two saints were both gay and married (in gay marriage or however it would be called?)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on November 05, 2012, 01:40:21 AM
ADOSIGHOIADHS

I just did like 10 but I think i accidently left the page, now I have to do them over again.

WARNING

SOME ICONS BELOW COULD BE DEEMED... TOO BLASPHEMOUS TO BE SEEN

Saint Bach

(http://www.philocrites.com/archives/bachicon-thumb.jpg)

Muslim artistic styled mixture thing:

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_3I6eIowAe7I/TKet2EHR-9I/AAAAAAAAA24/fnV8cU_LE2A/s1600/Lentz,+St+Francis+And+Sultan.jpg)

I don't know:

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_3I6eIowAe7I/TKeu6aE9YII/AAAAAAAAA3A/tx6sNePT4-0/s320/McNichols,+Bitter+Tree.jpg)

...

(http://www.pylgeralmanak.nl/afbeeldingen/image_phpSweVSB.jpg)

......

(http://www.eso-garden.com/images/uploads_bilder/black_elk_speaks_2.jpg)

Saint Gandhi:

(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTjwMW3PlISIXFJEGHz5ZsFjFHnwYNPhiGyu54m6V0TTlFAOxyJIEWssjc)

Saint Eve??? "Eve, the Mother of All" Take the forbidden fruit, it is good? (again by Robert)

(http://monasteriesoftheheart.org/sites/default/files/group_post_pics/EveIconLentz.jpg)

Creepy smile (imo):

(http://www.orthodoxcatholicchurch.org/images/stmychal2.jpg)

Juggeling:

(http://beafranciscan.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/st-francis-le-jongleur-de-dieu-icon-300-dpi-version1.jpg)

Another homoerotic "icon" by Robert Lentz:

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_3I6eIowAe7I/S3W8e3EQv1I/AAAAAAAAAnk/v7EBLdDH2Bs/s400/Lentz,+Polyeuct+%26+Nearchus.jpg)

Saint Albert Einstein:

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_grid/RLABE.jpg)

Jesus Christ: The Liberator:

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLJCL.jpg)

The Korean Christ:

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLKOC150.jpg)

Saint Merlin the Wizard of Britain:

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLMER.jpg)

"Pax Christi":

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLPAX.jpg)

PAGAN GOD QUETZALCOATL = CHRIST:

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLQZC.jpg)

"THE SERAPHIC CHRIST":

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLSEC.jpg)

...

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLWWZ.jpg)

THE ONES BELOW PERHAPS SHOULD NOT BE HERE... they are a little innaporrpriate:

St Francis of Assisi Receiving the Stigmata

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_3I6eIowAe7I/TKeuvm0gOrI/AAAAAAAAA28/UBNizdH8r2E/s320/Krayel,+Stigmata+Medium.jpg)

I am note sure...:

(http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6080/6084721178_0046134efb.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: dzheremi on November 05, 2012, 01:55:01 AM
I am all for freedom of expression. I am also all for putting Robert Lentz in jail forever, with no painting supplies.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 05, 2012, 02:04:22 AM
I am all for freedom of expression. I am also all for putting Robert Lentz in jail forever, with no painting supplies.

+1
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Severian on November 05, 2012, 02:07:07 AM
I am all for freedom of expression. I am also all for putting Robert Lentz in jail forever, with no painting supplies.

+1
+2

One of my favorite "Schlock Icons"

(http://www.forerunner.com/churchfathers/images/origen.jpg)
Origen of Alexandria
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Cyrillic on November 05, 2012, 02:13:17 AM
I am all for freedom of expression. I am also all for putting Robert Lentz in jail forever, with no painting supplies.

+1
+2

+3
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 05, 2012, 02:18:09 AM
I am all for freedom of expression. I am also all for putting Robert Lentz in jail forever, with no painting supplies.

+1

The same goes for his protege, the Jesuit priest William Hart McNichols. And the Orthodox priest Stamatios Skliris deserves to be locked in a room full of babushki and yiayies, not to be released until he repents of his crimes against iconography. It'll make any hauling before a bishop seem like a pleasant outing.

And don't get me started on the Russian ultranationalists and neomonarchists, or the dreamy New-Agey stuff that comes out of the Prosopon School ....  :P :P >:(

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 05, 2012, 02:21:24 AM
I am all for freedom of expression. I am also all for putting Robert Lentz in jail forever, with no painting supplies.

+1

The same goes for his protege, the Jesuit priest William Hart McNichols. And the Orthodox priest Stamatios Skliris deserves to be locked in a room full of babushki and yiayies, not to be released until he repents of his crimes against iconography. It'll make any hauling before a bishop seem like a pleasant outing.

And don't get me started on the Russian ultranationalists and neomonarchists, or the dreamy New-Agey stuff that comes out of the Prosopon School ....  :P :P >:(



Oh please, please, don't hold back. And supply photographic examples. That's what this threat is for!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 05, 2012, 02:22:47 AM
This is just priceless for its sheer ghastliness:

(http://www.betsyporter.com/images/Li_Ban_4580.JPG)

The spiel that accompanies this image:

painted as a gift for my daughter, author of the "Lost Voices" trilogy of young adult novels about contemporary teenage mermaids.

According to Irish Legend, Li Ban, a king's daughter, was one of the few survivors of a great flood that occurred before the arrival of Saint Patrick.
For a year, Li Ban lived with her lap dog in the sun room of her seaside castle.  When they ran out of food, Li Ban became a mermaid and the dog
became an otter.  Together they fished the coastal waters for 300 years. Then they were found by some monks and came ashore; and Li Ban was
baptized as a Christian.  Rather than live as a mermaid for another 300 years, Li Ban chose to die and go to heaven.

Li Ban is shown with arms raised in "orans" or prayer position, praising God for her life, her freedom, and her beautifully wild and verdant environment.


Laugh or cry as you wish. Cute otter, though. I like otters.  :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 05, 2012, 03:07:38 AM
This is just priceless for its sheer ghastliness:

(http://www.betsyporter.com/images/Li_Ban_4580.JPG)

The spiel that accompanies this image:

painted as a gift for my daughter, author of the "Lost Voices" trilogy of young adult novels about contemporary teenage mermaids.

According to Irish Legend, Li Ban, a king's daughter, was one of the few survivors of a great flood that occurred before the arrival of Saint Patrick.
For a year, Li Ban lived with her lap dog in the sun room of her seaside castle.  When they ran out of food, Li Ban became a mermaid and the dog
became an otter.  Together they fished the coastal waters for 300 years. Then they were found by some monks and came ashore; and Li Ban was
baptized as a Christian.  Rather than live as a mermaid for another 300 years, Li Ban chose to die and go to heaven.

Li Ban is shown with arms raised in "orans" or prayer position, praising God for her life, her freedom, and her beautifully wild and verdant environment.


Laugh or cry as you wish. Cute otter, though. I like otters.  :)

Was it because there were no actual Celtic saints with amazing and inspiring stories that this idiotic tale was composed? Surely not.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 05, 2012, 03:14:06 AM
Quote
Was it because there were no actual Celtic saints with amazing and inspiring stories that this idiotic tale was composed? Surely not.

Indeed! It must be said that the artist who painted this is not Orthodox, but that's still no excuse to take such liberties with iconography, especially when such folks claim fidelity to Orthodox tradition.

Here's something a wise and experienced iconographer once told me, in response to the profusion of false icons in recent years:

We have been down this path before and it always leads to the same place. A lack of humility and obedience. Originally, iconography was a monastic endeavor. It was supposed to be a vocation in the church. You were supposed to give up other forms of expression solely for iconography. Few have done that. Lately it has become a side show to one's art career and inner expression. Just a hobby to be taken up without much thought. Look at the cashing in on painting classes everywhere. $700+ to teach non Orthodox how to paint the sacred imagery. But without exposure to Liturgy every week, they pervert the images and make their own statements as if they had the authority. The arguments of "Why can't I?" and "How dare you tell me what to paint?" ring in the ears. We are not going to bend our knee to any authority as we are in charge of our own salvation. We have stacks of books that tell us so.

It's sad, and telling about our society and path. The saddest part is that we quietly accept these perversions of iconography as versions of the truth. The uninformed and uninspired current Orthodox accept false images and display them unknowingly. We open our mouths and speak with authority without the ancient knowledge to support us. We walk in error and repeat that error many times over.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: dzheremi on November 05, 2012, 03:26:17 AM
That's the stupidest story I've ever heard. Just for that, I'm going out tomorrow and punching an Irish person. Preferably Bono.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Alpo on November 05, 2012, 04:32:32 AM
What's wrong with "Muslim artistic styled mixture thing"? If it had Orthodox Saints instead of Francis and Caliph (?) I could perhaps venerate it.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Fabio Leite on November 05, 2012, 06:55:26 AM
Let's take a specialist's opinion:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: IXOYE on November 05, 2012, 03:53:06 PM
I am all for freedom of expression. I am also all for putting Robert Lentz in jail forever, with no painting supplies.

+1

The same goes for his protege, the Jesuit priest William Hart McNichols. And the Orthodox priest Stamatios Skliris deserves to be locked in a room full of babushki and yiayies, not to be released until he repents of his crimes against iconography. It'll make any hauling before a bishop seem like a pleasant outing.

And don't get me started on the Russian ultranationalists and neomonarchists, or the dreamy New-Agey stuff that comes out of the Prosopon School ....  :P :P >:(



What is up with the Prosopon School?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: choy on November 05, 2012, 03:57:51 PM
The Korean Christ:

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLKOC150.jpg)

I just watched "21 Jump Street" this past weekend and seeing this made me giggle a bit.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Ansgar on November 05, 2012, 04:19:06 PM
When i'm watching this, I remember that incident with the Harry Potter icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: orthonorm on November 05, 2012, 04:24:01 PM
Pasadi wins (not resized for your viewing displeasure):

This is an orthodox icon of aborted babies and they are depicted being thrown into Hell:
(http://www.orthodox.org/oocl/images/abort.gif)

The idea is that even without sins is so hard to make it to Heaven without BAPTISM. Neither unborn children don't make it that did not live one day.Anyhow the sin of abortion is erased through confession.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 05, 2012, 06:54:48 PM

What is up with the Prosopon School?

These (and they're not the only ones):

(http://www.prosoponschool.org/photos/01.jpg)

This image of God the Father, Christ and the Holy Spirit is a variant of the NT Trinity. Not only is God the Father shown as an old man, but the Holy Spirit is shown as a winged angelic figure, a form the Spirit has never manifested as. The Spirit has appeared in the form of a dove, as fiery tongues, and as the cloud of uncreated light surrounding Christ at His Transfiguration, but never in the form in this "icon".

(http://www.prosoponschool.org/photos/02.jpg)

Setting aside the uncanonicity of God the Father as an old man for a moment, while St Anna, together with her husband St Joachim, are liturgically referred to as “holy venerable forebears of God”, this does not mean that St Anna is on an equal theological footing with God the Father.

(http://www.prosoponschool.org/gallery_2/24.jpg)

This school has a particular fondness for painting Holy Wisdom and related images, which have, again, been denounced by the Church more than once as expressing an incomplete and defective theology, of denying the fullness of the Incarnation. This image goes further with the Holy Silence theme, by adding a star on the forehead and shoulders of the angel (as would be the case with icons of the Mother of God); and placing Christ Emmanuel over the angel’s body in the manner of Of the Sign icons. Did this virgin angel conceive and bear a son, called Emmanuel? To add to this theological confusion, there is a medallion of Christ’s face above the angel.

(http://www.prosoponschool.org/photos/16.jpg)

In icons of the Hospitality of Abraham, and in St Andrei of Radonezh’s Holy Trinity, the vessel in the foreground, containing a calf’s head, prefigures the sacrifice of the Son of God, and the Eucharistic chalice. In this “creative” twist on accepted iconography, the incarnate Christ Emmanuel is seen inside the vessel, with the inscription Lamb and Logos on either side of Him. More theological and Trinitarian confusion.

It is of great concern that the classes this school provides are very popular. For an iconographer, acquiring skill in painting technique is necessary, but, more important is acquiring a thorough knowledge of what should and should not be painted. It is essential that teachers of iconography are vigilant against the propagation of suspect and uncanonical images. It is acceptable for an iconographer to paint icons of canonical content, even if his skill is not polished. It is unacceptable for him to paint images with a masterly technique, but whose content goes against Orthodox doctrine and theology.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on November 05, 2012, 07:13:58 PM
What do you think of these:

(http://www.gardzienice.art.pl/gfx/nowosielski.jpg)

(https://forum.ioh.pl/graficzki2/1314888735_nowosielski_sw_mikolaj.jpg)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Chk9vsnRYvE/TbMhNUyLyzI/AAAAAAAADMk/gK0_0SzFgow/s1600/Anastasis+-+Nowosielski.jpg)

(http://i.wp.pl/a/f/jpeg/26340/nowosielski_obraz_policja550.jpeg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Iconodule on November 05, 2012, 08:41:08 PM
I actually like those.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on November 05, 2012, 08:52:53 PM
"Neither unborn children don't make it that did not live one day."

 ???

I miss Pasadi!

Also, I still don't get the thing in that icon, with the children on the playground.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on November 05, 2012, 09:36:01 PM
Now along with my obsession with non-canonical/fake apostolic churches, I have to add schlock icons to my list of sicknesses that consume nights when I cannot sleep but have access to Google. Thanks a lot.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 05, 2012, 10:06:44 PM
What do you think of these:

(http://www.gardzienice.art.pl/gfx/nowosielski.jpg)

(https://forum.ioh.pl/graficzki2/1314888735_nowosielski_sw_mikolaj.jpg)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Chk9vsnRYvE/TbMhNUyLyzI/AAAAAAAADMk/gK0_0SzFgow/s1600/Anastasis+-+Nowosielski.jpg)

(http://i.wp.pl/a/f/jpeg/26340/nowosielski_obraz_policja550.jpeg)

There's a difference between "rustic but powerful and moving", and "badly painted, with little sense of draftsmanship, which does little to evoke a prayerful attitude, but is more reminiscent of folk art".

Having said that, the one which is just passable is the last one of the female saint; the blue halo around the bishop-saint makes no sense at all (if gold is unavailable, then a pale color reminiscent of light can be chosen - the artist used a golden shde for the crosses on the omophorion, so why didn't he use the same in the halo?); and the Resurrection leaves out a lot of important theological detail, not even showing Christ pulling Adam out of the grave, surely a glaring omission in even a minimalist composition like this.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 05, 2012, 10:34:43 PM
Also, I still don't get the thing in that icon, with the children on the playground.

The scene with Mom and Dad in the playground with their tribe of little ones is inscribed The Blessed Family.

Another detail in this image which seems to have been lost on the artist who painted it: In icons, saints or other figures are frequently shown with a hand extended as a gesture of homage and supplication, and, in the case of the Mother of God, her gesture has two meanings: supplication, and showing her Son to be the way of salvation. The sorrowful angel at the top of the composition is gesturing towards the abortionist and the dragon. Oops.  :o :o
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 05, 2012, 11:04:16 PM

(http://www.prosoponschool.org/photos/01.jpg)

This image of God the Father, Christ and the Holy Spirit is a variant of the NT Trinity. Not only is God the Father shown as an old man, but the Holy Spirit is shown as a winged angelic figure, a form the Spirit has never manifested as. The Spirit has appeared in the form of a dove, as fiery tongues, and as the cloud of uncreated light surrounding Christ at His Transfiguration, but never in the form in this "icon".

That icon confused me at first since I've never seen the Father's old man halo like that. The "ho on," specifically. All of the old man Father icons I've seen have a starkly different halo than Christ's.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 05, 2012, 11:50:09 PM
Another comment on the above Paternity image:

Not only has the Holy Spirit never manifested as a winged angelic figure, but this winged angelic figure has been used to represent Holy Wisdom (uncanonical imagery, but let's set that aside for now). This Holy Wisdom figure is supposed to represent Christ before His Incarnation, not the Spirit. Furthermore, showing this figure in Christ's lap also speaks of Wisdom itself being a hypostasis of God, a person, not simply an attribute of Christ. This is completely contrary to Trinitarian theology.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 06, 2012, 01:07:20 AM
What do you think of these:

(http://www.gardzienice.art.pl/gfx/nowosielski.jpg)

(https://forum.ioh.pl/graficzki2/1314888735_nowosielski_sw_mikolaj.jpg)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Chk9vsnRYvE/TbMhNUyLyzI/AAAAAAAADMk/gK0_0SzFgow/s1600/Anastasis+-+Nowosielski.jpg)

(http://i.wp.pl/a/f/jpeg/26340/nowosielski_obraz_policja550.jpeg)

From the Soviet Realist School of iconography?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 06, 2012, 01:24:54 AM
Nothing like Soviet Realism, my friend - the complete opposite. More like naive art, and not particularly well-painted, either.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 06, 2012, 01:34:32 AM
Nothing like Soviet Realism, my friend - the complete opposite. More like naive art, and not particularly well-painted, either.

Well, it was sort of an ironic comment. :)

I could imagine those frescoed on drab concrete walls.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nicene on November 06, 2012, 01:57:28 AM
Wow.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 06, 2012, 02:07:22 AM
Nothing like Soviet Realism, my friend - the complete opposite. More like naive art, and not particularly well-painted, either.

Well, it was sort of an ironic comment. :)

I could imagine those frescoed on drab concrete walls.

Fair enough.  ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Severian on November 06, 2012, 11:37:02 PM
I am all for freedom of expression. I am also all for putting Robert Lentz in jail forever, with no painting supplies.

+1
+2

One of my favorite "Schlock Icons"

(http://www.forerunner.com/churchfathers/images/origen.jpg)
Origen of Alexandria
Who drew (not wrote, because it is uncanonical) this Image?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Timon on November 06, 2012, 11:43:22 PM
Why do these have to exist?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on November 07, 2012, 12:00:23 AM
Who drew (not wrote, because it is uncanonical)
The word for "write an icon" and "paint an icon" is the same in Greek.

"Writing" doesn't make it more holy and is a silly american thing.  :police:

As an EO I admit we helped it catch on.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on November 07, 2012, 12:02:41 AM
(http://greencanticle.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/st_guinefort.jpg)

(http://joanmitchellfoundation.org/uploads/artist-grants/MFA-2012-Musina-2-MusinaGuinefort.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 07, 2012, 12:42:27 AM
(http://greencanticle.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/st_guinefort.jpg)

(http://joanmitchellfoundation.org/uploads/artist-grants/MFA-2012-Musina-2-MusinaGuinefort.jpg)

So totally awesome! Thanks for posting. I especially like the top one with its juxtaposition of fat cherubs and blasphemous textual description.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 07, 2012, 09:45:14 AM
I am all for freedom of expression. I am also all for putting Robert Lentz in jail forever, with no painting supplies.

+1
+2

One of my favorite "Schlock Icons"

(http://www.forerunner.com/churchfathers/images/origen.jpg)
Origen of Alexandria
Who drew (not wrote, because it is uncanonical) this Image?

The artist is William Hart McNichols, a Roman Catholic Jesuit priest, and arguably the best-known protege of Robert Lentz. He has said this about his mentor: "Lentz is regarded as one of the foremost authorities on icons today."

Says it all, really. The bulk of McNichols' work is no less egregious and blasphemous than Lentz's. McNichols has not only painted an "icon" of a declared heretic, but seems to be unaware that Origen was an avowed iconoclast. Oh, the irony!  :P :P ::)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LizaSymonenko on November 07, 2012, 10:33:05 AM

What a horrendous waste of the God-given talent of artistry.

I guess people don't realize that they will have to answer one day for how they've used these talents....and if they've multiplied them for good.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 07, 2012, 10:03:27 PM
I still don't understand why Robert Lentz and his ilk aren't censured by their hierarchs...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on November 07, 2012, 10:13:47 PM
I still don't understand why Robert Lentz and his ilk aren't censured by their hierarchs...

According to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Lentz), he has gotten in some trouble, over his sexuality. It remains to be seen what they'll do with him in the future. I wonder if they haven't given him the boot yet because his paintings seem to be printed in books more than used in churches. I don't know of any parishes which are so far gone that they actually use his stuff. (God willing.) I wonder why people like him don't just leave the monastic life, go be secular at home, if they want total absence of restraint...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 07, 2012, 10:19:01 PM
According to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Lentz), he has gotten in some trouble, over his sexuality. It remains to be seen what they'll do with him in the future. I wonder if they haven't given him the boot yet because his paintings seem to be printed in books more than used in churches. I don't know of any parishes which are so far gone that they actually use his stuff. (God willing.) I wonder why people like him don't just leave the monastic life, go be secular at home, if they want total absence of restraint...

But no friction over his icons? Strange...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 07, 2012, 10:24:48 PM
I still don't understand why Robert Lentz and his ilk aren't censured by their hierarchs...

According to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Lentz), he has gotten in some trouble, over his sexuality. It remains to be seen what they'll do with him in the future. I wonder if they haven't given him the boot yet because his paintings seem to be printed in books more than used in churches. I don't know of any parishes which are so far gone that they actually use his stuff. (God willing.) I wonder why people like him don't just leave the monastic life, go be secular at home, if they want total absence of restraint...

From this post:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,38979.msg626536.html#msg626536

Quote
Robert Lentz's heretical and blasphemous images have continued to be freely available for sale, in disobedience to the directive from Abp Michael Sheehan of Santa Fe to the distributor of these images to withdraw them for sale. The archbishop issued this directive in 2005. The distributor has evidently done nothing to curb their sale.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on November 07, 2012, 10:25:46 PM
According to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Lentz), he has gotten in some trouble, over his sexuality. It remains to be seen what they'll do with him in the future. I wonder if they haven't given him the boot yet because his paintings seem to be printed in books more than used in churches. I don't know of any parishes which are so far gone that they actually use his stuff. (God willing.) I wonder why people like him don't just leave the monastic life, go be secular at home, if they want total absence of restraint...

But no friction over his icons? Strange...

True. Having seen how bad they can get, yeesh... Given what LBK posted, I hope the local bishop tries to stop him again.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 07, 2012, 10:28:20 PM
Biro, our posts must have crossed.  :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on November 07, 2012, 10:41:59 PM
Biro, our posts must have crossed.  :)

Sorry.  :-[
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Severian on November 07, 2012, 11:23:26 PM
(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Amulet-Ladanka-NY-Towers-09-11-/12/!B-JF6Kg!2k~$(KGrHqZ,!mEEy+jCzGFUBM72dl!M5g~~0_12.JPG)
What is the exact intent of this "Icon?"
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on November 07, 2012, 11:26:17 PM
To throw a Santa Maria on something in order to make it a holy remembrance, I suppose.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on November 07, 2012, 11:27:58 PM
That the Mother of God has sorrow for those who died Sep. 11, 2001 and prays for them.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on November 07, 2012, 11:46:21 PM
That the Mother of God has sorrow for those who died Sep. 11, 2001 and prays for them.
the planes are there.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 08, 2012, 12:17:03 AM
That the Mother of God has sorrow for those who died Sep. 11, 2001 and prays for them.
the planes are there.

Perhaps the artist had some sorrowful Mary intent going on with the sins of the world causing her pain.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 08, 2012, 12:36:10 AM
This painting is a commentary on the events of 9/11. As well as appropriating a sociopolitical event as an "iconographic" subject, the placing of the burning Twin Towers over the Virgin's body, in the manner of the icons of the Mother of God of the Sign, is just preposterous. Were the buildings the incarnation of God?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on November 08, 2012, 12:50:26 AM
No, but she holds on to the buildings, which shows concern and love. Hence her love for the people who were there.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 08, 2012, 01:52:22 AM
No, but she holds on to the buildings, which shows concern and love. Hence her love for the people who were there.

It is still appropriating a sociopolitical event as an iconographic subject. Iconography is concerned with expressing divine Truth, and should never be used as a vehicle for the promotion of "causes", not even "good" ones. The two aircraft flying on either side of the Virgin are in the position normally occupied by a pair of seraphim in many Of the Sign icons, recalling the hymn It is truly meet. Ridiculous and blasphemous. No-one has the right to take liberties with established and accepted iconographic imagery in the name of artistic "creativity", and presume to call such work an icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on November 08, 2012, 07:07:54 AM
That the Mother of God has sorrow for those who died Sep. 11, 2001 and prays for them.
the planes are there.

Instead of the angels:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/26/Perpetual_help_original_icon.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on November 08, 2012, 10:23:31 AM
No, but she holds on to the buildings, which shows concern and love. Hence her love for the people who were there.

It is still appropriating a sociopolitical event as an iconographic subject. Iconography is concerned with expressing divine Truth, and should never be used as a vehicle for the promotion of "causes", not even "good" ones. The two aircraft flying on either side of the Virgin are in the position normally occupied by a pair of seraphim in many Of the Sign icons, recalling the hymn It is truly meet. Ridiculous and blasphemous. No-one has the right to take liberties with established and accepted iconographic imagery in the name of artistic "creativity", and presume to call such work an icon.

You are aware that the artist probably isn't Orthodox to begin with? Also, that I've never seen this picture in a church?

You don't get to call penalties on players who aren't even in the game. It's not like anyone is forcing you to reverence the thing. When did you become the icon police?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LizaSymonenko on November 08, 2012, 11:30:47 AM

LBK is a well versed in iconography and the history thereof.

I have yet to disagree with any statement she has made pertaining to icons....and if I had a question on icons, LBK would definitely be the first one I would ask.

As for the artist being "innocent" and simply expressing their artistic freedom....well, they made the painting to resemble an icon....a well known icon, no less....therefore, they aren't all innocent.

What if someone took a photo of a person doing some silly act...and then they stuck your face in place of the original person on the photo.  Would you be offended?  It's ridiculing you, and perhaps putting you in a not so positive light....and yet, they are simply being artistic....so, it must be okay.


Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 08, 2012, 06:43:42 PM
No, but she holds on to the buildings, which shows concern and love. Hence her love for the people who were there.

It is still appropriating a sociopolitical event as an iconographic subject. Iconography is concerned with expressing divine Truth, and should never be used as a vehicle for the promotion of "causes", not even "good" ones. The two aircraft flying on either side of the Virgin are in the position normally occupied by a pair of seraphim in many Of the Sign icons, recalling the hymn It is truly meet. Ridiculous and blasphemous. No-one has the right to take liberties with established and accepted iconographic imagery in the name of artistic "creativity", and presume to call such work an icon.

You are aware that the artist probably isn't Orthodox to begin with? Also, that I've never seen this picture in a church?

You don't get to call penalties on players who aren't even in the game. It's not like anyone is forcing you to reverence the thing. When did you become the icon police?

When folks, Orthodox or otherwise, are painting images that resemble icons, and are calling them icons, then I do have the right and responsibility to call them out. Iconography is not a plaything for satisfying artistic whims and fancies.

To a non-Orthodox person, it is iconography which is the single most visible and definitive element which distinguishes the Orthodox Church from all others. It is our responsibility to ensure this holy and priceless treasure of our Church is preserved and defended against the influx of elements foreign to Orthodox belief and doctrine. The iconophiles who suffered and often paid with their lives during the iconoclastic upheavals of past centuries deserve nothing less in their honor.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on November 08, 2012, 07:00:07 PM
I didn't say I like Robert Lentz. In fact, I don't.

But he's not in your church, and no one is making you buy or use his stupid paintings.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 08, 2012, 07:05:42 PM
I didn't say I like Robert Lentz. In fact, I don't.

But he's not in your church, and no one is making you buy or use his stupid paintings.


He is promoting his blasphemies as icons, he is holding himself to be a master iconographer, and he is influencing others to follow his example. I have also criticized the work of Fr Stamatios Skliris, an Orthodox priest, another "authority on iconography", who paints images he calls icons, but which are blasphemous in their own way. I hold to no double standard.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on November 08, 2012, 07:19:12 PM
I didn't say I like Robert Lentz. In fact, I don't.

But he's not in your church, and no one is making you buy or use his stupid paintings.


He is promoting his blasphemies as icons, he is holding himself to be a master iconographer, and he is influencing others to follow his example. I have also criticized the work of Fr Stamatios Skliris, an Orthodox priest, another "authority on iconography", who paints images he calls icons, but which are blasphemous in their own way. I hold to no double standard.

Okay. I'm done with you.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: W.A.Mozart on November 08, 2012, 07:45:53 PM
(http://www.sveti-pantelejmon.com/Praznici%20Trojica%202.1.gif)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Antonis on November 08, 2012, 08:07:14 PM
Quote
The Spirit has appeared in the form of a dove, as fiery tongues, and as the cloud of uncreated light surrounding Christ at His Transfiguration, but never in the form in this "icon".
Really? I've never heard that position. I know that they were the uncreated energies, but have never heard specifically the Holy Spirit. Does that mean that all manifestations of the uncreated energies in light are the Holy Spirit specifically?

Don't mean to be confrontational, truly interested, I've never heard it.

And I don't see the problem with:

(http://www.prosoponschool.org/photos/02.jpg)

What exactly is the problem with this one?

I have seen many such icons in "normal" schools of iconography, even one where St. Maria, the mother of St. Anne, was present, holding St. Anne, who was holding the Theotokos, who was holding Christ. I believe it is called the "generation" icon.

Again, truly interested.  :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 08, 2012, 10:00:09 PM
The relative sizes of St Anna to the other figures is significant. Painting someone of greater or smaller size is a common expression of the relative rank/importance of one person to another. The icon Savior of Smolensk shows Christ standing, with the saints Alexander of Svir and Barlaam of Khutin prostrating themselves at His left and right. The saints are shown in much smaller proportion to that of Christ, as an expression of humility before Him.

(http://www.russiantreasures.net/images/rtn/icons/i167b.jpg)

Similarly, in icons of the feast of Mid-pentecost, which commemorates the twelve-year-old Christ teaching the elders in the Temple at Jerusalem, the Child is shown as proportionately the size of the adults in the composition, to express the greatness of His wisdom, a theme which pervades the hymnography of the feast.

(http://days.pravoslavie.ru/jpg/ib4526.jpg)

It may be asked, then why isn't the Christ-child shown similarly sized in icons of the Mother of God? Because these icons are primarily concerned with what the Church teaches about the Mother of God - and such teachings do not in any way diminish the divinity of her Child.

EDIT: Therefore, painting St Anna as foremost in size speaks of her superiority over both her daughter, and of Christ Emmanuel. This is the error of this composition, and an error shared with the corresponding Paternity image, which shows an enthroned God the Father as an old man, with a much smaller Christ in his lap, who, in turn is holding a dove. representing the Holy Spirit. Such a portrayal expresses a ranking in importance of the three Persons of the Holy Trinity, which is utterly contrary to Orthodox teaching.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 08, 2012, 11:30:46 PM
Quote
The Spirit has appeared in the form of a dove, as fiery tongues, and as the cloud of uncreated light surrounding Christ at His Transfiguration, but never in the form in this "icon".
Really? I've never heard that position. I know that they were the uncreated energies, but have never heard specifically the Holy Spirit. Does that mean that all manifestations of the uncreated energies in light are the Holy Spirit specifically?

Don't mean to be confrontational, truly interested, I've never heard it.


Many a Trinitarian hymn expresses the association of all three persons of the Holy Trinity with light, brightness, and radiance. Here are some examples:

I glorify Three without beginning, God in one Essence, Father, Son and Spirit, a single Light in threefold radiance, Kingdom of equal might in identity without confusion.

A Unity in three Persons I praise and a Trinity worshipped in one Nature, God the three in one, Light of triple sun, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

I praise the Godhead, Unity in three Persons: for the Father is Light, the Son is Light, and the Spirit is Light, of Light remaining undivided, shining forth in oneness of Nature, and in three rays of the Persons.


The Holy Spirit in particular is associated with enlightenment - an awakening to the things of God, most potently revealed at Pentecost, where humble laymen were transformed into Apostles who were led into all truth by that very Spirit.

A major theme of the feast of the Transfiguration is light and enlightenment; the same themes are also prevalent in the feasts of Theophany (known in Greek tradition also as Ton Photon (Feast of Lights) and Pentecost. All three are Trinitarian feasts.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on November 08, 2012, 11:52:57 PM

LBK is a well versed in iconography and the history thereof.

I have yet to disagree with any statement she has made pertaining to icons....and if I had a question on icons, LBK would definitely be the first one I would ask.

As for the artist being "innocent" and simply expressing their artistic freedom....well, they made the painting to resemble an icon....a well known icon, no less....therefore, they aren't all innocent.

What if someone took a photo of a person doing some silly act...and then they stuck your face in place of the original person on the photo.  Would you be offended?  It's ridiculing you, and perhaps putting you in a not so positive light....and yet, they are simply being artistic....so, it must be okay.




I agree. LBK is the only real iconography expert on these forums and it's a bit disheartening to see the disrespect she gets shown whenever she offers an opinion.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Antonis on November 09, 2012, 12:38:08 AM
Very interesting, thank you LBK.

What would you say of icons of Sts. Joachim and Anna with the young Theotokos standing between them? Is that permissible because it is historically accurate, as in, is size forfeit as a symbol when used in a historically accurate situation, or should she be larger like Christ in the mid-Pentecost icon?

Thanks!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 09, 2012, 12:53:24 AM
Very interesting, thank you LBK.

What would you say of icons of Sts. Joachim and Anna with the young Theotokos standing between them? Is that permissible because it is historically accurate, as in, is size forfeit as a symbol when used in a historically accurate situation, or should she be larger like Christ in the mid-Pentecost icon?

Thanks!

It would not be correct to show the little child of Joachim and Anna as adult-sized, though she is shown as a miniature adult, with the characteristic colors of her garments and the stars of perpetual virginity on her shoulders and forehead. The same goes for other icons of the Mother of God as a child, as in when she is held by her mother St Anna, and in the festal icon of her Entry into the Temple.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Antonis on November 09, 2012, 12:55:08 AM
Ah, neat, thanks!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 09, 2012, 01:18:11 AM
More on the Trinitarian nature of the feast of the Transfiguration - selections from Vespers and Matins:

Christ, the Light that shone before the sun, who in the body went about the earth, having fulfilled before His Crucifixion, as befitted His divine majesty, all things pertaining to His fearful dispensation, this day has mystically manifest the image of the Trinity upon Mount Tabor. For taking the three disciples He had expressly chosen, Peter, James, and John, He led them up into the mountain; and for a short time He concealed the flesh He had assumed, and was transfigured before them, making manifest the excellence of the original beauty, though not in its full perfection. For while giving them full assurance He also spared them, lest at the sight they should lose their lives: yet they saw as much as their bodily eyes were able to receive. He likewise called before Him the chief prophets Moses and Elijah, who testified to His divinity, that He is indeed the true brightness of the essence of the Father, the Ruler of the living and the dead. Therefore a cloud wrapped them like a tent; and out of the cloud from above loudly sounded the voice of the Father, testifying and saying: This is my beloved Son, whom I have begotten without change from the womb before the morning star: Him have I sent to save those who are baptized in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and who confess with faith that the One Power of the Godhead is indivisible. Listen to Him. And, O Christ our God, supreme in goodness, who loves mankind, shine upon us with the light of Your unapproachable glory and make us worthy to inherit Your never-ending Kingdom.

You ascended the mount with Your Disciples, and shone in the glory of the Father. Moses and Elijah were present with You; for the law and the prophets serve You, as You are God. And the Father designated for You natural prophetship, calling You “Son.” Therefore, we praise Him, with You, and with the Holy Spirit.

The pillar of fire plainly showed to Moses Christ transfigured, and the cloud pointed clearly to the grace of the Spirit that overshadowed Mount Tabor.

Come and hear me, O you peoples: going up into the holy and heavenly mountain, let us stand in spirit in the city of the living God, and let us gaze with our minds at the spiritual Godhead of the Father and the Spirit, shining forth in the Only-begotten Son.

Today on Tabor in the manifestation of Your light, O Word, unaltered Light from the Light of the unbegotten Father, we have seen the Father as Light and the Spirit as Light, guiding with light the whole creation.
(Exaposteilarion of the feast)

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 09, 2012, 06:01:10 AM
Oooh, this one's choice. Painted by another of the Lentz-McNichols circle, a member of the Secular Franciscan order:

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/product-images/giclee-prints/LWCTAPR.jpg)

The artist's spiel:

Under the oak at Mamre, Abraham entertained heavenly messengers.  Desert hospitality required one to offer refreshment, yet he was eager.  Sharing food is delight, generating fruits of unity.  Where two or more are gathered…  In this icon, (the prototype, The Holy Trinity icon by Rublev), the messengers are for our times.  In the center is Tom Fox, a 54 yr. old, peaceable, ex-Marine musician, father of two who served 3 missions in Iraq with the Christian Peacemaker Teams. Two nights before he was kidnapped, Tom was inspired as a Quaker to lead his friends in celebrating Eucharist, which was not part of his tradition.  This, I feel, manifested his faith that all shared one body.  Months of kidnapping ended with Tom’s murder March 9, 2006.

The figure to the left is Margaret Hassan, a 59 yr old Catholic Dubliner who married an Iraqi Muslim and moved to Iraq. For 30 years, through the Iran –Iraq war, 42 days of Gulf War carpet-bombing, 13 years of crushing sanctions and the current war begun in 2003, she served the families and suffering children that were her new family.  She served as head of Care International in Iraq for years when shockingly in Oct. 2004, she was kidnapped and likely shot to death Nov. 9.   Her body was never recovered.

65 yr old Italian Consolata Sister Leonella Sgorbati, (figure to the right), spent 36 yrs loving the poor in Kenya and Somalia.  Joyful and humorous, she too was beloved by her co-workers and the people of her ministry.  Leaving her hospital employment in Mogadishu Sept 17, 2006, accompanied by her Muslim bodyguard, a father of 4, they were ambushed and shot to death in the wake of comments by the Pope that enflamed many Muslims. Dying on the curb, she whispered, “I forgive, I forgive!”

The background in this icon commemorates the 9/11 attacks and the Al Amariyah Allied bombing of Bagdad, 1991, where a civilian shelter was targeted, incinerating 408, the heat of which left carbon prints of women and children on the walls.

War, economics, aggression, twisted fervor seeking God’s favor in fulfilling His ‘will’; these new messengers reaffirm; they shout truth in response; it is in compassion, in dialog, seeing neighbor, sharing at table, WE ARE ALL ONE BODY!


Have these people no fear when they paint such abominations?

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 09, 2012, 06:03:09 AM
The artist who painted the above butchered "Trinity" is also the one who produced the "original" Mother of God of 9/11. Here it is, along with his description:

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/product-images/giclee-prints/LWSMSPR.jpg)

Our Mother of Sorrows offers healing liniment to those suffering from the tragedies of September 11, 2001. Old Spanish and Mexican images of Our Lady of Sorrows as well as the traditional icon of Our Lady of Perpetual Help influenced the conception of this icon. The angels of the Perpetual Help icon, as well as their instruments of Christ's crucifixion are replaced by the American and United Airlines planes. The planes symbolize the victims at the Pentagon and Flight 93, as well as both planes that crashed into the World Trade Center. The planes invade the sacred space of the mandorla, the cloud of heavenly radiance that surrounds Mary. Represented by the almond shape and the radiating fiery rings, the mandorla is the intersection of heavenly and earthly realms. The stars of heaven surround Mary, the universal mother, in her sorrowful yet hopeful glance. The old church Slavonic lettering in gold leaf describes Mary as the Theotokos, the Mother of God.

Traditional images of Our Lady of Sorrows depict Mary's heart pierced by swords, symbolic of the seven times her heart was broken by the passion of her Son. Within Mary's embrace the oval which surrounds the World Trade Center symbolizes her sacred heart, but even more so her womb. In this icon, Our Mother embraces all those lost with her enduring love, just as she embraced the Child in her womb. The towers are depicted as they appeared on that bright, sunny morning in early September. The smoke, stylized and sanctified, bears witness to the ultimate sacrifice of so many on September 11.




Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 09, 2012, 06:37:07 AM
... and any collection of schlock icons wouldn't be complete without mention of the Dancing Saints extravaganza of syncretism which disgraces the walls of the Episcopal church of St Gregory of Nyssa in San Francisco. Here are some samples:

(http://www.allsaintscompany.org/sites/default/files/stg.icons_.spanel.v.jpg)

(http://www.davidsanger.com/images/stgregory/2-454-48.stgregorys.m.jpg)

The three figures in the middle are Origen, Malcolm X, and Queen Elizabeth I.

(http://www.allsaintscompany.org/sites/default/files/stg.icons_.epanel.v.jpg)

The lady in the purple suit in the middle of the upper section is Eleanor Roosevelt. The naked woman in the lower left (with horse, which is wearing more clothes than she is) is Lady Godiva.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: AZCatholic on November 09, 2012, 02:50:16 PM
Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow.


(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Cathedral_of_Christ_the_Saviour_in_Moscow_05.JPG/1024px-Cathedral_of_Christ_the_Saviour_in_Moscow_05.JPG)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3a/Christ_the_Saviour_in_Moscow.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Moscow_-_Cathedral_of_Christ_the_Saviour8.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 09, 2012, 05:08:09 PM
The artist who painted the above butchered "Trinity" is also the one who produced the "original" Mother of God of 9/11. Here it is, along with his description:

Our Mother of Sorrows offers healing liniment to those suffering from the tragedies of September 11, 2001. Old Spanish and Mexican images of Our Lady of Sorrows as well as the traditional icon of Our Lady of Perpetual Help influenced the conception of this icon. The angels of the Perpetual Help icon, as well as their instruments of Christ's crucifixion are replaced by the American and United Airlines planes. The planes symbolize the victims at the Pentagon and Flight 93, as well as both planes that crashed into the World Trade Center. The planes invade the sacred space of the mandorla, the cloud of heavenly radiance that surrounds Mary. Represented by the almond shape and the radiating fiery rings, the mandorla is the intersection of heavenly and earthly realms. The stars of heaven surround Mary, the universal mother, in her sorrowful yet hopeful glance. The old church Slavonic lettering in gold leaf describes Mary as the Theotokos, the Mother of God.

Traditional images of Our Lady of Sorrows depict Mary's heart pierced by swords, symbolic of the seven times her heart was broken by the passion of her Son. Within Mary's embrace the oval which surrounds the World Trade Center symbolizes her sacred heart, but even more so her womb. In this icon, Our Mother embraces all those lost with her enduring love, just as she embraced the Child in her womb. The towers are depicted as they appeared on that bright, sunny morning in early September. The smoke, stylized and sanctified, bears witness to the ultimate sacrifice of so many on September 11.


I guessed it right! I thought it had something to do with her sorrow.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 09, 2012, 05:08:19 PM
Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow.


Oh, yes, especially the Gerber Baby Jesus sitting in the old man's lap in the cupola. What a crying shame that the original artwork was reproduced when the cathedral was rebuilt! What a missed opportunity to fill it with the finest iconography and make it the treasure it deserved to be!  >:( :'( :'( :'(

There's even an "icon" of St Juliana Olshanskaya with her right hand raised in blessing, with the fingers arranged in the way priests bless. Unbelievable.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 09, 2012, 05:10:46 PM
Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow.
[images]

I personally find those beautiful, icons or not.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: akimori makoto on November 09, 2012, 07:53:48 PM
Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow.
[images]

I personally find those beautiful, icons or not.

They are hideous. The palette looks to have been chosen by a six year old.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 09, 2012, 08:06:34 PM
Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow.
[images]

I personally find those beautiful, icons or not.

They are hideous. The palette looks to have been chosen by a six year old.

Agreed!! and the anodyne, bland renditions of the individual saints, full of shadows and three-dimensionality, is hardly inspiring or conducive to prayer. The overblown and vapid depictions of the feasts, and, of course, the "trinity" in the central cupola, are no better.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shiny on November 09, 2012, 08:09:03 PM
LBK can you tell me why that Cathedral chose those icons?

I may have a surprise tonight for OC.net Stay tuned.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 09, 2012, 09:18:23 PM
LBK can you tell me why that Cathedral chose those icons?

A short explanation:

The original Cathedral of Christ the Savior was built over more than 20 years, starting in about 1824, IIRC. The reason for its construction was to commemorate the defeat of Napoleon and his attempt to conquer Russia. By this time, iconography, not just in the Russian empire, but also in the Orthodox world as a whole, had been almost completely overtaken by art overwhelmingly of western style and content, a process that had begun in earnest from the turn of the sixteenth century. Hence the choice of art for the 1820s cathedral.

The cathedral was personally chosen for demolition by Josef Stalin in 1931, who also appointed a film crew to officially document the destruction, as a gesture of the dominance and superiority of Soviet power over the Church. The footage still exists. In its place, a grand Hall of the People of massive proportions was proposed. Yet, any attempt at building anything of magnitude on the site was a structural failure. Eventually, the site became the city's swimming pool complex.  ;)

When, after the fall of the Soviet system sixty years later, it was decided, quite rightly, that the cathedral be rebuilt as a symbol of the rebirth and renewal of Orthodoxy, and a repudiation of the Soviet atheism which caused the destruction of the original. Unfortunately, the plan to replicate the original building also included reproducing the original artwork.  :( :( :(
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: ZealousZeal on November 10, 2012, 01:18:47 AM
Every time I see an icon I think of purchasing, I think, "What would LBK do?", and I answer myself: "I don't know anything about icons, so how would I know?"... and then I close the browser window and sigh.  :D Which is why I remain iconless. ;) But at least I don't have a Lentz special on my wall... Thank you, LBK!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 10, 2012, 03:50:15 AM
Quote
Every time I see an icon I think of purchasing, I think, "What would LBK do?"

*blush*

Quote
"I don't know anything about icons, so how would I know?"

Hang around long enough, and you'll learn plenty.  ;) And about good icons, too.  :) I'm not just about rubbishing schlock, though that's what I've become known for ...

Quote
But at least I don't have a Lentz special on my wall...

Good girl!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on November 10, 2012, 10:25:43 AM
Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow.

On the other hand, the basement church has very nice frescoes.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: podkarpatska on November 10, 2012, 12:23:46 PM
I came across an interesting article in the July 2012 Orthodox Arts Journal, written by one Aidan Hart entitled: "Towards Indigenous and Mature Liturgical Arts." http://www.orthodoxartsjournal.org/towards-indigenous-and-mature-liturgical-arts/

Perhaps this has been referenced before, if so I apologize, but I am curious as to LBK's take on Hart's hypothesis: "We often hear it said that traditional Orthodox liturgical arts are reviving. But how far advanced is this revival, how mature is it, and what in fact are we reviving? In this article I would like to stimulate discussion by briefly considering three related subjects: indigenous iconography, maturity, and features of a healthy climate that would help produce better liturgical artists."

From my read of his article, he would reject the same 'schlock' referenced in this this thread, but he may be taking a somewhat broader view than does LBK?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 10, 2012, 05:46:01 PM
Quote
From my read of his article, he would reject the same 'schlock' referenced in this this thread, but he may be taking a somewhat broader view than does LBK?

Fr Aidan has, unfortunately, painted a couple of schlock pieces which I've long had on file. The danger with such images is that they are quite well-painted, and by an Orthodox hand:

(http://www.aidanharticons.com/icons/17_big.jpg)

(http://www.aidanharticons.com/icons/TheHolyFamily_b.jpg)

As for "stylistic innovations", we need to look no further than Fr Stamatios Skliris and his acid-trip art to show how rampant individualism leads to serious schlock:

Prophet Elijah:
(http://www.spc.rs/files/u5/2012/7/sveti_ilija_stamatis_skliris.jpg)

Apostle Andrew just before his martyrdom (I spoke about this one on the Luke Warmodox treead)
(http://stamatis-skliris.gr/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/030-x900.jpg)

This one is supposed to be a visual version of the kontakion to the Mother of God "Champion Leader" (Ypermakho Stratigho)
(http://stamatis-skliris.gr/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/063-x900.jpg)



Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: podkarpatska on November 10, 2012, 05:54:06 PM
I don't have time to engage further on this topic right now, but I take it LBK does take issue with Fr. Aidan's hypothesis. I suspect he would take issue with her view of iconography. I am guessing he is not a poster here, but this has the makings of an interesting, and educational, discussion. I must confess that I do not know enough academically about the issue to have a valid opinion to articulate, but like many of us, I know what I 'like' and what I do not 'like.'  And, I think that much of what is being called 'schlock' here is really 'kitsch' - a subtle distinction but I think an important one.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 10, 2012, 06:04:09 PM
An iconographer is not a slave to artistic fashions which change constantly, he works in service, and under the direction of the Orthodox Church. Too often in recent years have people attempted to justify making aspects of Church life and practice "more relevant" to a "modern society". OK, then that means it's time we had rap music liturgies to encourage young people to turn up to church. Ridiculous? Of course it is! Christ and His Church are timeless and beyond time, "the same yesterday, today, and forever". Innovations, be they in liturgical practice, iconography, or other areas of Church life MUST be within the teachings and the Holy Tradition of the Church, and develop organically, not on an individual's whim or fancy.

Man does not need a modern message since he cannot comprehend the ancient one.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shiny on November 10, 2012, 09:03:37 PM
LBK, thanks for the explanation. And nice post above mine.

LOL @ "WWLBKD"? When it comes to buying icons. If she can get picture messages on her phone I could send her pictures of icons I want to see if they are canonical or not lol.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on November 10, 2012, 10:09:22 PM
LBK, thanks for the explanation. And nice post above mine.

LOL @ "WWLBKD"? When it comes to buying icons. If she can get picture messages on her phone I could send her pictures of icons I want to see if they are canonical or not lol.



I always just pm LBK when I wanna know what's what with an icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Opus118 on November 10, 2012, 10:58:52 PM
As for "stylistic innovations", we need to look no further than Fr Stamatios Skliris and his acid-trip art to show how rampant individualism leads to serious schlock:

Apostle Andrew just before his martyrdom (I spoke about this one on the Luke Warmodox treead)
(http://stamatis-skliris.gr/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/030-x900.jpg)

This one is supposed to be a visual version of the kontakion to the Mother of God "Champion Leader" (Ypermakho Stratigho)
(http://stamatis-skliris.gr/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/063-x900.jpg)

Personally I do not understand the acid trip reference. At least from my somewhat knowledgeable but limited perspective. As noted in the cited thread that I do not understand (perhaps because it is about people like me from someone that I like), the upper icon is certainly influenced by van Gogh. I would ascribe the second icon to Marc Chagall, since it contains a floating female leaning towards the left.

When I start doing iconography I am going to stick with Archangel Michael and Gabriel for the the North and South doors using an Art Nouveau style. I think it works. I am, of course, assuming it would meet with your approval (you would have to see what I have in mind first since the style varies). Michael would look a little bit like Ginger Rogers and Gabriel a little bit like Fred Astaire as it would be a better combination than Brezhnev and Kosygin.

 
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 10, 2012, 11:36:56 PM
Just got a free Catholic holy card with an image of St. John the Baptist on it by Lu Bro:

(http://www.bridgebuilding.com/images/lbjobx.jpg)

What are your thoughts on it?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: dzheremi on November 10, 2012, 11:45:04 PM
Looks like one of those creepy little "troll" dolls that were popular for a while a few decades ago.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 11, 2012, 04:05:34 AM
LBK, thanks for the explanation. And nice post above mine.

LOL @ "WWLBKD"? When it comes to buying icons. If she can get picture messages on her phone I could send her pictures of icons I want to see if they are canonical or not lol.

Emailing them to me is fine, Achronos. Like William said.  :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 11, 2012, 04:14:02 AM
Just got a free Catholic holy card with an image of St. John the Baptist on it by Lu Bro:

(http://www.bridgebuilding.com/images/lbjobx.jpg)

What are your thoughts on it?

Nothing at all wrong with its content, though the workmanship is rather rough. But it would be infinitely better to venerate an icon painted by this less-than-skilled hand, than, say, the Fr Stamatios Skliris stuff, or a well-painted but heretical Robert Lentz piece.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 11, 2012, 05:06:22 AM
Another work by the good Father. Wonder what he was on at the time ....

(http://www.monachos.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2524&d=1352622855)

Anyone remember those groovy black velvet wall hangings printed with scenes in Day-Glo colors, which were lit with "black light" for maximum effect?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shiny on November 11, 2012, 05:07:37 AM
What is this icon about?

(http://i.imgur.com/gvIil.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 11, 2012, 05:20:19 AM
It's of the Italian master painter of the early Renaissance, Fra Angelico, painted by the Jesuit William Hart McNichols.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on November 16, 2012, 11:54:25 AM
I am locking this subject as a precautionary measure; just received a report that malware may have been inserted into the page. Thanks, Carl Kraeff
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on November 17, 2012, 11:47:44 AM
We seem to be OK. I am unlocking the thread. Thanks to the alert forum member who reported the problem. Carl Kraeff
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 17, 2012, 12:47:21 PM
So would this be considered schlock? It's a "Young Virgin Mary."

(http://orthodoxwebstore.com/shopping/81-379-thickbox/young-virgin-mary.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on November 17, 2012, 01:34:08 PM
Just for LBK:

An icon of a non-Orthodox saint holding a statue of St. Joseph holding the child Christ.

(http://www.monasteryicons.com/graphics/products/large/542n.jpg)

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on November 17, 2012, 02:16:14 PM
So would this be considered schlock? It's a "Young Virgin Mary."

(http://orthodoxwebstore.com/shopping/81-379-thickbox/young-virgin-mary.jpg)

Worst and scariest thing I've seen in this thread. These eyes.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Cyrillic on November 17, 2012, 02:18:08 PM
Just for LBK:

An icon of a non-Orthodox saint holding a statue of St. Joseph holding the child Christ.

(http://www.monasteryicons.com/graphics/products/large/542n.jpg)



Better still, a Monastery icon of a non-Orthodox saint holding a statue of St. Joseph holding the child Christ.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: orthonorm on November 17, 2012, 02:23:08 PM
Just for LBK:

An icon of a non-Orthodox saint holding a statue of St. Joseph holding the child Christ.

(http://www.monasteryicons.com/graphics/products/large/542n.jpg)



LOL!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on November 17, 2012, 02:33:36 PM
What do you think of these:

(http://www.gardzienice.art.pl/gfx/nowosielski.jpg)

(https://forum.ioh.pl/graficzki2/1314888735_nowosielski_sw_mikolaj.jpg)

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Chk9vsnRYvE/TbMhNUyLyzI/AAAAAAAADMk/gK0_0SzFgow/s1600/Anastasis+-+Nowosielski.jpg)

(http://i.wp.pl/a/f/jpeg/26340/nowosielski_obraz_policja550.jpeg)

There's a difference between "rustic but powerful and moving", and "badly painted, with little sense of draftsmanship, which does little to evoke a prayerful attitude, but is more reminiscent of folk art".

Having said that, the one which is just passable is the last one of the female saint; the blue halo around the bishop-saint makes no sense at all (if gold is unavailable, then a pale color reminiscent of light can be chosen - the artist used a golden shde for the crosses on the omophorion, so why didn't he use the same in the halo?); and the Resurrection leaves out a lot of important theological detail, not even showing Christ pulling Adam out of the grave, surely a glaring omission in even a minimalist composition like this.

I wouldn't say the are "badly painted". The resolution and quality of the images is really bad. Here are two more works of the same man in better quality:

(http://www.cerkiew.pl/typo3temp/pics/aed851948d.jpg)

(http://hej-kto-polak.pl/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Jerzy_Nowosielski_Mandylion.jpg)

and here is "less minimalistic" Anastasis:

(http://dstp.rel.pl/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Nowosielski-Zmartwychwstanie.jpg)

I can agree he sometimes had "strange" usage of colours.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Severian on November 17, 2012, 02:52:58 PM
Another schlock Icon:

(http://www.davidjdunn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Theotokos-Eucharist-Cropped.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 17, 2012, 03:02:40 PM
(http://www.angelsofbyzantium.com/mediac/450_0/media/DIR_15901/Icon$20of$20Christ$20Emmanuel.jpg)

Weird, but maybe not schlock...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on November 17, 2012, 03:20:31 PM
I have a copy of the Trinity icon. The bad one with the Three Persons depicted separately. I'm getting rid of it, though.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 17, 2012, 03:57:11 PM
I have a copy of the Trinity icon. The bad one with the Three Persons depicted separately. I'm getting rid of it, though.

Which one? I'd take it if you weren't in Florida... ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on November 17, 2012, 04:25:51 PM
I have a copy of the Trinity icon. The bad one with the Three Persons depicted separately. I'm getting rid of it, though.

Which one? I'd take it if you weren't in Florida... ;)

(http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c24/neon000/IMG_0424.jpg)

This one.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 17, 2012, 08:25:09 PM
So would this be considered schlock? It's a "Young Virgin Mary."

(http://orthodoxwebstore.com/shopping/81-379-thickbox/young-virgin-mary.jpg)

It's certainly not canonical.

The title of this image is Mother of God at three years of age. Orthodox tradition celebrates the three-year-old child of Joachim and Anna entering the Temple, including the Holy of Holies, to be prepared for the awesome and incomprehensible task of conceiving and bearing the Son of God.

However, the following should be considered:

The young Virgin is consistently shown in Orthodox icons, including in icons of the Entry into the Temple, as a miniature adult, in a blue tunic covered by a red maphorion (cloak) bearing the three stars of perpetual virginity. There are many icons of her nativity which show her, newborn, in her crib, not as a babe in swaddling-clothes, which is, in itself, quite proper, but dressed in a maphorion, and bearing the three stars of perpetual virginity. This is quite consistent with the iconographic and hymnographic principle where linear time is not necessarily followed; the liturgical “today”, as it were, as well as being consistent with the hymnography and dogma of the Church.

By contrast, the portrayal of a bare-headed, sweet little girl in a blue tunic holding lilies is an image not from Orthodox tradition, but a saccharine, sentimental image from elsewhere, an attempt to make the Virgin “easier to relate to”. This sentimentalizing and humanizing tendency is frequently seen in western religious art. The intention is honourable, but it can result in an unfortunate “dumbing down” of the holy and sacred. Iconography concerns itself with what has been revealed, and with helping us conform ourselves to the will of God, not with pious sentiment or "what feels right".
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 17, 2012, 08:29:40 PM
Just for LBK:

An icon of a non-Orthodox saint holding a statue of St. Joseph holding the child Christ.

(http://www.monasteryicons.com/graphics/products/large/542n.jpg)



LOL!

Oh, this is just so memorably BAAAD! More proof (if any was needed) that the originals made by Monastery Icons are not painted, but made entirely by Photoshop.  :o :laugh: Love the sour smile on the saint's face ....  :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on November 18, 2012, 12:17:03 AM
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CvnoXm0yU_U/T2y5FuyotrI/AAAAAAAACSI/Ty0YFoA1MA8/s1600/LJ.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 18, 2012, 12:35:38 AM
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-CvnoXm0yU_U/T2y5FuyotrI/AAAAAAAACSI/Ty0YFoA1MA8/s1600/LJ.jpg)

Oh, lovely. Beautiful workmanship, but oh, so wrong!

Like the infamous Ark of Salvation image, what is objectionable about this image is the section in the lower right corner, where the enemies of God are depicted in quite specific ways, such as the Moslem wearing a turban, and the triple tiara of the Roman Catholic pope. Here's a critique of the "ark of salvation" image from a while back, it is relevant to the image William has posted:

Quote
No, that "icon" should not be venerated. It is simply a polemical propaganda piece, promoting a particular ecclesiopolitical ideology. Some food for thought:

Iconography is, above all else, concerned with the revelation of God in Trinity: of the incarnation of the Son and Word of God which has allowed the sanctification of fallen creation (matter), including humanity (made in the image of God)**; of the signs and wonders of the Divine revelation in both the Old and New Testament periods; and, in its portrayal of the saints, their transfiguration from mere men and women into those who have attained deification, a "oneness with God" and full participation of the heavenly life with God and in God, through the conduct of their earthly lives and their steadfast witness to the true faith. They have become true icons and reflections of the Divine. The word godly is most apt to describe them.

(** St John of Damascus sums this up beautifully: "Of old, the incorporeal and uncircumscribed God was not depicted at all. But now that God has appeared in the flesh and lived among men, I make an image of God who can be seen. I do not worship matter, but I worship the Creator of matter, who through matter effected my salvation. I will not cease to venerate the matter through which my salvation has been effected.")

Secondly, in the same way that the saints have obliterated their passions to give themselves completely to God, icons must also reflect this dispassionate quality. Obvious displays of human emotions, even a “positive” one such as laughter, are considered to be manifestations of human passion, and therefore have no place in iconography. Christ’s kingdom is “not of this world” (John 18: 36), therefore the portrayal of saints in their spiritually transformed state must be dispassionate. This also applies to church singing and reading; the singers and readers are there to glorify God and serve the church by their efforts, not to self-aggrandize. Even the display of sorrow in the face of a saint or the Mother of God should be kept subtle, with the emotion conveyed with the eyes, not through histrionics.

Thirdly, there must be complete agreement between scripture, liturgical content (which represents the distillation of the doctrinal, dogmatic and theological position of the Church), and the pictorial content of an icon for any icon to be deemed canonical.

Hence there is no place for ugliness, anger, enmity, and other negative emotions in iconography. The purpose of an icon is to draw us closer to God. Of course, there are specific examples of didactic icons, such as Last Judgement and Ladder of Divine Ascent which feature fearsome dragon-like creatures swallowing unrepentant evildoers. The Resurrection icon shows the personification of sin and death bound in chains in the abyss. It may be said, therefore, if there is room for such portrayals in these canonical icons, then why object to the presence of the figures in this Ark of Salvation image?

I offer this reply: An icon is a material, tangible expression of the incarnate God. The iconographic portrayal of the saints as icons of Christ, then, should reflect the sanctity, dispassion and boundless compassionate mercy of Christ to those who repent of their sins. Do we not pray to the saints and the Mother of God to intercede on our behalf? Are we not exhorted to pray for our enemies, to love them, and not to hate them? Of all scripture passages on this theme, Matt. 5: 43-48 is perhaps the most useful and succinct:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect."

We are also assured that God is Love, and that His love and mercy are available to all who seek Him in true faith. There are petitions in various Orthodox litanies which ask for the repentance and return to the true faith of sinners, apostates, and, yes, enemies. One which immediately comes to mind is "Let us pray for those who love us, and those who hate us", a petition in the litany sung towards the end of the Great Compline services of Great Lent where the Canon of St Andrew of Crete is sung.

There is the question of the iconographic portrayal of prophets and saints who denounced kings and princes. Such scenes are found in the smaller panels of a "life" icon of a saint or prophet (an icon which has a large central panel of the saint or prophet, surrounded by a series of smaller panels showing scenes of his or her life). Keeping to the dispassionate nature of icons, these scenes of rebuke of kings and princes (such as in icons of Prophet Elijah, and any number of OT and NT saints and righteous ones) show the saint standing before the errant ruler with a hand raised in rebuke, but nothing more. It is also significant that such scenes, almost without exception, are never used as icons in their own right.

It is not surprising that certain schismatic groups have favored this so-called Ark of Salvation image as it reflects their particular ideology. This image suggests that those who are not Orthodox are somehow beyond repentance and redemption. Can we really agree with this as Orthodox Christians? The persecuting Pharisee Saul openly boasted of his zeal and success in persecuting Christians, yet, by the grace of God, became one of the Princes of the Apostles, a pillar of Orthodoxy. There are also innumerable converts to the Orthodox faith who have come from every religious background imaginable, including atheism, paganism and communism; many who have become saints, in times of old, and in our present day. The grace of God knows no bounds.

Iconography, as I have said before, must never be used for political or ideological purposes. To portray the non-Orthodox as a whole as being irredeemable and in league with demonic and evil forces to destroy Orthodoxy is a shameful debasement of iconography. I am reminded of a reply to a convert to Orthodoxy as to how he came to the conclusion that the Orthodox faith was the true faith: "The Soviet Union was capable of destroying anything. Yet, despite its immense power and resources, it could not destroy the Orthodox Church. So that was good enough for me." The gates of hell cannot prevail, indeed ...

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,11209.msg297730.html#msg297730

There is a place in Orthodox tradition for didactic (teaching a moral lesson) images, made to teach a moral lesson, rather than than being intended for veneration. The walls of monastery churches and refectories often feature such images. If the image William posted showed the unrepentant sinners in more generic form, as is seen in proper icons of the Last Judgement or the Ladder of Divine Ascent, then it would have been acceptable as a didactic image. Instead, the portrayal of the enemies of God as seen here pushes this image into sociopolitical commentary, something iconography is implacably opposed to.

It is also possible that the iconographer painted this image in honest ignorance of the implications of the offending section, likely because he had seen such erroneous imagery elsewhere, and simply copied it. All the more reason for every iconographer to be on the ball as to what should and should not be painted.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Fabio Leite on November 18, 2012, 01:51:07 PM
What about this?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on November 18, 2012, 03:43:35 PM
What is that? ^
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Opus118 on November 18, 2012, 11:59:28 PM
What is that? ^

A place where I would want to live without further information.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on November 20, 2012, 01:46:41 AM
Here to ruin your day!

(http://content.animalnewyork.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/32.jpg)

(http://stalinsmoustache.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/stalin-icon-03a.jpg)

(http://stalinsmoustache.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/stalin-icon-01a.jpg)

(http://stalinsmoustache.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/stalin-icon-05a1.jpg)

(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5104/5850924073_62805b6316_b.jpg)

(http://www.archdpdx.org/icon/marystaricon-pix4.jpg)

(http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/The%20Indwelling%20of%20the%20Trinity.JPG)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_xAtnpPNZevY/TAsN_S1VRcI/AAAAAAAAB64/BeA7VmugThA/s1600/Holy_Eucharist_Trinity_Icon.jpg)

(http://stelizabeth720.org/images/Christ-HawaiiNei.jpg)

(http://stvincentimages.cstcis.cti.depaul.edu:8181/Pictures/01.%20Portraits/Icons/_w/Icon,%20USA,%20DPU,%20card_JPG.jpg)

(http://media-cache-ec4.pinterest.com/upload/237213105342949031_7xMD9BOu_c.jpg)

(http://puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/andre/images/Mother_Eagle_Wings.jpg)

(http://puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/andre/images/our_lady_of_the_apocalypse.jpg)

(http://puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/andre/images/mary_most_holy_mother_of_all_nations.jpg)

(http://www.sevenwholedays.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/mlk-icon.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on November 20, 2012, 02:03:50 AM
And Nephi wins the thread.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 20, 2012, 03:14:06 AM
(http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/The%20Indwelling%20of%20the%20Trinity.JPG)

Anyone remember the film The Greatest Story Ever Told? It had a big-name cast, and grand and noble intentions (Telly Savalas as Pontius Pilate was hard-boiled but fair, and Donald Pleasance a suitably creepy Satan), but was a heroic failure in the hopeless miscasting of Max von Sydow as Jesus (aloof, too old, too wooden), and John Wayne as the centurion at the foot of the cross (he utters only a single line, but he singlehandedly torpedoes the whole picture). Film critics and film historians alike have failed for the better part of 50 years to solve the mystery of why the Duke was chosen for the part.

This Jesus looks alarmingly like how Mr von Sydow looked in the film.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on November 23, 2012, 02:45:58 PM
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Cathedral_of_Christ_the_Saviour_in_Moscow_05.JPG/1024px-Cathedral_of_Christ_the_Saviour_in_Moscow_05.JPG)

This isn't even my final form!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: akimori makoto on November 23, 2012, 05:41:01 PM
This isn't even my final form!

Good call!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on November 24, 2012, 02:38:57 AM
Also, are the three Persons emanating from the Tetragrammaton? Modalism and name worship all in one icon!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shiny on November 24, 2012, 05:50:19 AM
The hallmark of a great religion is the ability to poke fun at it.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on November 24, 2012, 11:01:22 AM
A seasonal favorite:

(http://www3.artflakes.com/artwork/products/706617/poster/santaclaus.jpg?1320362706)

Not trying to be an actual icon, but as the kids say there's loads of fail in this one.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 25, 2012, 12:52:33 AM
Here to ruin your day!

(http://content.animalnewyork.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/32.jpg)

(http://stalinsmoustache.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/stalin-icon-03a.jpg)

(http://stalinsmoustache.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/stalin-icon-01a.jpg)

(http://stalinsmoustache.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/stalin-icon-05a1.jpg)

(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5104/5850924073_62805b6316_b.jpg)

(http://www.archdpdx.org/icon/marystaricon-pix4.jpg)

(http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/The%20Indwelling%20of%20the%20Trinity.JPG)

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_xAtnpPNZevY/TAsN_S1VRcI/AAAAAAAAB64/BeA7VmugThA/s1600/Holy_Eucharist_Trinity_Icon.jpg)

(http://stelizabeth720.org/images/Christ-HawaiiNei.jpg)

(http://stvincentimages.cstcis.cti.depaul.edu:8181/Pictures/01.%20Portraits/Icons/_w/Icon,%20USA,%20DPU,%20card_JPG.jpg)

(http://media-cache-ec4.pinterest.com/upload/237213105342949031_7xMD9BOu_c.jpg)

(http://puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/andre/images/Mother_Eagle_Wings.jpg)

(http://puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/andre/images/our_lady_of_the_apocalypse.jpg)

(http://puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/andre/images/mary_most_holy_mother_of_all_nations.jpg)

(http://www.sevenwholedays.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/mlk-icon.jpg)

YES! Finally some more icons of the all-glorious Stalin of thrice-terrible memory.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 25, 2012, 12:56:14 AM
Also, are the three Persons emanating from the Tetragrammaton? Modalism and name worship all in one icon!

There has to be an icon that sums up all wacky Russian sects in one. Someone please find it.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on November 25, 2012, 01:06:13 AM
Stalin is laughing somewhere deep in hell.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 25, 2012, 01:16:29 AM
Stalin is laughing somewhere deep in hell.

In the icon where he is between Sts. Alexander Nevsky and Dmitri Donskoi, it's like they're taking him in for questioning. They probably have some questions for the artist as well. One might think them less terrifying than Stalin, but one would be wrong.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 25, 2012, 02:54:40 AM
There has to be an icon that sums up all wacky Russian sects in one. Someone please find it.

Oooooh, that's a tall order, even for LBK's forensic abilities. Only because the gamut of wacky Russian sects covers such a wide range. Russians never do anything by halves.  ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Azul on November 25, 2012, 07:51:38 AM
I am all for freedom of expression. I am also all for putting Robert Lentz in jail forever, with no painting supplies.

+1
+2

One of my favorite "Schlock Icons"

(http://www.forerunner.com/churchfathers/images/origen.jpg)
Origen of Alexandria
Who drew (not wrote, because it is uncanonical) this Image?

The artist is William Hart McNichols, a Roman Catholic Jesuit priest, and arguably the best-known protege of Robert Lentz. He has said this about his mentor: "Lentz is regarded as one of the foremost authorities on icons today."

Says it all, really. The bulk of McNichols' work is no less egregious and blasphemous than Lentz's. McNichols has not only painted an "icon" of a declared heretic, but seems to be unaware that Origen was an avowed iconoclast. Oh, the irony!  :P :P ::)

Origen was an Iconoclast?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Azul on November 25, 2012, 07:57:56 AM
So would this be considered schlock? It's a "Young Virgin Mary."

(http://orthodoxwebstore.com/shopping/81-379-thickbox/young-virgin-mary.jpg)

where is the like button?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 25, 2012, 04:10:05 PM
Ironically, the "Orthodox" icon of Stalin (the one the mustache-less man, probably mustacheless out of reverence for Stalin, is holding) does more to elevate Stalin to God-like status than any Soviet iconography did. Orthodox icons of Stalin should display him as a non-martyr or a martyr of one believes he was killed (but certainly not depict him like Christ). He should be holding either a list of his victims or a cigar. He does not give blessings, but may give a "high five" or thumbs-up, but the thumbs-up must be accompanied by an enigmatic, unsettling grin. I think, if it's a gift for Isa, Stalin can be depicted holding maps, either of gulags or conquests.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on November 27, 2012, 02:37:31 PM
the stalin icon is the worst one so far
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Fabio Leite on November 30, 2012, 10:54:50 AM
Probably not even intended as icon, but the halo is there. :)
(http://simplefreechurch.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/jesus-elvis-velvet-painting-sm-frame.jpg)

And this also:
(http://www.examiner.com/images/blog/EXID3766/images/Alien_Jesus.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on November 30, 2012, 11:08:21 AM
I know this is of non-Orthodox origin (it is the Catholic ‘Our Lady of the New Advent’), but...Is there any rule against having Christ depicted holding, I dunno, greenery?

(http://puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/andre/images/advent_n.gif)

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on November 30, 2012, 01:17:52 PM
Is there any rule against having Christ depicted holding, I dunno, greenery?
Only if it is coriander, olive or lemon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on November 30, 2012, 03:34:43 PM
Here is one that claims to be of Arius the heretic

(http://www.catholica.com.au/ianstake/images/Arius_205x256.jpg)


And Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Christ (It is monastery icons, though, to be fair, but still a shlock icon nonetheless

(http://firstlightforum.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/the_gospel_of_judas_iscariot_by_testingpointdesign.jpg?w=627)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Schultz on November 30, 2012, 03:43:07 PM
Here is one that claims to be of Arius the heretic

(http://www.catholica.com.au/ianstake/images/Arius_205x256.jpg)


And Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Christ (It is monastery icons, though, to be fair, but still a shlock icon nonetheless

(http://firstlightforum.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/the_gospel_of_judas_iscariot_by_testingpointdesign.jpg?w=627)

I find both of these far more offensive than any Stalin icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on November 30, 2012, 04:07:25 PM
Might as well round it out — Nestorious:

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DVsNetV3ctA/TFcjHTu0pnI/AAAAAAAAAvs/8lvsybwAtMw/s1600/Nestorius.jpg)

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on November 30, 2012, 04:18:39 PM
Might as well round it out — Nestorious:

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DVsNetV3ctA/TFcjHTu0pnI/AAAAAAAAAvs/8lvsybwAtMw/s1600/Nestorius.jpg)



Ha. I was trying to find one of him, and couldn't.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: akimori makoto on November 30, 2012, 05:48:10 PM
Might as well round it out — Nestorious:

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DVsNetV3ctA/TFcjHTu0pnI/AAAAAAAAAvs/8lvsybwAtMw/s1600/Nestorius.jpg)



That appears to be St Gregory the Wonderworker.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: akimori makoto on November 30, 2012, 05:49:06 PM
Here is one that claims to be of Arius the heretic

(http://www.catholica.com.au/ianstake/images/Arius_205x256.jpg)

And I think that's St Spyridon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on November 30, 2012, 05:50:03 PM
Here is one that claims to be of Arius the heretic

(http://www.catholica.com.au/ianstake/images/Arius_205x256.jpg)

And I think that's St Spyridon.

Oops, sorry  :-[
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 30, 2012, 05:58:06 PM
Might as well round it out — Nestorious:

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DVsNetV3ctA/TFcjHTu0pnI/AAAAAAAAAvs/8lvsybwAtMw/s1600/Nestorius.jpg)



That's not Nestorius. That is a 12th century icon of St Gregory the Wonderworker of Neocaesaria.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 30, 2012, 05:59:42 PM
Here is one that claims to be of Arius the heretic

(http://www.catholica.com.au/ianstake/images/Arius_205x256.jpg)

And I think that's St Spyridon.

Yes, it is St Spyridon. The inscription is pretty clear, and the saint is wearing his distinctive wicker shepherd's hat.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Cyrillic on November 30, 2012, 05:59:58 PM
Everyone's fooling everyone  :police:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 30, 2012, 06:01:06 PM

And Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Christ (It is monastery icons, though, to be fair, but still a shlock icon nonetheless

(http://firstlightforum.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/the_gospel_of_judas_iscariot_by_testingpointdesign.jpg?w=627)

Oh, good grief! Even more reason not to buy from Monastery Icons ...  :o :P :P :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 30, 2012, 06:01:44 PM
I would like to see some icons of Ivan the Terrible before I die.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 30, 2012, 06:03:34 PM
Is there any rule against having Christ depicted holding, I dunno, greenery?
Only if it is coriander, olive or lemon.

Coriander? Coriander?? OREGANO!!  :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on November 30, 2012, 06:09:04 PM
Might as well round it out — Nestorious:

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DVsNetV3ctA/TFcjHTu0pnI/AAAAAAAAAvs/8lvsybwAtMw/s1600/Nestorius.jpg)



That's not Nestorius. That is a 12th century icon of St Gregory the Wonderworker of Neocaesaria.
DAMN YOU, GOOGLE!

So much for a one-off heretical icon post. I thought it was too well preserved to be true...Every other image I could find of Nestorious had the face scratched off.

Gotta brush up on my Greek.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 30, 2012, 06:19:37 PM
I know this is of non-Orthodox origin (it is the Catholic ‘Our Lady of the New Advent’), but...Is there any rule against having Christ depicted holding, I dunno, greenery?

(http://puffin.creighton.edu/jesuit/andre/images/advent_n.gif)



The consistent Orthodox iconographic tradition is that the Christ-child holds a small scroll, symbolizing divine wisdom (after all, He is the Wisdom and the Word of God) if He holds anything.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: witega on November 30, 2012, 06:21:31 PM
I would like to see some icons of Ivan the Terrible before I die.

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ltqd2eawNv1r4vg6ro1_500.jpg)

No halo, but clearly in an iconographic style.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 30, 2012, 06:26:47 PM
I would like to see some icons of Ivan the Terrible before I die.

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ltqd2eawNv1r4vg6ro1_500.jpg)

No halo, but clearly in an iconographic style.

I was aware of this. It's just a near-contemporaneous portrait. Since Western portraiture was not really in Muscovy at the time, iconographic art was the sort of baseline, it seems.

In traditional Orthodox icons of St. Ivan Grozny, he is holding a severed head, dripping blood.

I'd like to know what the Slavonic says.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: akimori makoto on November 30, 2012, 06:29:47 PM
Here is one that claims to be of Arius the heretic

(http://www.catholica.com.au/ianstake/images/Arius_205x256.jpg)

And I think that's St Spyridon.

Yes, it is St Spyridon. The inscription is pretty clear, and the saint is wearing his distinctive wicker shepherd's hat.

Oh, so that's what it is? I thought it was some kind of malformed giant acorn.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 30, 2012, 07:09:01 PM
Someone asked for "icons" of Ivan the Terrible:

(http://s46.radikal.ru/i114/1009/32/b116eeab4219.jpg)

And this is allegedly a myrrh-streaming version:

(http://ambulaev.narod.ru/ig_mt_ikona.jpg)

The spiel at the bottom is a velichaniya (magnification, a hymn of praise sung at Matins at the Polyeleos/Polyelei, as the priest stands before the icon of the saint or feast being commemorated, censing it) to the "saint":

We magnify you, our great-martyr, beloved of Christ, and divinely-wise Tsar Ioann, and we honor your holy memory, for you pray to Christ our God for us.

Un-believable.  :P :P :P :P :P :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on November 30, 2012, 08:04:45 PM
The style is a lot better than those of Stalin, however.

Great martyr?

I read in a couple articles quotes from people in the Russian Chruch that myrrh streaming from an icon isn't proof of sanctity of the individual depicted. This was before the Royal Martyrs were canonized. Same also with St. Yevgeny Rodionov.

It is unfortunate there are no bloody heads or that he and Metropolitan St. Philip are not together.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 30, 2012, 10:00:09 PM
The style is a lot better than those of Stalin, however.

Great martyr?

I read in a couple articles quotes from people in the Russian Chruch that myrrh streaming from an icon isn't proof of sanctity of the individual depicted. This was before the Royal Martyrs were canonized. Same also with St. Yevgeny Rodionov.

It is unfortunate there are no bloody heads or that he and Metropolitan St. Philip are not together.

Indeed. What these fanatics overlook is that their beloved "Tsar-martyr" will never be proclaimed a saint, in part because of his part in the murder of Metropolitan St Philip of Moscow. The tsar is referred to in the festal hymns for St Philip as "a new Herod" and "a new Pharaoh". Hardly the stuff of sainthood.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on November 30, 2012, 10:08:17 PM
Indeed. What these fanatics overlook is that their beloved "Tsar-martyr" will never be proclaimed a saint, in part because of his part in the murder of Metropolitan St Philip of Moscow. The tsar is referred to in the festal hymns for St Philip as "a new Herod" and "a new Pharaoh". Hardly the stuff of sainthood.

St. Columban and St. Finnian?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 30, 2012, 10:14:44 PM
Indeed. What these fanatics overlook is that their beloved "Tsar-martyr" will never be proclaimed a saint, in part because of his part in the murder of Metropolitan St Philip of Moscow. The tsar is referred to in the festal hymns for St Philip as "a new Herod" and "a new Pharaoh". Hardly the stuff of sainthood.

St. Columban and St. Finnian?

Did one murder the other?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on November 30, 2012, 10:31:58 PM
(http://www.theologyincolor.com/ray/twintowers5.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on November 30, 2012, 10:37:31 PM
Indeed. What these fanatics overlook is that their beloved "Tsar-martyr" will never be proclaimed a saint, in part because of his part in the murder of Metropolitan St Philip of Moscow. The tsar is referred to in the festal hymns for St Philip as "a new Herod" and "a new Pharaoh". Hardly the stuff of sainthood.

St. Columban and St. Finnian?

Did one murder the other?

They were trying to.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on November 30, 2012, 11:24:59 PM
(http://www.theologyincolor.com/ray/twintowers5.jpg)

Oh, yes, the pigeon pair to the Mother of God of 9/11, by the hand of another of my "favorites". He's so all over the shop, it's not funny. Thanks for this, I only have it on file in a rather small size.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on November 30, 2012, 11:42:25 PM
One of the weirder Holy Trinity icons out there:

(http://campus.belmont.edu/honors/Christs/001trinity1.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on November 30, 2012, 11:56:03 PM
One of the weirder Holy Trinity icons out there:

(http://campus.belmont.edu/honors/Christs/001trinity1.jpg)

Makes me dizzy looking at that
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 01, 2012, 12:10:11 AM

And Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Christ (It is monastery icons, though, to be fair, but still a shlock icon nonetheless

(http://firstlightforum.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/the_gospel_of_judas_iscariot_by_testingpointdesign.jpg?w=627)

Oh, good grief! Even more reason not to buy from Monastery Icons ...  :o :P :P :P

Ugh. Holding the rope he used to hang himself.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: neon_knights on December 01, 2012, 12:43:41 AM

And Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Christ (It is monastery icons, though, to be fair, but still a shlock icon nonetheless

(http://firstlightforum.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/the_gospel_of_judas_iscariot_by_testingpointdesign.jpg?w=627)

Oh, good grief! Even more reason not to buy from Monastery Icons ...  :o :P :P :P

Ugh. Holding the rope he used to hang himself.

Not to mention his intestines.

Disgusting icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on December 01, 2012, 08:44:48 AM

And Judas Iscariot, who betrayed Christ (It is monastery icons, though, to be fair, but still a shlock icon nonetheless

(http://firstlightforum.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/the_gospel_of_judas_iscariot_by_testingpointdesign.jpg?w=627)

Oh, good grief! Even more reason not to buy from Monastery Icons ...  :o :P :P :P

Ugh. Holding the rope he used to hang himself.

Not to mention his intestines.

Disgusting icon.

Oh gross. I didn't even notice that.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Fabio Leite on December 01, 2012, 12:03:06 PM
LBK, what's your evaluation of the works below? They were made with the marquetry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marquetry) technique.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on December 01, 2012, 12:10:19 PM
These are not bad^
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 01, 2012, 05:20:53 PM
Bit concerned about the faceless angels - and even more so about the lack of stars of ever-virginity on the Mother of God's maphorion. Marquetry allows quite fine detail to be used, as has been done with the letters of the divine name in the halo of the Christ-child in the last piece, so why these omissions?  ???
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Fabio Leite on December 01, 2012, 05:52:17 PM
I checked and the first icon is a "work in progress" being sold for around U$2K. They are not made by an Orthodox person. Would they still be fit for veneration, or are they just beautiful art?

Bit concerned about the faceless angels - and even more so about the lack of stars of ever-virginity on the Mother of God's maphorion. Marquetry allows quite fine detail to be used, as has been done with the letters of the divine name in the halo of the Christ-child in the last piece, so why these omissions?  ???
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 01, 2012, 06:10:01 PM
The absence of the stars on the Mother of God is a serious omission. And I do have a problem with work which is made to resemble icons, but is intended as "art". It's one thing to have a print of a Renaissance master, or other non-iconographic art and to know that it can be admired and enjoyed for what it is. Nothing at all wrong with that. But when a work looks like an icon, but isn't, or isn't quite, then regarding it as "art" blurs the boundaries.

Great care is taken by hymnographers to write hymns and prayers which accurately reflect and proclaim what the Church teaches and believes. I would feel uneasy at the thought that an Orthodox Christian would choose to display an "iconographic" image as "art", knowing that the image is deficient as an icon.

See what I mean?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on December 01, 2012, 06:24:09 PM
And I do have a problem with work which is made to resemble icons, but is intended as "art".

Why can't it be venerated? Because of stars? What about the "Joy of all who Sorrow"?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 01, 2012, 06:29:07 PM
And I do have a problem with work which is made to resemble icons, but is intended as "art".

Why can't it be venerated? Because of stars? What about the "Joy of all who Sorrow"?

Most, if not all, of the Joy of All Who Sorrow" icons I've seen do have the stars.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on December 01, 2012, 06:40:40 PM
Most I've seen don't. They have coins but not starts.

Is it really bad that those 95% of paintings Orthodox  people keep at homes or churches that do not meet the canons are still venerated by them or treated as icons. Is it bad that they buy paper mounts or some printed out as they cannot afford a professional iconographer or cannot contact one?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 01, 2012, 06:44:24 PM
Most I've seen don't. They have coins but not starts.

Is it really bad that those 95% of paintings Orthodox  people keep at homes or churches that do not meet the canons are still venerated by them or treated as icons. Is it bad that they buy paper mounts or some printed out as they cannot afford a professional iconographer or cannot contact one?

Two very separate questions there.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: dzheremi on December 01, 2012, 06:47:33 PM
Put another way: If I had the money for a really professional, proper icon, I'd just as well give that money to the church, if I was determined to spend it on something of a religious nature. Is that bad?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 01, 2012, 07:16:45 PM
One need not spend hardly any money for a traditional, canonical, proper icon. Many Athonite monks have only paper icons in their cells.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on December 01, 2012, 08:17:02 PM
One need not spend hardly any money for a traditional, canonical, proper icon. Many Athonite monks have only paper icons in their cells.

That's why consider the  need fo "canonical icon" crusade a bit exaggerated. Not that I do not agree that there are bad icons.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on December 01, 2012, 10:02:28 PM
Put another way: If I had the money for a really professional, proper icon, I'd just as well give that money to the church, if I was determined to spend it on something of a religious nature. Is that bad?

I would probably do the same. There's no way I could bring myself to pay large sums of money for a handpainted icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 01, 2012, 11:17:00 PM
One need not spend hardly any money for a traditional, canonical, proper icon. Many Athonite monks have only paper icons in their cells.

That's why consider the  need fo "canonical icon" crusade a bit exaggerated. Not that I do not agree that there are bad icons.

But paper icons and "canonical icons" are two totally different things, in the sense that there are plenty of canonical paper icons. Paper icons are not uncanonical, unless I've missed the memo.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 01, 2012, 11:55:58 PM
Most I've seen don't. They have coins but not starts.

Is it really bad that those 95% of paintings Orthodox  people keep at homes or churches that do not meet the canons are still venerated by them or treated as icons. Is it bad that they buy paper mounts or some printed out as they cannot afford a professional iconographer or cannot contact one?

Michal, you must have missed this post from the "Non-Canonical Wonderworking Icons" thread:

Quote
I have previously spoken on this forum on the almost complete takeover of traditional iconography by naturalistic religious art over several centuries, across all the Orthodox world. Much of this was due to official patronage of this “new” religious art, be it by nobles, kings, or emperors of countries where Orthodoxy was the dominant faith. There was no separation of Church and State – indeed, the king/emperor/tsar was a kind of earthly representative of the Church. To this day, the affectionate titles for a Russian priest and his wife are Batiushka and Matushka (Little Father, Little Mother). The same titles were used for the Tsars and Tsarinas of imperial Russia. History shows that many rulers of Orthodox countries, for better and worse, adopted (willingly or otherwise) western customs and mores, and imposed them on their nations or empires. In Russia, this led to the founding of state-sponsored iconographic workshops, which promoted the highly naturalistic “Synodal” or “Academic” styles, as well as imagery commonly found in western religious art. The “iconography” of the Moscow Cathedral of Christ the Savior, commissioned in the 1820s, reflects the almost complete dominance of western imagery over traditional iconography.

The Kursk-Root icon of the Mother of God dates from the last decade of the 13th century, and consisted of simply an icon of the Mother of God of the Sign. As the repeatedly miraculous nature of this little icon became known more widely, it was decided at the turn of the seventeenth century, three hundred years after the discovery of the icon, to enlarge and "beautify" it by adding a broad border on which were painted icons of Old Testament prophets, and, in the upper border, an image of God the Father. The inclusion of the latter was hardly surprising, as such imagery had already begun infiltrating iconography.

Greece, the other center of Orthodoxy, was not immune from extraneous influences. The Venetians colonized large areas of the Greek mainland, and many of its islands, prior to, or during, the Ottoman period. The Cretan School produced some of the most sublime and reverent iconography anywhere, but, unfortunately, eventually descended into an imitation of renaissance art, losing its liturgical and theological integrity. The progressive westernizing of the works of the iconographers Tzannes and Damaskinos is a good example of this.

Keeping this in mind, and that of traveled iconographers themselves incorporating elements of western art in their works, is it any wonder that western forms of religious art soon became the norm? We have the examples of Sts Seraphim of Sarov and Nektarios of Aegina and their veneration of images we know to be suspect. But, are we to condemn these holy men? Are we to say that their sanctity is in question? Of course not. The fact is, that they had little choice but to venerate such images, as these images were everywhere.

The hallowed ground of Mt Athos was not immune from these influences – indeed, there is, to this day, a profusion of suspect and uncanonical images on the walls of many of its monasteries. These include NT Trinities, eyes in triangles, and St Joseph the Betrothed holding the young Christ, which are clearly contrary to Orthodox doctrine and theology. The people of Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Romania, and other nations in eastern Europe on the border of Orthodox East and Roman Catholic West similarly were surrounded by heterodox images, in all innocence. Can we blame them for holding their beloved Ostrobramskaya, Akhtirskaya, and Diveyevo icons to their hearts?

So where does this leave us? God can, if He so chooses, to work His grace through imperfect vessels, be they human beings, or an imperfectly-mounted printed icon (the recent myrrh-streaming icon of St Nicholas), or an image that falls short of canonical guidelines. As He accepts and loves us, despite our multitude of sins and faults, so He has accepted these imperfect images. However, we are also expected to do what we can to “get right” with God.

In terms of iconography, we can no longer claim ignorance of canon, scripture or liturgical deposit. It is increasingly difficult to claim illiteracy, geographic and cultural isolation for the perpetuation of images deficient or contrary to Orthodox doctrine and theology. It grieves me that certain people who conduct well-patronized classes in icon painting continue to promote uncanonical and deficient images. I am not convinced that this is being done in honest ignorance.

On the other hand, I am heartened that some iconographers are painting “corrective” motifs on their copies of historic but deficient images, such as ensuring the Mother of God bears the three stars of perpetual virginity, that a motif of Christ or the OT Holy Trinity, instead of God the Father, is in the upper border of a Kursk-Root or Derzhavnaya icon of the Mother of God. I have also seen the removal of NT Trinities and eyes in triangles from prominent positions in some Orthodox churches in the city where I live. Small, but very welcome steps in the right direction.

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,48230.msg841047.html#msg841047
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Cyrillic on December 02, 2012, 03:18:18 PM
Too funny not to post.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mapl634JHb1rhnaddo1_400.gif
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on December 02, 2012, 03:21:36 PM
Not really.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nathanael on December 02, 2012, 03:40:02 PM
Quote
Too funny not to post.

please, more decency! Such things make me sad. (But I see your're 18, so I can understand you a bit).
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Cyrillic on December 02, 2012, 03:42:44 PM
Quote
Too funny not to post.

please, more decency! Such things make me sad. (But I see your're 18, so I can understand you a bit).

Have you forgotten what thread this is?

But yeah, the gangster St. Basil might have crossed the line but it isn't as bad as for example this one from the OP:

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLLOD.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nathanael on December 02, 2012, 03:51:12 PM
Quote
Have you forgotten what thread this is?

I have no problem if somebody posts such things. But to write that this is funny....mh.

And this "icon"- lord of the dance!!!! Kyrie eleison. Who creates such icons do you know maybe?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Cyrillic on December 02, 2012, 03:52:59 PM
I have no problem if somebody posts such things. But to write that this is funny....mh.
I think remarkable would better express what I think about it than funny.

And this "icon"- lord of the dance!!!! Kyrie eleison. Who creates such icons do you know maybe?

A gay Roman Catholic monk. I kid you not. He's called Robert Lentz and calls himself a master of iconography.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 02, 2012, 04:12:28 PM
A gay Roman Catholic monk. I kid you not. He's called Robert Lentz and calls himself a master of iconography.

Only a master of evil, says Obi Wan.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nathanael on December 02, 2012, 04:16:26 PM
Quote
I think remarkable would better express what I think about it than funny.

remarkable? No. It's disordered.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nathanael on December 02, 2012, 04:34:58 PM
Cyrillic, forgive me for my harsh statements.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Cyrillic on December 02, 2012, 04:43:35 PM
Cyrillic, forgive me for my harsh statements.

Nathanael, forgive me my insensitive post.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on December 05, 2012, 06:12:45 PM
st. bishop Barnaba (Macedonia)
(http://www.poa-info.org/mk/biblioteka/besedi/img/sv_varnava_nastic.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Asteriktos on December 05, 2012, 06:18:57 PM
Can't say that I've ever seen a train in an icon before.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 05, 2012, 06:43:09 PM
Can't say that I've ever seen a train in an icon before.

Here's one with a car. In the early 1950s, St John of Shanghai and San Francisco, who was Bishop of Paris at the time, once served a panikhida (requiem) for an assassinated Serbian noble in a Paris street, on the spot where the murder took place.

(http://saintjohnwonderworker.org/images/STJ0005.jpg)

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on December 05, 2012, 08:35:51 PM
I don't know if this would be "schlock" but this is in the Catholic Basilica of the Immaculate Conception in Washington DC. I think the name of it is "Christ in Majesty."


(http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201211/r1037566_11925822.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 05, 2012, 11:09:06 PM
I don't know if this would be "schlock" but this is in the Catholic Basilica of the Immaculate Conception in Washington DC. I think the name of it is "Christ in Majesty."


(http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201211/r1037566_11925822.jpg)

Ghastly. It looks like a 14-year-old schoolboy's LARPing fantasy. A waste of otherwise superb mosaic workmanship. And its "hyper-realism" disqualifies it as an icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 06, 2012, 02:11:31 AM
st. bishop Barnaba (Macedonia)
(http://www.poa-info.org/mk/biblioteka/besedi/img/sv_varnava_nastic.jpg)

It would be better, for iconographic purposes, if St. Varnava was actually crucified and actually made to carry a cross. Otherwise, it plays into the hands of the folks who want to make the Entrance of the Theotokos into the Temple an allegory.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on December 06, 2012, 02:19:19 AM
Otherwise, it plays into the hands of the folks who want to make the Entrance of the Theotokos into the Temple an allegory.
Joseph or (the Theotokos's father, I can't remember which) being rich in the story confuses me much more, Shanghaiski.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 06, 2012, 02:55:58 AM
st. bishop Barnaba (Macedonia)
(http://www.poa-info.org/mk/biblioteka/besedi/img/sv_varnava_nastic.jpg)

It would be better, for iconographic purposes, if St. Varnava was actually crucified and actually made to carry a cross. Otherwise, it plays into the hands of the folks who want to make the Entrance of the Theotokos into the Temple an allegory.

Indeed another example of iconography used for playing politics.  >:( >:(

St Varnava is a confessor-saint, not a martyr. The inscription (the white lettering over the cross he is carrying) correctly says so - ispovednik. Even if he was a martyr, it would be quite sufficient to depict him holding a martyr's cross in his hand.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on December 08, 2012, 12:51:08 PM
Ran across this one, which I had forgotten about.

On the cover of an archdiocesan magazine, no less.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: orthonorm on December 08, 2012, 12:58:13 PM
Can't say that I've ever seen a train in an icon before.

LOL.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: orthonorm on December 08, 2012, 01:00:10 PM
Ran across this one, which I had forgotten about.

On the cover of an archdiocesan magazine, no less.



What does the scroll say, either my screen or my eyes are failing me. Probably both.

Weird.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on December 08, 2012, 01:02:42 PM
Ran across this one, which I had forgotten about.

On the cover of an archdiocesan magazine, no less.



What does the scroll say, either my screen or my eyes are failing me. Probably both.

Weird.

"He went and preached unto the spirits in prison."

Why the scroll is being broken by someone from Hades makes no sense.

Nor why they are all slate-shaded.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Deacon Lance on December 08, 2012, 02:59:37 PM


"He went and preached unto the spirits in prison."

Why the scroll is being broken by someone from Hades makes no sense.

Nor why they are all slate-shaded.

I would imagine the scroll of our debt is being torn up by Christ being presented it by a demon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on December 09, 2012, 06:05:07 PM
Trains and cars? Well I raise you one St. Nicholas steering a boat!

(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mekuvwrimz1rb44tmo1_1280.jpg)

Is this schlock?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 09, 2012, 06:36:46 PM
Trains and cars? Well I raise you one St. Nicholas steering a boat!

(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mekuvwrimz1rb44tmo1_1280.jpg)

Is this schlock?

You bet it's schlock! It's one thing to recognize St Nicholas of Myra as patron and protector of mariners and fishermen, but this is just disrespectful, cartoonish rubbish.

It's by the Orthodox priest who painted the trippy St Andrew and the modernist "Resurrection" I commented on earlier. I call this piece "St Nick the Sailor Man". I'd love to know what patristic or liturgical precedent he used to justify paint the crosses on the saint's omophorion in the shape of propellers .... The next step would be the troparion and kontakion to St Nicholas sung in sea-shanty style during Liturgy.  >:(

And what's with the seagulls looking for lunch?? Any ideas, folks?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on December 09, 2012, 08:02:46 PM
Here's one I found on Pintrest of God the Father

(http://media-cache-ec4.pinterest.com/upload/237213105342949031_7xMD9BOu_c.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on December 09, 2012, 08:43:16 PM
It's by the Orthodox priest who painted the trippy St Andrew and the modernist "Resurrection" I commented on earlier.
I thought the style looked familiar...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Alpo on December 10, 2012, 04:52:42 PM
What do you think of this?

(http://www.crossroadsinitiative.com/pics/St_Leo_The_Great_icon_new_sm.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 10, 2012, 07:03:08 PM
What do you think of this?

(http://www.crossroadsinitiative.com/pics/St_Leo_The_Great_icon_new_sm.jpg)

The artist is Catholic (whether Roman or Eastern is not clear), and a good amount of his work reflects non-Orthodox themes such as the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, various post-schism western saints, the assumption of the Virgin, and St Joseph the Betrothed holding the Christ-child. So it is no surprise to see St Leo the Great wearing the papal triple tiara, even though it would not have existed in St Leo's time.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on December 10, 2012, 07:07:24 PM
Here's one I found on Pintrest of God the Father

(http://media-cache-ec4.pinterest.com/upload/237213105342949031_7xMD9BOu_c.jpg)

He looks like the singer in Def Leppard.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on December 10, 2012, 07:08:10 PM
So it is no surprise to see St Leo the Great wearing the papal triple tiara, even though it would not have existed in St Leo's time.

Really?

(http://www.stjohndc.org/Russian/icons_h/det20_StJames_Lord_Brother.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dan the Man on December 10, 2012, 07:24:36 PM
and St Joseph the Betrothed holding the Christ-child

Wait, is this bad? St. Joseph is my patron, so a friend of mine sent me an icon of St. Joseph holding the Christ-child that he bought at St. Anthony's monastery in Arizona. St. Anthony's is definitely Orthodox, as is my friend, so it never crossed my mind that there could be something wrong with it. It looks almost exactly like this one, for clarification:
(http://hilltopshepherd.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/stjosephicon.png)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on December 10, 2012, 07:26:59 PM
and St Joseph the Betrothed holding the Christ-child

Wait, is this bad? St. Joseph is my patron, so a friend of mine sent me an icon of St. Joseph holding the Christ-child that he bought at St. Anthony's monastery in Arizona. St. Anthony's is definitely Orthodox, as is my friend, so it never crossed my mind that there could be something wrong with it. It looks almost exactly like this one, for clarification:
(http://hilltopshepherd.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/stjosephicon.png)

Some people want to retroactively minimize St. Joseph, because they don't want to be confused with the Roman Catholics, whose veneration of him (as 'St. Joseph the Worker') is quite a bit more prominent. You must jump in front of a bus rather than be confused with a Roman Catholic.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on December 10, 2012, 10:37:47 PM
and St Joseph the Betrothed holding the Christ-child

Wait, is this bad? St. Joseph is my patron, so a friend of mine sent me an icon of St. Joseph holding the Christ-child that he bought at St. Anthony's monastery in Arizona. St. Anthony's is definitely Orthodox, as is my friend, so it never crossed my mind that there could be something wrong with it. It looks almost exactly like this one, for clarification:
(http://hilltopshepherd.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/stjosephicon.png)

Some people want to retroactively minimize St. Joseph, because they don't want to be confused with the Roman Catholics, whose veneration of him (as 'St. Joseph the Worker') is quite a bit more prominent. You must jump in front of a bus rather than be confused with a Roman Catholic.

(http://www.fotoblography.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/straw-man.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shiny on December 10, 2012, 10:56:19 PM
And isn't that icon wrong theologically? The one of St. Joseph holding Christ.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 10, 2012, 11:00:51 PM
So it is no surprise to see St Leo the Great wearing the papal triple tiara, even though it would not have existed in St Leo's time.

Really?

(http://www.stjohndc.org/Russian/icons_h/det20_StJames_Lord_Brother.jpg)

Umm, Michal, what has the icon of St James, Brother of the Lord, have to do with the thread?  ???
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 10, 2012, 11:01:21 PM
And isn't that icon wrong theologically? The one of St. Joseph holding Christ.

Yes, it is, I'm sorry to say.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dan the Man on December 10, 2012, 11:34:56 PM
And isn't that icon wrong theologically? The one of St. Joseph holding Christ.

Yes, it is, I'm sorry to say.
Well that answers my question then. Now what do I do?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 10, 2012, 11:40:20 PM
And isn't that icon wrong theologically? The one of St. Joseph holding Christ.

Yes, it is, I'm sorry to say.
Well that answers my question then. Now what do I do?

You could donate it to an RC friend or church, I suppose. It would fit in with their theology and doctrine.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on December 10, 2012, 11:55:26 PM
So it is no surprise to see St Leo the Great wearing the papal triple tiara, even though it would not have existed in St Leo's time.

Really?

(http://www.stjohndc.org/Russian/icons_h/det20_StJames_Lord_Brother.jpg)

Umm, Michal, what has the icon of St James, Brother of the Lord, have to do with the thread?  ???

I think he's referring to the omophor, which could be seen as an anachronism.

Edit: according to the Catholic Encyclopedia at least.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catholic_Encyclopedia_(1913)/Pallium (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Catholic_Encyclopedia_(1913)/Pallium)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Alpo on December 11, 2012, 02:01:03 AM
Umm, Michal, what has the icon of St James, Brother of the Lord, have to do with the thread?  ???

Both this and St. Leo's icon contain anachronistic vestments.

Is there something wrong with St. Leo's icon besides vestments?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 11, 2012, 02:13:18 AM
Umm, Michal, what has the icon of St James, Brother of the Lord, have to do with the thread?  ???

Both this and St. Leo's icon contain anachronistic vestments.

Is there something wrong with St. Leo's icon besides vestments?

The triple crown, which dates in its earliest form from the time the Roman papacy was beginning to grow in temporal power, speaks not of Orthodoxy, but of post-schism Rome, or, at least, a Rome soon to schism from Orthodoxy. St James in Byzantine vestments has no such overtones, as the Church was undivided during his time.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Jason.Wike on December 11, 2012, 03:05:54 AM
(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLLOD.jpg)


Suddenly periodic wiping of the historical record of art or writings that are just bad doesn't seem wrong. Based on the way we do things are now, if someone in 500 years finds just one of these things they're going to think everyone of our time period was into this weird crap.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on December 11, 2012, 04:43:25 AM
Umm, Michal, what has the icon of St James, Brother of the Lord, have to do with the thread?  ???

Both this and St. Leo's icon contain anachronistic vestments.

Is there something wrong with St. Leo's icon besides vestments?

The triple crown, which dates in its earliest form from the time the Roman papacy was beginning to grow in temporal power, speaks not of Orthodoxy, but of post-schism Rome, or, at least, a Rome soon to schism from Orthodoxy. St James in Byzantine vestments has no such overtones, as the Church was undivided during his time.


"St. James painted with an omophorion - good because we did it. St. Leo painted with a tiara - bad because evil Papists did it."

I've expected better than that from you.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 11, 2012, 05:37:45 AM
Umm, Michal, what has the icon of St James, Brother of the Lord, have to do with the thread?  ???

Both this and St. Leo's icon contain anachronistic vestments.

Is there something wrong with St. Leo's icon besides vestments?

The triple crown, which dates in its earliest form from the time the Roman papacy was beginning to grow in temporal power, speaks not of Orthodoxy, but of post-schism Rome, or, at least, a Rome soon to schism from Orthodoxy. St James in Byzantine vestments has no such overtones, as the Church was undivided during his time.


"St. James painted with an omophorion - good because we did it. St. Leo painted with a tiara - bad because evil Papists did it."

I've expected better than that from you.

I base my posts on iconography on the testimony of the Church through her iconographic record and traditions. The consistent tradition for the iconographic portrayal of early bishop-saints is to show them bare-headed (as the mitre had not come into use prior to the fall of Constantinople), vested in phelonion and omophorion, and holding a Gospel book. The sakkos replaced the phelonion in about the twelfth century.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Alpo on December 11, 2012, 12:40:39 PM
I base my posts on iconography on the testimony of the Church through her iconographic record and traditions. The consistent tradition of the Byzantien churches for the iconographic portrayal of early bishop-saints is to show them bare-headed (as the mitre had not come into use prior to the fall of Constantinople), vested in phelonion and omophorion, and holding a Gospel book. The sakkos replaced the phelonion in about the twelfth century.

Fixed. I'm not entirely comfortable with the Leo's vestments on that icon/painting either but there's more to Orthodoxy than just Greek Orthodoxy.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on December 11, 2012, 02:05:44 PM
Trains and cars? Well I raise you one St. Nicholas steering a boat!

(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mekuvwrimz1rb44tmo1_1280.jpg)

Is this schlock?

You bet it's schlock! It's one thing to recognize St Nicholas of Myra as patron and protector of mariners and fishermen, but this is just disrespectful, cartoonish rubbish.

It's by the Orthodox priest who painted the trippy St Andrew and the modernist "Resurrection" I commented on earlier. I call this piece "St Nick the Sailor Man". I'd love to know what patristic or liturgical precedent he used to justify paint the crosses on the saint's omophorion in the shape of propellers .... The next step would be the troparion and kontakion to St Nicholas sung in sea-shanty style during Liturgy.  >:(

And what's with the seagulls looking for lunch?? Any ideas, folks?

(http://24.media.tumblr.com/9ae6c8114f3008b141a40e1a350b40d6/tumblr_mev3al5EHr1rkghcuo1_400.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Alpo on December 11, 2012, 03:33:30 PM
^Please tell me that is photoshopped.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on December 11, 2012, 03:43:35 PM
^Please tell me that is photoshopped.

I've posted in Picture of a day thread a better caption of that frescoe. I don't want to seek for it know. It's also on OrthPhoto.net.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Cyrillic on December 11, 2012, 03:45:10 PM
I like the St. Nicholas painting.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on December 11, 2012, 03:47:50 PM
painting

Oh, you!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on December 11, 2012, 06:15:09 PM
Umm, Michal, what has the icon of St James, Brother of the Lord, have to do with the thread?  ???

Both this and St. Leo's icon contain anachronistic vestments.

Is there something wrong with St. Leo's icon besides vestments?

The triple crown, which dates in its earliest form from the time the Roman papacy was beginning to grow in temporal power, speaks not of Orthodoxy, but of post-schism Rome, or, at least, a Rome soon to schism from Orthodoxy. St James in Byzantine vestments has no such overtones, as the Church was undivided during his time.


"St. James painted with an omophorion - good because we did it. St. Leo painted with a tiara - bad because evil Papists did it."

I've expected better than that from you.

Why does LBK even try?  :-\
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 11, 2012, 06:18:40 PM
Umm, Michal, what has the icon of St James, Brother of the Lord, have to do with the thread?  ???

Both this and St. Leo's icon contain anachronistic vestments.

Is there something wrong with St. Leo's icon besides vestments?

The triple crown, which dates in its earliest form from the time the Roman papacy was beginning to grow in temporal power, speaks not of Orthodoxy, but of post-schism Rome, or, at least, a Rome soon to schism from Orthodoxy. St James in Byzantine vestments has no such overtones, as the Church was undivided during his time.


"St. James painted with an omophorion - good because we did it. St. Leo painted with a tiara - bad because evil Papists did it."

I've expected better than that from you.

Why does LBK even try?  :-\

Because LBK knows that there are plenty of other folks out there who are genuinely interested and want to learn more about the priceless treasure that is iconography.   :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on December 11, 2012, 06:24:27 PM
Umm, Michal, what has the icon of St James, Brother of the Lord, have to do with the thread?  ???

Both this and St. Leo's icon contain anachronistic vestments.

Is there something wrong with St. Leo's icon besides vestments?

The triple crown, which dates in its earliest form from the time the Roman papacy was beginning to grow in temporal power, speaks not of Orthodoxy, but of post-schism Rome, or, at least, a Rome soon to schism from Orthodoxy. St James in Byzantine vestments has no such overtones, as the Church was undivided during his time.


"St. James painted with an omophorion - good because we did it. St. Leo painted with a tiara - bad because evil Papists did it."

I've expected better than that from you.

Why does LBK even try?  :-\

Because LBK knows that there are plenty of other folks out there who are genuinely interested and want to learn more about the priceless treasure that is iconography.   :)

I'm still confused about the implications of the Tiara though. If the Tiara was used by Orthodox Popes, then what is the problem with displaying Pope Leo with one?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on December 11, 2012, 06:32:54 PM
(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/art_image_full/RLLOD.jpg)


Suddenly periodic wiping of the historical record of art or writings that are just bad doesn't seem wrong. Based on the way we do things are now, if someone in 500 years finds just one of these things they're going to think everyone of our time period was into this weird crap.

Gah. Jesus isn't the horned god of wicca <_< This is just ghastly.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 12, 2012, 12:24:05 AM
Umm, Michal, what has the icon of St James, Brother of the Lord, have to do with the thread?  ???

Both this and St. Leo's icon contain anachronistic vestments.

Is there something wrong with St. Leo's icon besides vestments?

The triple crown, which dates in its earliest form from the time the Roman papacy was beginning to grow in temporal power, speaks not of Orthodoxy, but of post-schism Rome, or, at least, a Rome soon to schism from Orthodoxy. St James in Byzantine vestments has no such overtones, as the Church was undivided during his time.


"St. James painted with an omophorion - good because we did it. St. Leo painted with a tiara - bad because evil Papists did it."

I've expected better than that from you.

Why does LBK even try?  :-\

Because LBK knows that there are plenty of other folks out there who are genuinely interested and want to learn more about the priceless treasure that is iconography.   :)

I'm still confused about the implications of the Tiara though. If the Tiara was used by Orthodox Popes, then what is the problem with displaying Pope Leo with one?

To my knowledge, the triple tiara was not used until after the schism. That there are images of pre-schism popes with the triple tiara dates them as post-schism images and says nothing of the pre-schism popes whatever.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on December 12, 2012, 12:27:10 AM
Is the triple tiara more decorative/fashion, or does it actually symbolize theology?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 12, 2012, 12:43:51 AM
Is the triple tiara more decorative/fashion, or does it actually symbolize theology?

It is symbolic of the new papacy's (post-schism/post Gregory VII, specifically) overlordship of the secular and spiritual worlds, of heaven (Peter has the keys), purgatory, and earth (being able to excuse nobles from their oaths of allegiance to sovereigns).
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on December 12, 2012, 02:23:18 AM
It is symbolic of the new papacy's (post-schism/post Gregory VII, specifically) overlordship of the secular and spiritual worlds, of heaven (Peter has the keys), purgatory, and earth (being able to excuse nobles from their oaths of allegiance to sovereigns).
Then I can definitely see why it would be objectionable in an icon. Thank you.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Cyrillic on December 12, 2012, 04:22:28 AM
Is the triple tiara more decorative/fashion, or does it actually symbolize theology?

I thought it stood for universal jurisdiction, patriarchate of the west and bishop of Rome. Three layers of authority.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on December 20, 2012, 05:54:22 PM
(http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/45029027/John+Coltrane+saintjohncoltraneenthronedmark.jpg)

Is that John Coltrane?


Why are their Thrones underneath his feet?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 20, 2012, 06:00:39 PM
(http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/45029027/John+Coltrane+saintjohncoltraneenthronedmark.jpg)

Is that John Coltrane?


Why are their Thrones underneath his feet?

Yes, that is supposed to be "Saint" John Coltrane. Yes, the red winged things are supposed to be cherubim, as seen in icons of Christ in Majesty. The red winged things are also in the shape of vinyl records, according to the artist who painted this schlock.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on December 20, 2012, 06:04:48 PM
(http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/45029027/John+Coltrane+saintjohncoltraneenthronedmark.jpg)

Is that John Coltrane?


Why are their Thrones underneath his feet?

Yes, that is supposed to be "Saint" John Coltrane. Yes, the red winged things are supposed to be cherubim, as seen in icons of Christ in Majesty. The red winged things are also in the shape of vinyl records, according to the artist who painted this schlock.

Ah, I didn't catch the record thing.

What a stupid icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 20, 2012, 06:08:56 PM
(http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/45029027/John+Coltrane+saintjohncoltraneenthronedmark.jpg)

Is that John Coltrane?


Why are their Thrones underneath his feet?

Yes, that is supposed to be "Saint" John Coltrane. Yes, the red winged things are supposed to be cherubim, as seen in icons of Christ in Majesty. The red winged things are also in the shape of vinyl records, according to the artist who painted this schlock.

Ah, I didn't catch the record thing.

What a stupid icon waste of time and paint.

Fixed it for ya.  ;)

.... and the artist has also spelled the "saint's" name wrong. There should be two Ns in it.   ::)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on December 20, 2012, 06:13:20 PM
Quote
Fixed it for ya

LOL. Nice  :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 20, 2012, 06:15:11 PM
Quote
Fixed it for ya

LOL. Nice  :laugh:

We aim to please.  ;) :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 20, 2012, 06:34:27 PM
(http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/45029027/John+Coltrane+saintjohncoltraneenthronedmark.jpg)

Is that John Coltrane?


Why are their Thrones underneath his feet?

Yes, that is supposed to be "Saint" John Coltrane. Yes, the red winged things are supposed to be cherubim, as seen in icons of Christ in Majesty. The red winged things are also in the shape of vinyl records, according to the artist who painted this schlock.

Ah, I didn't catch the record thing.

What a stupid icon waste of time and paint.

Fixed it for ya.  ;)

.... and the artist has also spelled the "saint's" name wrong. There should be two Ns in it.   ::)

Years ago, I went to the Athenian Candle Company in Chicago, which sold Monastery Icons and evil spirit spray (either evil spirit in a can or evil spirit repellant--I couldn't tell), and asked a woman who worked there if the Greek name for John was "Ioannos" or "Ioannis" since I didn't know any Greek at the time, and she said, "Whatever you want it to be."
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: OrthoMEX on December 20, 2012, 06:46:26 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r76ruZ0IqMo The inside of st gregory of nyssa episcopal church Schlock galore
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 20, 2012, 07:00:43 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r76ruZ0IqMo The inside of st gregory of nyssa episcopal church Schlock galore

IIRC I posted some of these images a while back.  :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on December 20, 2012, 07:03:27 PM
Quote
evil spirit spray

That sounds like something TBN would try to sell. Sadly, I'm sure people would buy it.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Ioannis Climacus on December 20, 2012, 07:18:26 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r76ruZ0IqMo The inside of st gregory of nyssa episcopal church Schlock galore
It looks like one giant, historical can-can.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on December 20, 2012, 07:52:09 PM
I thought the same thing.  :D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Jason.Wike on December 20, 2012, 08:55:07 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r76ruZ0IqMo The inside of st gregory of nyssa episcopal church Schlock galore

Shlock like that is just fuel for the Islamists. Who could really argue if they said it should be destroyed? What would they say? "Its a great piece of art"?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 20, 2012, 11:55:52 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r76ruZ0IqMo The inside of st gregory of nyssa episcopal church Schlock galore

Shlock like that is just fuel for the Islamists. Who could really argue if they said it should be destroyed? What would they say? "Its a great piece of art"?

Do Islamists need fuel? Only if they're tied to stakes! :) (It was a sick joke, but funny.)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 21, 2012, 12:28:16 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r76ruZ0IqMo The inside of st gregory of nyssa episcopal church Schlock galore

IIRC I posted some of these images a while back.  :)

Yup, just as I thought. Here's the post:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,47878.msg834397.html#msg834397
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 21, 2012, 12:39:16 AM
Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow.


Oh, yes, especially the Gerber Baby Jesus sitting in the old man's lap in the cupola. What a crying shame that the original artwork was reproduced when the cathedral was rebuilt! What a missed opportunity to fill it with the finest iconography and make it the treasure it deserved to be!  >:( :'( :'( :'(

There's even an "icon" of St Juliana Olshanskaya with her right hand raised in blessing, with the fingers arranged in the way priests bless. Unbelievable.


I've heard abbesses bless with their fingers arranged that way. Everyone, including the priests if I'm not mistaken, used to bless themselves and otherse in the same manner when they still used the two-finger sign of the Cross. Maybe abbesses don't bless in icons, though.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 21, 2012, 01:09:29 AM
Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow.


Oh, yes, especially the Gerber Baby Jesus sitting in the old man's lap in the cupola. What a crying shame that the original artwork was reproduced when the cathedral was rebuilt! What a missed opportunity to fill it with the finest iconography and make it the treasure it deserved to be!  >:( :'( :'( :'(

There's even an "icon" of St Juliana Olshanskaya with her right hand raised in blessing, with the fingers arranged in the way priests bless. Unbelievable.


I've heard abbesses bless with their fingers arranged that way
. Everyone, including the priests if I'm not mistaken, used to bless themselves and otherse in the same manner when they still used the two-finger sign of the Cross. Maybe abbesses don't bless in icons, though.

Abbesses with the authority to bless do so with their fingers arranged as one would to cross oneself. The IC-XC arrangement is restricted to male clergy of the rank of priest and above.

St Juliana Olshanskaya was not an abbess. She was a girl of noble birth, and died at the age of sixteen.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 21, 2012, 01:31:42 AM
Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow.


Oh, yes, especially the Gerber Baby Jesus sitting in the old man's lap in the cupola. What a crying shame that the original artwork was reproduced when the cathedral was rebuilt! What a missed opportunity to fill it with the finest iconography and make it the treasure it deserved to be!  >:( :'( :'( :'(

There's even an "icon" of St Juliana Olshanskaya with her right hand raised in blessing, with the fingers arranged in the way priests bless. Unbelievable.


I've heard abbesses bless with their fingers arranged that way
. Everyone, including the priests if I'm not mistaken, used to bless themselves and otherse in the same manner when they still used the two-finger sign of the Cross. Maybe abbesses don't bless in icons, though.

Abbesses with the authority to bless do so with their fingers arranged as one would to cross oneself. The IC-XC arrangement is restricted to male clergy of the rank of priest and above.

St Juliana Olshanskaya was not an abbess. She was a girl of noble birth, and died at the age of sixteen.

Did the IC-XC arrangement come to Russia with the three-fingered sign of the cross?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on December 24, 2012, 07:45:42 PM
So would this be considered schlock? It's a "Young Virgin Mary."

(http://orthodoxwebstore.com/shopping/81-379-thickbox/young-virgin-mary.jpg)

I actually rather like this, to be honest. I don't think it's an icon, though.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 24, 2012, 09:31:06 PM
So would this be considered schlock? It's a "Young Virgin Mary."

(http://orthodoxwebstore.com/shopping/81-379-thickbox/young-virgin-mary.jpg)

I actually rather like this, to be honest. I don't think it's an icon, though.

If you've been immersed in the whys and wherefores of iconography for as long as I have, you'll know why I wrote what I wrote about it. Personally, this image, while well-intended, doesn't even qualify as good religious art, in the way that, say, Michelangelo's Pieta or Tintoretto's Crucifixion are. This image of the little Mary is simply sentimental and saccharine, in no way expressive of the magnitude of the mystery in which she willingly participated.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 24, 2012, 09:39:23 PM
So would this be considered schlock? It's a "Young Virgin Mary."

(http://orthodoxwebstore.com/shopping/81-379-thickbox/young-virgin-mary.jpg)

I actually rather like this, to be honest. I don't think it's an icon, though.

If you've been immersed in the whys and wherefores of iconography for as long as I have, you'll know why I wrote what I wrote about it. Personally, this image, while well-intended, doesn't even qualify as good religious art, in the way that, say, Michelangelo's Pieta or Tintoretto's Crucifixion are. This image of the little Mary is simply sentimental and saccharine, in no way expressive of the magnitude of the mystery in which she willingly participated.

It also strikes me as somewhat symbolically blasphemous--albeit probably unintentional. Even in the Orthodox icons I've seen of the Entrance of the Mother of God into the Temple, where Our Lady is depicted as the three-year-old girl she was at the time, she is still depicted wearing the blue undergarment covered by the red outergarment. The blue symbolizes humanity, the red divinity. She was human and took on divinity in that she gave birth to the second person of the Trinity, Christ God. Icons of Christ show him with the red undergarment and blue outergarment, in that he was God and took on humanity in the Incarnation.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: FatherGiryus on December 24, 2012, 10:05:10 PM
Hold on to your pemmican...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on December 24, 2012, 10:09:20 PM
While I can't top that, I did find this:

(http://mattstone.blogs.com/photos/escoteric_icons/cosmic_christ_celtic.jpg)

Where to start...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 24, 2012, 10:26:19 PM
While I can't top that, I did find this:

(http://mattstone.blogs.com/photos/escoteric_icons/cosmic_christ_celtic.jpg)

Where to start...

If only it were more in the iconographic style..NOT.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 24, 2012, 10:32:47 PM
Hold on to your pemmican...

Sorry, Father!

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/product-images/giclee-prints/RLCLTPR.jpg)

The Holy Trinity as a trio of tribal women.

And, in case you missed it, this post and image:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,47878.msg834394.html#msg834394
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 24, 2012, 10:34:47 PM
While I can't top that, I did find this:

(http://mattstone.blogs.com/photos/escoteric_icons/cosmic_christ_celtic.jpg)

Where to start...

If only it were more in the iconographic style..NOT.

Because it is NOT in an iconographic style, it's easier to dismiss. Far more subversive and dangerous are images painted in iconographic styles, but are not icons in any way due to their content. See my post above.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: FatherGiryus on December 25, 2012, 12:04:41 AM
That thing drips with dumb...

Hold on to your pemmican...

Sorry, Father!

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/product-images/giclee-prints/RLCLTPR.jpg)

The Holy Trinity as a trio of tribal women.

And, in case you missed it, this post and image:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,47878.msg834394.html#msg834394
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on December 25, 2012, 01:02:07 AM
That thing drips with dumb...

Hold on to your pemmican...

Sorry, Father!

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/product-images/giclee-prints/RLCLTPR.jpg)

The Holy Trinity as a trio of tribal women.

And, in case you missed it, this post and image:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,47878.msg834394.html#msg834394

The multitude of Celtic Orthodox saints will be having words with the artist and those who accept the image. They may be brief like their prayers, but they will be to the point.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 25, 2012, 01:41:24 AM
That thing drips with dumb...

Hold on to your pemmican...

Sorry, Father!

(https://www.trinitystores.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/product-images/giclee-prints/RLCLTPR.jpg)

The Holy Trinity as a trio of tribal women.

And, in case you missed it, this post and image:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,47878.msg834394.html#msg834394

"Drips with dumb" doesn't end there. Here's the idiotic, syncretist spiel about it from the artist:

From ancient times human beings have responded to experiences with the divine with works of art. They have used metaphor and image to
describe what they have “seen.” Individual expressions of personal experiences of the divine have often challenged rigid religious traditions. Religious institutions have mistrusted the images of the ancients as well as the images of the mystics.

The spiritual genius of many ethnic groups through the centuries has been responsible for profound images of faith. The drawings on the walls of prehistoric caves and early sculpture are powerful witnesses to highly developed spiritual as well as artistic sentiments of peoples who lived centuries before the birth of the traditional religions of the East and West.

Native Americans, Africans, Asians, as well as early Europeans saw their religious traditions and images cast aside in favour of the Christian images current at the time. Treasures of faith were lost, as cultures were systematically destroyed by colonists and conquerors. It is time to recover discarded religious treasures.

A beautiful image from ancient Celtic religious experience was God as a trinity of women. The Maiden gave birth to creation. The Mother nurtured and protected it, and the Crone brought it wisely to its end. A raven accompanied the Crone as a symbol of life and death: though it ate dead things, it flew high into the heavens. In this icon the three women are depicted from different races to extend the Celtic image to a more global perspective. The snake was another sacred feminine image. It represented life, fertility, and rejuvenation. Devouring its own tail, it represented immortality.

Feminine images have suffered greatly in the west. Women will continue to suffer oppression in any religious society until their images have been reclaimed and honored. These feminine insights can help to present a new healing perspective on the problems that face our modern world.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on December 25, 2012, 08:41:25 AM
Maiden? Mother? Crone?

Gah! I just can't even with this anymore <_<
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on December 25, 2012, 12:20:57 PM
Oh my Lord.

I almost wish LBK would come out with a book of these bad icons. I just hope it wouldn't give some unfortunate people even more bad ideas. ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on December 25, 2012, 12:36:26 PM
Having said that, the one which is just passable is the last one of the female saint; the blue halo around the bishop-saint makes no sense at all (if gold is unavailable, then a pale color reminiscent of light can be chosen - the artist used a golden shde for the crosses on the omophorion, so why didn't he use the same in the halo?);

I'm reading a book illustrated with a fresco of Transfiguration from XIIth century and some halos in there are blue and some - golden.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on December 25, 2012, 03:53:17 PM
Oh my Lord.

I almost wish LBK would come out with a book of these bad icons. I just hope it wouldn't give some unfortunate people even more bad ideas. ;)

I've been working on it for a few years. Hope to publish in the New Year.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on December 25, 2012, 06:47:05 PM
Oh my Lord.

I almost wish LBK would come out with a book of these bad icons. I just hope it wouldn't give some unfortunate people even more bad ideas. ;)

I've been working on it for a few years. Hope to publish in the New Year.

Wonderful! I will buy a copy. :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on January 03, 2013, 02:39:10 PM
Here is one of an Arab Jesus

(http://mattstone.blogs.com/photos/christian_art_middle_east/arab_jesus.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on January 08, 2013, 08:35:35 PM
Here is one of an Arab Jesus

(http://mattstone.blogs.com/photos/christian_art_middle_east/arab_jesus.jpg)


Actually I think that's Aramaic.

Would this image be considered schlock? It's titled "Christ God the Geometer"

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/God_the_Geometer.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on January 08, 2013, 08:45:59 PM
The eyes on that are scary.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on January 08, 2013, 09:45:45 PM
Anyone who dislikes good ole Robby is going to love this
(http://www.stmarymagdalenes.org/marymags.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b4/Sharbat_Gula.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 08, 2013, 09:56:57 PM

Would this image be considered schlock? It's titled "Christ God the Geometer"

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/God_the_Geometer.jpg)

It's not quite schlock, though the eyes are pretty creepy. The idea of God the Geometer has a scriptural basis, such as these quotes:

Isaiah 40:12: Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand, measured heaven with a span and calculated the dust of the earth in a measure? Weighed the mountains in scales and the hills in a balance??

Isaiah 48:13: Indeed My hand has laid the foundation of the earth, and My right hand has spanned the heavens; when I call to them,
they stand up together.


Job 38: 4-6: “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone?


Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 08, 2013, 10:01:56 PM
Anyone who dislikes good ole Robby is going to love this
(http://www.stmarymagdalenes.org/marymags.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b4/Sharbat_Gula.jpg)


Oh, he should have been taken to the cleaners on charges of plagiarism and breach of copyright.

It also violates a central principle of iconography: that the icon represents the prototype, i.e. the actual person who is the subject of the icon. St Mary Magdalene was not a late 20th-century Aghan girl, but a first-century Jewish woman from Magdala.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on January 08, 2013, 10:03:11 PM
(http://emergingyouth.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/trinityicon.jpg)

Because it depicts God the Father, it would be schlock, right? Also, the Holy Spirit is a dove, and can only be depicted as a dove during the Baptism, right?

I never understood why, but for whatever reason, some like to portray God the Father as an old man with a white beard.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 08, 2013, 10:10:55 PM
(http://emergingyouth.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/trinityicon.jpg)

Because it depicts God the Father, it would be schlock, right? Also, the Holy Spirit is a dove, and can only be depicted as a dove during the Baptism, right?

I never understood why, but for whatever reason, some like to portray God the Father as an old man with a white beard.

This is the most well-known uncanonical image, and, sadly, despite the wealth of patristic, liturgical, conciliar and doctrinal evidence denouncing it, it is still being painted, for reasons only known to the painters.  :(

And, in the example posted, painted not very well.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on January 09, 2013, 12:15:14 AM
(http://emergingyouth.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/trinityicon.jpg)

Because it depicts God the Father, it would be schlock, right? Also, the Holy Spirit is a dove, and can only be depicted as a dove during the Baptism, right?

I never understood why, but for whatever reason, some like to portray God the Father as an old man with a white beard.

Neither Holy, nor Byzantine, nor Icons. Needs name change.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 09, 2013, 12:36:00 AM

Neither Holy, nor Byzantine, nor Icons. Needs name change.

WIN!!  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on January 09, 2013, 10:30:51 AM
Does anyone here happen to know why so many "icons" of the Father have that triangle around His head?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on January 09, 2013, 02:19:28 PM
Does anyone here happen to know why so many "icons" of the Father have that triangle around His head?

Maybe it signifies the Trinity. Just a guess.  :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: domNoah on January 10, 2013, 10:19:48 PM
They should be burned and all digital copies destroyed.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 10, 2013, 10:47:22 PM
They should be burned and all digital copies destroyed.

Indeed, but close to impossible to actually achieve.  ::)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on January 15, 2013, 05:58:53 PM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/574494_485972304747401_2102286722_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: FatherGiryus on January 15, 2013, 07:38:44 PM
Who did this?

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/574494_485972304747401_2102286722_n.jpg)

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on January 15, 2013, 07:53:46 PM
Who did this?

No idea. I've found it on a facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=485972304747401&set=a.485969638081001.118946.310848572259776&type=3&theater
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on January 15, 2013, 09:48:55 PM
Protection of the Theotokos of the Potamac?

(http://www.comeandseeicons.com/bvm/nkt01.jpg)

Quote
Our Lady of Washington, DC

Troparion
Steadfast protectress of Christians, and constant advocate before the Creator: do not despise the cry of us sinners, but in thy goodness come speedily to help us who call on thee in faith. Hasten to hear our petitions and to intercede for us, O Theotokos, for thou dost always protect those who honor thee.

This icon shows the Mother of God holding a veil of protection over Washington, DC. You can see the Potomac, the Capitol, the White House, the Lincoln, Washington & Jefferson Memorials, and the Smithsonian. But, front and center is the St. Nicholas Orthodox Cathedral. This icon calls us to prayer to ask for the Theotokos' intercession for our nation. The Scriptures tell us that military might is not the true measure of a nation, and it is ultimately useless in its defense. Psalm 20 follows (Remember that "Zion" is a metaphor for the Virgin Mary):

The LORD hear thee in the day of trouble; the name of the God of Jacob defend thee;
Send thee help from the sanctuary, and strengthen thee out of Zion;
Remember all thy offerings, and accept thy burnt sacrifice; Selah.
Grant thee according to thine own heart, and fulfil all thy counsel.
We will rejoice in thy salvation, and in the name of our God we will set up our banners: the LORD fulfil all thy petitions.
Now know I that the LORD saveth his anointed; he will hear him from his holy heaven with the saving strength of his right hand.
Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God.
They are brought down and fallen: but we are risen, and stand upright.
Save, LORD: let the king hear us when we call.

This icon is by the hand of Nadine Kastelan Thola. Source (http://www.comeandseeicons.com/bvm/nkt01.htm).
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 15, 2013, 10:04:41 PM
Who did this?

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/574494_485972304747401_2102286722_n.jpg)


The style and content strongly suggests Ukrainian Eastern Catholic.

The Mother of God bears no stars of ever-virginity at all on her head and shoulders.  :o

Moreover, I find the photorealism and linear perspective of the buildings and other structures and features against the more conventionally abstracted human figures quite jarring. And what's with the disembodied arm with something orange in its hand coming out of the border at center-right, over the group of three people over the flyover?  ???
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on January 15, 2013, 10:17:44 PM
Who did this?

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/574494_485972304747401_2102286722_n.jpg)


The style and content strongly suggests Ukrainian Eastern Catholic.

http://www.pouke.org/forum/topic/865-%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B5-%D1%84%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B5-%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BA/page-310

Here you can find it in better resolution. Some links associate it with the Serbian Diocese of Western America (especially the Alhambra parish). In a facebook comment one user recognised the buiildings there as Orthodox Churches from the area.

edit:
actually the original file is from the diocesan website:

http://www.westsrbdio.org/images/homepage_illustrations/OurLadyofLosAngeles.jpg
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 15, 2013, 10:35:33 PM
Who did this?

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/574494_485972304747401_2102286722_n.jpg)


The style and content strongly suggests Ukrainian Eastern Catholic.

http://www.pouke.org/forum/topic/865-%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B5-%D1%84%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B5-%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BA/page-310

Here you can find it in better resolution. Some links associate it with the Serbian Diocese of Western America (especially the Alhambra parish). In a facebook comment one user recognised the buiildings there as Orthodox Churches from the area.

Thanks for the high-res link. The orange thing is a basketball, the three people on the motorway are musicians.

The Serbian connection makes sense - the range of colors used, their high saturation, the impressionistic, stippled artistic effects such as for clouds, vegetation and earth, and the eyes in the larger figures (all much more clearly visible in the large image) are straight out of the "school" of Fr Stamatios Skliris, who is popular among Serbs, and whom I've taken to task earlier in this thread.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 16, 2013, 12:50:24 PM
I don't think that icon is schlock, maybe some of the elements within it could be excluded, but  overall it seems fine.

Someone already posted one for DC, and I've seen one for Athens/Piraeus. Fr. Josiah Trenham has one in his Church for Riverside, CA.

It isn't a new thing.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on January 16, 2013, 12:53:08 PM
Is the "Our Lady" moniker kosher though?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 16, 2013, 01:00:58 PM
Is the "Our Lady" moniker kosher though?

Why wouldn't it be?

"Our Most-Holy Lady Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary"

(I know, it's slightly different but still...)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Alpo on January 16, 2013, 01:19:03 PM
Is the "Our Lady" moniker kosher though?

Why wouldn't it be?

Because it's Latin. :o
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on January 16, 2013, 01:24:57 PM
I just asked because I've never heard it used in an Orthodox setting so it struck me as odd.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on January 16, 2013, 06:51:06 PM
I just asked because I've never heard it used in an Orthodox setting so it struck me as odd.

You've never been to a Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom? Or Orthros in an Eastern Orthodox church? The phrase "Calling to mind our most blessed and glorious Lady the Theotokos..." occurs about a million times.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on January 16, 2013, 07:23:35 PM
I just asked because I've never heard it used in an Orthodox setting so it struck me as odd.

You've never been to a Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom? Or Orthros in an Eastern Orthodox church? The phrase "Calling to mind our most blessed and glorious Lady the Theotokos..." occurs about a million times.

I've been to a Coptic church a few times, but other than that, it's been all Indian Orthodox for me.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on January 16, 2013, 07:27:08 PM
I just asked because I've never heard it used in an Orthodox setting so it struck me as odd.

You've never been to a Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom? Or Orthros in an Eastern Orthodox church? The phrase "Calling to mind our most blessed and glorious Lady the Theotokos..." occurs about a million times.

I've been to a Coptic church a few times, but other than that, it's been all Indian Orthodox for me.

I'm just kind of tired of the "Those darned Latins!" business getting thrown around all the time. Or, "Orthodox can say it but other people can't." "Our Lady" is a perfectly legitimate term.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on January 16, 2013, 07:54:33 PM
I just asked because I've never heard it used in an Orthodox setting so it struck me as odd.

You've never been to a Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom? Or Orthros in an Eastern Orthodox church? The phrase "Calling to mind our most blessed and glorious Lady the Theotokos..." occurs about a million times.

I've been to a Coptic church a few times, but other than that, it's been all Indian Orthodox for me.

I'm just kind of tired of the "Those darned Latins!" business getting thrown around all the time. Or, "Orthodox can say it but other people can't." "Our Lady" is a perfectly legitimate term.

Yeah, that's not what I was suggesting at all. Like I said, I've never heard it used in an Orthodox context, so I asked  if it was OK for Orthodox to use it. Turns out it is, so end of story.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 16, 2013, 11:47:46 PM
I don't think that icon is schlock, maybe some of the elements within it could be excluded, but  overall it seems fine.

Someone already posted one for DC, and I've seen one for Athens/Piraeus. Fr. Josiah Trenham has one in his Church for Riverside, CA.

It isn't a new thing.

There is quite a difference in composition between proper icons of the Mother of God as protector and patroness of certain regions, islands or cities, and the Skliris-inspired image.

1. Proper icons of this type are uniform in their artistic style, maintaining the non-realistic, abstracted rendering of landscape and human figures alike. The image above does not. The heavenly and otherworldly collides with photographic realism. There is no harmony or order in what is portrayed.

2. Proper icons of this type would show saints of the region, island or city, churches and other holy places associated with the place, and, at the most, one or two secular landmarks (though this is rarely necessary, if the other compositional elements readily identify the place). The image posted above is littered with all sorts of superfluous and cutesy detail, like the basketballer's arm (with the letters NBA in the Cyrillic alphabet painted on the ball he is holding - WHY??), the musicians on the motorway, and the fairground.

This painting is little more than a feel-good exercise, a "Visit Sunny Los Angeles!" pop poster, not a holy icon which evokes prayer and compunction and draws us closer to the presence of God.

And I'll repeat my earlier observation: There are no stars of Ever-virginity on the garments of the Mother of God. Completely unacceptable.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on January 17, 2013, 03:46:29 PM
All this glittering has to be schlock.

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/ac015a0c3a47e3e28e47c6e8ef8cebed/tumblr_mgpvhgx8PA1rb44tmo1_400.gif)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on January 17, 2013, 06:59:37 PM
All this glittering has to be schlock.

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/ac015a0c3a47e3e28e47c6e8ef8cebed/tumblr_mgpvhgx8PA1rb44tmo1_400.gif)

It looks like a myspace glitter graphic
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on January 17, 2013, 08:44:24 PM
It looks like a myspace glitter graphic
Pretty sure it is, but it was being shared on Orthodox tumblr pages and had to post it here.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on January 17, 2013, 08:47:02 PM
It looks like a myspace glitter graphic
Pretty sure it is, but it was being shared on Orthodox tumblr pages and had to post it here.

LBK ain't gonna like this...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on January 17, 2013, 09:00:00 PM
Icon usually placed at the church I attend secondly most often has some brocade / false diamond ornaments and the general impression is exactly the one as the one from this gif.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 17, 2013, 09:49:15 PM
It looks like a myspace glitter graphic
Pretty sure it is, but it was being shared on Orthodox tumblr pages and had to post it here.

LBK ain't gonna like this...

Stating the obvious, aren't you?  ;) :laugh:

That's the digital version of stuck-on glitter in haloes and puff paint highlights. Yup, there seems to be no limit to tackifying perfectly good icons.  :(
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Antonis on January 17, 2013, 11:19:19 PM
I have seen some monasteries do a very good job of applying such ornaments, even "tacky" glitter glue. I have several such icons and they are really well done and beautiful.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 17, 2013, 11:34:22 PM
I have seen some monasteries do a very good job of applying such ornaments, even "tacky" glitter glue. I have several such icons and they are really well done and beautiful.

It is disrespectful to the work of the iconographer. The spiritual beauty of an icon, even a mounted paper print, needs no such frivolous and cheap "adornments".
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 18, 2013, 12:42:54 AM
I have seen some monasteries do a very good job of applying such ornaments, even "tacky" glitter glue. I have several such icons and they are really well done and beautiful.

I've also seen glitter around an icon, silver and in the areas often covered by the pressed metal covers. However, this icon with the glitter background was hidden back in a closet in the altar area, maybe there was a reason...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 18, 2013, 01:58:49 AM
I have seen some monasteries do a very good job of applying such ornaments, even "tacky" glitter glue. I have several such icons and they are really well done and beautiful.

I've also seen glitter around an icon, silver and in the areas often covered by the pressed metal covers. However, this icon with the glitter background was hidden back in a closet in the altar area, maybe there was a reason...

It was probably donated to the church by a well-meaning parishioner, but the priest wisely dispatched it to a cranny. Church cupboards are repositories of this sort of thing, as well as sources of damaged oil lamps and censers, old drapes and holey stikharia, and cracked lamp glass. Few things ever get thrown out.  ;)

Occasionally, such items can be restored to something more acceptable. Old RC wall crucifixes and processional crosses painted with western-type Crucifixion scenes can often be rehabilitated. I was once called upon to convert a wall crucifix about two feet tall which had been languishing in a church cupboard into an Orthodox processional cross, and I'm currently in the process of stripping a painted processional cross of its rather lurid imagery, to then stain and lacquer it, and attach an iconographic Christ mounted on thin board to it.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 18, 2013, 02:13:31 AM
I have seen some monasteries do a very good job of applying such ornaments, even "tacky" glitter glue. I have several such icons and they are really well done and beautiful.

I've also seen glitter around an icon, silver and in the areas often covered by the pressed metal covers. However, this icon with the glitter background was hidden back in a closet in the altar area, maybe there was a reason...

It was probably donated to the church by a well-meaning parishioner, but the priest wisely dispatched it to a cranny. Church cupboards are repositories of this sort of thing, as well as sources of damaged oil lamps and censers, old drapes and holey stikharia, and cracked lamp glass. Few things ever get thrown out.  ;)

Occasionally, such items can be restored to something more acceptable. Old RC wall crucifixes and processional crosses painted with western-type Crucifixion scenes can often be rehabilitated. I was once called upon to convert a wall crucifix about two feet tall which had been languishing in a church cupboard into an Orthodox processional cross, and I'm currently in the process of stripping a painted processional cross of its rather lurid imagery, to then stain and lacquer it, and attach an iconographic Christ mounted on thin board to it.

There were a few other icons with this one but they either had broken glass or broken frames and were of Orthodox Saints and canonically painted (though some of a western style, but our whole iconostasis is that way). I've thought about buying new frames and maybe drilling some more screws into the brick so they can hang in the sanctuary. I'll leave the glitter one there though, but maybe mount it in the closet instead of just laying there...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 18, 2013, 02:22:50 AM
There were a few other icons with this one but they either had broken glass or broken frames and were of Orthodox Saints and canonically painted (though some of a western style, but our whole iconostasis is that way). I've thought about buying new frames and maybe drilling some more screws into the brick so they can hang in the sanctuary. I'll leave the glitter one there though, but maybe mount it in the closet instead of just laying there...

Check with your priest first.  ;)

As for frames, you might need to get them custom framed, as many old icons aren't a modern standard size. If any icons are painted, not mounted prints, make sure there is a space between the glass and the surface of the icon. The best way to do this is to have a proper kiot made, or a double frame: the inner frame (traditionally in a gold or silver finish), then the glass, then the outer frame (a suitable timber molding in a mid-to-dark tone, not plastic or metallic). This mimics the effect of a kiot.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 18, 2013, 02:34:57 AM
There were a few other icons with this one but they either had broken glass or broken frames and were of Orthodox Saints and canonically painted (though some of a western style, but our whole iconostasis is that way). I've thought about buying new frames and maybe drilling some more screws into the brick so they can hang in the sanctuary. I'll leave the glitter one there though, but maybe mount it in the closet instead of just laying there...

Check with your priest first.  ;)

As for frames, you might need to get them custom framed, as many old icons aren't a modern standard size. If any icons are painted, not mounted prints, make sure there is a space between the glass and the surface of the icon. The best way to do this is to have a proper kiot made, or a double frame: the inner frame (traditionally in a gold or silver finish), then the glass, then the outer frame (a suitable timber molding in a mid-to-dark tone, not plastic or metallic). This mimics the effect of a kiot.

The Priest that put them there is gone and we have no permanent attached Priest.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 18, 2013, 02:39:23 AM
There were a few other icons with this one but they either had broken glass or broken frames and were of Orthodox Saints and canonically painted (though some of a western style, but our whole iconostasis is that way). I've thought about buying new frames and maybe drilling some more screws into the brick so they can hang in the sanctuary. I'll leave the glitter one there though, but maybe mount it in the closet instead of just laying there...

Check with your priest first.  ;)

As for frames, you might need to get them custom framed, as many old icons aren't a modern standard size. If any icons are painted, not mounted prints, make sure there is a space between the glass and the surface of the icon. The best way to do this is to have a proper kiot made, or a double frame: the inner frame (traditionally in a gold or silver finish), then the glass, then the outer frame (a suitable timber molding in a mid-to-dark tone, not plastic or metallic). This mimics the effect of a kiot.

The Priest that put them there is gone and we have no permanent attached Priest.

You'll still need a priest's permission to do such things, especially anything done in the sanctuary. Not doing so is asking for trouble - I speak from very long experience.

You might simply have to wait until a permanent replacement for your former priest is appointed.  :police:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 18, 2013, 03:01:05 AM
Edit: sent a reply by a PM since its detracting from the thread discussion.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: FatherGiryus on January 18, 2013, 12:02:23 PM
Thought it was one of those 'Twilight' vampire references...

All this glittering has to be schlock.

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/ac015a0c3a47e3e28e47c6e8ef8cebed/tumblr_mgpvhgx8PA1rb44tmo1_400.gif)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 18, 2013, 06:16:36 PM
Thought it was one of those 'Twilight' vampire references...


 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on January 18, 2013, 08:12:08 PM
It looks like a myspace glitter graphic
Pretty sure it is, but it was being shared on Orthodox tumblr pages and had to post it here.

LBK ain't gonna like this...

Stating the obvious, aren't you?  ;) :laugh:

That's the digital version of stuck-on glitter in haloes and puff paint highlights. Yup, there seems to be no limit to tackifying perfectly good icons.  :(

I'm waiting for cyber myrrh to flow from it.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: dcommini on January 18, 2013, 08:56:21 PM
It looks like a myspace glitter graphic

What is that?  :D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 18, 2013, 10:58:28 PM
It looks like a myspace glitter graphic
Pretty sure it is, but it was being shared on Orthodox tumblr pages and had to post it here.

LBK ain't gonna like this...

Stating the obvious, aren't you?  ;) :laugh:

That's the digital version of stuck-on glitter in haloes and puff paint highlights. Yup, there seems to be no limit to tackifying perfectly good icons.  :(

I'm waiting for cyber myrrh to flow from it.

Brilliant!  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Antonis on January 18, 2013, 11:09:24 PM
I have seen some monasteries do a very good job of applying such ornaments, even "tacky" glitter glue. I have several such icons and they are really well done and beautiful.

It is disrespectful to the work of the iconographer. The spiritual beauty of an icon, even a mounted paper print, needs no such frivolous and cheap "adornments".
::)

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on January 18, 2013, 11:11:43 PM
LBK, what about rizas and the like?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Antonis on January 18, 2013, 11:14:20 PM
It's all blasphemy. All of it.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on January 18, 2013, 11:16:09 PM
It's all blasphemy. All of it.

Can you stop? I'm not on the whiney bandwagon that hates the fact that LBK has iconographic standards, I was asking a question. Thanks.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on January 18, 2013, 11:19:11 PM
It's all blasphemy. All of it.

Can you stop? I'm not on the whiney bandwagon that hates the fact that LBK has iconographic standards, I was asking a question. Thanks.

I was actually about to ask what she thought of them as well, and likewise as a genuine question.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on January 18, 2013, 11:37:44 PM
Well, to be fair, it is the Church that has iconographic standards. LBK is just articulating them.

Now, there are icons in churches which don't meet the standards, just as there are priests who do not meet the canonical requirements for ordination, and some of those icons and priests work miracles. But they are exceptions. And we do not make rules from exceptions.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: OrthoMEX on January 19, 2013, 09:04:40 PM
you have to copy and paste the whole link just clicking the blue part will just take you to my wall            
http://www.facebook.com/#!/photo.php?fbid=2596092317033&set=a.1187085892753.22403.1696472180&type=1&theater
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 19, 2013, 09:36:03 PM
LBK, what about rizas and the like?

It's all blasphemy. All of it.

Can you stop? I'm not on the whiney bandwagon that hates the fact that LBK has iconographic standards, I was asking a question. Thanks.

I was actually about to ask what she thought of them as well, and likewise as a genuine question.

Strictly speaking, a riza is an unnecessary embellishment which obscures the content of an icon. The beauty of lilies is not improved by gilding them. A riza which only covers a plain background is tolerable.

However, a great number of icons, past and present, consist of a riza through which the hands and faces of the figures are visible, but, underneath, that's all there is. This is simply deception. It would be better to have a humble paper icon print mounted and framed, with no riza or oklad at all, than one of these fakes, even if the face and hands are skilfully painted.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 19, 2013, 10:06:50 PM
Well, to be fair, it is the Church that has iconographic standards. LBK is just articulating them.

Now, there are icons in churches which don't meet the standards, just as there are priests who do not meet the canonical requirements for ordination, and some of those icons and priests work miracles. But they are exceptions. And we do not make rules from exceptions.

I think LBK is expressing a more fanatical view of the standards our church has. It's like some who take monasticism and the Orthodox tradition of monasticism and then magnify that x100 and create an odd, more extreme view.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 19, 2013, 10:18:02 PM
Well, to be fair, it is the Church that has iconographic standards. LBK is just articulating them.

Now, there are icons in churches which don't meet the standards, just as there are priests who do not meet the canonical requirements for ordination, and some of those icons and priests work miracles. But they are exceptions. And we do not make rules from exceptions.

I think LBK is expressing a more fanatical view of the standards our church has. It's like some who take monasticism and the Orthodox tradition of monasticism and then magnify that x100 and create an odd, more extreme view.

Devin, the hole you're digging for yourself is only getting deeper. Stop digging, if you know what's good for you.   :angel:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 19, 2013, 10:22:33 PM
Well, to be fair, it is the Church that has iconographic standards. LBK is just articulating them.

Now, there are icons in churches which don't meet the standards, just as there are priests who do not meet the canonical requirements for ordination, and some of those icons and priests work miracles. But they are exceptions. And we do not make rules from exceptions.

I think LBK is expressing a more fanatical view of the standards our church has. It's like some who take monasticism and the Orthodox tradition of monasticism and then magnify that x100 and create an odd, more extreme view.

Devin, the hole you're digging for yourself is only getting deeper. Stop digging, if you know what's good for you.   :angel:

I'm in no hole. It's as ridiculous as someone who insists on crossing themselves exactly right every time or bowing at the waist every time before asking a blessing.

It's legalism and pharisaism, ridgidity for the sake of ridgidity.

I've accepted the people with these views are simply Orthodoxys version of Obsessive Compulsive. Or people who are suffering from the shock of their past traditions, like former Anglicans who are deathly afraid of any discussion about women's priesthood.

Or those who insist every parish has to always face East, or that the Liturgy of St James cannot and shouldn't ever be celebrated because the Priest faces West.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Antonis on January 19, 2013, 11:44:26 PM
Quote
It's legalism and pharisaism, ridgidity for the sake of ridgidity.

+1

When one is condemning humble, Athonite-style monks as being disrespectful with their "frivolous and cheap 'adornments'" that is a sure sign of going over the edge:

Quote
It is disrespectful to the work of the iconographer. The spiritual beauty of an icon, even a mounted paper print, needs no such frivolous and cheap "adornments".

I find their love and dedication to glorifying a saint with painstaking, careful work to be humbling.

My icon of Saint John Chrysostom, "frivolously and cheap[ly]" adorned:

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 20, 2013, 12:12:56 AM
“To gild refined gold, to paint the lily,
To throw a perfume on the violet,
To smooth the ice, or add another hue
Unto the rainbow, or with taper-light
To seek the beauteous eye of heaven to garnish,
Is wasteful and ridiculous excess.”
(King John: Act iv Scene 2.)

Shakespeare knew what he was talking about.  ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 20, 2013, 12:17:17 AM
“To gild refined gold, to paint the lily,
To throw a perfume on the violet,
To smooth the ice, or add another hue
Unto the rainbow, or with taper-light
To seek the beauteous eye of heaven to garnish,
Is wasteful and ridiculous excess.”
(King John: Act iv Scene 2.)

Shakespeare knew what he was talking about.  ;)

Hyperdox Herman: Argues we shouldn't use icons painted by non-Orthodox, quotes non-Orthodox to support his stance on icons.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 20, 2013, 12:24:22 AM
“To gild refined gold, to paint the lily,
To throw a perfume on the violet,
To smooth the ice, or add another hue
Unto the rainbow, or with taper-light
To seek the beauteous eye of heaven to garnish,
Is wasteful and ridiculous excess.”
(King John: Act iv Scene 2.)

Shakespeare knew what he was talking about.  ;)

Hyperdox Herman: Argues we shouldn't use icons painted by non-Orthodox, quotes non-Orthodox to support his stance on icons.

Clutching at straws, aren't we?  ::)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 20, 2013, 12:25:35 AM
“To gild refined gold, to paint the lily,
To throw a perfume on the violet,
To smooth the ice, or add another hue
Unto the rainbow, or with taper-light
To seek the beauteous eye of heaven to garnish,
Is wasteful and ridiculous excess.”
(King John: Act iv Scene 2.)

Shakespeare knew what he was talking about.  ;)

Hyperdox Herman: Argues we shouldn't use icons painted by non-Orthodox, quotes non-Orthodox to support his stance on icons.

Clutching at straws, aren't we?  ::)

Nope, just sensing the profound irony.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 20, 2013, 12:29:47 AM
Quote
It's legalism and pharisaism, ridgidity for the sake of ridgidity.

+1

When one is condemning humble, Athonite-style monks as being disrespectful with their "frivolous and cheap 'adornments'" that is a sure sign of going over the edge:

Quote
It is disrespectful to the work of the iconographer. The spiritual beauty of an icon, even a mounted paper print, needs no such frivolous and cheap "adornments".

I find their love and dedication to glorifying a saint with painstaking, careful work to be humbling.

My icon of Saint John Chrysostom, "frivolously and cheap[ly]" adorned:

Here is my icon of Christ I bought in Greece, one of my favorites that I own, that is "frivolously and cheap[ly]" adorned.

It's definitely NOT "schlock":
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on January 20, 2013, 12:38:28 AM
I guess people are really attached to their dumb glitter.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on January 20, 2013, 12:53:20 AM
There are rules, and there are exceptions. To make rules out of exceptions is madness.

Here's an illustration.

In Orthodoxy, you can have a former male prostitute who killed 10 people become a priest and even work miracles. He can even process with a myrrh-streaming glitter-bedecked icon through the streets and people will prostrate themselves to get a blessing.

In Idiocy, it is decided that the priesthood is a great vocation for all former male proestitutes and murderers and that glitter is good everywhere because it symbolizes the uncreated light. But eventually people stop prostrating themselves for blessings and there are no miracles.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 20, 2013, 01:10:24 AM
There are rules, and there are exceptions. To make rules out of exceptions is madness.

Here's an illustration.

In Orthodoxy, you can have a former male prostitute who killed 10 people become a priest and even work miracles. He can even process with a myrrh-streaming glitter-bedecked icon through the streets and people will prostrate themselves to get a blessing.

In Idiocy, it is decided that the priesthood is a great vocation for all former male proestitutes and murderers and that glitter is good everywhere because it symbolizes the uncreated light. But eventually people stop prostrating themselves for blessings and there are no miracles.

Yet you and LBK have not illustrated how riza and precious stones on icons are an "exception" rather than the rule.

All that has been illustrated is LBK's ideas are closer to a little old babushka's piety and simple faith than to a deeper, more theological, more intellectual and more learned/informed piety and faith. The former isn't worse than the latter unless the former starts demanding that their faith is the norm, when it isn't and hasn't ever been.

I'm currently reading the Brother's Karamazov, and yes, it is fiction, but based heavily on Russian life at the time. I've seen a lot of this sort of "piety" being illustrated in the book, where the people refuse to question the Genesis story as being literal, or who think only in literal terms about the "faith of a mustard seed" passage. Such is a simple faith, usually by those who are earnest, good Orthodox Christians.

But, at the same time, faith and one's knowledge of the faith, and knowledge of iconography and hymnography should go deeper (if it can). Some have to stay on that basic level (otherwise, if seriously challenged, they lose their faith entirely), and that is fine. But they shouldn't demand that everyone remain on that basic, simple level.

It's like how we tell new converts about the unchanging Liturgy, how it is the liturgy of the ancient church and unchanged. Yet we know that it has in fact, changed, significantly. St. John Chrystostom would not be comfortable serving it today, though he'd find many aspects familiar (of course, especially his and St. Basil's prayers). Even more-so, St. Irenaeus and St. Justin Martyr wouldn't feel very familiar in our Liturgy today because of how different it is. It isn't like it evolved from the First Century to the Fourth and then stopped evolving. It continued to change and evolve. Same thing for our iconography. Someone from the First or Second Century may look at our iconography and won't recognize many of the elements within them, but could probably still see the influence that Jewish iconography and Early Christian iconography has had and that there is clearly a line connecting the two.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 20, 2013, 01:28:13 AM
Quote
All that has been illustrated is LBK's ideas are closer to a little old babushka's piety and simple faith than to a deeper, more theological, more intellectual and more learned/informed piety and faith. The former isn't worse than the latter unless the former starts demanding that their faith is the norm, when it isn't and hasn't ever been.

See this post, Devin:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,19963.msg867368.html#msg867368

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on January 20, 2013, 05:58:43 PM
(http://www.armenianchurch-ed.net/wpblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/HolyTranslators.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Symeon77 on January 20, 2013, 06:31:15 PM
(http://www.armenianchurch-ed.net/wpblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/HolyTranslators.jpg)

Ewwwww... Now WHAT was that?   ???

Someone care to parse this one?

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on January 20, 2013, 06:42:39 PM
(http://www.armenianchurch-ed.net/wpblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/HolyTranslators.jpg)

Somehow I see Armenia and think Vulcan.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Jason.Wike on January 20, 2013, 09:34:35 PM
It's all blasphemy. All of it.

Sorry I HAD to grumpycat this. Not mocking you or anything it just goes with this cat so good.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on January 20, 2013, 10:24:24 PM
(http://www.armenianchurch-ed.net/wpblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/HolyTranslators.jpg)

I actually like the style of this, whatever it may be.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Antonis on January 21, 2013, 12:46:19 AM
It's all blasphemy. All of it.

Sorry I HAD to grumpycat this. Not mocking you or anything it just goes with this cat so good.
:D

Saving that one.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: FatherGiryus on January 21, 2013, 01:57:42 AM
Looks like a Christianized version of a Socialist Realism mural.

(http://www.armenianchurch-ed.net/wpblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/HolyTranslators.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Apostolos on January 21, 2013, 07:18:19 AM
I wonder LBK, what do you think of George Kordis' (http://giorgoskordis.com) iconography style? For some he is a prominent iconographer, for others, he is a dangerous innovator walking a thin line:
(http://i.imgur.com/Ub0xQvG.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/1Fm9RFV.jpg)

And a couple of icons I have issues with:
(http://i.imgur.com/TafIqE6.jpg)
Theotokos the eldress/gerontissa

(http://i.imgur.com/6Cxg96j.jpg)
Theotokos the abbess of Athos
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Aram on January 21, 2013, 02:25:47 PM
(http://www.armenianchurch-ed.net/wpblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/HolyTranslators.jpg)
This is an Armenian icon, or more accurately, a small portion of a very, very large iconographic tapestry in Etchmiadzin.  At the top is the traditional Armenian symbol of the letter Eh, standing for "I am," or "He Is."  The main scene depicts the Holy Translators, Ss. Sahag and Mesrob.  St. Sahag is holding the open book, St. Mesrob is at the forefront, holding a tablet with the inscribed Armenian alphabet.  The style is typically Armenian to my eyes, nothing out of the ordinary.

More information on the Holy Translators here:

http://www.armenianchurch-ed.net/wpblog/tag/st-sahag/
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on January 21, 2013, 02:33:50 PM
(http://www.armenianchurch-ed.net/wpblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/HolyTranslators.jpg)
This is an Armenian icon, or more accurately, a small portion of a very, very large iconographic tapestry in Etchmiadzin.  At the top is the traditional Armenian symbol of the letter Eh, standing for "I am," or "He Is."  The main scene depicts the Holy Translators, Ss. Sahag and Mesrob.  St. Sahag is holding the open book, St. Mesrob is at the forefront, holding a tablet with the inscribed Armenian alphabet.  The style is typically Armenian to my eyes, nothing out of the ordinary.

More information on the Holy Translators here:

http://www.armenianchurch-ed.net/wpblog/tag/st-sahag/

I would like it a lot more if it wasn't so "busy". There's just way too much going on there to keep track.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Aram on January 21, 2013, 02:42:27 PM
I would like it a lot more if it wasn't so "busy". There's just way too much going on there to keep track.
Well, to be fair, it's an absolutely gigantic tapestry covering a very large wall, so the actual impact when you see it in person is far different than a tiny jpg on a computer screen.  It's one of (I think) three hanging in a meeting hall in the Catholicos' residence in Etchmiadzin.  This might help in gauging the scale:

http://armenianpainters.blogspot.com/2012/05/grigor-khandjian-1909-1998.html
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Brigidsboy on January 21, 2013, 03:33:44 PM
I appreciate much of George Kordis' work. The top example for instance. The panel icon below it doesn't do much for me.

I wonder LBK, what do you think of George Kordis' (http://giorgoskordis.com) iconography style? For some he is a prominent iconographer, for others, he is a dangerous innovator walking a thin line:
(http://i.imgur.com/Ub0xQvG.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/1Fm9RFV.jpg)

And a couple of icons I have issues with:
(http://i.imgur.com/TafIqE6.jpg)
Theotokos the eldress/gerontissa

(http://i.imgur.com/6Cxg96j.jpg)
Theotokos the abbess of Athos
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Brigidsboy on January 21, 2013, 03:38:41 PM
I would like it a lot more if it wasn't so "busy". There's just way too much going on there to keep track.
Well, to be fair, it's an absolutely gigantic tapestry covering a very large wall, so the actual impact when you see it in person is far different than a tiny jpg on a computer screen.  It's one of (I think) three hanging in a meeting hall in the Catholicos' residence in Etchmiadzin.  This might help in gauging the scale:

http://armenianpainters.blogspot.com/2012/05/grigor-khandjian-1909-1998.html

Khandjian's tapestry was never meant for veneration. It isn't an icon per se. I have seen it in person and it really is a magnificent work.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 21, 2013, 10:51:00 PM
I wonder LBK, what do you think of George Kordis' (http://giorgoskordis.com) iconography style? For some he is a prominent iconographer, for others, he is a dangerous innovator walking a thin line:
(http://i.imgur.com/Ub0xQvG.jpg)

I've had a look at his works on his site, and his work varies in quality and artistic style. Some of the work has a distinct Stamatios Skliris influence in the oversized eyes, often with a deer-in-the-headlights look. The animation is simply overdone. Everything looks like it's moving in the wind, there is a distinct lack of stillness in a great deal of his work. It gives the impression of disorder, rather than lightness.

The above Meeting of the Lord shows the infant Christ dressed in the red and blue garments associated with His adult portrayals, and not in the white or gold (or both) garments which have been consistently and unvaveringly used in the icons of this feast. I find the looks in the eyes of the figures quite disturbing and unsettling.


(http://i.imgur.com/1Fm9RFV.jpg)

Surely he could have chosen a better background color! That magenta is just horrible and sickly.  :P :P :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 21, 2013, 11:01:28 PM
And a couple of icons I have issues with:
(http://i.imgur.com/TafIqE6.jpg)
Theotokos the eldress/gerontissa

(http://i.imgur.com/6Cxg96j.jpg)
Theotokos the abbess of Athos

I also have a problem with the Gerontissa, also known as Abbess of Athos, where the Mother of God is vested in a bishop's mantle. An abbot of archimandrite rank may wear a mantle similar to that of a bishop, but this mantle does not have the stripes, and the panels usually bear crosses, not the four Evangelists. By contrast, the mantle of an Orthodox abbess is plain, without the three horizontal stripes or the four rectangular panels.

When an abbess blesses, she arranges her fingers in the way one does when crossing oneself. The IC XC hand configuration (as shown in the Gerontissa) is to be used only by male clergy of priestly rank and above. The Gerontissa ascribes a rank to the Mother of God which is completely at odds with what the Church teaches about her. She is not, nor ever was, a priest, deacon, bishop or abbess.

The second work is more acceptable, as she is shown as a lay eldress (which she was, the Apostles sought and valued her advice and counsel) not as a cleric, and patron and protector of Athos. It would have been proper to show Christ somewhere, such as in the upper border of the icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Deborah on January 22, 2013, 05:25:14 AM
(http://www.armenianchurch-ed.net/wpblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/HolyTranslators.jpg)

I actually like the style of this, whatever it may be.

The general style and peoples' expressions brings to mind Alphonse Mucha's post-Art Nouveau era non-commercial work.  I don't know if the style is exactly the same (will have to look up specific examples of Mucha's work to jog my memory), but evokes the same feelings.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on January 22, 2013, 06:05:05 AM
It also reminded me of Secession.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 22, 2013, 07:40:37 AM
Someone get them a Kleenex! Or a box of them! They're about to cry buckets!

(http://www.art10gallery.com/Data/ExhibitionImages/A10G_byzicon3.jpg)

(http://www.art10gallery.com/Data/ExhibitionImages/A10G_byzicon4.jpg)

The artist should give up his anime habit. It's unhealthy.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on January 26, 2013, 06:39:57 PM
Someone get them a Kleenex! Or a box of them! They're about to cry buckets!

(http://www.art10gallery.com/Data/ExhibitionImages/A10G_byzicon3.jpg)

(http://www.art10gallery.com/Data/ExhibitionImages/A10G_byzicon4.jpg)

The artist should give up his anime habit. It's unhealthy.
Those are just horrifying.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Jason.Wike on January 26, 2013, 07:03:06 PM
Someone get them a Kleenex! Or a box of them! They're about to cry buckets!

(http://www.art10gallery.com/Data/ExhibitionImages/A10G_byzicon3.jpg)

(http://www.art10gallery.com/Data/ExhibitionImages/A10G_byzicon4.jpg)

The artist should give up his anime habit. It's unhealthy.
Those are just horrifying.

Exactly. And I know it will sound kooky but in a real picture of Jesus or the Theotokos there is a certain recognition that 'it is them' in them, which these don't have. They do not register as Jesus and the Theotokos in me at all.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 26, 2013, 07:10:58 PM
More from this group of Greek "innovators":

This is supposed to be St Justin of Celije, also known as St Justin Popovitch. The lack of halo here reflects the fact that this image was painted before St Justin was officially glorified, but its absence is of no real consequence in the face of the unmitigated and disrespectful grotesqueness of this painting:

(http://www.pasya.gr/images/sobipro/entries/298/10.%CE%9F%20%CE%B1%CE%B2%CE%B2%CE%AC%CF%82%20%CE%99%CE%BF%CF%85%CF%83%CF%84%CE%AF%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%82%20%CE%A0%CF%8C%CF%80%CE%BF%CE%B2%CE%B9%CF%84%CF%82.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 26, 2013, 07:21:35 PM
And this one, of St Gelasius the Mime.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/el/b/b5/10.%CE%9F_%CE%AC%CE%B3%CE%B9%CE%BF%CF%82_%CE%93%CE%B5%CE%BB%CE%AC%CF%83%CE%B9%CE%BF%CF%82_%CE%BF_%CE%BC%CE%AF%CE%BC%CE%BF%CF%82.jpg)

The saint's right hand is showing reverence and deference to his actor's mask. Nice. And the colors just speak of fairgrounds, circuses and pantomimes, cotton candy for hair.

And we're supposed to take the clowns who paint such images seriously?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Asteriktos on January 26, 2013, 07:45:18 PM
More from this group of Greek "innovators":

This is supposed to be St Justin of Celije, also known as St Justin Popovitch. The lack of halo here reflects the fact that this image was painted before St Justin was officially glorified, but its absence is of no real consequence in the face of the unmitigated and disrespectful grotesqueness of this painting:

How dare they do that to my patron saint!!  >:(

And this one, of St Gelasius the Mime.

This one literally got a verbal reaction out of me...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on January 26, 2013, 10:58:34 PM
I hope that group's style dies out very quickly... :-X
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 26, 2013, 11:04:12 PM
I hope that group's style dies out very quickly... :-X

I wish their bishops would haul them over the coals, and order their sacrilegious bunk destroyed.  >:(
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Alpo on January 27, 2013, 06:13:19 AM
I like the picture of St. Justin. I'm not exactly convinced that it is an icon but I like it as a painting.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: PeterTheAleut on January 27, 2013, 06:02:33 PM
Thread locked pending review by this section's moderator...

When ridiculing what someone else posts to their blog, do consider that that person may eventually join our forum and see this ridicule. How, then, do you wish this ridicule to be seen?  -PtA
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on January 29, 2013, 10:40:51 AM
I have deleted all posts related to the icon of the Theotokos that was copied from the personal blog of AD (AustralianDiaspora) and posted here.  It appears that ADs blog did not contain any restrictions on using her content. Therefore, the posting of the icon was not a violation. However, since that time AD has objected to the use of her icon and consequently I took the action in deleting it from our forum. Please refrain from commenting on this icon or on the person of AustralianDiaspora that is derived from this now "nonexistent" icon. Thanks, Carl Kraeff
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: AustralianDiaspora on January 29, 2013, 11:43:29 AM
Thank you for deleting the link to my URL. I probably didn't express clearly that the issue I had was not with the use of my pictures as much as it was posting a link to my personal blog and the comments unrelated to the pictures themselves. I apologize if the gifs I made offended anyone.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on January 29, 2013, 03:58:00 PM
Thank you for deleting the link to my URL. I probably didn't express clearly that the issue I had was not with the use of my pictures as much as it was posting a link to my personal blog and the comments unrelated to the pictures themselves. I apologize if the gifs I made offended anyone.

Apparently I misunderstood. Do you want to report your icon so that folks can discuss it? Carl Kraeff
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: AustralianDiaspora on January 30, 2013, 05:55:05 AM
I'm not sure what you mean by report? At this point I wonder if it would be better for us all to just move on however seeing as how I have seen an enormous disagreement in regards to the digital alternation of icons, it may be worth discussing (though this topic might not be the place).
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 30, 2013, 06:15:20 AM
I'm not sure what you mean by report? At this point I wonder if it would be better for us all to just move on however seeing as how I have seen an enormous disagreement in regards to the digital alternation of icons, it may be worth discussing (though this topic might not be the place).

I was thrown by what Carl posted, until I realized he'd made a typo: report instead of repost.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: AustralianDiaspora on January 30, 2013, 09:27:07 AM
Ah thank you. In that case I'd prefer not to repost the images :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on January 30, 2013, 12:11:12 PM
Thank you both. Carl
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on January 30, 2013, 01:44:11 PM
And a couple of icons I have issues with:

I also have a problem with the Gerontissa, also known as Abbess of Athos, where the Mother of God is vested in a bishop's mantle. An abbot of archimandrite rank may wear a mantle similar to that of a bishop, but this mantle does not have the stripes, and the panels usually bear crosses, not the four Evangelists. By contrast, the mantle of an Orthodox abbess is plain, without the three horizontal stripes or the four rectangular panels.

When an abbess blesses, she arranges her fingers in the way one does when crossing oneself. The IC XC hand configuration (as shown in the Gerontissa) is to be used only by male clergy of priestly rank and above. The Gerontissa ascribes a rank to the Mother of God which is completely at odds with what the Church teaches about her. She is not, nor ever was, a priest, deacon, bishop or abbess.

The second work is more acceptable, as she is shown as a lay eldress (which she was, the Apostles sought and valued her advice and counsel) not as a cleric, and patron and protector of Athos. It would have been proper to show Christ somewhere, such as in the upper border of the icon.


She is the Mother of God, Holy of Holies, the Mercy Seat and Queen of Heaven. She's higher than any Priest or Bishop.

I don't see any issue with it, especially if we put a crown on her.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on January 30, 2013, 10:26:15 PM
(http://www.printeryhouse.org/imp/M29.jpg)
Quote
This image by Sr. Marie Paul, OSB, is a synthesis of two classical icons. The first is the Crucifixion; the second is Christ the High Priest. The Crucifixion image has been used from earliest times. A lesser-known icon is that of Christ the High Priest. The depiction originated in the Balkans in the fourteenth century and spread throughout the Orthodox world. Christ is shown on the cross fully vested, both Sacrifice and Intercessor. He is flanked by Mary His mother and St. John the Evangelist.
From: http://www.printeryhouse.org/ProdPage.asp?prod=M29

Would this fall under shlock?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 30, 2013, 10:42:05 PM
(http://www.printeryhouse.org/imp/M29.jpg)
Quote
This image by Sr. Marie Paul, OSB, is a synthesis of two classical icons. The first is the Crucifixion; the second is Christ the High Priest. The Crucifixion image has been used from earliest times. A lesser-known icon is that of Christ the High Priest. The depiction originated in the Balkans in the fourteenth century and spread throughout the Orthodox world. Christ is shown on the cross fully vested, both Sacrifice and Intercessor. He is flanked by Mary His mother and St. John the Evangelist.
From: http://www.printeryhouse.org/ProdPage.asp?prod=M29

Would this fall under shlock?

There are depictions of a clothed, though not vested, crucified Christ in catacomb art and in some early manuscript illuminations, but, very quickly, this form of depiction disappeared. Given that the iconography of the Crucifixion and of the Christ as High Priest have remained resolutely separate for so many centuries, I would put this image down as being honestly misguided. But the absence of any halo around Christ's head is a fatal omission, rendering this image completely unsuitable for veneration.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on January 30, 2013, 10:44:17 PM
(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Hand-Painted-Russian-Icon-of-The-Holy-Trinity-with-Adam-and-Eve-Dated-1800s-/00/s/NjQwWDQ3OA==/$(KGrHqJ,!l!FBKg(MdtvBQTY,s,Kyw~~60_3.JPG)

I came across this antique icon (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Hand-Painted-Russian-Icon-of-The-Holy-Trinity-with-Adam-and-Eve-Dated-1800s-/271056403181?) on Ebay, and I'm wondering what's going on here. It clearly depicts the Father and the Son, and the Holy Spirit as a dove above the Son, but then who is the angel? Is it supposed to be a second representation of the Spirit, or something else?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 30, 2013, 10:55:49 PM
Two possibilities come to mind: Either St John the Baptist, as he is often shown (in error, I'm afraid) with wings, and he is gesturing to the "Trinity"; or, less likely, Holy Wisdom. Whatever the true answer, this painting is quite unsuitable for veneration for a variety of reasons.

Christ Holy Wisdom is an uncanonical, but sadly common, depiction of the pre-incarnate Christ, as a winged androgynous figure. Wisdom "icons" appeared in Russia in about the 16th century, along with a number of other compositions which are contrary to Orthodox doctrine and theology.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on January 30, 2013, 11:11:36 PM
Two possibilities come to mind: Either St John the Baptist, as he is often shown (in error, I'm afraid) with wings, and he is gesturing to the "Trinity"; or, less likely, Holy Wisdom. Whatever the true answer, this painting is quite unsuitable for veneration for a variety of reasons.

Christ Holy Wisdom is an uncanonical, but sadly common, depiction of the pre-incarnate Christ, as a winged androgynous figure. Wisdom "icons" appeared in Russia in about the 16th century, along with a number of other compositions which are contrary to Orthodox doctrine and theology.
What is the wooden object they're all three holding? I assumed it had something to do with divinity.

I see what you mean about the gesturing. Oddly though, while the angel is gesturing to the Trinity, the Father is to the Son, and the Son to Adam and Eve. Hmm...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on January 30, 2013, 11:18:10 PM
The wooden staff is likely a staff of authority, a bit like a king's scepter, and is a common motif in non-Orthodox religious art. If so, it makes the presence of the winged figure all the more confusing theologically, as he is holding the same type of object as the Christ and Father figures.

Orthodox icons of angels show them bearing a long, spear-like object, which is a messenger's staff (angelos = messenger in Greek), as they act on behalf of the Heavenly King.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on January 31, 2013, 04:56:28 PM
The whole image is kind of weird, with the Holy Trinity and their friend Ron looking into a palantír at naked Adam and Eve.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on January 31, 2013, 05:00:47 PM
(http://www.printeryhouse.org/imp/M29.jpg)
Quote
This image by Sr. Marie Paul, OSB, is a synthesis of two classical icons. The first is the Crucifixion; the second is Christ the High Priest. The Crucifixion image has been used from earliest times. A lesser-known icon is that of Christ the High Priest. The depiction originated in the Balkans in the fourteenth century and spread throughout the Orthodox world. Christ is shown on the cross fully vested, both Sacrifice and Intercessor. He is flanked by Mary His mother and St. John the Evangelist.
From: http://www.printeryhouse.org/ProdPage.asp?prod=M29

Would this fall under shlock?

Yes.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on January 31, 2013, 05:09:49 PM
The whole image is kind of weird, with the Holy Trinity and their friend Ron looking into a palantír at naked Adam and Eve.

You cannot hide. I see you.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on February 01, 2013, 04:53:51 AM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/644248_470717912991837_1358526700_n.jpg)

this one made me laugh
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 01, 2013, 06:15:55 AM
^ Points for sheer rarity of subject!  :laugh:

As a stand-alone icon, completely impossible to venerate because of the lack of saints or holy ones in the composition. At least Judas Iscariot (on the left, dark hair and beard) isn't shown with a halo, thank God.  ;)

This image would only make sense if it were a panel in a larger icon featuring other Holy Week scenes surrounding a central panel of either the Crucifixion or the Resurrection. But the narrow red and greenish border confirms it is a stand-alone "icon".  Weird. ??? ???
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 01, 2013, 09:09:27 AM
Another addled and confused variation of the Holy Trinity: the description on the back of this print is "A Trinity of Teachers". From left to right, the Mother of God, Christ, and St Mary Magdalene. OYYY!!!

The rough and rustic painting style is the very least of its problems ....

(http://i1326.photobucket.com/albums/u652/LBK11/trinityofteachers_zps2965733f.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on February 01, 2013, 11:33:33 AM
I know I have posted one three-headed Trinity in this thread, but here's another one.

(http://www.sveti-pantelejmon.com/Praznici%20Trojica%202.1.gif)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on February 01, 2013, 09:57:46 PM
An icon of an Anglican priest (http://dailyoffice.org/2013/01/24/morning-prayer-1-24-13-ordination-of-florence-li-tim-oi-1st-woman-priest-in-the-anglican-communion-1944/):

(http://dailyoffice.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/florencelitim-oi-revdrellenfrancispoissonosh-458.jpg?w=500)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dan the Man on February 05, 2013, 11:42:05 PM
(http://www.tolkienlibrary.com/tolkien-book-store/images/thumbs/jay-johnstone-24.jpg)

Theoden, Archbishop of Edoras?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 05, 2013, 11:53:40 PM
(http://www.tolkienlibrary.com/tolkien-book-store/images/thumbs/jay-johnstone-24.jpg)

Theoden, Archbishop of Edoras?

There oughta be a law:

http://www.jaystolkien.com/categories.php?Cid=40

And yes, the artist calls them icons.  >:( >:( >:(
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Father H on February 05, 2013, 11:57:20 PM
Another addled and confused variation of the Holy Trinity: the description on the back of this print is "A Trinity of Teachers". From left to right, the Mother of God, Christ, and St Mary Magdalene. OYYY!!!

The rough and rustic painting style is the very least of its problems ....

(http://i1326.photobucket.com/albums/u652/LBK11/trinityofteachers_zps2965733f.jpg)

Wow.  Just, wow.  Scary. 
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 06, 2013, 12:02:43 AM
Another addled and confused variation of the Holy Trinity: the description on the back of this print is "A Trinity of Teachers". From left to right, the Mother of God, Christ, and St Mary Magdalene. OYYY!!!

The rough and rustic painting style is the very least of its problems ....

(http://i1326.photobucket.com/albums/u652/LBK11/trinityofteachers_zps2965733f.jpg)

Wow.  Just, wow.  Scary. 

Scary, all right. I found it as a small mounted print at a charity stall. I paid a dollar for it, only to prevent some poor unsuspecting soul from buying it. My first intention was to burn it as soon as I got home, but I thought it better to at least photograph it for my schlock file first. I'll probably end up burning it eventually.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Father H on February 06, 2013, 12:09:10 AM
I know I have posted one three-headed Trinity in this thread, but here's another one.

(http://www.sveti-pantelejmon.com/Praznici%20Trojica%202.1.gif)

Ok, this gets "2nd most scary looking" award following the monstrosity triple-face Novgorodian 'trinity.'   The one LBK posted still might win "overall theologically most disturbing" category.    
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Father H on February 06, 2013, 12:13:38 AM
Another addled and confused variation of the Holy Trinity: the description on the back of this print is "A Trinity of Teachers". From left to right, the Mother of God, Christ, and St Mary Magdalene. OYYY!!!

The rough and rustic painting style is the very least of its problems ....

(http://i1326.photobucket.com/albums/u652/LBK11/trinityofteachers_zps2965733f.jpg)

Wow.  Just, wow.  Scary. 

Scary, all right. I found it as a small mounted print at a charity stall. I paid a dollar for it, only to prevent some poor unsuspecting soul from buying it.


Good call. 
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dan the Man on February 06, 2013, 12:28:20 AM
(http://www.tolkienlibrary.com/tolkien-book-store/images/thumbs/jay-johnstone-24.jpg)

Theoden, Archbishop of Edoras?

There oughta be a law:

http://www.jaystolkien.com/categories.php?Cid=40

And yes, the artist calls them icons.  >:( >:( >:(

And then there's Lentz:

(http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lbdevqPfHO1qdbwc8o1_400.jpg)

As a Tolkien fan it makes me cringe, as a Christian...words can't even describe. I think Tolkien would roll over in his grave if he ever saw this.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 06, 2013, 01:00:14 AM
I know I have posted one three-headed Trinity in this thread, but here's another one.

(http://www.sveti-pantelejmon.com/Praznici%20Trojica%202.1.gif)

Ok, this gets "2nd most scary looking" award following the monstrosity triple-face Novgorodian 'trinity.'   The one LBK posted still might win "overall theologically most disturbing" category.    

There should be an asylum for the theologically disturbed.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 06, 2013, 01:10:34 AM
I know I have posted one three-headed Trinity in this thread, but here's another one.

(http://www.sveti-pantelejmon.com/Praznici%20Trojica%202.1.gif)

Ok, this gets "2nd most scary looking" award following the monstrosity triple-face Novgorodian 'trinity.'   The one LBK posted still might win "overall theologically most disturbing" category.    

There should be an asylum for the theologically disturbed.

A haven and provision of healing for those poor souls who have suffered spiritual damage because of this stuff, a prison for chronic and repeat offenders who knowingly paint this stuff (including confiscation and prohibition of any artist's materials) for crimes against iconography, and a facility to educate those who have made mistakes in honest ignorance, and who truly wish to paint proper icons.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 06, 2013, 01:47:24 AM
Ok, this gets "2nd most scary looking" award following the monstrosity triple-face Novgorodian 'trinity.'   The one LBK posted still might win "overall theologically most disturbing" category.    

Father H, you might have missed this one from page 2:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,47878.msg834394.html#msg834394
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on February 08, 2013, 06:36:35 PM
Jude was a holy person! He repented after! He was even considered a saint! and the Gospol of Jude!

I learned it on the History Channel, it must be true!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 09, 2013, 12:02:23 AM
Jude was a holy person! He repented after! He was even considered a saint! and the Gospol of Jude!

I learned it on the History Channel, it must be true!!!!!!!!

Who are you talking about?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Father H on February 09, 2013, 02:35:28 AM
Jude was a holy person! He repented after! He was even considered a saint! and the Gospol of Jude!

I learned it on the History Channel, it must be true!!!!!!!!

Who are you talking about?

Gunnarr, this is not meant to be rude, but I must ask the same question as Shanghaiski.  Are you posting about something on another thread and accidentally posted it here? 
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on February 09, 2013, 02:39:51 AM
Jude was a holy person! He repented after! He was even considered a saint! and the Gospol of Jude!

I learned it on the History Channel, it must be true!!!!!!!!

Who are you talking about?

Gunnarr, this is not meant to be rude, but I must ask the same question as Shanghaiski.  Are you posting about something on another thread and accidentally posted it here? 

IMO he is referring in a satirical way to the "icon" I've posted before.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Father H on February 09, 2013, 02:47:38 AM
Jude was a holy person! He repented after! He was even considered a saint! and the Gospol of Jude!

I learned it on the History Channel, it must be true!!!!!!!!

Who are you talking about?

Gunnarr, this is not meant to be rude, but I must ask the same question as Shanghaiski.  Are you posting about something on another thread and accidentally posted it here? 

IMO he is referring in a satirical way to the "icon" I've posted before.

ok.  thanks Michal
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on February 09, 2013, 08:23:35 AM
Jude was a holy person! He repented after! He was even considered a saint! and the Gospol of Jude!

I learned it on the History Channel, it must be true!!!!!!!!

Who are you talking about?

Gunnarr, this is not meant to be rude, but I must ask the same question as Shanghaiski.  Are you posting about something on another thread and accidentally posted it here? 

IMO he is referring in a satirical way to the "icon" I've posted before.

Yeah the History Channel part gave it away.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: TheMathematician on February 14, 2013, 04:22:13 PM
IM sure im not the only one that doesnt like icons being defaced


(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/154868_161593267323757_716590553_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on February 14, 2013, 04:25:39 PM
IM sure im not the only one that doesnt like icons being defaced

Do pixels on a computer screen constitute an Icon?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 14, 2013, 10:25:19 PM
IM sure im not the only one that doesnt like icons being defaced

Do pixels on a computer screen constitute an Icon?

An intangible digital image is not an icon in the strict sense (so venerating a screen saver or desktop wallpaper isn't a great idea), but a digital image or file has the potential to become a real, tangible icon, as it can be printed (the invisible, immaterial God became tangible, visible - a central principle of the justification of the existence of icons) and then mounted or framed, making it suitable for veneration. However, the 'shopping of digital icons for humorous or other "creative" effect is unacceptable and disrespectful.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 15, 2013, 12:52:01 AM
IM sure im not the only one that doesnt like icons being defaced


(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/154868_161593267323757_716590553_n.jpg)

No, you are not. It's especially troubling as there's contention, AFAIK, over just how vernacular Old Church Slavonic was.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Jason.Wike on February 15, 2013, 12:58:49 AM

No, you are not. It's especially troubling as there's contention, AFAIK, over just how vernacular Old Church Slavonic was.

So what happened then? They made up a language to evangelise the Slavs and just made up a new language that no one actually understood? There definitely becomes a point where a written language may no longer be the vernacular, but it seems incredible it could start out that way.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 15, 2013, 03:30:33 AM

No, you are not. It's especially troubling as there's contention, AFAIK, over just how vernacular Old Church Slavonic was.

So what happened then? They made up a language to evangelise the Slavs and just made up a new language that no one actually understood? There definitely becomes a point where a written language may no longer be the vernacular, but it seems incredible it could start out that way.

Not quite. My understanding is that Sts Cyril and Methodius standardized the writing of the prevailing Old Slavonic language prevalent at the time, by adapting the existing Greek alphabet. The relationship between Old Slavonic (the spoken language) and liturgical-use Church Slavonic is pretty close, from what I've gathered; it would have been much closer than, say, Church Slavonic and modern Russian.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on February 15, 2013, 08:47:25 AM
Well, considering whenever I use Slavonic, just about everybody Slavic tends to get the jist of what I'm saying- it's easier than communicating in Nadsat, anyway.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 15, 2013, 08:51:42 AM
Well, considering whenever I use Slavonic, just about everybody Slavic tends to get the jist of what I'm saying- it's easier than communicating in Nadsat, anyway.

... though there are some hilarious pitfalls, too. Zhivot' in Church Slavonic means life, in modern Russian, it means stomach or belly.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on February 15, 2013, 08:59:57 AM
Well, considering whenever I use Slavonic, just about everybody Slavic tends to get the jist of what I'm saying- it's easier than communicating in Nadsat, anyway.

... though there are some hilarious pitfalls, too. Zhivot' in Church Slavonic means life, in modern Russian, it means stomach or belly.  :laugh:

True. Though it's incredible difficult to go wrong with Gospoda, pomiluj!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 15, 2013, 09:08:27 AM
Well, considering whenever I use Slavonic, just about everybody Slavic tends to get the jist of what I'm saying- it's easier than communicating in Nadsat, anyway.

... though there are some hilarious pitfalls, too. Zhivot' in Church Slavonic means life, in modern Russian, it means stomach or belly.  :laugh:

True. Though it's incredible difficult to go wrong with Gospoda, pomiluj!

Umm, it's Gospodi, pomiluj.  :angel:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on February 15, 2013, 09:13:35 AM
Well, considering whenever I use Slavonic, just about everybody Slavic tends to get the jist of what I'm saying- it's easier than communicating in Nadsat, anyway.

... though there are some hilarious pitfalls, too. Zhivot' in Church Slavonic means life, in modern Russian, it means stomach or belly.  :laugh:

True. Though it's incredible difficult to go wrong with Gospoda, pomiluj!

Umm, it's Gospodi, pomiluj.  :angel:

Thank you. My Glagolitic Alphabet self-translations are not that reliable.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Fabio Leite on February 17, 2013, 01:43:31 PM
Don't know if anyone posted these yet, but there you go....

images removed due to user's request - MK
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on February 17, 2013, 07:21:29 PM
Saw this on Tumblr. I really like it for some reason, but is it schlock?

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/93c0e3f160c0f13b36664556ab038094/tumblr_mic9b8Uo8y1qkm0g3o1_500.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 17, 2013, 09:39:08 PM
Saw this on Tumblr. I really like it for some reason, but is it schlock?

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/93c0e3f160c0f13b36664556ab038094/tumblr_mic9b8Uo8y1qkm0g3o1_500.jpg)

This image is an attempt to express the most-used kontakion to the Mother of God, To the Champion Leader (Ti Ypermakho Statigho/Vzbrannoy Voyevodye). The secondary inscription reads: стой за Христа до мученического креста, an exhortation to martyrdom.

This image is problematic on a number of levels, including the attire of the Mother of God. Replacing her blue tunic and red maphorion with a warrior's helmet and chainmail removes a central representation of her humanity (blue) being graced by Divinity (red), which represents the mystery of the Incarnation. She is also holding a martyr's cross, which is also at odds with what we know of her earthly life, and what the Church proclaims in hymns and prayers to her.

This image is one of various "innovative" images painted between the 17th and 20th centuries, which, at best, are misguided in their theology, at worst, are little more than expressions of nationalism/imperialism.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on February 17, 2013, 10:44:19 PM
This image is an attempt to express the most-used kontakion to the Mother of God, To the Champion Leader (Ti Ypermakho Statigho/Vzbrannoy Voyevodye). The secondary inscription reads: стой за Христа до мученического креста, an exhortation to martyrdom.

This image is problematic on a number of levels, including the attire of the Mother of God. Replacing her blue tunic and red maphorion with a warrior's helmet and chainmail removes a central representation of her humanity (blue) being graced by Divinity (red), which represents the mystery of the Incarnation. She is also holding a martyr's cross, which is also at odds with what we know of her earthly life, and what the Church proclaims in hymns and prayers to her.

This image is one of various "innovative" images painted between the 17th and 20th centuries, which, at best, are misguided in their theology, at worst, are little more than expressions of nationalism/imperialism.

Makes sense. I did notice the martyr's cross as not being coherent, but wasn't sure about the rest. At least it kept the stars of virginity. :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on February 18, 2013, 12:00:07 AM
Oh Gospodi pomiluj! on us and all these artists!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 18, 2013, 12:35:31 AM
At least it kept the stars of virginity. :P

Yep, my reaction as well.  :P ::) ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Asteriktos on February 18, 2013, 12:36:21 AM
(http://i1326.photobucket.com/albums/u652/LBK11/trinityofteachers_zps2965733f.jpg)

The feet are wonky, but otherwise a very nice painting :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 18, 2013, 12:55:06 AM
(http://i1326.photobucket.com/albums/u652/LBK11/trinityofteachers_zps2965733f.jpg)

The feet are wonky, but otherwise a very nice painting :)

Late impressionistic, I'd say. And the impression it gives of late is "heresy."
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 18, 2013, 12:57:11 AM

The feet are wonky, but otherwise a very nice painting :)

You're kidding, right? I've known twelve-year-olds whose draftsmanship was superior.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on February 18, 2013, 12:57:28 AM
This is the strangest riza I've sever seen... Are those torsos flying in the sky?

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/bf3a73df15188e01027df71e4939fe41/tumblr_mie241fQZ81qa2fuyo1_1280.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Asteriktos on February 18, 2013, 01:00:23 AM

The feet are wonky, but otherwise a very nice painting :)

You're kidding, right? I've known twelve-year-olds whose draftsmanship was superior.

I've seen youtube videos of 5 year olds playing the piano, guitar, etc. who are playing things some professional musicians can't play. Doesn't mean the professional musicans are worthless.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 18, 2013, 01:04:41 AM
This is the strangest riza I've sever seen... Are those ripped-abs torsoes flying in the sky?


No, they're not. They are votive tokens, put on the icon either to ask for healing through prayer to the Mother of God, or in gratitude for prayers answered. These pressed-metal tokens come in a variety of forms, including hands, eyes, legs, and whole bodies. This custom seems to be far more prevalent among Greeks and Orthodox from the Balkans, less so with Russians. The Greek word for these offerings is tamata, singular tama (vow).
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on February 18, 2013, 01:08:58 AM
This is the strangest riza I've sever seen... Are those ripped-abs torsoes flying in the sky?


No, they're not. They are votive tokens, put on the icon either to ask for healing through prayer to the Mother of God, or in gratitude for prayers answered. These pressed-metal tokens come in a variety of forms, including hands, eyes, legs, and whole bodies. This custom seems to be far more prevalent among Greeks and Orthodox from the Balkans, less so with Russians. The Greek word for these offerings is tamata, singular tama (vow).

Had no idea - thanks!

I really should've titled this thread something like "LBK's Musings on Schlock and Unusual Icons."
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 18, 2013, 01:09:48 AM

The feet are wonky, but otherwise a very nice painting :)

You're kidding, right? I've known twelve-year-olds whose draftsmanship was superior.

I've seen youtube videos of 5 year olds playing the piano, guitar, etc. who are playing things some professional musicians can't play. Doesn't mean the professional musicans are worthless.

I seriously doubt this "Trinity of Teachers" was painted by a properly-trained artist, let alone an iconographer. I've seen far too much of this sort of stuff over the years to know that it is the work of someone who not only can't paint, but has painted a theologically worthless and spiritually dangerous work, whether in knowledge or in ignorance. The former is the lesser error, the latter is completely unacceptable.

I have many icons on file that are "rough" or "rustic" in execution, but are full of spiritual power and authenticity. This "trinity" is not one of them.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 18, 2013, 01:10:29 AM

Had no idea - thanks!


Happy to help.  :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on February 18, 2013, 03:18:41 AM
*sigh* I'm guessing these people get carried away in their enthusiasm and don't read do research on writing icons beforehand. I still say, Gospodi pomiluy nas, nyne i prisno i vo veki vekov!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 18, 2013, 03:25:09 AM
*sigh* I'm guessing these people get carried away in their enthusiasm and don't read do research on writing icons beforehand. I still say, Gospodi pomiluy nas, nyne i prisno i vo veki vekov!

I wish this could explain all these wayward images, but it doesn't. Earlier in the thread I criticized work by an Orthodox priest, who has made a name for himself as an "authority" on iconography, with books published, lecture tours and iconographic workshops. There is no justification for his position as a priest to confer authority on what he paints.

Likewise, there are plenty of Orthodox iconographers who have knowingly and willfully painted images which cannot be called icons. I am only a small voice speaking out against such vanities, but I hope that I can make a bit of difference in showing people what is good and proper and what is not.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on February 18, 2013, 03:49:38 AM
For example, until now I wasn't aware that two of the icons brought up here, Theotokos holding the World and St. Joseph holding the Christ child were uncanonical, seeing as they're on my icon corner- though technically, being Catholic, I suppose neither is my byzantised Divine Mercy either.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 18, 2013, 03:59:15 AM
For example, until now I wasn't aware that two of the icons brought up here, Theotokos holding the World and St. Joseph holding the Christ child were uncanonical, seeing as they're on my icon corner- though technically, being Catholic, I suppose neither is my byzantised Divine Mercy either.

You're quite right, the image of Christ Divine Mercy is not a proper Orthodox icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on February 18, 2013, 04:15:42 AM
Well, I could figure that- considering it's not an Orthodox icon in the first place. Then again, I'm not Orthodox, so I suppose I'd have to check the canons of my own church to see if it's alright to venerate that icons. Goodness knows my icon of my patron, St. Anthony of Padua, is not Orthodox.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on February 18, 2013, 04:38:14 AM
This is the strangest riza I've sever seen... Are those ripped-abs torsoes flying in the sky?


No, they're not. They are votive tokens, put on the icon either to ask for healing through prayer to the Mother of God, or in gratitude for prayers answered. These pressed-metal tokens come in a variety of forms, including hands, eyes, legs, and whole bodies. This custom seems to be far more prevalent among Greeks and Orthodox from the Balkans, less so with Russians. The Greek word for these offerings is tamata, singular tama (vow).

Not only among Greeks. Fairly popular here.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on February 19, 2013, 10:15:32 AM
I think nobody has posted it yet

(http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/images/christ_dachau.img_assist_custom-600x450.jpg)
Christ Opening the Gates of Dachau
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: FatherGiryus on February 19, 2013, 10:43:20 AM
Where's the 42nd Infantry Division?


I think nobody has posted it yet

(http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/images/christ_dachau.img_assist_custom-600x450.jpg)
Christ Opening the Gates of Dachau

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: FatherGiryus on February 19, 2013, 10:47:21 AM
(http://www.thequeenofangels.com.php5-17.dfw1-2.websitetestlink.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/MaryKoran.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 19, 2013, 10:50:24 AM
What on earth is THAT??  :o
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on February 19, 2013, 11:01:20 AM
There's written "Sura Maryam" - like the title of one Coran's suras, but it's a total mix (symbols of Christianity, Judaism and Islam on the crown), but - iIslam is a mix of various religions, isn't it?
However, as we know, generally it's prohibited do depict somebody in Islam, so that's very strange picture
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 19, 2013, 11:07:29 AM
There's written "Sura Maryam" - like the title of one Coran's suras, but it's a total mix (symbols of Christianity, Judaism and Islam on the crown), but - isn't Islam a mix of various religions?
However, as we know, generally it's prohibetd do depict somebody in Islam, so that's very strange picture

Quite right about the prohibition of depicting holy ones. And if it is meant to be an Islamic picture, the woman's dress and expression falls rather short of their standards of modesty.  ::)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on February 19, 2013, 03:53:08 PM
This one's fun:
(http://02varvara.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/00-uniate-icon-of-yushchenko-01.jpg?w=800&h=1120)

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 19, 2013, 07:04:04 PM
Oh, that is just so irredeemably BAAAAAD!!  :o :o :P :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on February 21, 2013, 01:36:23 AM
How about this? I keep seeing it referred to as "Child Bearing" or "Delivery Helping."

(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Holy-MARY-CHRIST-Child-RUSSIAN-Church-Prayer-Icon-for-New-Mothers-Children-/00/s/MTI4MFg5NjA=/$(KGrHqVHJBsFCEURKRgpBQm+h+p2(!~~60_57.JPG)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 21, 2013, 01:48:13 AM
This is known as The Word Made Flesh, and praying to it is said to help in childbirth. It's of western origin, which has come into Orthodoxy through those regions straddling Roman Catholic west and Orthodox east.

A far better icon in expressing the Incarnation is the Mother of God of the Sign (Platytera, Znamennaya). No need for uncovered hair, and other features and omissions of the posted image which diminish its canonicity.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Jason.Wike on February 21, 2013, 03:04:48 AM
There's written "Sura Maryam" - like the title of one Coran's suras, but it's a total mix (symbols of Christianity, Judaism and Islam on the crown), but - iIslam is a mix of various religions, isn't it?
However, as we know, generally it's prohibited do depict somebody in Islam, so that's very strange picture

Even stranger since Judaism either regards Mary as mythical or a harlot, or  a mythical harlot, but everything except someone they give a fig about.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on February 23, 2013, 06:10:34 PM
Here is one of St. (in the Catholic Church, anyhow) Kolbe with the Theotokos and Christ. For the longest time I thought that was God the Father with glasses on.

Hopefully this won't make anyone's head explode.

(http://simplyfranciscan.com/saints/slides/maximilian.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on February 23, 2013, 06:22:09 PM
Oh Gospodi, our iconographers seem to get stranger and stranger. At least they had the Theotokos depicted with the stars of virignity...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: orthonorm on February 23, 2013, 06:30:10 PM
iIslam

Just when you thought the whole iThing went too far . . .
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 23, 2013, 06:58:12 PM
Here is one of St. (in the Catholic Church, anyhow) Kolbe with the Theotokos and Christ. For the longest time I thought that was God the Father with glasses on.

Hopefully this won't make anyone's head explode.

(http://simplyfranciscan.com/saints/slides/maximilian.jpg)

Lovely, another addition to my schlock file.  ::) :P ;)

St Maximilian is the father AND mother of the Mother of God! St Maximilian of the Sign! What a travesty. It's not doing him or his memory any favors.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 23, 2013, 06:58:12 PM
Oh Gospodi, our iconographers seem to get stranger and stranger. At least they had the Theotokos depicted with the stars of virignity...

This is, unfortunately, what happens when artists, usually, but not exclusively, non-Orthodox, painting religious subjects in an "iconographic" style have no idea of what an icon is or is not. The non-realistic, abstracted painting style is only a part of what makes an image an icon, and worthy of veneration.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on February 23, 2013, 07:16:01 PM

Quote
Lovely, another addition to my schlock file.  ::) :P ;)

I'm here to please :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 24, 2013, 03:08:24 AM

Quote
Lovely, another addition to my schlock file.  ::) :P ;)

I'm here to please :laugh:

... for which I am truly grateful, as are the iconographers I know who seek my advice on what not to paint.  :laugh:

Seriously, one in particular has even included a segment called "Is this an icon/not an icon" in his talks to parishes, thanks to me. *blush*
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on February 24, 2013, 06:53:47 AM
Edit: sometimes the page displays it and sometimes not, don't know on what it depends, so I'm attaching them

Two pictures from a website of Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church

(http://uaoc.org/ecard/images/1184090507magdalen.jpg) "st. Mary Magdalen"  ::) Probably under the influence of Catholic teachings about her...

(http://uaoc.org/ecard/images/1183601875proteccion-de-maria.jpg) "Protection of the Theotokos"
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 24, 2013, 09:24:25 AM
The St Mary Magdalene that Dominika posted is by the notorious Jesuit priest, Fr William Hart McNichols. A trademark of his paintings is his love of "innovation", all too often with a sociopolitical message promoting his causes du jour. His artistic style is also quite creepy, at least to me.

The Holy Protection painting fills me with dismay - blatant Ukrainian nationalism hijacking the Mother of God and one of her feasts to promote its cause. Ghastly.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on February 24, 2013, 08:02:51 PM
I think nobody has posted it yet

(http://www.antiochian.org/sites/antiochian.org/files/images/christ_dachau.img_assist_custom-600x450.jpg)
Christ Opening the Gates of Dachau

Vile beyond further words.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Antonis on February 24, 2013, 08:15:11 PM
It's in an Orthodox Chapel at Dachau. Many Orthodox were sent to Dachau, and the imagery is due to the fact that the camp was liberated on Pascha.

Quote
May 6 (23 April on the Orthodox calendar) was the day of Pascha, Orthodox Easter. In a cell block used by Catholic priests to say daily Mass, several Greek, Serbian and Russian priests and one Serbian deacon, wearing makeshift vestments made from towels of the SS guard, gathered with several hundred Greek, Serbian and Russian prisoners to celebrate the Paschal Vigil. A prisoner named Rahr described the scene:

   In the entire history of the Orthodox Church there has probably never been an Easter service like the one at Dachau in 1945. Greek and Serbian priests together with a Serbian deacon adorned the make-shift 'vestments' over their blue and gray-striped prisoners' uniforms. Then they began to chant, changing from Greek to Slavonic, and then back again to Greek. The Easter Canon, the Easter Sticheras—everything was recited from memory. The Gospel—In the beginning was the Word—also from memory. And finally, the Homily of Saint John—also from memory. A young Greek monk from the Holy Mountain stood up in front of us and recited it with such infectious enthusiasm that we shall never forget him as long as we live. Saint John Chrysostomos himself seemed to speak through him to us and to the rest of the world as well!


There is a Russian Orthodox chapel at the camp today, and it is well known for its icon of Christ leading the prisoners out of the camp gates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp#Post-liberation_Easter

I think we need to be careful with some things that we condemn so harshly on this thread. Our Church celebrates the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee for a reason.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on February 24, 2013, 08:36:52 PM
"st. Mary Magdalen"  ::) Probably under the influence of Catholic teachings about her...
Why the eyeroll?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on February 24, 2013, 08:37:20 PM
My point is, if you paint a "God's hand was in this" icon, you'd better be willing to go all the way.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on February 24, 2013, 10:28:25 PM
It's in an Orthodox Chapel at Dachau. Many Orthodox were sent to Dachau, and the imagery is due to the fact that the camp was liberated on Pascha.

Quote
May 6 (23 April on the Orthodox calendar) was the day of Pascha, Orthodox Easter. In a cell block used by Catholic priests to say daily Mass, several Greek, Serbian and Russian priests and one Serbian deacon, wearing makeshift vestments made from towels of the SS guard, gathered with several hundred Greek, Serbian and Russian prisoners to celebrate the Paschal Vigil. A prisoner named Rahr described the scene:

   In the entire history of the Orthodox Church there has probably never been an Easter service like the one at Dachau in 1945. Greek and Serbian priests together with a Serbian deacon adorned the make-shift 'vestments' over their blue and gray-striped prisoners' uniforms. Then they began to chant, changing from Greek to Slavonic, and then back again to Greek. The Easter Canon, the Easter Sticheras—everything was recited from memory. The Gospel—In the beginning was the Word—also from memory. And finally, the Homily of Saint John—also from memory. A young Greek monk from the Holy Mountain stood up in front of us and recited it with such infectious enthusiasm that we shall never forget him as long as we live. Saint John Chrysostomos himself seemed to speak through him to us and to the rest of the world as well!


There is a Russian Orthodox chapel at the camp today, and it is well known for its icon of Christ leading the prisoners out of the camp gates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp#Post-liberation_Easter

I think we need to be careful with some things that we condemn so harshly on this thread. Our Church celebrates the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee for a reason.

It is not Pharisaical to state what is the tradition of the Church and what harm is done by gross deviation therefrom. Shall we have no rules at all? Shall there be no order in the Church? Are there not limits? Is there not a tradition?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 25, 2013, 12:52:08 AM
It's in an Orthodox Chapel at Dachau. Many Orthodox were sent to Dachau, and the imagery is due to the fact that the camp was liberated on Pascha.

Quote
May 6 (23 April on the Orthodox calendar) was the day of Pascha, Orthodox Easter. In a cell block used by Catholic priests to say daily Mass, several Greek, Serbian and Russian priests and one Serbian deacon, wearing makeshift vestments made from towels of the SS guard, gathered with several hundred Greek, Serbian and Russian prisoners to celebrate the Paschal Vigil. A prisoner named Rahr described the scene:

   In the entire history of the Orthodox Church there has probably never been an Easter service like the one at Dachau in 1945. Greek and Serbian priests together with a Serbian deacon adorned the make-shift 'vestments' over their blue and gray-striped prisoners' uniforms. Then they began to chant, changing from Greek to Slavonic, and then back again to Greek. The Easter Canon, the Easter Sticheras—everything was recited from memory. The Gospel—In the beginning was the Word—also from memory. And finally, the Homily of Saint John—also from memory. A young Greek monk from the Holy Mountain stood up in front of us and recited it with such infectious enthusiasm that we shall never forget him as long as we live. Saint John Chrysostomos himself seemed to speak through him to us and to the rest of the world as well!


There is a Russian Orthodox chapel at the camp today, and it is well known for its icon of Christ leading the prisoners out of the camp gates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp#Post-liberation_Easter

I think we need to be careful with some things that we condemn so harshly on this thread. Our Church celebrates the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee for a reason.

It is not Pharisaical to state what is the tradition of the Church and what harm is done by gross deviation therefrom. Shall we have no rules at all? Shall there be no order in the Church? Are there not limits? Is there not a tradition?

Totally agree. Icons are not vehicles for promoting "causes", even "good" ones, and must certainly not be expressions of wishful thinking or historical revisionism.

What should have been commissioned for the Dachau chapel was a proper icon of the sainted martyrs and confessors who were incarcerated there, and those Orthodox with them, against the background of the camp buildings and other structures. Such an icon could have indeed featured Christ, either in a motif in the upper border of the icon, or in an upper corner, blessing the saints and inmates.

There are established iconographic conventions which determine how historical events are to be portrayed. It is a crying shame that these have not been followed in the creation of this painting.  :P :( :(
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on February 25, 2013, 11:01:12 AM
"st. Mary Magdalen"  ::) Probably under the influence of Catholic teachings about her...
Why the eyeroll?

Well, such type of "icons" are a bit irritaiting and I just wanted to show my disapproval regarding it and its origins ;) Or maybe in other words: that's the gesture I would do, if I saw such picture.


Totally agree. Icons are not vehicles for promoting "causes", even "good" ones, and must certainly not be expressions of wishful thinking or historical revisionism.

What should have been commissioned for the Dachau chapel was a proper icon of the sainted martyrs and confessors who were incarcerated there, and those Orthodox with them, against the background of the camp buildings and other structures. Such an icon could have indeed featured Christ, either in a motif in the upper border of the icon, or in an upper corner, blessing the saints and inmates.

That's the point and a good idea
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on February 25, 2013, 01:02:37 PM
"st. Mary Magdalen"  ::) Probably under the influence of Catholic teachings about her...
Why the eyeroll?

Well, such type of "icons" are a bit irritaiting and I just wanted to show my disapproval regarding it and its origins ;) Or maybe in other words: that's the gesture I would do, if I saw such picture.

Ah, ok. I thought you were rolling your eyes at St. Mary Magdalene, which would have been baffling.

Forgive my thickheadedness.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on February 25, 2013, 01:41:41 PM
"st. Mary Magdalen"  ::) Probably under the influence of Catholic teachings about her...
Why the eyeroll?

Well, such type of "icons" are a bit irritaiting and I just wanted to show my disapproval regarding it and its origins ;) Or maybe in other words: that's the gesture I would do, if I saw such picture.

Ah, ok. I thought you were rolling your eyes at St. Mary Magdalene, which would have been baffling.

Forgive my thickheadedness.

No problem :) That's why I wrote it the quotation marks ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Antonis on February 25, 2013, 04:38:08 PM
It's in an Orthodox Chapel at Dachau. Many Orthodox were sent to Dachau, and the imagery is due to the fact that the camp was liberated on Pascha.

Quote
May 6 (23 April on the Orthodox calendar) was the day of Pascha, Orthodox Easter. In a cell block used by Catholic priests to say daily Mass, several Greek, Serbian and Russian priests and one Serbian deacon, wearing makeshift vestments made from towels of the SS guard, gathered with several hundred Greek, Serbian and Russian prisoners to celebrate the Paschal Vigil. A prisoner named Rahr described the scene:

   In the entire history of the Orthodox Church there has probably never been an Easter service like the one at Dachau in 1945. Greek and Serbian priests together with a Serbian deacon adorned the make-shift 'vestments' over their blue and gray-striped prisoners' uniforms. Then they began to chant, changing from Greek to Slavonic, and then back again to Greek. The Easter Canon, the Easter Sticheras—everything was recited from memory. The Gospel—In the beginning was the Word—also from memory. And finally, the Homily of Saint John—also from memory. A young Greek monk from the Holy Mountain stood up in front of us and recited it with such infectious enthusiasm that we shall never forget him as long as we live. Saint John Chrysostomos himself seemed to speak through him to us and to the rest of the world as well!


There is a Russian Orthodox chapel at the camp today, and it is well known for its icon of Christ leading the prisoners out of the camp gates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp#Post-liberation_Easter

I think we need to be careful with some things that we condemn so harshly on this thread. Our Church celebrates the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee for a reason.

It is not Pharisaical to state what is the tradition of the Church and what harm is done by gross deviation therefrom. Shall we have no rules at all? Shall there be no order in the Church? Are there not limits? Is there not a tradition?
I didn't say that, did I?

There is a difference between preserving propriety when it comes to icons and Pharisaical condemnation and searching every icon for slight error to call out and condemn. I am sure that most of the people in Russia that painted icons that include God the Father are far more holy than I am. Are icons of God the Father wrong and to be discouraged? Yes. Can God work miracles and inspire through imperfect things? Yes.

A lot of the icons in this thread disgust me. That being said, a lot of the utter condemnations of even slight iconographic error AND their iconographers is just as saddening.

That has absolutely nothing to do with "having no rules."
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Carl Kraeff (Second Chance) on February 25, 2013, 04:58:40 PM
It's in an Orthodox Chapel at Dachau. Many Orthodox were sent to Dachau, and the imagery is due to the fact that the camp was liberated on Pascha.

Quote
May 6 (23 April on the Orthodox calendar) was the day of Pascha, Orthodox Easter. In a cell block used by Catholic priests to say daily Mass, several Greek, Serbian and Russian priests and one Serbian deacon, wearing makeshift vestments made from towels of the SS guard, gathered with several hundred Greek, Serbian and Russian prisoners to celebrate the Paschal Vigil. A prisoner named Rahr described the scene:

   In the entire history of the Orthodox Church there has probably never been an Easter service like the one at Dachau in 1945. Greek and Serbian priests together with a Serbian deacon adorned the make-shift 'vestments' over their blue and gray-striped prisoners' uniforms. Then they began to chant, changing from Greek to Slavonic, and then back again to Greek. The Easter Canon, the Easter Sticheras—everything was recited from memory. The Gospel—In the beginning was the Word—also from memory. And finally, the Homily of Saint John—also from memory. A young Greek monk from the Holy Mountain stood up in front of us and recited it with such infectious enthusiasm that we shall never forget him as long as we live. Saint John Chrysostomos himself seemed to speak through him to us and to the rest of the world as well!


There is a Russian Orthodox chapel at the camp today, and it is well known for its icon of Christ leading the prisoners out of the camp gates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp#Post-liberation_Easter

I think we need to be careful with some things that we condemn so harshly on this thread. Our Church celebrates the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee for a reason.

I think he was being sarcastic. I personally like that icon very much.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 25, 2013, 07:11:45 PM
Quote
There is a difference between preserving propriety when it comes to icons and Pharisaical condemnation and searching every icon for slight error to call out and condemn. I am sure that most of the people in Russia that painted icons that include God the Father are far more holy than I am. Are icons of God the Father wrong and to be discouraged? Yes. Can God work miracles and inspire through imperfect things? Yes.

Would you regard creative tweaking of prayers and hymns to serve a cause as acceptable? If so, why?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: FatherGiryus on February 26, 2013, 03:10:22 PM
Another contestant in the 'Mr. Angel 2013' Contest...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on February 26, 2013, 03:14:59 PM
Quote
There is a difference between preserving propriety when it comes to icons and Pharisaical condemnation and searching every icon for slight error to call out and condemn. I am sure that most of the people in Russia that painted icons that include God the Father are far more holy than I am. Are icons of God the Father wrong and to be discouraged? Yes. Can God work miracles and inspire through imperfect things? Yes.

Would you regard creative tweaking of prayers and hymns to serve a cause as acceptable? If so, why?

So the Church has never altered the Liturgy to combat the views of Heretics?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on February 26, 2013, 04:30:04 PM
From a story about folk iconography. Maybe not schlock, but strange.

(http://www.pravmir.ru/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/MG_5754-432x600.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: orthonorm on February 26, 2013, 04:41:47 PM
It's in an Orthodox Chapel at Dachau. Many Orthodox were sent to Dachau, and the imagery is due to the fact that the camp was liberated on Pascha.

Quote
May 6 (23 April on the Orthodox calendar) was the day of Pascha, Orthodox Easter. In a cell block used by Catholic priests to say daily Mass, several Greek, Serbian and Russian priests and one Serbian deacon, wearing makeshift vestments made from towels of the SS guard, gathered with several hundred Greek, Serbian and Russian prisoners to celebrate the Paschal Vigil. A prisoner named Rahr described the scene:

   In the entire history of the Orthodox Church there has probably never been an Easter service like the one at Dachau in 1945. Greek and Serbian priests together with a Serbian deacon adorned the make-shift 'vestments' over their blue and gray-striped prisoners' uniforms. Then they began to chant, changing from Greek to Slavonic, and then back again to Greek. The Easter Canon, the Easter Sticheras—everything was recited from memory. The Gospel—In the beginning was the Word—also from memory. And finally, the Homily of Saint John—also from memory. A young Greek monk from the Holy Mountain stood up in front of us and recited it with such infectious enthusiasm that we shall never forget him as long as we live. Saint John Chrysostomos himself seemed to speak through him to us and to the rest of the world as well!


There is a Russian Orthodox chapel at the camp today, and it is well known for its icon of Christ leading the prisoners out of the camp gates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp#Post-liberation_Easter

I think we need to be careful with some things that we condemn so harshly on this thread. Our Church celebrates the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee for a reason.

I think he was being sarcastic. I personally like that icon very much.

I'll speak for Nick, he wasn't being sarcastic. It is disgusting.

What's next an icon with Christ whispering Let's Roll! in the ear of a man on United Airlines Flight 93?

No thanks.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 26, 2013, 06:33:36 PM
Quote
There is a difference between preserving propriety when it comes to icons and Pharisaical condemnation and searching every icon for slight error to call out and condemn. I am sure that most of the people in Russia that painted icons that include God the Father are far more holy than I am. Are icons of God the Father wrong and to be discouraged? Yes. Can God work miracles and inspire through imperfect things? Yes.

Would you regard creative tweaking of prayers and hymns to serve a cause as acceptable? If so, why?

So the Church has never altered the Liturgy to combat the views of Heretics?

There is a huge difference between the liturgical proclamations against heresy (such as the establishment of the feast of, and the writing of hymnography for, the Sunday of Orthodoxy), and, say, the use of "Creator, Liberator and Sustainer" as a baptismal Trinitarian formula. The former is necessary and established by the whole Church; the latter is the product of individualism motivated by worldly reasons.

The painting of "icons" which are, in essence, the personal musings and expressions of the artist or of the patrons who commissioned them are just as unacceptable and wrong as the false trinitarian formula I quoted.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 26, 2013, 07:12:55 PM

What's next an icon with Christ whispering Let's Roll! in the ear of a man on United Airlines Flight 93?

No thanks.

Good boy, you're learning!

I now have visions of Buddy Jesus "icons" in my head ....  :P :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: FatherGiryus on February 26, 2013, 07:29:32 PM
I have two of these at home.  It is an old Romanian pattern.

From a story about folk iconography. Maybe not schlock, but strange.

(http://www.pravmir.ru/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/MG_5754-432x600.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Severian on February 26, 2013, 08:20:02 PM
Forgive me if this one has been discussed before, but is this also a "schlock Icon?" If so, why?

(http://markpenrith.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/origen1.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 27, 2013, 07:20:58 AM
I have two of these at home.  It is an old Romanian pattern.

From a story about folk iconography. Maybe not schlock, but strange.

(http://www.pravmir.ru/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/MG_5754-432x600.jpg)

Not just in Romania, but in other regions where RC and Orthodox overlap, such as western Ukraine, Poland, the Baltics, etc. It's a variant of the western (and some late Cretan School) Crucifixions which show an angel catching the stream of blood gushing from Christ's pierced side in a chalice.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on February 27, 2013, 07:20:58 AM
Forgive me if this one has been discussed before, but is this also a "schlock Icon?" If so, why?

(http://markpenrith.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/origen1.jpg)

Yes, it is. Origen, anathematized as a heretic at the Fifth Ecumenical Council, is shown in a position of prominence and authority over the saints. The fact that he does not bear a halo is almost beside the point. His epitracheilion bears a cross, which signifies he is a priest in good standing with the Church. In proper icons, deposed or anathematised clerics are shown in vestments devoid of any crosses or other Christian symbols, a potent expression of their falling away from the Church.

These two posts, by Fr H and Shanghaiski respectively, on the "St Origen" thread are excellent:

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,29635.msg468459.html#msg468459

Quote
It isn't just about apokatastasis.  Gregory of Nyssa did not have bad anthropology--Origen did.  And this was the councils first concern, as we see it in the first of its anathemas.   Origen taught the pre-existence of souls, and worse yet, the men and material flesh only came about, not because of the will of God, but as the result of their sinful desire not to see the face of God.   For Origen the man is not body and soul, but the sole hidden in the "trap" of a body because his love for God grew cold and hid there!   That Origin is a heretic has little to do with the fact of restoration and much to do with the fact that he taught and upheld a completely dangerous view of creation, man and the Incarnation and whole of soteriology.   He taught not only restoration but also that the personhood of each human person will "disappear" and all be absorbed into the Godhead.   This is more Hinduism than it is Christianity. 

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,29635.msg468515.html#msg468515

Quote
The Church has made her position on the status of Origen's person. Beyond that, with regard to his writings, she takes the good and leaves the bad. Origen has not been made worthy of veneration for the good he has written, but has been condemned for the bad, and all the bad that that caused later. If we venerate him in contradiction of what the Church bids us do, we will be found disobedient. But if we follow the Church and accept what good teaching Origen provides, leave the rest, and leave aside the issue of his person because we ourselves are in no position to take it up, then we do well, I think. The matter is a settled one, as far as the Church is concerned. It was a painful decision at the time, and reconsidering it now, 1500 years later would be more difficult and dangerous--and for what? Our faith is not defined by either the person or teachings of Origen, but by Christ--His Person, teachings, and the teaching on His Person. It was for that that the 5th Council was convened, and for false teaching on that subject that Origen was condemned.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on March 05, 2013, 12:45:18 PM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/37092_380587252035008_1742701117_n.jpg)

schlock or not?

I personally like that style.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on March 05, 2013, 12:46:59 PM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/37092_380587252035008_1742701117_n.jpg)

schlock or not?

I personally like that style.

I have no idea, but it is lovely.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 05, 2013, 01:21:49 PM
This one's fun:
(http://02varvara.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/00-uniate-icon-of-yushchenko-01.jpg?w=800&h=1120)



I'm part Ukrainian and this one makes me sick.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Monk Vasyl on March 05, 2013, 01:23:41 PM
It's in an Orthodox Chapel at Dachau. Many Orthodox were sent to Dachau, and the imagery is due to the fact that the camp was liberated on Pascha.

Quote
May 6 (23 April on the Orthodox calendar) was the day of Pascha, Orthodox Easter. In a cell block used by Catholic priests to say daily Mass, several Greek, Serbian and Russian priests and one Serbian deacon, wearing makeshift vestments made from towels of the SS guard, gathered with several hundred Greek, Serbian and Russian prisoners to celebrate the Paschal Vigil. A prisoner named Rahr described the scene:

   In the entire history of the Orthodox Church there has probably never been an Easter service like the one at Dachau in 1945. Greek and Serbian priests together with a Serbian deacon adorned the make-shift 'vestments' over their blue and gray-striped prisoners' uniforms. Then they began to chant, changing from Greek to Slavonic, and then back again to Greek. The Easter Canon, the Easter Sticheras—everything was recited from memory. The Gospel—In the beginning was the Word—also from memory. And finally, the Homily of Saint John—also from memory. A young Greek monk from the Holy Mountain stood up in front of us and recited it with such infectious enthusiasm that we shall never forget him as long as we live. Saint John Chrysostomos himself seemed to speak through him to us and to the rest of the world as well!


There is a Russian Orthodox chapel at the camp today, and it is well known for its icon of Christ leading the prisoners out of the camp gates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_concentration_camp#Post-liberation_Easter

I think we need to be careful with some things that we condemn so harshly on this thread. Our Church celebrates the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee for a reason.

I think he was being sarcastic. I personally like that icon very much.

I, too, think this is a beautiful and moving icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 06, 2013, 01:54:06 AM
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/37092_380587252035008_1742701117_n.jpg)

schlock or not?

I personally like that style.

No, it's not schlock. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.

The composition of the Child clinging to His mother in this way is seen in quite a few icons, such as Korsunskaya, Savior of the Lost (also known as Rescuer of the Drowning), and the Pskov-Pechersk Umileniye. The icon Yaroslavskaya is also very similar, in that the Child is grasping His Mother's mantle with one hand, and caressing her face with the other.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eastern Mind on March 06, 2013, 10:18:26 AM
IM sure im not the only one that doesnt like icons being defaced


(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/154868_161593267323757_716590553_n.jpg)

"Catholic Memes" does this all the time and it irritates me to no end.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on March 06, 2013, 10:23:29 AM
No, it's not schlock. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.

The composition of the Child clinging to His mother in this way is seen in quite a few icons, such as Korsunskaya, Savior of the Lost (also known as Rescuer of the Drowning), and the Pskov-Pechersk Umileniye. The icon Yaroslavskaya is also very similar, in that the Child is grasping His Mother's mantle with one hand, and caressing her face with the other.

I'm not talking about composition, but about style (something like modern computer graphic).
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: TheMathematician on March 06, 2013, 10:23:36 AM
IM sure im not the only one that doesnt like icons being defaced


(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/154868_161593267323757_716590553_n.jpg)

"Catholic Memes" does this all the time and it irritates me to no end.
That's where I took it form, haha. My one seminarian friend in the Rcc shared it
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 06, 2013, 10:47:53 AM
No, it's not schlock. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.

The composition of the Child clinging to His mother in this way is seen in quite a few icons, such as Korsunskaya, Savior of the Lost (also known as Rescuer of the Drowning), and the Pskov-Pechersk Umileniye. The icon Yaroslavskaya is also very similar, in that the Child is grasping His Mother's mantle with one hand, and caressing her face with the other.

I'm not talking about composition, but about style (something like modern computer graphic).

The smoothness of the facial modeling (shading) is something a skilled artist can achieve. The best Cretan School icons (before their degeneration into imitations of Renaissance art) featured facial modeling that was softer and less geometric than other iconographic styles, while still keeping to a non-photographic, otherworldly look.

OTOH, the stuff that Monastery Icons produces just has to be the product of a graphics program. Cookie-cutter pictures. Never have I seen work (I cannot bring myself to call their products "icons") that looks so plastic, artificial, soulless, and totally lacking in any reverence or spiritual power.  :P :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on March 06, 2013, 11:01:12 AM
No, it's not schlock. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.

The composition of the Child clinging to His mother in this way is seen in quite a few icons, such as Korsunskaya, Savior of the Lost (also known as Rescuer of the Drowning), and the Pskov-Pechersk Umileniye. The icon Yaroslavskaya is also very similar, in that the Child is grasping His Mother's mantle with one hand, and caressing her face with the other.

I'm not talking about composition, but about style (something like modern computer graphic).

The smoothness of the facial modeling (shading) is something a skilled artist can achieve. The best Cretan School icons (before their degeneration into imitations of Renaissance art) featured facial modeling that was softer and less geometric than other iconographic styles, while still keeping to a non-photographic, otherworldly look.

What about that (still asking about technique and coloristics only)?

(http://thehandmaid.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/holy-theotokos-icon.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 07, 2013, 03:32:39 AM
No, it's not schlock. There's nothing inherently wrong with it.

The composition of the Child clinging to His mother in this way is seen in quite a few icons, such as Korsunskaya, Savior of the Lost (also known as Rescuer of the Drowning), and the Pskov-Pechersk Umileniye. The icon Yaroslavskaya is also very similar, in that the Child is grasping His Mother's mantle with one hand, and caressing her face with the other.

I'm not talking about composition, but about style (something like modern computer graphic).

The smoothness of the facial modeling (shading) is something a skilled artist can achieve. The best Cretan School icons (before their degeneration into imitations of Renaissance art) featured facial modeling that was softer and less geometric than other iconographic styles, while still keeping to a non-photographic, otherworldly look.

What about that (still asking about technique and coloristics only)?


Again, while I would regard the presence of the crown on the Virgin's head as an unnecessary embellishment (and the profusion of elaborate detailing is distracting from proper stillness and gravitas of a good icon), this is still an icon suitable for veneration. I find the choice of colors heading towards the shrill and loud end of the spectrum, not that I'm surprised. It has the look of the work of Fr Stamatios Skliris when he's behaving himself (i.e. when he's not indulging in the all-out psychedelic impressionism I have critiqued in this thread), or the work of someone influenced by him.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 13, 2013, 11:03:15 AM
In response to Liza Symonenko's posting of a lurid "icon" of Tsar Nicholas II in the "Strange icons" thread, here's some more ultramonarchist grist for your mills:

(http://www.drakula.org/sv_horugv/5/pics/2_1.jpg)

The upper inscription reads: For Faith, Tsar, and Fatherland! The lower one reads: Angel of the Russian Land/Tsar-Redeemer Nicholas II

The fools who promote such blasphemous madness are known as царебожники tsarebozhniki - they have elevated the tsar to an equal footing with God.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on March 13, 2013, 11:08:05 AM
In response to Liza Symonenko's posting of a lurid "icon" of Tsar Nicholas II in the "Strange icons" thread, here's some more ultramonarchist grist for your mills:

The upper inscription reads: For Faith, Tsar, and Fatherland! The lower one reads: Angel of the Russian Land/Tsar-Redeemer Nicholas II

The fools who promote such blasphemous madness are known as царебожники tsarebozhniki - they have elevated the tsar to an equal footing with God.

So they're somewhat of a Russian version of Rastafari? ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 13, 2013, 11:18:26 AM
In response to Liza Symonenko's posting of a lurid "icon" of Tsar Nicholas II in the "Strange icons" thread, here's some more ultramonarchist grist for your mills:

The upper inscription reads: For Faith, Tsar, and Fatherland! The lower one reads: Angel of the Russian Land/Tsar-Redeemer Nicholas II

The fools who promote such blasphemous madness are known as царебожники tsarebozhniki - they have elevated the tsar to an equal footing with God.

So they're somewhat of a Russian version of Rastafari? ;)

If you mean those who call themselves Rastas and who deify Emperor Haile Selassie, yes.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 13, 2013, 11:33:24 AM
... and one that ialmisry would, erm, appreciate, of "The Holy, Right-believing Emperor, Peter the Great":

(http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/saltkrakan/18923016/19769/19769_original.jpg)

A competent portrait painting spoiled by some pretty basic 'shopping, but it's the thought that counts.  :P :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 13, 2013, 11:35:17 AM

Peter the Great....a saint?  Really?

People need to review what it takes to become a saint.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 13, 2013, 11:40:37 AM

Peter the Great....a saint?  Really?

People need to review what it takes to become a saint.

My dear Liza, do you think fanatics who come up with this garbage bother with such details?  :o ::) :'( :'(
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 13, 2013, 11:51:25 AM
More from the Tsarebozhniki:

(http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/saltkrakan/18923016/24562/24562_original.jpg)

Note the empty throne, waiting in anticipation to be occupied again. The motifs of the empty throne and the table bearing the Gospel are features of proper icons of the Last Judgement, where, following the Second Coming and the judgement of the living and the dead, the final act of history, Christ will resume His throne, to reign over His Kingdom that has no end.

The title of this travesty, oddly enough, given its "eschatological" content, is Mother of God of the Kingdom of Great Russia.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 13, 2013, 12:02:48 PM
And if ultramonarchism combined with ultranationalism isn't enough for these people, they've come up with this twist on the Creed in pictorial form:

(http://gifakt.ru/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/2dd2a96a1.jpg)

Some seriously weird **** goin' down ....
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on March 13, 2013, 12:05:06 PM
And if ultramonarchism combined with ultranationalism isn't enough for these people, they've come up with this twist on the Creed in pictorial form:

Some seriously weird **** goin' down ....

The Creed written on a peace sign? What's weird about that?  :angel:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on March 13, 2013, 12:22:15 PM
Transgender Christ:

(http://lh5.ggpht.com/_bbCVnA_5z9I/SjlTJVMe_VI/AAAAAAAAB6w/5jD_97hHSXE/51R0ZBJ5C4L._SS500_.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Ansgar on March 13, 2013, 12:44:54 PM
And if ultramonarchism combined with ultranationalism isn't enough for these people, they've come up with this twist on the Creed in pictorial form:

Some seriously weird **** goin' down ....

The Creed written on a peace sign? What's weird about that?  :angel:

The swastika might be a peace symbol, but I have a feeling that the person who made that image wasn't aware of that.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 01:58:43 PM
I have an icon question. I have found several sites with the meaning of colors in icon, but they never mention the pink we see in some icons. It doesn't seem to be a color used a lot in the first millenium though. Where did it come from, and is there any meaning to it or it was just "fashionable" somewhere and become a stylistic thing?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 13, 2013, 04:42:00 PM

Can you link to an example?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 13, 2013, 08:04:57 PM
I have an icon question. I have found several sites with the meaning of colors in icon, but they never mention the pink we see in some icons. It doesn't seem to be a color used a lot in the first millenium though. Where did it come from, and is there any meaning to it or it was just "fashionable" somewhere and become a stylistic thing?

Pink, as in salmon pink, was used from time to time mainly in Russian icons (less commonly in Greek icons) as a highlight color on the underside of angels' wings, instead of the more common blue and white tones. It calls to mind the light of dawn, while the more common blue suggests heaven. Often, pairs of angels are painted in complementary colors: one angel has pink highlights on his wings, the other blue. One angel wears, say, a red mantle over a green tunic, the other a green mantle over a red tunic.

A more rosy pink, is frequently seen as a garment color in the frescoes of some of the ancient Serbian monasteries and churches. I am not sure whether this is the original shade, or whether it is the result of alteration of pigments due to aging or atmospheric effects.

Colors are generally chosen for their symbolic value, but there is also some scope for creativity, as long as it does not override any established symbolic conventions, such as the red and blue garments of Christ and the Mother of God. In the past, the range of colors an iconographer used was also influenced by the local availability of certain pigments and ores, and certain iconographic schools or regions became known for their use of certain distinctive colors, such as the sage green of Pskov, and the vermilion of Novgorod.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 08:11:30 PM
"Each color can mean pretty everything" - that what I deduced after reading one book about icons.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on March 13, 2013, 08:12:03 PM
... and one that ialmisry would, erm, appreciate, of "The Holy, Right-believing Emperor, Peter the Great":

(http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/saltkrakan/18923016/19769/19769_original.jpg)

A competent portrait painting spoiled by some pretty basic 'shopping, but it's the thought that counts.  :P :P

He needs to be portrayed as he is in heaven--with robes and a long beard.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on March 13, 2013, 08:13:35 PM
Transgender Christ:

(http://lh5.ggpht.com/_bbCVnA_5z9I/SjlTJVMe_VI/AAAAAAAAB6w/5jD_97hHSXE/51R0ZBJ5C4L._SS500_.jpg)

Don't know about transgender, but it's definitely theologically bizarre.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 13, 2013, 08:16:34 PM
Transgender Christ:

(http://lh5.ggpht.com/_bbCVnA_5z9I/SjlTJVMe_VI/AAAAAAAAB6w/5jD_97hHSXE/51R0ZBJ5C4L._SS500_.jpg)

Don't know about transgender, but it's definitely theologically bizarre.

The infamous and clearly uncanonical "Angel of Blessed Silence". It's been around for centuries, and is unfortunately still around, just like the equally theologically execrable "NT Trinity".  ::) ::) >:(
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on March 13, 2013, 08:17:36 PM
He needs to be portrayed as he is in heaven--with robes and a long beard cuffed and under table.

fixed that for you
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Fabio Leite on March 13, 2013, 08:58:48 PM
Thanks!


I have an icon question. I have found several sites with the meaning of colors in icon, but they never mention the pink we see in some icons. It doesn't seem to be a color used a lot in the first millenium though. Where did it come from, and is there any meaning to it or it was just "fashionable" somewhere and become a stylistic thing?

Pink, as in salmon pink, was used from time to time mainly in Russian icons (less commonly in Greek icons) as a highlight color on the underside of angels' wings, instead of the more common blue and white tones. It calls to mind the light of dawn, while the more common blue suggests heaven. Often, pairs of angels are painted in complementary colors: one angel has pink highlights on his wings, the other blue. One angel wears, say, a red mantle over a green tunic, the other a green mantle over a red tunic.

A more rosy pink, is frequently seen as a garment color in the frescoes of some of the ancient Serbian monasteries and churches. I am not sure whether this is the original shade, or whether it is the result of alteration of pigments due to aging or atmospheric effects.

Colors are generally chosen for their symbolic value, but there is also some scope for creativity, as long as it does not override any established symbolic conventions, such as the red and blue garments of Christ and the Mother of God. In the past, the range of colors an iconographer used was also influenced by the local availability of certain pigments and ores, and certain iconographic schools or regions became known for their use of certain distinctive colors, such as the sage green of Pskov, and the vermilion of Novgorod.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 13, 2013, 09:03:22 PM
Thanks!

Thank you. We aim to please.  :D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on March 14, 2013, 11:06:13 AM
Transgender Christ:

(http://lh5.ggpht.com/_bbCVnA_5z9I/SjlTJVMe_VI/AAAAAAAAB6w/5jD_97hHSXE/51R0ZBJ5C4L._SS500_.jpg)

Don't know about transgender, but it's definitely theologically bizarre.

The infamous and clearly uncanonical "Angel of Blessed Silence". It's been around for centuries, and is unfortunately still around, just like the equally theologically execrable "NT Trinity".  ::) ::) >:(
I found it on a site for transgender Christians, and they were promoting it as an icon that “emphasizes the feminine features of Christ.” I thought it was strange, but figured it was based on a prototype that had been maimed through history and political ambition.



Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 14, 2013, 02:01:16 PM
This one's fun:
(http://02varvara.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/00-uniate-icon-of-yushchenko-01.jpg?w=800&h=1120)



I'm part Ukrainian and this one makes me sick.

I'm 100% Ukrainian....and it totally makes me sick.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 14, 2013, 06:38:35 PM
Transgender Christ:

(http://lh5.ggpht.com/_bbCVnA_5z9I/SjlTJVMe_VI/AAAAAAAAB6w/5jD_97hHSXE/51R0ZBJ5C4L._SS500_.jpg)

Don't know about transgender, but it's definitely theologically bizarre.

The infamous and clearly uncanonical "Angel of Blessed Silence". It's been around for centuries, and is unfortunately still around, just like the equally theologically execrable "NT Trinity".  ::) ::) >:(
I found it on a site for transgender Christians, and they were promoting it as an icon that “emphasizes the feminine features of Christ.” I thought it was strange, but figured it was based on a prototype that had been maimed through history and political ambition.


The historical image always showed this ambiguity. Wisdom is grammatically feminine in most languages, including Greek and Slavonic. In English, which does not  have grammatical genders, this "femininity" is retained in scripture: "Wisdom has built her house ..." The image is uncanonical as it shows Christ in a symbolic form, as an attribute of His, as a "type and shadow", and not in the fullness of His revelation as God Incarnate.

The appropriation of this image by the transgender lobby is not at all surprising, particularly as the specific image posted was painted by William Hart McNichols, a protege of Robert Lentz, a Jesuit priest and homosexual, whose "iconography", like that of Lentz, frequently expresses themes promoting tolerance and acceptance of homosexuality and other "gender identities".
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on March 14, 2013, 06:55:42 PM
The image is uncanonical as it shows Christ in a symbolic form, as an attribute of His, as a "type and shadow", and not in the fullness of His revelation as God Incarnate.

This always confuses me since it doesn't seem to apply to either the Visitation of Abraham ("OT Trinity") or the "NT Trinity" (with the Father symbolically depicted as an old man). The Visitation is (symbolically?) depicting a pre-Incarnate Christ, which seems theologically problematic just like depicting Christ as a messenger, a lamb, or some other non-Incarnate form is problematic. The NT Trinity's symbolic "Father" is, on the other hand, not allowed despite the OT Trinity being allowed to depict the Persons through symbols.

???
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 14, 2013, 07:04:08 PM
The image is uncanonical as it shows Christ in a symbolic form, as an attribute of His, as a "type and shadow", and not in the fullness of His revelation as God Incarnate.

This always confuses me since it doesn't seem to apply to either the Visitation of Abraham ("OT Trinity") or the "NT Trinity" (with the Father symbolically depicted as an old man). The Visitation is (symbolically?) depicting a pre-Incarnate Christ, which seems theologically problematic just like depicting Christ as a messenger, a lamb, or some other non-Incarnate form is problematic. The NT Trinity's symbolic "Father" is, on the other hand, not allowed despite the OT Trinity being allowed to depict the Persons through symbols.

???

You're missing two crucial details here, which most people understandably miss:

1. The OT Trinity can be thus depicted, as it is a revealed image. Three strangers did appear to Abraham and Sarah at the Oak of Mamre. OTOH, who has seen the pre-incarnate Wisdom of God as an androgynous angel?

2. The haloes on the heads of the three angels in the OT Trinity are plain. None of them bear the holy name of God, none of them bear the nine lines forming a cross, and none of the angels bear the inscription IC XC. The absence of these motifs are crucial to the acceptance of this icon as safe and canonical, which the Church has indeed done.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Orthodox11 on March 14, 2013, 07:06:08 PM
... and one that ialmisry would, erm, appreciate, of "The Holy, Right-believing Emperor, Peter the Great":

I shuddered...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 14, 2013, 07:41:19 PM
... and one that ialmisry would, erm, appreciate, of "The Holy, Right-believing Emperor, Peter the Great":

A competent portrait painting spoiled by some pretty basic 'shopping, but it's the thought that counts.  :P :P

I hope ialmisry does NOT appreciate it.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on March 14, 2013, 08:18:05 PM
You're missing two crucial details here, which most people understandably miss:

1. The OT Trinity can be thus depicted, as it is a revealed image. Three strangers did appear to Abraham and Sarah at the Oak of Mamre. OTOH, who has seen the pre-incarnate Wisdom of God as an androgynous angel?
Aren't the three strangers "androgynous angels?" :P But I understand what you mean: the Visitation is a revealed symbol, whereas the "pre-incarnate Wisdom of God" is not. Although, wouldn't the pre-incarnate Word (of course not as Wisdom, per se) be effectively revealed through the Visitation? Even if one can't particularly point out which individual stranger corresponded to the Son.

Quote
2. The haloes on the heads of the three angels in the OT Trinity are plain. None of them bear the holy name of God, none of them bear the nine lines forming a cross, and none of the angels bear the inscription IC XC. The absence of these motifs are crucial to the acceptance of this icon as safe and canonical, which the Church has indeed done.
Interesting point. So then would an Ethiopian Trinity icon, like below, be possibly "safe and canonical" from an EO perspective? Unless it falls into the same problem as #1, simply being an unrevealed image of the Trinity. I'm not sure if you've touched on this question somewhere else on this forum or not.

(http://icons-et.dk/images/Treenigheden.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 14, 2013, 10:14:02 PM
... and one that ialmisry would, erm, appreciate, of "The Holy, Right-believing Emperor, Peter the Great":

A competent portrait painting spoiled by some pretty basic 'shopping, but it's the thought that counts.  :P :P

I hope ialmisry does NOT appreciate it.

Our dear Isa is not exactly fond of that particular tsar. In his kinder moments, he refers him to "Peter the not-so-great".  :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on March 14, 2013, 10:20:55 PM
More from the Tsarebozhniki:

(http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/saltkrakan/18923016/24562/24562_original.jpg)

Note the empty throne, waiting in anticipation to be occupied again. The motifs of the empty throne and the table bearing the Gospel are features of proper icons of the Last Judgement, where, following the Second Coming and the judgement of the living and the dead, the final act of history, Christ will resume His throne, to reign over His Kingdom that has no end.

The title of this travesty, oddly enough, given its "eschatological" content, is Mother of God of the Kingdom of Great Russia.



Who is the saint sitting to the left of the throne?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 14, 2013, 10:24:54 PM
You're missing two crucial details here, which most people understandably miss:

1. The OT Trinity can be thus depicted, as it is a revealed image. Three strangers did appear to Abraham and Sarah at the Oak of Mamre. OTOH, who has seen the pre-incarnate Wisdom of God as an androgynous angel?
Aren't the three strangers "androgynous angels?" :P But I understand what you mean: the Visitation is a revealed symbol, whereas the "pre-incarnate Wisdom of God" is not. Although, wouldn't the pre-incarnate Word (of course not as Wisdom, per se) be effectively revealed through the Visitation? Even if one can't particularly point out which individual stranger corresponded to the Son.

Quote
2. The haloes on the heads of the three angels in the OT Trinity are plain. None of them bear the holy name of God, none of them bear the nine lines forming a cross, and none of the angels bear the inscription IC XC. The absence of these motifs are crucial to the acceptance of this icon as safe and canonical, which the Church has indeed done.
Interesting point. So then would an Ethiopian Trinity icon, like below, be possibly "safe and canonical" from an EO perspective? Unless it falls into the same problem as #1, simply being an unrevealed image of the Trinity. I'm not sure if you've touched on this question somewhere else on this forum or not.

(http://icons-et.dk/images/Treenigheden.jpg)

The Ethiopian trinities are not canonical from an EO perspective. Neither God the Father, nor the Holy Spirit have ever revealed themselves in the form of bearded old men. Only the Son of God became incarnate, and His taking up of human nature was full and complete, while still maintaining His full divinity.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 14, 2013, 10:43:27 PM
This one's fun:
(http://02varvara.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/00-uniate-icon-of-yushchenko-01.jpg?w=800&h=1120)



I'm part Ukrainian and this one makes me sick.

I'm 100% Ukrainian....and it totally makes me sick.



Poor Liza! As soon as I saw it, I knew you wouldn't be happy, to put it mildly.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 14, 2013, 11:02:15 PM
Who is the saint sitting to the left of the throne?

I can make out Holy and Monk, the first and third words, but the middle word of the inscription is difficult to make out because of the resolution. It doesn't appear to be an actual name, it is more likely a descriptive, an adjective, making this monk a generic figure, not a real person. If so, it adds to the falseness of this image as an icon: It is impossible and improper to venerate fictitious or imaginary characters.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on March 15, 2013, 08:21:30 AM
It is impossible and improper to venerate fictitious or imaginary characters.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSELDgPBpraGwzeXydMSCj0nl05kiuzTTcCNw-VGkw3lfKF8XTc)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 15, 2013, 08:36:28 AM
It is impossible and improper to venerate fictitious or imaginary characters.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSELDgPBpraGwzeXydMSCj0nl05kiuzTTcCNw-VGkw3lfKF8XTc)

Just because someone painted an "icon" of that parable doesn't make it suitable for veneration. It is a didactic image, not an icon. There is nothing in Orthodox tradition which tells us who he was, and if he became a saint. Therefore, how is it possible or proper to venerate people who are characters in a teaching lesson, but were never real people, flesh and blood and soul?

OTOH, the Samaritan woman who conversed with Christ at the well, and the woman with the issue of blood who was healed by touching the hem of Christ's garment, were not named in the scripture accounts in which they appear, but Orthodox tradition names them as Photeini/Svetlana and Veronica, and both are saints.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 15, 2013, 09:40:59 AM
Poor Liza! As soon as I saw it, I knew you wouldn't be happy, to put it mildly.

Nauseating....and very upsetting that some Ukrainian would do this.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 15, 2013, 09:43:18 AM
Poor Liza! As soon as I saw it, I knew you wouldn't be happy, to put it mildly.

Nauseating....and very upsetting that some Ukrainian would do this.

... and there would be plenty of Russians, Greeks, etc who would be nauseated and angry at the schlock produced by their countrymen, some of which has found its way onto this thread. Those that aren't, should be.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LizaSymonenko on March 15, 2013, 09:45:46 AM
It is impossible and improper to venerate fictitious or imaginary characters.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSELDgPBpraGwzeXydMSCj0nl05kiuzTTcCNw-VGkw3lfKF8XTc)

Just because someone painted an "icon" of that parable doesn't make it suitable for veneration. It is a didactic image, not an icon. There is nothing in Orthodox tradition which tells us who he was, and if he became a saint. Therefore, how is it possible or proper to venerate people who are characters in a teaching lesson, but were never real people, flesh and blood and soul?

OTOH, the Samaritan woman who conversed with Christ at the well, and the woman with the issue of blood who was healed by touching the hem of Christ's garment, were not named in the scripture accounts in which they appear, but Orthodox tradition names them as Photeini/Svetlana and Veronica, and both are saints.



In order to "venerate" the icon, you kiss it.  Whom would you kiss here?  The Pharisee or the tax collector....and why would you kiss them?

While the tax collector is a good example of repentance, that we should emulate, he's hardly worthy of kissing and venerating.

We only venerate and worship God....and His saints (only due to God's grace upon and working through them).

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 15, 2013, 09:47:15 AM
It is impossible and improper to venerate fictitious or imaginary characters.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSELDgPBpraGwzeXydMSCj0nl05kiuzTTcCNw-VGkw3lfKF8XTc)

Just because someone painted an "icon" of that parable doesn't make it suitable for veneration. It is a didactic image, not an icon. There is nothing in Orthodox tradition which tells us who he was, and if he became a saint. Therefore, how is it possible or proper to venerate people who are characters in a teaching lesson, but were never real people, flesh and blood and soul?

OTOH, the Samaritan woman who conversed with Christ at the well, and the woman with the issue of blood who was healed by touching the hem of Christ's garment, were not named in the scripture accounts in which they appear, but Orthodox tradition names them as Photeini/Svetlana and Veronica, and both are saints.



In order to "venerate" the icon, you kiss it.  Whom would you kiss here?  The Pharisee or the tax collector....and why would you kiss them?

While the tax collector is a good example of repentance, that we should emulate, he's hardly worthy of kissing and venerating.

We only venerate and worship God....and His saints (only due to God's grace upon and working through them).



Precisely, my dear Liza. Precisely.  :D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: podkarpatska on March 15, 2013, 10:24:46 AM
It is impossible and improper to venerate fictitious or imaginary characters.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSELDgPBpraGwzeXydMSCj0nl05kiuzTTcCNw-VGkw3lfKF8XTc)

Just because someone painted an "icon" of that parable doesn't make it suitable for veneration. It is a didactic image, not an icon. There is nothing in Orthodox tradition which tells us who he was, and if he became a saint. Therefore, how is it possible or proper to venerate people who are characters in a teaching lesson, but were never real people, flesh and blood and soul?

OTOH, the Samaritan woman who conversed with Christ at the well, and the woman with the issue of blood who was healed by touching the hem of Christ's garment, were not named in the scripture accounts in which they appear, but Orthodox tradition names them as Photeini/Svetlana and Veronica, and both are saints.



In order to "venerate" the icon, you kiss it.  Whom would you kiss here?  The Pharisee or the tax collector....and why would you kiss them?

While the tax collector is a good example of repentance, that we should emulate, he's hardly worthy of kissing and venerating.

We only venerate and worship God....and His saints (only due to God's grace upon and working through them).



Precisely, my dear Liza. Precisely.  :D

The discussions here have been interesting, and as always, informative. However, it seems to me that there are at least categories of images being discussed and perhaps being lumped together. This is confusing. I see them as:

1. True "schlock", schlock being defined as something "of low quality or value" implying something cheesy, kitschy, bargain basement, touristy etc...

2. Paintings of a religious motif, not truly icons to be venerated - but perhaps of pietetic value or sentiment...Such images have been used in both the west and east as teaching tools for the illiterate or to illustrate children's books for generations. (Bible stories, even church ceilings ...)

3. Heretical images...

There may be others as well.

I guess I am not comfortable in lumping them all together as "schlock."

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 15, 2013, 10:39:46 AM

The discussions here have been interesting, and as always, informative. However, it seems to me that there are at least categories of images being discussed and perhaps being lumped together. This is confusing. I see them as:

1. True "schlock", schlock being defined as something "of low quality or value" implying something cheesy, kitschy, bargain basement, touristy etc...

2. Paintings of a religious motif, not truly icons to be venerated - but perhaps of pietetic value or sentiment...Such images have been used in both the west and east as teaching tools for the illiterate or to illustrate children's books for generations. (Bible stories, even church ceilings ...)

3. Heretical images...

There may be others as well.

I guess I am not comfortable in lumping them all together as "schlock."


I quite agree. The image Michal posted, and the subsequent posts would be better suited to the sister thread "Strange icons".
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Orthodox11 on March 15, 2013, 10:43:09 AM
Our dear Isa is not exactly fond of that particular tsar. In his kinder moments, he refers him to "Peter the not-so-great".  :laugh:

I'm quite happy with the simple Old Believer appellation 'antichrist'.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on March 17, 2013, 06:07:31 PM
Only for people with strong nerves:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Christian-National-Bolshevism-%D0%A5%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9-%D0%9D%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB-%D0%91%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BC/230569607023216
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on March 17, 2013, 06:14:43 PM
Wow, that was... wow.  ???
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on March 17, 2013, 06:55:55 PM
Only for people with strong nerves:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Christian-National-Bolshevism-%D0%A5%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9-%D0%9D%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB-%D0%91%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BC/230569607023216

Apparently they're Catholic...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Apostolic Seeker on March 17, 2013, 07:10:58 PM
Only for people with strong nerves:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Christian-National-Bolshevism-%D0%A5%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9-%D0%9D%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB-%D0%91%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BC/230569607023216

Apparently they're Catholic...
I wonder how they reconcile all that stuff. Catholicism, Stalinism, Nationalsocialism, Tsarism, ...  ???
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: W.A.Mozart on March 24, 2013, 08:07:43 PM
the answer is simple -facebookism
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on March 24, 2013, 08:40:17 PM
Makes me happy I use Facebook for games and talking about my friends' cats. :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on March 27, 2013, 04:45:10 PM
(http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2462/5808549919_b3460c0f3b_o.jpg) From Romanian monastery Brâncoveanu


And
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qX5QznflEjQ/UCnwkte3FsI/AAAAAAAAVjI/8vYE2p8rW8o/s1600/the+martyrdom+of+the+Brancoveanu+saints+-+fresco+at+Brancoveanu+Monastery+of+Sambata+de+Sus+-+Transylvania.jpg)
Don't know if is it schlock or just strange?...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on March 27, 2013, 05:35:22 PM
Is that St. John Rossos?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on March 27, 2013, 05:50:02 PM
Is that St. John Rossos?

No, "Martyrdom of Constantin Brancoveanu and his family"
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Severian on March 27, 2013, 05:52:19 PM
Would this Icon of St. Cyril vested as a Priest (not a Bishop) be considered uncanonical from the EO POV?

(http://themotherofgod.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/pillars-cyril-alexandria.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 27, 2013, 05:54:41 PM
(http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2462/5808549919_b3460c0f3b_o.jpg) From Romanian monastery Brâncoveanu


And
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-qX5QznflEjQ/UCnwkte3FsI/AAAAAAAAVjI/8vYE2p8rW8o/s1600/the+martyrdom+of+the+Brancoveanu+saints+-+fresco+at+Brancoveanu+Monastery+of+Sambata+de+Sus+-+Transylvania.jpg)
Don't know if is it schlock or just strange?...

The first one is a variation of the Deesis (Supplicatory) type, which shows the Mother of God and St John the Baptist on either side of Christ, gesturing to him in prayer and supplication. In this icon, Christ is shown as the enthroned Great High Priest, a common iconographic type, most often seen in the icon within the bishop's throne in Greek churches.

The second one is a detail from a much larger narrative icon showing a scene from the life of what seems to be a martyr or martyrs of the Ottoman period.

Neither of them are schlock.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on March 27, 2013, 05:57:58 PM

The first one is a variation of the Deesis (Supplicatory) type, which shows the Mother of God and St John the Baptist on either side of Christ, gesturing to him in prayer and supplication. In this icon, Christ is shown as the enthroned Great High Priest, a common iconographic type, most often seen in the icon within the bishop's throne in Greek churches.

The second one is a detail from a much larger narrative icon showing a scene from the life of what seems to be a martyr or martyrs of the Ottoman period.

Neither of them are schlock.

I know the first one is Deesis, but the colours and Christ's eyes... Are a bit strange.

As for the second one, it's probably the first one in which I've seen a mosque. And thank you for the answer, as you're a specialist regarding this subject ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 27, 2013, 05:58:44 PM
Would this Icon of St. Cyril vested as a Priest (not a Bishop) be considered uncanonical from the EO POV?

(http://themotherofgod.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/pillars-cyril-alexandria.jpg)

Saints of clerical rank should be shown either in their clerical "civvies", or in vestments appropriate to his rank. If St Cyril was a bishop, it would be wrong to portray him as only a priest.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 27, 2013, 06:31:21 PM

As for the second one, it's probably the first one in which I've seen a mosque.
Here's another one, of St George the New Martyr of Ioannina.

(http://lh3.ggpht.com/-NvR_t7_dECY/SlifBdF9eQI/AAAAAAAABXU/1oMAch6b1gM/s512/17-Gheorghe.JPG)

Ioannina is a city in north-west Greece, and at least three Ottoman-era mosques still stand there, though they are no longer used for worship. St George was martyred during the Ottoman period, so, as a symbol of his place of martyrdom and of the perpetrators of it, one of the mosques of Ioannina is often seen in the background of his icons.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on March 30, 2013, 08:18:16 AM
^ thanks for sharing.

(http://www.ikonografski-ateljeminic.com/sites/default/files/node_gallery/Isus-Hristos.jpg)
Is it schlock? (it's a Serbian icon and the text in the Gospel is written in Serbia ""I am the Light of the world...")
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 30, 2013, 09:49:42 AM
Would this Icon of St. Cyril vested as a Priest (not a Bishop) be considered uncanonical from the EO POV?

(http://themotherofgod.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/pillars-cyril-alexandria.jpg)

The Byzantine mitre was not adopted until the fall of the Empire by the Eastern Orthodox, even later by the Copts and Assyrians.  That is why early bishop saints are never shown with it, i.e St. John Chrysostom, St. Basil etc.  The omophor being the identifying symbol of a bishop in Byzantine iconography.  St. Nicholas is anachronistically shown with it in some icons I believe due to western images protraying him as a Western bishop.  St. Cyril certainly did not wear the Byzantine mitre although in Byzantine iconography he is portrayed with a polystavrion cap.
http://www.comeandseeicons.com/c/cap25.htm

Given that Coptic vestments and iconography differ from Byzantine it is not proper to judge it by Byzantine standards.  I would judge that the headwear shown in the Coptic icon is that worn before adoption of the Byzantine mitre.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on March 30, 2013, 11:00:15 AM
Why is it brown? I mean all of it is brown.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Deacon Lance on March 30, 2013, 12:10:07 PM
Why is it brown? I mean all of it is brown.
I think that is the computer.  The stole is burgundy and the phelon and mitre are muted non-metallic gold.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on March 30, 2013, 12:31:17 PM
^ thanks for sharing.

(http://www.ikonografski-ateljeminic.com/sites/default/files/node_gallery/Isus-Hristos.jpg)
Is it schlock? (it's a Serbian icon and the text in the Gospel is written in Serbia ""I am the Light of the world...")

Doesn't look too bad to me. The colors clash a bit, but since we say the Lord is the Creator of life, I think it's theologically okay. Just my thought.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on March 30, 2013, 01:12:11 PM
It is impossible and improper to venerate fictitious or imaginary characters.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSELDgPBpraGwzeXydMSCj0nl05kiuzTTcCNw-VGkw3lfKF8XTc)

Just because someone painted an "icon" of that parable doesn't make it suitable for veneration. It is a didactic image, not an icon. There is nothing in Orthodox tradition which tells us who he was, and if he became a saint. Therefore, how is it possible or proper to venerate people who are characters in a teaching lesson, but were never real people, flesh and blood and soul?

OTOH, the Samaritan woman who conversed with Christ at the well, and the woman with the issue of blood who was healed by touching the hem of Christ's garment, were not named in the scripture accounts in which they appear, but Orthodox tradition names them as Photeini/Svetlana and Veronica, and both are saints.



In order to "venerate" the icon, you kiss it.  Whom would you kiss here?  The Pharisee or the tax collector....and why would you kiss them?

While the tax collector is a good example of repentance, that we should emulate, he's hardly worthy of kissing and venerating.

We only venerate and worship God....and His saints (only due to God's grace upon and working through them).



Precisely, my dear Liza. Precisely.  :D

Unless you follow St. Gabriel of Mtskheta's advice and venerate the case/outside edge. I don't know what he would have done with that one, but his favorite thing to do was rescue and clean up discarded icons and put them in his church.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on March 30, 2013, 01:13:18 PM
Our dear Isa is not exactly fond of that particular tsar. In his kinder moments, he refers him to "Peter the not-so-great".  :laugh:

I'm quite happy with the simple Old Believer appellation 'antichrist'.

Then you will probably be quite surprised.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 31, 2013, 12:59:26 AM
^ thanks for sharing.

(http://www.ikonografski-ateljeminic.com/sites/default/files/node_gallery/Isus-Hristos.jpg)
Is it schlock? (it's a Serbian icon and the text in the Gospel is written in Serbia ""I am the Light of the world...")

My first thought: Christ is seated on the Earth as His throne. This is false imagery, as Christ's throne is heavenly, ineffable, His kingdom is not of this world.

My second thought: The cartoonish background of planets, stars and heavenly bodies is swirling, noisy, chaotic. It violates the quality of order, stillness and gravitas which any good icon has, and which brings us to prayer and compunction.

This painting is yet another example of someone's "creativity" getting in the way of a proper and sober proclamation of what is true and right. A shame, as the painter's artistic skill is otherwise quite good.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Jason.Wike on March 31, 2013, 04:47:11 AM
I don't think even the schlockiest icon can compare to this horrid monstrosity of a statuette (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Brass-Jesus-/151013971096?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2329225498).
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Asteriktos on March 31, 2013, 04:55:13 AM
I don't think even the schlockiest icon can compare to this horrid monstrosity of a statuette (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Brass-Jesus-/151013971096?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2329225498).

That would totally fit on a Star Trek episode about an alien planet/culture  ;D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 31, 2013, 06:36:44 AM
I don't think even the schlockiest icon can compare to this horrid monstrosity of a statuette (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Brass-Jesus-/151013971096?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2329225498).

Not so fast, I have some pretty baaaaad stuff on file which easily beats it.  ;) But I agree it's ghastly, fake and bland.

My instant thought on the statuette: A traffic cop on point duty.  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on March 31, 2013, 08:27:27 AM
Unless you follow St. Gabriel of Mtskheta's advice and venerate the case/outside edge. I don't know what he would have done with that one, but his favorite thing to do was rescue and clean up discarded icons and put them in his church.

Venerating the frame of the icon, or, indeed, the glass over the icon, is no different than venerating the icon itself. We venerate icons as a whole, without making a distinction between the image itself, and the frame and glass that enclose it.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 11, 2013, 01:17:26 PM
From a church in one of the border regions of Orthodox East and RC West:

God the Father, clearly inscribed as such, looking down on His crucified Son:

(http://www.pravoslavie.ks.ua/upload/gallery/1_12801739391707173044f.jpg)

... and the Crucifixion:

(http://www.pravoslavie.ks.ua/upload/gallery/1_12801739731736129360f.jpg)

Some seriously weird stuff goin' down  ....  :o :o
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on April 11, 2013, 02:08:18 PM
Yipes.  :o >:( :-[
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on April 22, 2013, 03:26:34 PM
have these been posted?

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)

(http://jonathanscorner.com/ecumenism/internetakias.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on April 22, 2013, 03:30:52 PM
have these been posted?


Oh man, the second image had me in stitches. :D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on April 22, 2013, 04:14:20 PM
have these been posted?
^^  :o



(http://02varvara.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/acrod-st-nicholas-icon.jpg)
Schlock or just strange?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 22, 2013, 07:13:19 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 22, 2013, 07:31:26 PM

(http://02varvara.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/acrod-st-nicholas-icon.jpg)
Schlock or just strange?

According to the source: Icon of the Deliverance of the Carpatho-Russian coalminers from a mine disaster on St Nicholas Day (19 December) in 1907

Unusual, but not quite schlock.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: orthonorm on April 22, 2013, 07:55:33 PM
It is impossible and improper to venerate fictitious or imaginary characters.

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSELDgPBpraGwzeXydMSCj0nl05kiuzTTcCNw-VGkw3lfKF8XTc)

Just because someone painted an "icon" of that parable doesn't make it suitable for veneration. It is a didactic image, not an icon. There is nothing in Orthodox tradition which tells us who he was, and if he became a saint. Therefore, how is it possible or proper to venerate people who are characters in a teaching lesson, but were never real people, flesh and blood and soul?

OTOH, the Samaritan woman who conversed with Christ at the well, and the woman with the issue of blood who was healed by touching the hem of Christ's garment, were not named in the scripture accounts in which they appear, but Orthodox tradition names them as Photeini/Svetlana and Veronica, and both are saints.



In order to "venerate" the icon, you kiss it.  Whom would you kiss here?  The Pharisee or the tax collector....and why would you kiss them?

While the tax collector is a good example of repentance, that we should emulate, he's hardly worthy of kissing and venerating.

We only venerate and worship God....and His saints (only due to God's grace upon and working through them).



Precisely, my dear Liza. Precisely.  :D

The discussions here have been interesting, and as always, informative. However, it seems to me that there are at least categories of images being discussed and perhaps being lumped together. This is confusing. I see them as:

1. True "schlock", schlock being defined as something "of low quality or value" implying something cheesy, kitschy, bargain basement, touristy etc...

2. Paintings of a religious motif, not truly icons to be venerated - but perhaps of pietetic value or sentiment...Such images have been used in both the west and east as teaching tools for the illiterate or to illustrate children's books for generations. (Bible stories, even church ceilings ...)

3. Heretical images...

There may be others as well.

I guess I am not comfortable in lumping them all together as "schlock."



When are you not wrong? Many Americans have so broaden the term schlock to render it almost meaningless. Frankly, I am not pleased when it is used synonymously with kitsch.

Two words from Yiddish / German dialect meaning two different often very different things. Look up up Arnold Schoenberg's famous quote about kitsch and plain.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: podkarpatska on April 22, 2013, 08:15:45 PM

(http://02varvara.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/acrod-st-nicholas-icon.jpg)
Schlock or just strange?

According to the source: Icon of the Deliverance of the Carpatho-Russian coalminers from a mine disaster on St Nicholas Day (19 December) in 1907

Unusual, but not quite schlock.

There is an interesting story here. The late Metropolitan Nicholas of the ACROD commissioned this icon and presented it to the parish of  St. Nicholas, Jacobs Creek, Pa on the centennial in 2007 of the worst coal mine disaster in Pennsylvania at the Darr mine. 239 miners perished but the death toll would have been nearly 500 had the Rusyn immigrant miners not refused to work on December 19,1907 - the paternal feast day of their village church - Greek Catholic at the time, now Orthodox. The event is commemorated as a miraculous intercession of St. Nicholas. http://www.stnicholascenter.org/pages/centennial/
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on April 23, 2013, 05:04:09 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on April 23, 2013, 07:20:00 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


It's in the narthex of the church at the New Skete Monastery (OCA stavropegial).
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 23, 2013, 07:40:35 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


It's in the narthex of the church at the New Skete Monastery (OCA stavropegial).

That figures. It's a "lovely" match to the other non-Orthodox figures painted in the nave:

(http://holytrinityorthodox.org/photos/images/New%20Skete/P8110010.jpg)

Dorothy Day and Mother Theresa are not Orthodox, and should not be painted within the nave of an Orthodox church.

(http://holytrinityorthodox.org/photos/images/New%20Skete/P8110009.jpg)

Abp Michael Ramsey and Pope Paul VI are not Orthodox, and should not be painted within the nave of an Orthodox church.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on April 23, 2013, 08:26:37 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


It's in the narthex of the church at the New Skete Monastery (OCA stavropegial).

That figures. It's a "lovely" match to the other non-Orthodox figures painted in the nave:

(http://holytrinityorthodox.org/photos/images/New%20Skete/P8110010.jpg)

Dorothy Day and Mother Theresa are not Orthodox, and should not be painted within the nave of an Orthodox church.

(http://holytrinityorthodox.org/photos/images/New%20Skete/P8110009.jpg)

Abp Michael Ramsey and Pope Paul VI are not Orthodox, and should not be painted within the nave of an Orthodox church.

Sorry, I was confused. The first image--don't know where it's from. But the depictions of those other dudes in New Skete are in the narthex, not the nave, and predate it's reception into the Orthodox Church, from the time they were still Eastern Rite Franciscans.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on April 23, 2013, 08:28:25 PM
I remember reading the first image is from Crete or Cyprus.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on April 23, 2013, 08:36:31 PM
I remember reading the first image is from Crete or Cyprus.

From an RC church? Why the Latin if in a Greek church? And why that image if on Crete or Cyprus--hardly outposts of ecumenism.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on April 23, 2013, 09:09:45 PM
I remember reading the first image is from Crete or Cyprus.

From an RC church? Why the Latin if in a Greek church? And why that image if on Crete or Cyprus--hardly outposts of ecumenism.

It bumps inside my head it is in the (Orthodox) Archdiocese curia or some community centre belonging to it. I might be wrong, though.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Deacon Lance on April 23, 2013, 11:21:44 PM
Sorry, I was confused. The first image--don't know where it's from. But the depictions of those other dudes in New Skete are in the narthex, not the nave, and predate it's reception into the Orthodox Church, from the time they were still Eastern Rite Franciscans.

Wrong again.  The Church of the Transfiguration was the original one, built in 1970, when they were still Byzantine Catholic.   They became Orthodox in 1979.  The Church of Holy Wisdom was built in 1983 and the iconography finished in 2002.  The images are in the nave not the narthex.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Opus118 on April 24, 2013, 12:29:29 AM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


This is a wonderful and inspiring icon. This is what I hope for.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 24, 2013, 02:06:58 AM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


This is a wonderful and inspiring icon. This is what I hope for.

It is not an icon. It is, at best, wishful thinking; at worst, ecclesiopolitical propaganda. At any rate, it is completely unsuitable for veneration. I make no apologies for my position.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 24, 2013, 02:12:23 AM
I remember reading the first image is from Crete or Cyprus.

From an RC church? Why the Latin if in a Greek church? And why that image if on Crete or Cyprus--hardly outposts of ecumenism.

Crete was for centuries under Venetian rule; Cyprus was first occupied by the Crusaders, and later ruled by Venice. The iconography and devotional practices of both regions soon became heavily influenced by western forms.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Ansgar on April 24, 2013, 02:59:01 AM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


This is a wonderful and inspiring icon. This is what I hope for.

It is not an icon. It is, at best, wishful thinking; at worst, ecclesiopolitical propaganda. At any rate, it is completely unsuitable for veneration. I make no apologies for my position.

I can't say anything for sure, but I have heard it hangs inside the Phanar.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on April 24, 2013, 12:35:42 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


This is a wonderful and inspiring icon. This is what I hope for.

It is not an icon. It is, at best, wishful thinking; at worst, ecclesiopolitical propaganda. At any rate, it is completely unsuitable for veneration. I make no apologies for my position.

I can't say anything for sure, but I have heard it hangs inside the Phanar.

Do no say that you are giving me a heart attack!!!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: ilyazhito on April 24, 2013, 05:13:07 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


It's in the narthex of the church at the New Skete Monastery (OCA stavropegial).

That figures. It's a "lovely" match to the other non-Orthodox figures painted in the nave:

(http://holytrinityorthodox.org/photos/images/New%20Skete/P8110010.jpg)

Dorothy Day and Mother Theresa are not Orthodox, and should not be painted within the nave of an Orthodox church.

(http://holytrinityorthodox.org/photos/images/New%20Skete/P8110009.jpg)

Abp Michael Ramsey and Pope Paul VI are not Orthodox, and should not be painted within the nave of an Orthodox church.
They should paint a new image, or at least cover up the non-Orthodox figures. That way the icon would be less schlocky.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on April 24, 2013, 05:14:34 PM
I remember reading the first image is from Crete or Cyprus.

From an RC church? Why the Latin if in a Greek church? And why that image if on Crete or Cyprus--hardly outposts of ecumenism.

Crete was for centuries under Venetian rule; Cyprus was first occupied by the Crusaders, and later ruled by Venice. The iconography and devotional practices of both regions soon became heavily influenced by western forms.

What that history has to do with a modern commemorative painting of a modern event?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 24, 2013, 06:37:18 PM
I remember reading the first image is from Crete or Cyprus.

From an RC church? Why the Latin if in a Greek church? And why that image if on Crete or Cyprus--hardly outposts of ecumenism.

Crete was for centuries under Venetian rule; Cyprus was first occupied by the Crusaders, and later ruled by Venice. The iconography and devotional practices of both regions soon became heavily influenced by western forms.

What that history has to do with a modern commemorative painting of a modern event?

I was answering the statement of Crete or Cyprus being "hardly outposts of ecumenism".
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Opus118 on April 25, 2013, 10:24:29 AM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


This is a wonderful and inspiring icon. This is what I hope for.

It is not an icon. It is, at best, wishful thinking; at worst, ecclesiopolitical propaganda. At any rate, it is completely unsuitable for veneration. I make no apologies for my position.

Just to be clear, I believe it is Pope Paul VI on the left and Patriarch Athenagorus on the right. I think I could argue about the veneration thing but perhaps after Easter (and if I am in the mood for getting browbeaten). Let us leave it as an instructional icon. They sowed the seeds that I hope we will continue to water and nurture such that some day rift in the Church will end.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 25, 2013, 07:54:27 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


This is a wonderful and inspiring icon. This is what I hope for.

It is not an icon. It is, at best, wishful thinking; at worst, ecclesiopolitical propaganda. At any rate, it is completely unsuitable for veneration. I make no apologies for my position.

Just to be clear, I believe it is Pope Paul VI on the left and Patriarch Athenagorus on the right. I think I could argue about the veneration thing but perhaps after Easter (and if I am in the mood for getting browbeaten). Let us leave it as an instructional icon. They sowed the seeds that I hope we will continue to water and nurture such that some day rift in the Church will end.

Opus, you're still missing the point. The appropriation of iconography to promote a cause, be it political, social or ecclesiopolitical, even if that cause is a "good" one, is a shameful debasement of what iconography is and stands for. We have seen such images a number of times on this thread, images which are simply vehicles for this or that cause. None of them are acceptable, even as didactic images.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Deacon Lance on April 25, 2013, 08:48:08 PM
It is a commerative image of an historical event not an icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 25, 2013, 09:29:07 PM
It is a commerative image of an historical event not an icon.

It would have been preferable to paint the event in a more conventional, naturalistic style, to clearly distinguish the event as an earthly encounter in time. The use of the abstracted, non-naturalistic, timeless iconographic style, and using the motif of the brotherly embrace and their joint holding a model of a church, one which is seen in icons of Apostles Peter and Paul, only serves to confuse people.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: FatherGiryus on April 25, 2013, 09:58:37 PM
From my last trip to Romania and a parish consecration.  That's Metropolitan Teofan of Iaşi, who is very much alive and looks, in this fresco, very 'iconic.'  All over Romania, there were paintings of bishops, princes, and even a Sultan, right up there on the back walls of churches next to the saints. 

It is a commerative image of an historical event not an icon.

It would have been preferable to paint the event in a more conventional, naturalistic style, to clearly distinguish the event as an earthly encounter in time. The use of the abstracted, non-naturalistic, timeless iconographic style, and using the motif of the brotherly embrace and their joint holding a model of a church, one which is seen in icons of Apostles Peter and Paul, only serves to confuse people.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 25, 2013, 10:20:06 PM
From my last trip to Romania and a parish consecration.  That's Metropolitan Teofan of Iaşi, who is very much alive and looks, in this fresco, very 'iconic.'  All over Romania, there were paintings of bishops, princes, and even a Sultan, right up there on the back walls of churches next to the saints. 

It is a commerative image of an historical event not an icon.

It would have been preferable to paint the event in a more conventional, naturalistic style, to clearly distinguish the event as an earthly encounter in time. The use of the abstracted, non-naturalistic, timeless iconographic style, and using the motif of the brotherly embrace and their joint holding a model of a church, one which is seen in icons of Apostles Peter and Paul, only serves to confuse people.

It is one thing to have a conventional portrait of a living hierarch in a church office or parish hall. There is also a convention of painting "iconographic portraits" (without haloes, without the appellation "Saint" of departed holy people who may well be glorified as saints in the future. However, the placing of a portrait painted in an iconographic style of a living person within the nave of a church, surrounded by proclaimed saints, is not right.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on April 25, 2013, 10:21:48 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


This is a wonderful and inspiring icon. This is what I hope for.

It is not an icon. It is, at best, wishful thinking; at worst, ecclesiopolitical propaganda. At any rate, it is completely unsuitable for veneration. I make no apologies for my position.

I can't say anything for sure, but I have heard it hangs inside the Phanar.

Do no say that you are giving me a heart attack!!!

Really? Due to shock and surprise?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on April 25, 2013, 10:23:08 PM
I remember reading the first image is from Crete or Cyprus.

From an RC church? Why the Latin if in a Greek church? And why that image if on Crete or Cyprus--hardly outposts of ecumenism.

Crete was for centuries under Venetian rule; Cyprus was first occupied by the Crusaders, and later ruled by Venice. The iconography and devotional practices of both regions soon became heavily influenced by western forms.

What that history has to do with a modern commemorative painting of a modern event?

I was answering the statement of Crete or Cyprus being "hardly outposts of ecumenism".

Art forms don't really mean ecumenism. I meant that if the pope and patriarch were to meet in Cyprus or Crete, there would be large protests.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Deacon Lance on April 25, 2013, 10:42:57 PM
It is a commerative image of an historical event not an icon.

It would have been preferable to paint the event in a more conventional, naturalistic style, to clearly distinguish the event as an earthly encounter in time. The use of the abstracted, non-naturalistic, timeless iconographic style, and using the motif of the brotherly embrace and their joint holding a model of a church, one which is seen in icons of Apostles Peter and Paul, only serves to confuse people.

I thought it was more naturalistic than iconographic and they did exchange the brotherly embrace, not sure how differently that could be represented.  Also not sure what both of them holding a model of St Peter's Basilica is to represent as neither founded or funded a church which is what the model church is used to represent.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on April 25, 2013, 10:47:46 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


It's in the narthex of the church at the New Skete Monastery (OCA stavropegial).

How does that happen?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 25, 2013, 10:49:43 PM
It is a commerative image of an historical event not an icon.

It would have been preferable to paint the event in a more conventional, naturalistic style, to clearly distinguish the event as an earthly encounter in time. The use of the abstracted, non-naturalistic, timeless iconographic style, and using the motif of the brotherly embrace and their joint holding a model of a church, one which is seen in icons of Apostles Peter and Paul, only serves to confuse people.

I thought it was more naturalistic than iconographic and they did exchange the brotherly embrace, not sure how differently that could be represented.  Also not sure what both of them holding a model of St Peter's Basilica is to represent as neither founded or funded a church which is what the model church is used to represent.

The motif of them jointly holding a church is clearly speaking of church unity. The image is appropriating established and well-understood iconographic imagery to make an ecclesiopolitical statement in the guise of an "icon". The gold-leaf background and lettered inscriptions further attest to the "iconographic" intent of the image, giving the lie to it being simply a conventional painting.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 25, 2013, 10:50:49 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


It's in the narthex of the church at the New Skete Monastery (OCA stavropegial).

How does that happen?

"Through less than diligent episcopal oversight" is the most charitable way I can express it.  >:(
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Daedelus1138 on April 25, 2013, 11:01:45 PM
Says it all, really. The bulk of McNichols' work is no less egregious and blasphemous than Lentz's. McNichols has not only painted an "icon" of a declared heretic, but seems to be unaware that Origen was an avowed iconoclast. Oh, the irony!  :P :P ::)

  Is Origen an anathematized heretic, or merely some of his ideas were rejected by the Orthodox?   In the West, in the Anglican and Catholic tradition, I've never seen him equated with somebody like Arius- in fact his theology is often referenced as typical of the early Alexandrian tradition.

   
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on April 25, 2013, 11:07:49 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


It's in the narthex of the church at the New Skete Monastery (OCA stavropegial).

How does that happen?

People mistake their own wishes and desires with holy thoughts.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on April 25, 2013, 11:09:04 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


It's in the narthex of the church at the New Skete Monastery (OCA stavropegial).

How does that happen?

"Through less than diligent episcopal oversight" is the most charitable way I can express it.  >:(

When the bishop will not act, it is time for the babushki to intervene.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on April 25, 2013, 11:10:00 PM
Says it all, really. The bulk of McNichols' work is no less egregious and blasphemous than Lentz's. McNichols has not only painted an "icon" of a declared heretic, but seems to be unaware that Origen was an avowed iconoclast. Oh, the irony!  :P :P ::)

  Is Origen an anathematized heretic, or merely some of his ideas were rejected by the Orthodox?   In the West, in the Anglican and Catholic tradition, I've never seen him equated with somebody like Arius- in fact his theology is often referenced as typical of the early Alexandrian tradition.

   

See the Fifth Ecumenical Council, accepted also by the West.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 25, 2013, 11:10:50 PM
Says it all, really. The bulk of McNichols' work is no less egregious and blasphemous than Lentz's. McNichols has not only painted an "icon" of a declared heretic, but seems to be unaware that Origen was an avowed iconoclast. Oh, the irony!  :P :P ::)

  Is Origen an anathematized heretic, or merely some of his ideas were rejected by the Orthodox?   In the West, in the Anglican and Catholic tradition, I've never seen him equated with somebody like Arius- in fact his theology is often referenced as typical of the early Alexandrian tradition.

   

The Fifth Ecumenical Council condemned Origen, Didymus, and Evagrius for teaching the pre-existence of souls, reincarnation, the ultimate salvation of demons, that heavenly bodies possessed souls, and other errors.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 25, 2013, 11:12:10 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


It's in the narthex of the church at the New Skete Monastery (OCA stavropegial).

How does that happen?

"Through less than diligent episcopal oversight" is the most charitable way I can express it.  >:(

When the bishop will not act, it is time for the babushki to intervene.

Yup. Although I fear that babushki and yiayies are in VERY short supply at New Skete ....  :( :P :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Daedelus1138 on April 25, 2013, 11:31:18 PM
See the Fifth Ecumenical Council, accepted also by the West.

   Accepted by Roman Catholics perhaps...   it is a very old tradition that Anglicans usually only look to the first four as guidance.

  Still, I haven't heard many Catholics denounce Origen completely, merely some of his theology not gaining acceptance.

  On an unrelated note...  The pictures of the interior of St. Gregory of Nyssa (the Episcopalian church in San Francisco) were shocking, especially Malcom X being depicted as a saint.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on April 25, 2013, 11:38:28 PM
 The pictures of the interior of St. Gregory of Nyssa (the Episcopalian church in San Francisco) were shocking, especially Malcom X being depicted as a saint.

Oh, there's so much "iconographic" schlock in that church, I could write a reasonable-sized book on it.  :P :P :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on April 26, 2013, 08:12:07 AM
Art forms don't really mean ecumenism. I meant that if the pope and patriarch were to meet in Cyprus or Crete, there would be large protests.

AFAIR, he visited Cyprus. And Greece.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on April 27, 2013, 04:43:09 PM
Art forms don't really mean ecumenism. I meant that if the pope and patriarch were to meet in Cyprus or Crete, there would be large protests.

AFAIR, he visited Cyprus. And Greece.

But were pope and patriarch together?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on April 27, 2013, 04:56:34 PM
Art forms don't really mean ecumenism. I meant that if the pope and patriarch were to meet in Cyprus or Crete, there would be large protests.

AFAIR, he visited Cyprus. And Greece.

But were pope and patriarch together?

He met there Primates of the Churches of Cyprus and Greece.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on April 27, 2013, 06:55:32 PM
Art forms don't really mean ecumenism. I meant that if the pope and patriarch were to meet in Cyprus or Crete, there would be large protests.

AFAIR, he visited Cyprus. And Greece.

But were pope and patriarch together?

He met there Primates of the Churches of Cyprus and Greece.

As I recall there were protests.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Antonis on April 28, 2013, 12:57:11 AM
What are people's opinions on icons of St. Constantine that depict him with a beard?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Schultz on April 29, 2013, 12:47:31 PM

(http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hesykhia/image/oikoumene.jpg)


It's hard to tell if this was painted by an RC/BC or "True Orthodox" hand. If the former, it's on a par with the syncretistic schlock seen at the New Skete monastery; if the latter, yet another polemical, ecclesiopolitical statement. At least neither figure sports a halo.

Where did you find this image, Gunnar? I'm interested.

I found it on an orthodox blog which had an article celebrating Patriarch Bartholomew inviting the Pope Francis to phanar and jerusalem. I cannot find who created it or where it is or anything more about it. I tried searching for it with google images but it just brought up more blogs and news articles which also just used the image


This is a wonderful and inspiring icon. This is what I hope for.

It is not an icon. It is, at best, wishful thinking; at worst, ecclesiopolitical propaganda. At any rate, it is completely unsuitable for veneration. I make no apologies for my position.

I can't say anything for sure, but I have heard it hangs inside the Phanar.

Could you possibly be confusing this image with the icon of Sts. Peter and Andrew embracing, commissioned by, IIRC, Pope Paul for Pat. Athenagoras, at the time of the lifting of the anathemas?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on April 29, 2013, 09:07:04 PM
What are people's opinions on icons of St. Constantine that depict him with a beard?

Not sure people's opinions are of much worth. Married and monastic saints are depicted with beards, whether they actually had them or not, unless they were eunuchs (sometimes). So, while for example St. Demetrius of Thessaloniki or more certainly St. John the Russian were 36 and 40 at the time of their deaths and St. John likely had a beard I would think, they are depicted as beardless in icons because they were unmarried. Sometimes icons of them make them look like they're 18.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: pmpn8rGPT on May 07, 2013, 09:51:49 PM
(http://opentabernacle.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/chagall_jesus.jpg)
Jesus wore Tefillin?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on May 07, 2013, 09:55:34 PM
Chagall?

edit:

yes, Chagall

(http://www.uky.edu/~popkin/chagall.jpg)

@pmpn8rGPT: Why do you consider a Belarusian Jewish cubist to be an authority on Orthodox iconography?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 08, 2013, 04:16:00 AM
Chagall?

edit:

yes, Chagall

(http://www.uky.edu/~popkin/chagall.jpg)

@pmpn8rGPT: Why do you consider a Belarusian Jewish cubist to be an authority on Orthodox iconography?

Even as art, it misses the mark, IMHO. It's bland, anodyne, ineffectual, even in its attempt to highlight the suffering of the Jewish people during the Holocaust. It doesn't seem to work.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on May 08, 2013, 04:26:22 AM
Even as art, it misses the mark, IMHO. It's bland, anodyne, ineffectual, even in its attempt to highlight the suffering of the Jewish people during the Holocaust. It doesn't seem to work.

Disagree in all points.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 08, 2013, 04:29:38 AM
Even as art, it misses the mark, IMHO. It's bland, anodyne, ineffectual, even in its attempt to highlight the suffering of the Jewish people during the Holocaust. It doesn't seem to work.

Disagree in all points.

You are entitled to your opinion, as I am entitled to mine on the quality of this painting. I might add that I'm mystified as to why it found its way onto the thread, when it doesn't come close to resembling an icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on May 17, 2013, 04:13:02 PM
First post on OCnet in a while, and thought I'd start off by sharing some icons by Fr. William Hart McNichols (RC).

(http://www.standreirublevicons.com/uploads/pictures/big/HPMJ132.web.png) (http://www.standreirublevicons.com/gallery.php?action=viewPicture&id=81)

(http://www.standreirublevicons.com/uploads/pictures/big/JLRA108.web.png) (http://www.standreirublevicons.com/gallery.php?action=viewPicture&id=92)

(http://www.standreirublevicons.com/uploads/pictures/big/HSCY212.web.png) (http://www.standreirublevicons.com/gallery.php?action=viewPicture&id=329)

(http://www.standreirublevicons.com/uploads/pictures/big/EEST233.web.png) (http://www.standreirublevicons.com/gallery.php?action=viewPicture&id=377)
"El Espiritu Santo de Taos." I'm assuming this last one is supposed to be a personified Holy Spirit?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LizaSymonenko on May 17, 2013, 04:14:42 PM

Oh my goodness....
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on May 17, 2013, 04:27:12 PM
(http://www.christ-the-kingsecinst.org/Madonna_con_Bambino_Native-American.jpg)

American Indian Christ and Mother of God.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 18, 2013, 07:49:26 AM

(http://www.standreirublevicons.com/uploads/pictures/big/EEST233.web.png)[/url]
"El Espiritu Santo de Taos." I'm assuming this last one is supposed to be a personified Holy Spirit?

Yes, it is.

For those who might not know, William Hart McNichols, a Jesuit priest, has painted about as much "iconographic" rubbish as the better-known Robert Lentz, ranging from touchy-feely personal musings to outright blasphemies. This statement of his is part of public record: "Lentz is regarded as one of the foremost authorities on icons today.” Nuff said.  :P :P :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 18, 2013, 08:00:10 AM
First post on OCnet in a while, and thought I'd start off by sharing some icons by Fr. William Hart McNichols (RC).

(http://www.standreirublevicons.com/uploads/pictures/big/HPMJ132.web.png) (http://www.standreirublevicons.com/gallery.php?action=viewPicture&id=81)

For those who are wondering who these two are, the Greek inscription reads "St Francis" and "St Michael". They are shown as patrons and protectors of New York.

One is indeed an RC saint, being St Francis of Assisi. The other is the late Fr Mychal Judge, the chaplain to the NY Fire Dept, who was killed in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. Fr Judge is a favorite subject of both McNichols and Lentz, because of the late priest's homosexual orientation. Both artists, who are homosexual themselves, have painted various "icons" which promote male and female homosexuality in a positive way, in direct violation of what their own church teaches.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Romaios on May 18, 2013, 08:25:33 AM
First post on OCnet in a while, and thought I'd start off by sharing some icons by Fr. William Hart McNichols (RC).

(http://www.standreirublevicons.com/uploads/pictures/big/HSCY212.web.png) (http://www.standreirublevicons.com/gallery.php?action=viewPicture&id=329)

Creepy! This (Un)Holy Sophia reminds me of the zombi-like figures that adorn some of Hildegard von Bingen's writings:

(http://www.nwcreations.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/20-501.jpg)

(http://sofiaserve.typepad.com/.a/6a0111685becb0970c011278fae40b28a4-320wi)

(http://0.tqn.com/d/womenshistory/1/G/O/g/2/Hildegard_of_Bingen_ww1.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Arachne on May 18, 2013, 08:27:59 AM
(http://0.tqn.com/d/womenshistory/1/G/O/g/2/Hildegard_of_Bingen_ww1.jpg)

 :o That's Azathoth reaching through the portal! Kill it with fire!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on May 19, 2013, 11:57:28 PM
A Methodist makes us feel less embarrassed about Death to the World and Orthodoxy or Death:

http://morganguyton.wordpress.com/2013/05/18/the-despised-ones-a-bloggers-collective/
(http://morganguyton.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/316243_10152853452075077_756394589_n.jpg)

I like that it has the short vowel markers.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 20, 2013, 02:58:29 AM
Another from the Was This Really Necessary Department, aka A Waste of Paint and Time:

(http://www.notofthisworldicons.com/product_images/Painting%20with%20Royal%20Martyrshr.jpg)

The look in Christ's eyes is pretty creepy, too.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on May 20, 2013, 03:09:56 AM
Another from the Was This Really Necessary Department, aka A Waste of Paint and Time:

(http://www.notofthisworldicons.com/product_images/Painting%20with%20Royal%20Martyrshr.jpg)

The look in Christ's eyes is pretty creepy, too.

(http://struckbyenlightning.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/crying-indian1.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: truthseeker32 on May 24, 2013, 12:19:45 PM
(http://laughingsquid.com/wp-content/uploads/star2.jpg)

More here: http://laughingsquid.com/star-wars-as-medieval-art/
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on May 24, 2013, 12:31:37 PM
Well, at least that one was supposed to be weird.  ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: podkarpatska on May 25, 2013, 07:51:24 AM
Well, at least that one was supposed to be weird.  ;)

Perhaps not by the illustrator though...Joseph Campbell probably would used it in an essay in The Atlantic....
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 25, 2013, 08:12:15 AM
I must admit, I laughed when I saw it, for its sheer silliness, and knowing that that was its intent.

Unlike the abominations visited upon us by "master iconographers" who oughta know better.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on May 25, 2013, 09:50:34 AM

More here: http://laughingsquid.com/star-wars-as-medieval-art/

Vey shocking but yeah, this one with Jar Jar Binks is funny.

However, I must say, I really like Star Wars and some,let's say, not so serious pictures, but I think there are some boundaries...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 25, 2013, 10:04:15 AM

More here: http://laughingsquid.com/star-wars-as-medieval-art/

Vey shocking but yeah, this one with Jar Jar Binks is funny.

However, I must say, I really like Star Wars and some,let's say, not so serious pictures, but I think there are some boundaries...

If the artist paints one with Jabba the Hutt ....  :P :P :o :o :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on May 26, 2013, 09:51:08 PM
Try this one on for size- granted, this one is not Schlock, just nice-looking, but I'd prefer to run it through LBK before putting this icon on my wall.

(http://the_theotokos_of_jerusalem_by_lordshadowblade-d5sde7g.jpg)

http://theophilia.deviantart.com/art/The-Theotokos-of-Jerusalem-349985068 (http://theophilia.deviantart.com/art/The-Theotokos-of-Jerusalem-349985068)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on May 26, 2013, 10:16:49 PM
Try this one on for size- granted, this one is not Schlock, just nice-looking, but I'd prefer to run it through LBK before putting this icon on my wall.

(http://th01.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/i/2013/022/1/2/the_theotokos_of_jerusalem_by_lordshadowblade-d5sde7g.jpg)

http://theophilia.deviantart.com/art/The-Theotokos-of-Jerusalem-349985068 (http://theophilia.deviantart.com/art/The-Theotokos-of-Jerusalem-349985068)

I've seen Theophilia's DA before, and I must say that I like her(?) stuff.

With that particular icon, I think the biggest problem with it is the deficient use of "I AM" in the halo. Maybe also the improper use of colors for the clothes. Although LBK might see something else.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on May 26, 2013, 10:33:06 PM
Hmm... thank you. I was just making sure. Well, at least it certainly beats Lentz's work. :D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 26, 2013, 11:26:44 PM
Try this one on for size- granted, this one is not Schlock, just nice-looking, but I'd prefer to run it through LBK before putting this icon on my wall.

(http://th01.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/i/2013/022/1/2/the_theotokos_of_jerusalem_by_lordshadowblade-d5sde7g.jpg)

http://theophilia.deviantart.com/art/The-Theotokos-of-Jerusalem-349985068 (http://theophilia.deviantart.com/art/The-Theotokos-of-Jerusalem-349985068)

I've seen Theophilia's DA before, and I must say that I like her(?) stuff.

With that particular icon, I think the biggest problem with it is the deficient use of "I AM" in the halo. Maybe also the improper use of colors for the clothes. Although LBK might see something else.

LBK indeed sees something else. More than one something in fact. The "I AM" in the halo is the least of its problems.

The woman looks like a Bratz doll (though she does have a nose), all gooey-eyed with a bit of "come hither". The child is utterly devoid of any sense of being all-knowing, there is not a scrap of divine majesty in him. He's a generic Gerber Baby. Or a kewpie doll. I can almost hear him saying "goo!"

Sentimental, self-indulgent schlock. Worthless as an icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on May 26, 2013, 11:36:41 PM
(http://th07.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/i/2010/213/7/0/The_Theotokos_of_Vladimir_by_LordShadowblade.jpg)

I think this is much more well done. Same artist. Anything you see with this one?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on May 26, 2013, 11:38:14 PM
Too much Disney. I like Disney but not on icons.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 26, 2013, 11:42:15 PM
(http://th07.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/i/2010/213/7/0/The_Theotokos_of_Vladimir_by_LordShadowblade.jpg)

I think this is much more well done. Same artist. Anything you see with this one?

Eyeshadow overload, and far too much blush.  :P

Why bother with an insipid copy of one of the most sublime and spiritually powerful icons in existence, when it's so easy to get a framed or mounted print of the original masterpiece? Some historic icons are impossible to adequately replicate. The Vladimirskaya is one of them.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on May 26, 2013, 11:45:31 PM
I can almost hear him saying "goo!"
God forbid the incarnate Logos use babytalk.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on May 26, 2013, 11:47:05 PM
"come hither".
Yeah, I can see that.

Why bother with an insipid copy
He has scattered the proud in the imaginations of their hearts.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 26, 2013, 11:48:48 PM
I can almost hear him saying "goo!"
God forbid the incarnate Logos use babytalk.

You oughta know better than that. Icons aren't photographs, frozen in time.

Show me a proper, canonical icon which doesn't show the Child as all-wise. Show me in the hymns of the Church for the Nativity and the Meeting of the Lord where the Child is a helpless, unknowing babe.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on May 26, 2013, 11:51:26 PM
You oughta know better than that. Icons aren't photographs, frozen in time.
True, but your disgust at the notion of Christ as an infant talking like an infant is disturbing.

It smacks of docetism.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 26, 2013, 11:51:56 PM
Why bother with an insipid copy
He has scattered the proud in the imaginations of their hearts.

These artists are expressing the indulgent fantasies of their imaginations. A true iconographer has no such pride, only humility to use his talents and abilities to serve the Church and to express her teachings.

Iconography is an obedience, not a hobby for dilettante artists.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on May 26, 2013, 11:53:44 PM
Why bother with an insipid copy
He has scattered the proud in the imaginations of their hearts.

These artists are expressing the indulgent fantasies of their imaginations. A true iconographer has no such pride, only humility to use his talents and abilities to serve the Church and to express her teachings.

Iconography is an obedience, not a hobby for dilettante artists.

The website she's posting on indicates that her work is not intended to replace or substitute for iconography.

It's a website for kids to swap sketches and adults to gather cult followings or show off in e-gallery format. Not the Louvre or a cathedral.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 26, 2013, 11:54:44 PM
You oughta know better than that. Icons aren't photographs, frozen in time.
True, but your disgust at the notion of Christ as an infant talking like an infant is disturbing.

It smacks of docetism.


Yet again you miss the point. The Child is indeed shown as an infant in His icons. Heck, in Nativity icons, He's being washed by the midwives, to show His birth was natural, as a testimony to His Incarnation, and potently expressing His humility. He is forever God, yet He condescends to be washed after His birth.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 26, 2013, 11:58:51 PM
Why bother with an insipid copy
He has scattered the proud in the imaginations of their hearts.

These artists are expressing the indulgent fantasies of their imaginations. A true iconographer has no such pride, only humility to use his talents and abilities to serve the Church and to express her teachings.

Iconography is an obedience, not a hobby for dilettante artists.

The website she's posting on indicates that her work is not intended to replace or substitute for iconography.

It's a website for kids to swap sketches and adults to gather cult followings or show off in e-gallery format. Not the Louvre or a cathedral.



Icons are not playthings for artistic self-expression. If these folks want to paint icons, then they should apprentice themselves to a master iconographer and learn properly. Something that looks like an icon can, and will, be regarded as such by pious but unsuspecting folks.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: NicholasMyra on May 26, 2013, 11:59:16 PM
Why bother with an insipid copy
He has scattered the proud in the imaginations of their hearts.

These artists are expressing the indulgent fantasies of their imaginations. A true iconographer has no such pride, only humility to use his talents and abilities to serve the Church and to express her teachings.

Iconography is an obedience, not a hobby for dilettante artists.

The website she's posting on indicates that her work is not intended to replace or substitute for iconography.

It's a website for kids to swap sketches and adults to gather cult followings or show off in e-gallery format. Not the Louvre or a cathedral.



Icons are not playthings for artistic self-expression. If these folks want to paint icons, then they should apprentice themselves to a master iconographer and learn properly. Something that looks like an icon can, and will, be regarded as such by pious but unsuspecting folks.

They aren't icons, LBK. They don't look like icons.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shiny on May 27, 2013, 12:06:11 AM
LBK indeed sees something else. More than one something in fact. The "I AM" in the halo is the least of its problems.

The woman looks like a Bratz doll (though she does have a nose), all gooey-eyed with a bit of "come hither". The child is utterly devoid of any sense of being all-knowing, there is not a scrap of divine majesty in him. He's a generic Gerber Baby. Or a kewpie doll. I can almost hear him saying "goo!"

Sentimental, self-indulgent schlock. Worthless as an icon.

I just wanted to say that I absolutely adore you. I had a good laugh out of this.

Quote
dilettante artist

LOL!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shiny on May 27, 2013, 12:07:08 AM
They aren't icons, LBK. They don't look like icons.

Oh yes they do. As if it was a Bratz Iconography Coloring Book for Kids.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 27, 2013, 12:08:02 AM
Why bother with an insipid copy
He has scattered the proud in the imaginations of their hearts.

These artists are expressing the indulgent fantasies of their imaginations. A true iconographer has no such pride, only humility to use his talents and abilities to serve the Church and to express her teachings.

Iconography is an obedience, not a hobby for dilettante artists.

The website she's posting on indicates that her work is not intended to replace or substitute for iconography.

It's a website for kids to swap sketches and adults to gather cult followings or show off in e-gallery format. Not the Louvre or a cathedral.



Icons are not playthings for artistic self-expression. If these folks want to paint icons, then they should apprentice themselves to a master iconographer and learn properly. Something that looks like an icon can, and will, be regarded as such by pious but unsuspecting folks.

They aren't icons, LBK. They don't look like icons.

Tell that to folks like Nephi, who, in genuine and honest ignorance, would likely have purchased such an image if no-one alerted them otherwise.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shiny on May 27, 2013, 12:11:13 AM
I almost spat my Coke all over my screen seeing that Star Wars one. I think I woke my neighbors up from laughing.

I wonder if Robert Lentz ever sent a Valentine's Day card to LBK that looked like an icon, and maybe included a free sample of his icon on Harvey Milk.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on May 27, 2013, 12:12:47 AM
THIS is why I'm now running these past you, LBK, before they go on my icon corner.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 27, 2013, 12:25:35 AM
I almost spat my Coke all over my screen seeing that Star Wars one. I think I woke my neighbors up from laughing.

I wonder if Robert Lentz ever sent a Valentine's Day card to LBK that looked like an icon, and maybe included a free sample of his icon on Harvey Milk.

If he knew about the sustained and systematic criticism I've leveled at his work, online, and in print ....
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 27, 2013, 12:26:09 AM
THIS is why I'm now running these past you, LBK, before they go on my icon corner.

Thank you.  :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shiny on May 27, 2013, 12:35:38 AM
I almost spat my Coke all over my screen seeing that Star Wars one. I think I woke my neighbors up from laughing.

I wonder if Robert Lentz ever sent a Valentine's Day card to LBK that looked like an icon, and maybe included a free sample of his icon on Harvey Milk.

If he knew about the sustained and systematic criticism I've leveled at his work, online, and in print ....
LOL. You ever personally sent the guy a message to knock it off with the icons?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on May 27, 2013, 12:37:58 AM
You're welcome. You're the only person I know who is an expert on icons, so...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 27, 2013, 12:47:44 AM
I almost spat my Coke all over my screen seeing that Star Wars one. I think I woke my neighbors up from laughing.

I wonder if Robert Lentz ever sent a Valentine's Day card to LBK that looked like an icon, and maybe included a free sample of his icon on Harvey Milk.

If he knew about the sustained and systematic criticism I've leveled at his work, online, and in print ....
LOL. You ever personally sent the guy a message to knock it off with the icons?

A few years ago, the RC Archbishop of Santa Fe ordered the distributors of Lentz's work to cease further production of products featuring his most blasphemous images (the homoerotic ones, the "Christ" as a woman, the "Celtic Trinity", the naked pagan horned god "Christ", etc). The distributor lumped these into a category called "Images that Challenge", with mention of Abp Michael Sheehan's directive.

At the time, they were supposed to simply sell off any existing stock, and cease production of any more. Something must have got lost in translation, because these items continue to be freely available through this outlet.

If an archbishop's directive was blithely ignored, you think the lone voice of an LBK would make any difference to Mr Lentz? Such people are so full of their own awesomeness, they'll carry on in their own delusions, thumbing their noses at any attempt to correct them. A bolt from the blue might be the only way.  :o ::)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 27, 2013, 12:48:32 AM
You're welcome. You're the only person I know who is an expert on icons, so...

Happy to help, it's the least I can do. You're welcome to PM me whenever you wish.  :)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on May 28, 2013, 11:54:20 AM
First post on OCnet in a while, and thought I'd start off by sharing some icons by Fr. William Hart McNichols (RC).

(http://www.standreirublevicons.com/uploads/pictures/big/HPMJ132.web.png) (http://www.standreirublevicons.com/gallery.php?action=viewPicture&id=81)

(images redacted for brevity)

"El Espiritu Santo de Taos." I'm assuming this last one is supposed to be a personified Holy Spirit?

Quote
http://www.standreirublevicons.com/biography.php

"In September 1990, he moved to Albuquerque, New Mexico to study the technique, history and spirituality of icon painting (technically "icon writing") with Russian-American master, Robert Lentz. He also assists with sacramental ministry in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe, New Mexico."

That explains why his work is crap and the definition of "schlock", he learned from Robert Lentz, the worst "iconographer" (he doesn't even deserve that in quotes) in this entire country.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Cyrillic on May 28, 2013, 11:57:07 AM
Strange. Francis in Greek is Φραγσισκος, not Φρασισκος.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 28, 2013, 11:59:47 AM
First post on OCnet in a while, and thought I'd start off by sharing some icons by Fr. William Hart McNichols (RC).

(http://www.standreirublevicons.com/uploads/pictures/big/HPMJ132.web.png) (http://www.standreirublevicons.com/gallery.php?action=viewPicture&id=81)

(images redacted for brevity)

"El Espiritu Santo de Taos." I'm assuming this last one is supposed to be a personified Holy Spirit?

Quote
http://www.standreirublevicons.com/biography.php

"In September 1990, he moved to Albuquerque, New Mexico to study the technique, history and spirituality of icon painting (technically "icon writing") with Russian-American master, Robert Lentz. He also assists with sacramental ministry in the Archdiocese of Santa Fe, New Mexico."

That explains why his work is crap and the definition of "schlock", he learned from Robert Lentz, the worst "iconographer" (he doesn't even deserve that in quotes) in this entire country.

Oh, there are others who are just as bad, though their motivations might be a little more benign. Like the woman who painted this, which I posted early in the life of this thread. Here is is again, for those who came in late:

This is just priceless for its sheer ghastliness:

(http://www.betsyporter.com/images/Li_Ban_4580.JPG)

The spiel that accompanies this image:

painted as a gift for my daughter, author of the "Lost Voices" trilogy of young adult novels about contemporary teenage mermaids.

According to Irish Legend, Li Ban, a king's daughter, was one of the few survivors of a great flood that occurred before the arrival of Saint Patrick.
For a year, Li Ban lived with her lap dog in the sun room of her seaside castle.  When they ran out of food, Li Ban became a mermaid and the dog
became an otter.  Together they fished the coastal waters for 300 years. Then they were found by some monks and came ashore; and Li Ban was
baptized as a Christian.  Rather than live as a mermaid for another 300 years, Li Ban chose to die and go to heaven.

Li Ban is shown with arms raised in "orans" or prayer position, praising God for her life, her freedom, and her beautifully wild and verdant environment.


Laugh or cry as you wish. Cute otter, though. I like otters.  :)


Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on May 28, 2013, 12:03:29 PM
I'm kind of hoping, with the potential unification of our jurisdictions, maybe even with the Assembly, we could get an official "stamp of approval" sort of thing for iconographers.

It could be a copyright seal that iconographers may put on their websites or products (on the backs, like some Greek iconographers do in Greece) in order to show the iconographer is officially approved by the Assembly of Bishops, and recognized as canonical iconographers.
Making the seal copyright would allow the Assembly to take legal action should any unsanctioned iconographer/painter try to use the seal to deceive people.

This could go along with a section of their website linking to an alphabetical list of approved iconographers and their locations.

The same seal could be used on official church documents and church signs so people will know which churches are canonical and which aren't.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 28, 2013, 12:03:43 PM
Strange. Francis in Greek is Φραγσισκος, not Φρασισκος.

You almost got it right.  :)

It's actually Φραγκισκος. But what you thought was a C is simply a gamma with a rather prominent serif at the base of the letter. Lentz's spelling is correct, but he's put the accent mark on the wrong syllable. It should be on the second syllable, not the first.  :D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Cyrillic on May 28, 2013, 12:04:34 PM
Strange. Francis in Greek is Φραγσισκος, not Φρασισκος.

You almost got it right.  :)

It's actually Φραγκισκος. But what you thought was a C is simply a gamma with a rather prominent serif at the base of the letter. Lentz's spelling is correct, but he's put the accent mark on the wrong syllable. It should be on the second syllable, not the first.  :D

 :-[

I say typo.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 28, 2013, 12:09:24 PM
I'm kind of hoping, with the potential unification of our jurisdictions, maybe even with the Assembly, we could get an official "stamp of approval" sort of thing for iconographers.

It could be a copyright seal that iconographers may put on their websites or products (on the backs, like some Greek iconographers do in Greece) in order to show the iconographer is officially approved by the Assembly of Bishops, and recognized as canonical iconographers.
Making the seal copyright would allow the Assembly to take legal action should any unsanctioned iconographer/painter try to use the seal to deceive people.

This could go along with a section of their website linking to an alphabetical list of approved iconographers and their locations.

The seals I've on the back of Greek icons simply certifies that the icon is cleared for export. Nothing to do with an episcopal imprimatur.

At any rate, what would an imprimatur do to stop the likes of Fr Stamatios Skliris, an Orthodox priest, and with a growing following through his book sales, lecture tours and painting workshops, who has knowingly and deliberately painted plenty of schlock in his time?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 28, 2013, 12:11:59 PM
Strange. Francis in Greek is Φραγσισκος, not Φρασισκος.

You almost got it right.  :)

It's actually Φραγκισκος. But what you thought was a C is simply a gamma with a rather prominent serif at the base of the letter. Lentz's spelling is correct, but he's put the accent mark on the wrong syllable. It should be on the second syllable, not the first.  :D

 :-[

I say typo.

Don't be hard on yourself. Greek is a tough language. Slavonic is even more fun to decipher, especially when the letters are intricately merged and interlocked.  :o :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on May 28, 2013, 12:12:51 PM
I'm kind of hoping, with the potential unification of our jurisdictions, maybe even with the Assembly, we could get an official "stamp of approval" sort of thing for iconographers.

It could be a copyright seal that iconographers may put on their websites or products (on the backs, like some Greek iconographers do in Greece) in order to show the iconographer is officially approved by the Assembly of Bishops, and recognized as canonical iconographers.
Making the seal copyright would allow the Assembly to take legal action should any unsanctioned iconographer/painter try to use the seal to deceive people.

This could go along with a section of their website linking to an alphabetical list of approved iconographers and their locations.

The seals I've on the back of Greek icons simply certifies that the icon is cleared for export. Nothing to do with an episcopal imprimatur .

At any rate, what would an imprimatur do to stop the likes of Fr Stamatios Skliris, an Orthodox priest and with a growing following through his book sales, lecture tours and painting workshops, who has knowingly painted plenty of schlock in his time?

He's in Greece, is he not? I'm talking about American iconographers using a seal by the Assembly. The iconographers would have to apply to receive the seal, and this would involve submitting a portfolio of their work, proof of their background etc...

Also, I'm looking at his website, some of his work looks brilliant in mural form on church walls, at a distance. But just terrible up close (which a lot of Byzantine work is like this, as I saw in Greece).
His murals/frescoes are just impressive. The small icons, not so much.

This is absolutely stunning, reminds me a lot of Romanian Churches:
http://stamatis-skliris.gr/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/a8039-x900.jpg

This is also amazing:
http://stamatis-skliris.gr/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/gen-ilioy.jpg

and this:
http://stamatis-skliris.gr/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/1a_5953-x900.jpg

Yet some of his other work isn't so impressive.

We have to be careful about judging the use of "bright colors" in icons. Most of the ancient icons we see today have faded significantly, and it hasn't just been a few hundred years, but for some over half a millenia if not more.
While not an icon, look at the Mona Lisa, painted 500 years ago, which modern research shows, probably looks nothing like it originally did, but the colors were probably closer to La Gioconda. Or the example of Gothic Churches, many of which were painted in brilliant colors, which have worn away to the dull, dark grey of stone. Or, of course, Greek temples, which had brilliant colors and have all worn away to stone. Many icons may be the same way, years of usage, exposure to incense and smoke, light and moisture have possibly worn away brilliant colors they may have had.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 28, 2013, 12:18:48 PM
I'm kind of hoping, with the potential unification of our jurisdictions, maybe even with the Assembly, we could get an official "stamp of approval" sort of thing for iconographers.

It could be a copyright seal that iconographers may put on their websites or products (on the backs, like some Greek iconographers do in Greece) in order to show the iconographer is officially approved by the Assembly of Bishops, and recognized as canonical iconographers.
Making the seal copyright would allow the Assembly to take legal action should any unsanctioned iconographer/painter try to use the seal to deceive people.

This could go along with a section of their website linking to an alphabetical list of approved iconographers and their locations.

The seals I've on the back of Greek icons simply certifies that the icon is cleared for export. Nothing to do with an episcopal imprimatur .

At any rate, what would an imprimatur do to stop the likes of Fr Stamatios Skliris, an Orthodox priest and with a growing following through his book sales, lecture tours and painting workshops, who has knowingly painted plenty of schlock in his time?

He's in Greece, is he not? I'm talking about American iconographers using a seal by the Assembly. The iconographers would have to apply to receive the seal, and this would involve submitting a portfolio of their work, proof of their background etc...

Good idea in theory, but it would be only as good as the iconographic knowledge of the hierarchs who oversee it. The aforementioned Fr Stamatios has painted some of his worst stuff in the church at Chambesy, Switzterland, which is a patriarchal (EP) church. The mind boggles as to how or why he was given the blessing to despoil a church so hideously.  >:(
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: 88Devin12 on May 28, 2013, 12:25:27 PM
I'm kind of hoping, with the potential unification of our jurisdictions, maybe even with the Assembly, we could get an official "stamp of approval" sort of thing for iconographers.

It could be a copyright seal that iconographers may put on their websites or products (on the backs, like some Greek iconographers do in Greece) in order to show the iconographer is officially approved by the Assembly of Bishops, and recognized as canonical iconographers.
Making the seal copyright would allow the Assembly to take legal action should any unsanctioned iconographer/painter try to use the seal to deceive people.

This could go along with a section of their website linking to an alphabetical list of approved iconographers and their locations.

The seals I've on the back of Greek icons simply certifies that the icon is cleared for export. Nothing to do with an episcopal imprimatur .

At any rate, what would an imprimatur do to stop the likes of Fr Stamatios Skliris, an Orthodox priest and with a growing following through his book sales, lecture tours and painting workshops, who has knowingly painted plenty of schlock in his time?

He's in Greece, is he not? I'm talking about American iconographers using a seal by the Assembly. The iconographers would have to apply to receive the seal, and this would involve submitting a portfolio of their work, proof of their background etc...

Good idea in theory, but it would be only as good as the iconographic knowledge of the hierarchs who oversee it. The aforementioned Fr Stamatios has painted some of his worst stuff in the church at Chambesy, Switzterland, which is a patriarchal (EP) church. The mind boggles as to how or why he was given the blessing to despoil a church so hideously.  >:(

sorry for editing my post after the fact. I posted some of his work I kind of like.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 28, 2013, 12:32:14 PM
I'm kind of hoping, with the potential unification of our jurisdictions, maybe even with the Assembly, we could get an official "stamp of approval" sort of thing for iconographers.

It could be a copyright seal that iconographers may put on their websites or products (on the backs, like some Greek iconographers do in Greece) in order to show the iconographer is officially approved by the Assembly of Bishops, and recognized as canonical iconographers.
Making the seal copyright would allow the Assembly to take legal action should any unsanctioned iconographer/painter try to use the seal to deceive people.

This could go along with a section of their website linking to an alphabetical list of approved iconographers and their locations.

The seals I've on the back of Greek icons simply certifies that the icon is cleared for export. Nothing to do with an episcopal imprimatur .

At any rate, what would an imprimatur do to stop the likes of Fr Stamatios Skliris, an Orthodox priest and with a growing following through his book sales, lecture tours and painting workshops, who has knowingly painted plenty of schlock in his time?

He's in Greece, is he not? I'm talking about American iconographers using a seal by the Assembly. The iconographers would have to apply to receive the seal, and this would involve submitting a portfolio of their work, proof of their background etc...

Good idea in theory, but it would be only as good as the iconographic knowledge of the hierarchs who oversee it. The aforementioned Fr Stamatios has painted some of his worst stuff in the church at Chambesy, Switzterland, which is a patriarchal (EP) church. The mind boggles as to how or why he was given the blessing to despoil a church so hideously.  >:(

sorry for editing my post after the fact. I posted some of his work I kind of like.

Bright colors are not the problem, and Fr S can behave himself when he puts his mind to it, which makes his forays into self-expression and psychedelia all the more infuriating, as it's clear these works are not the result of honest ignorance. He also has an unfortunate tendency, even in his mainstream work, to paint large and wide eyes which, at best, give a "deer in the headlights" expression, and, at worst, are just creepy and sinister.

I've posted a few times on this thread, and on the Luke Warmodox thread, on images he has painted. If you haven't seen them, I'd recommend you do.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on May 28, 2013, 12:34:22 PM
(http://www.betsyporter.com/images/Li_Ban_4580.JPG)

There's an icon of the Starbucks logo?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Arachne on May 28, 2013, 12:43:23 PM
(http://www.betsyporter.com/images/Li_Ban_4580.JPG)

There's an icon of the Starbucks logo?

http://whitepaintedwoman.wordpress.com/2010/02/14/liban/

The Starbucks logo always looked more like one of the Furies to me.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on May 28, 2013, 02:21:53 PM
(http://www.betsyporter.com/images/Li_Ban_4580.JPG)

There's an icon of the Starbucks logo?

Some of these wacky ones make me want to slap somebody.  :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 29, 2013, 03:09:58 AM
(http://www.betsyporter.com/images/Li_Ban_4580.JPG)

There's an icon of the Starbucks logo?

Some of these wacky ones make me want to slap somebody.  :P

I don't think I could manage such restraint!  :o :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: W.A.Mozart on May 29, 2013, 03:49:04 PM
found this on some serbian website. its their famous singer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceca_%28singer%29

(http://blejac.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/ceca.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 29, 2013, 07:15:56 PM
found this on some serbian website. its their famous singer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceca_%28singer%29

(http://blejac.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/ceca.jpg)

The only thing worthwhile about this schlock are the fairy lights.

I'm also appalled and enraged by the incomprehensible stupidity of the artist, not only for painting such garbage (what a waste of paint, leaf - that's not gold paint in the background - and time!), but for where it was exhibited:

A student of the Faculty of Arts in Nis, Vladislava Djuric found herself in the spotlight after her work portraying a Serbian folk star Svetlana Ceca Raznatovic as an icon of the Holy Mother of God has been exhibited in a local elementary school.

In an interview for the daily Press, Vladislava said she was shocked as she never thought her artwork would get so much public interest and explained she had no intention of deriding the Serbian tradition.

“It was a work for graphic communications on the subject of Serbian brand. My idea was that a portrait of the folk icon presented as a holy painting reflects the current quality of Serbia’s culture. I chose Ceca as she is often referred to as a ‘Serbian mother’ – she is a synonym for a person who is victim, widow, hero, single mother… She has a very strong influence on many young people. In our everyday life she comes across as an icon and that is why I decided to present her this way. It is solely my artistic reflection on the reality, my personal attitude towards the modern Serbian society and no one else stands behind this idea.” Djuric explained.

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/6021484-folk-icon-as-holy-mother-art-or-profanity
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Antonis on May 29, 2013, 10:00:38 PM
I'm kind of hoping, with the potential unification of our jurisdictions, maybe even with the Assembly, we could get an official "stamp of approval" sort of thing for iconographers.

It could be a copyright seal that iconographers may put on their websites or products (on the backs, like some Greek iconographers do in Greece) in order to show the iconographer is officially approved by the Assembly of Bishops, and recognized as canonical iconographers.
Making the seal copyright would allow the Assembly to take legal action should any unsanctioned iconographer/painter try to use the seal to deceive people.

This could go along with a section of their website linking to an alphabetical list of approved iconographers and their locations.

The seals I've on the back of Greek icons simply certifies that the icon is cleared for export. Nothing to do with an episcopal imprimatur.

At any rate, what would an imprimatur do to stop the likes of Fr Stamatios Skliris, an Orthodox priest, and with a growing following through his book sales, lecture tours and painting workshops, who has knowingly and deliberately painted plenty of schlock in his time?
So you're saying Fr Stamatios should stamata?  :D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Tikhon.of.Colorado on May 29, 2013, 10:40:11 PM
^ thanks for sharing.

(http://www.ikonografski-ateljeminic.com/sites/default/files/node_gallery/Isus-Hristos.jpg)
Is it schlock? (it's a Serbian icon and the text in the Gospel is written in Serbia ""I am the Light of the world...")
My inner Doctor Who fan is fanboying over this icon so hard.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 30, 2013, 12:51:33 AM
I'm kind of hoping, with the potential unification of our jurisdictions, maybe even with the Assembly, we could get an official "stamp of approval" sort of thing for iconographers.

It could be a copyright seal that iconographers may put on their websites or products (on the backs, like some Greek iconographers do in Greece) in order to show the iconographer is officially approved by the Assembly of Bishops, and recognized as canonical iconographers.
Making the seal copyright would allow the Assembly to take legal action should any unsanctioned iconographer/painter try to use the seal to deceive people.

This could go along with a section of their website linking to an alphabetical list of approved iconographers and their locations.

The seals I've on the back of Greek icons simply certifies that the icon is cleared for export. Nothing to do with an episcopal imprimatur.

At any rate, what would an imprimatur do to stop the likes of Fr Stamatios Skliris, an Orthodox priest, and with a growing following through his book sales, lecture tours and painting workshops, who has knowingly and deliberately painted plenty of schlock in his time?
So you're saying Fr Stamatios should stamata?  :D

YES!! If his bishop's name is Gregory, he should live up to his name and order Fr S to cease and desist.  ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: podkarpatska on May 30, 2013, 02:22:54 PM
Not knowing much about the Serbian singer, I read up on her. The picture, painted in an ersatz iconographic style, goes well beyond schlock. It is blasphemous.

Were we Orthodox like the Muslim mobs, we would have rioted and demanded the painter's hand be dispatched for such sacrilege. Thankfully, we are a more patient lot and we can wait for God's judgment.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Iconodule on May 30, 2013, 04:10:42 PM
Well, I like Fr. Stamatis' icons.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 30, 2013, 04:54:30 PM
found this on some serbian website. its their famous singer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceca_%28singer%29

(http://blejac.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/ceca.jpg)

Best. Schlock. Icon. Ever.

Although the painter forgot to giver her a cross halo and three stars. Better luck next time.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on May 30, 2013, 04:56:46 PM
Well, I like Fr. Stamatis' icons.

And I like chant that sounds like cats being drowned and camels being neutered.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: podkarpatska on May 30, 2013, 05:32:48 PM
Well, I like Fr. Stamatis' icons.

And I like chant that sounds like cats being drowned and camels being neutered.

I was going to add something snarky about chanters, but the better angels stopped me.

As to the Serbian singer's painting...from reading her bio, it would seem  there is no need for the stars.....
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on May 31, 2013, 05:59:01 AM
Well, I like Fr. Stamatis' icons.

You're kidding me, right?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Iconodule on May 31, 2013, 07:21:28 AM
Well, I like Fr. Stamatis' icons.

You're kidding me, right?

(http://stamatis-skliris.gr/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/proffoto-011-x900.jpg)

What's not to like?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on May 31, 2013, 07:24:41 AM
^ That image reminds me of a sad dog. Just saying.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Dominika on May 31, 2013, 08:07:02 AM
found this on some serbian website. its their famous singer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceca_%28singer%29

(http://blejac.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/ceca.jpg)

Best. Schlock. Icon. Ever.

Although the painter forgot to giver her a cross halo and three stars. Better luck next time.

Yeah, probably the schlockest icon I've ever seen. And the fact it's been painted by my countrywoman... Gosh.  :-[ But I (and my Serbian family too) wonder why Ceca is so popular, although we have much better national (I mean, turbo-folk) singers - both sexes.   ::)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on May 31, 2013, 08:48:18 AM
The one of St. Isaac makes my eyes hurt.  :-[
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on June 04, 2013, 11:40:56 PM
(http://www.sacredartgallery.com/catalog/support_images/49icon.jpg)

19th century Russian icon.

Would this one also be schlock? "The Mother of God of Three Joys"

(http://www.sacredartgallery.com/catalog/support_images/61icon.jpg)

Both found here (http://www.sacredartgallery.com/sacredartcatalog.htm).
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on June 05, 2013, 12:12:24 AM
I'm kind of hoping, with the potential unification of our jurisdictions, maybe even with the Assembly, we could get an official "stamp of approval" sort of thing for iconographers.

It could be a copyright seal that iconographers may put on their websites or products (on the backs, like some Greek iconographers do in Greece) in order to show the iconographer is officially approved by the Assembly of Bishops, and recognized as canonical iconographers.
Making the seal copyright would allow the Assembly to take legal action should any unsanctioned iconographer/painter try to use the seal to deceive people.

This could go along with a section of their website linking to an alphabetical list of approved iconographers and their locations.

The same seal could be used on official church documents and church signs so people will know which churches are canonical and which aren't.

Um didn't you like join the trash-LBK bandwagon earlier in this thread at some point? Have you done another 180?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: orthonorm on June 05, 2013, 12:23:24 AM
found this on some serbian website. its their famous singer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceca_%28singer%29

(http://blejac.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/ceca.jpg)

Best. Schlock. Icon. Ever.

Although the painter forgot to giver her a cross halo and three stars. Better luck next time.

LOL! I have to start looking that this thread more.

*boggle*
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on June 05, 2013, 12:34:46 AM
(http://www.sacredartgallery.com/catalog/support_images/49icon.jpg)

19th century Russian icon.

Would this one also be schlock? "The Mother of God of Three Joys"

(http://www.sacredartgallery.com/catalog/support_images/61icon.jpg)

Both found here (http://www.sacredartgallery.com/sacredartcatalog.htm).

The first one is not an icon at all, but a conventional RC Sacred Heart painting of Christ, with the added imagery of Him as the Good Shepherd. It probably came out of Poland, western Ukraine, or some other region of middle or eastern Europe where Orthodoxy met with Roman Catholicism.

The second one is called Of the Three Joys (Trekh Radostyey), and is derived from Italian religious paintings of the "Holy Family" which entered Russia in about the 18th century. This is a well-known example of the type:

(http://центрвик.рф/foto-2013/08-01/01.jpg)


St Joseph the Betrothed is to the left of the Mother of God, and a young St John the Baptist to the right. It would have been better for the Virgin to be shown in her conventional attire, and with her hair covered, as well as the stars of virginity, of course. There are other versions which are more acceptable, such as this one:

(http://achram.ru/bogorodiza/foto-ikona/ikona-trex-radostei.jpg)



Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: orthonorm on June 05, 2013, 12:38:44 AM
(http://www.sacredartgallery.com/catalog/support_images/49icon.jpg)

19th century Russian icon.

Would this one also be schlock? "The Mother of God of Three Joys"

(http://www.sacredartgallery.com/catalog/support_images/61icon.jpg)

Both found here (http://www.sacredartgallery.com/sacredartcatalog.htm).

These would in no possible way be schlock. Unless the person painting them is also making artisan mayonaise and selling it on etsy as well.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Fabio Leite on June 11, 2013, 03:48:19 PM
The Surfing Madonna ;D
(http://www.surfingmadonna.org/pix/surfingmadonna06.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on June 11, 2013, 07:16:34 PM
Oh dear. :-[
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on June 11, 2013, 07:40:04 PM
The Surfing Madonna ;D
(http://www.surfingmadonna.org/pix/surfingmadonna06.jpg)

Now I've got this song rattling in my head  :o :laugh: :laugh::

Well, I don't care if it rains or freezes,
Long as I have my plastic Jesus
Riding on the dashboard of my car
Through all trials and tribulations,
We will travel every nation,
With my plastic Jesus I'll go far.

CHORUS
Plastic Jesus, plastic Jesus
Riding on the dashboard of my car
Through my trials and tribulations,
And my travels thru the nations,
With my plastic Jesus I'll go far.


I don't care if it rains or freezes
As long as I've got my Plastic Jesus
Glued to the dashboard of my car,
You can buy Him phosphorescent
Glows in the dark, He's Pink and Pleasant,
Take Him with you when you're travelling far

I don't care if it's dark or scary
Long as I have magnetic Mary
Ridin' on the dashboard of my car
I feel I'm protected amply
I've got the whole damn Holy Family
Riding on the dashboard of my car

You can buy a Sweet Madonna
Dressed in rhinestones sitting on a
Pedestal of abalone shell
Goin' ninety, I'm not wary
'Cause I've got my Virgin Mary
Guaranteeing I won't go to Hell

I don't care if it bumps or jostles
Long as I got the Twelve Apostles
Bolted to the dashboard of my car
Don't I have a pious mess
Such a crowd of holiness
Strung across the dashboard of my car
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on June 11, 2013, 08:32:49 PM
I don't have a plastic Jesus adorning my dashboard, but I am the proud owner of one of these:

http://www.ship-of-fools.com/gadgets/toys_pets_games/010.html
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Opus118 on June 11, 2013, 11:57:18 PM
The Surfing Madonna ;D
(http://www.surfingmadonna.org/pix/surfingmadonna06.jpg)

This was never an icon. It was a mosaic that was installed under a bridge in Encinitis California. The artist happened to be a roommate of the postdoc that I shared an office with. He went to Italy to study mosaic art and decided to apply it at home. No more, no less.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: orthonorm on June 11, 2013, 11:59:04 PM
The Surfing Madonna ;D
(http://www.surfingmadonna.org/pix/surfingmadonna06.jpg)

Now I've got this song rattling in my head  :o :laugh: :laugh::

Well, I don't care if it rains or freezes,
Long as I have my plastic Jesus
Riding on the dashboard of my car
Through all trials and tribulations,
We will travel every nation,
With my plastic Jesus I'll go far.

CHORUS
Plastic Jesus, plastic Jesus
Riding on the dashboard of my car
Through my trials and tribulations,
And my travels thru the nations,
With my plastic Jesus I'll go far.


I don't care if it rains or freezes
As long as I've got my Plastic Jesus
Glued to the dashboard of my car,
You can buy Him phosphorescent
Glows in the dark, He's Pink and Pleasant,
Take Him with you when you're travelling far

I don't care if it's dark or scary
Long as I have magnetic Mary
Ridin' on the dashboard of my car
I feel I'm protected amply
I've got the whole damn Holy Family
Riding on the dashboard of my car

You can buy a Sweet Madonna
Dressed in rhinestones sitting on a
Pedestal of abalone shell
Goin' ninety, I'm not wary
'Cause I've got my Virgin Mary
Guaranteeing I won't go to Hell

I don't care if it bumps or jostles
Long as I got the Twelve Apostles
Bolted to the dashboard of my car
Don't I have a pious mess
Such a crowd of holiness
Strung across the dashboard of my car

We used to sing this in vacation Bible school along with that other brilliant work I posted about.

I'll be thinking this all day tomorrow.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on June 24, 2013, 09:52:39 PM
Just found it on ebay. The center icon, of course. The Holy Spirit proceeding from the Theotokos?

(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/3-GREEK-Orthodox-Icons-Wooden-Virgin-Mary-Baby-Jesus-Wall-Mounts-EC-/00/s/MTMyNFgxNjAw/z/XDAAAMXQLs5Rp6uG/$(KGrHqN,!qcFGlEjIVVeBRp6uGeDE!~~60_57.JPG)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on June 25, 2013, 01:47:36 AM
"Nice" find, Nephi.  :P ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: William on June 25, 2013, 01:50:59 AM
Just found it on ebay. The center icon, of course. The Holy Spirit proceeding from the Theotokos?

(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/3-GREEK-Orthodox-Icons-Wooden-Virgin-Mary-Baby-Jesus-Wall-Mounts-EC-/00/s/MTMyNFgxNjAw/z/XDAAAMXQLs5Rp6uG/$(KGrHqN,!qcFGlEjIVVeBRp6uGeDE!~~60_57.JPG)

Deiparoque?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on June 25, 2013, 01:55:04 AM
Just found it on ebay. The center icon, of course. The Holy Spirit proceeding from the Theotokos?
Deiparoque?

ZING!  :D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on June 25, 2013, 10:20:11 AM
"Nice" find, Nephi.  :P ;)

Too bad I won't be bidding on it. ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on June 25, 2013, 10:22:00 AM
Just found it on ebay. The center icon, of course. The Holy Spirit proceeding from the Theotokos?

Deiparoque?

Unfortunately I don't understand the joke.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: therovingmethodist on June 25, 2013, 11:38:40 AM
Just found it on ebay. The center icon, of course. The Holy Spirit proceeding from the Theotokos?

Deiparoque?

Unfortunately I don't understand the joke.

"and the Deipara"
Deipara is Latin for Theotokos, last I checked.

Whoops! I wrote Deipater at first!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: orthonorm on June 25, 2013, 01:21:27 PM
Just found it on ebay. The center icon, of course. The Holy Spirit proceeding from the Theotokos?

Deiparoque?

Unfortunately I don't understand the joke.

"and the Deipara"
Deipara is Latin for Theotokos, last I checked.

Whoops! I wrote Deipater at first!

It's a word that has been Americaned, I think mostly notably in adjective form deiparous.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on June 25, 2013, 01:23:50 PM
Just found it on ebay. The center icon, of course. The Holy Spirit proceeding from the Theotokos?

Deiparoque?

Unfortunately I don't understand the joke.

"and the Deipara"
Deipara is Latin for Theotokos, last I checked.

Whoops! I wrote Deipater at first!

Oh I get it now. :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on June 30, 2013, 12:21:02 PM
My eyes hurt:

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/q74/5703_548726491851331_1962952877_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Asteriktos on June 30, 2013, 03:28:18 PM
Looks like popcorn (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-fc/popcorn.gif)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on June 30, 2013, 03:30:04 PM
Looks like popcorn (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-fc/popcorn.gif)

Marshmallows maybe, but popcorn? Not sure I see it.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on July 05, 2013, 10:40:57 PM
(http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e338/ewriggs/Icons/Theotokos/kozelshchanskaya.jpg)

Schlock?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on July 05, 2013, 11:37:52 PM
(http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/logossophia/37971644/383763/383763_original.jpg)(http://img1.liveinternet.ru/images/attach/c/2/68/766/68766058_1294164351_David_Popiashvili_christehing.jpg)(http://img2.minibanda.ru/Notes/d/6/d/cache/d6d1a9cd-4b2b-4121-abd0-611415626970-w500-h500.jpg)
Not really sure what these are trying to be honestly, but just thought I'd include them here.

(http://www.ecva.org/exhibition/venite_adoremus/baker_theotokos.jpg)
Episcopalian icon.

(http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/12/chankara.0/0_9257_ad714c84_L)(http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/14/chankara.0/0_926a_882427cc_L)(http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/14/chankara.0/0_9274_26586249_L)
Mary, Gethsemane, and the Nativity.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 06, 2013, 02:18:20 AM
(http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e338/ewriggs/Icons/Theotokos/kozelshchanskaya.jpg)

Schlock?

No. The Kozelshchanskaya is of western origin, and in many ways falls short of canonicity (absence of stars, the exposed hair of the Virgin, etc) but is not schlock. It's in that nebulous group, like Akhtirskaya and Ostrobramskaya, arising from the geographic overlap between RC west and Orthodox east.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 06, 2013, 02:20:04 AM
(http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/logossophia/37971644/383763/383763_original.jpg)(http://img1.liveinternet.ru/images/attach/c/2/68/766/68766058_1294164351_David_Popiashvili_christehing.jpg)(http://img2.minibanda.ru/Notes/d/6/d/cache/d6d1a9cd-4b2b-4121-abd0-611415626970-w500-h500.jpg)
Not really sure what these are trying to be honestly, but just thought I'd include them here.


Folk art at best. Not icons at all.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 06, 2013, 02:25:02 AM

(http://www.ecva.org/exhibition/venite_adoremus/baker_theotokos.jpg)
Episcopalian icon.


Ghastly and stupid. The disembodied hands (presumably representing the crucified Christ) as a creative variant of Christ Emmanuel are silly enough, but the clincher is the Virgin blessing (only male saints of clerical rank bless), and with her left hand to boot.  ::) ::)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 06, 2013, 02:29:46 AM

(http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/12/chankara.0/0_9257_ad714c84_L)(http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/14/chankara.0/0_926a_882427cc_L)(http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/14/chankara.0/0_9274_26586249_L)
Mary, Gethsemane, and the Nativity.

Attractive Asian Christian art, but utterly unsuitable for Orthodox veneration. There's a thread somewhere where I had quite a bit to say about a picture of Christ and the Mother of God painted as Chinese nobility. A great deal of this sort of stuff comes out of RC circles where "social inclusion" is a major credo.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on July 06, 2013, 07:46:01 AM
(http://www.pravmir.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/kingDavid.jpg)

What is he doing?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Arachne on July 06, 2013, 08:08:05 AM
Stop! Hammer time!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 06, 2013, 08:12:16 AM
(http://www.pravmir.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/kingDavid.jpg)

What is he doing?

It's an iconographic representation of this passage from 2 Samuel:

12And it was told king David, saying, The LORD has blessed the house of Obededom, and all that pertains to him, because of the ark of God. So David went and brought up the ark of God from the house of Obededom into the city of David with gladness. 13And it was so, that when they that bore the ark of the LORD had gone six paces, he sacrificed oxen and fatted calves. 14And David danced before the LORD with all his might; and David was girded with a linen ephod.

The mural is in a church dedicated to Prophet David the King, in Tblisi, Georgia. This is one of many murals showing scenes from the life of the prophet.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 06, 2013, 11:46:22 AM
Stop! Hammer time!

:D

But LBK, what is David doing there?  It doesn't look like he's sacrificing oxen and fatted calves (unless they're dwarves), dancing in a linen ephod, or even carrying the Ark.  My first impression was that he was forcefully throwing a bag of money onto a table.  :P

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Deacon Lance on July 06, 2013, 11:54:51 AM
Stop! Hammer time!

:D

But LBK, what is David doing there?  It doesn't look like he's sacrificing oxen and fatted calves (unless they're dwarves), dancing in a linen ephod, or even carrying the Ark.  My first impression was that he was forcefully throwing a bag of money onto a table.  :P



He is obviously doing the arm wave as should be obvious to any breakdancer. ;D For those unfamiliar there is this handy video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhBZtsee7OY
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on July 06, 2013, 03:39:58 PM
Yeah, but he won't be able to spin on his head while he's wearing the crown.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on July 06, 2013, 03:51:06 PM
Stop! Hammer time!

:D

But LBK, what is David doing there?  It doesn't look like he's sacrificing oxen and fatted calves (unless they're dwarves), dancing in a linen ephod, or even carrying the Ark.  My first impression was that he was forcefully throwing a bag of money onto a table.  :P



He is obviously doing the arm wave as should be obvious to any breakdancer. ;D For those unfamiliar there is this handy video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhBZtsee7OY

My first association.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 06, 2013, 09:33:16 PM
Stop! Hammer time!

:D

But LBK, what is David doing there?  It doesn't look like he's sacrificing oxen and fatted calves (unless they're dwarves), dancing in a linen ephod, or even carrying the Ark.  My first impression was that he was forcefully throwing a bag of money onto a table.  :P



I know. All I can see is him flailing his arms about. The other murals in this church are generally OK in content, but this one just didn't do it for me.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: brastaseptim on July 06, 2013, 10:15:22 PM
Stop! Hammer time!

:D

But LBK, what is David doing there?  It doesn't look like he's sacrificing oxen and fatted calves (unless they're dwarves), dancing in a linen ephod, or even carrying the Ark.  My first impression was that he was forcefully throwing a bag of money onto a table.  :P



I know. All I can see is him flailing his arms about. The other murals in this church are generally OK in content, but this one just didn't do it for me.

And I've never been more surprised that a strange-looking, questionable icon just didn't appeal to our resident iconography expert.  ;D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on July 06, 2013, 10:46:08 PM
My eyes hurt:

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn2/q74/5703_548726491851331_1962952877_n.jpg)

Can't have too much bling.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 06, 2013, 10:55:47 PM
My eyes hurt:


Can't have too much bling.

A textbook case of over-egging the custard.  :P :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shiny on July 07, 2013, 10:14:59 AM
http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/logossophia/37971644/383763/383763_original.jpg
http://img1.liveinternet.ru/images/attach/c/2/68/766/68766058_1294164351_David_Popiashvili_christehing.jpg
http://img2.minibanda.ru/Notes/d/6/d/cache/d6d1a9cd-4b2b-4121-abd0-611415626970-w500-h500.jpg
Not really sure what these are trying to be honestly, but just thought I'd include them here.

http://www.ecva.org/exhibition/venite_adoremus/baker_theotokos.jpg
Episcopalian icon.

http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/12/chankara.0/0_9257_ad714c84_Lhttp://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/14/chankara.0/0_926a_882427cc_L
http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/14/chankara.0/0_9274_26586249_L
Mary, Gethsemane, and the Nativity.

I think these are fascinating.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: W.A.Mozart on July 20, 2013, 03:37:05 AM
(http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/logossophia/37971644/383763/383763_original.jpg)(http://img1.liveinternet.ru/images/attach/c/2/68/766/68766058_1294164351_David_Popiashvili_christehing.jpg)(http://img2.minibanda.ru/Notes/d/6/d/cache/d6d1a9cd-4b2b-4121-abd0-611415626970-w500-h500.jpg)
Not really sure what these are trying to be honestly, but just thought I'd include them here.


These are painted by of an artist from Georgia, David Popiashvili - Давид Попиашвили. Date of birth 1969, Tbilisi, Georgia. Graduated from the State Academy of Fine Arts.

I think they are beautiful.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Taste-and-See/374623815918894

also googled them on a Serbian website http://www.pouke.org/forum/topic/21611-david-popiashvilli-ciklus-od-30-ilustracija-za-de%C4%8Diju-bibliju/
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: W.A.Mozart on July 20, 2013, 03:39:14 AM
Taste and See
20 September 2012


also http://ibt.org.ru/multimedia_original%20CD/introduction.html
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 20, 2013, 04:48:54 AM
Taste and See
20 September 2012


also http://ibt.org.ru/multimedia_original%20CD/introduction.html

And? The article you've linked to states clearly that the book where these illustrations feature is a work of "creative fantasy". In other words, a product of the writer's and, therefore, the artist's, imaginations. Further evidence that these pictures cannot be considered to be icons. Folk art, yes, as I wrote before. Cute pictures to illustrate a book, yes. Icons, no.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: ilyazhito on July 20, 2013, 03:38:36 PM
I agree. These pictures are good illustrations, but I would not want them to be icons. Even though the Georgian iconographic style is different from the Byzantine or Russo-Byzantine standards, these paintings do not conform even to the Georgian style. These might even be didactic and in good taste, but why bring up these illustrations in a discussion about icons?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on July 21, 2013, 09:59:47 PM
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/421682bba3369fcdae349484b0ccef68/tumblr_mhj749pvT61rmgpyyo1_1280.jpg)(http://www.foodsnute.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/ET-ET-in-Christian-Icon1.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Asteriktos on July 21, 2013, 10:04:49 PM
There has to be some kind of pun to be made here about pray vs. prey and abductions.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 21, 2013, 10:45:00 PM
The ET icon really bothers me.  Everyone knows his finger glowed yellow/white, not red. 

Otherwise, perfectly acceptable. 






(Just kidding, LBK...breathe! :))
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 21, 2013, 11:05:34 PM
The ET icon really bothers me.  Everyone knows his finger glowed yellow/white, not red. 

Otherwise, perfectly acceptable. 






(Just kidding, LBK...breathe! :))

I know you rather well, my dear Mor ....  :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on July 22, 2013, 11:41:16 AM
The ET icon really bothers me.  Everyone knows his finger glowed yellow/white, not red.  

Otherwise, perfectly acceptable.  

Anathema! Everyone knows a proper canonical ET icon should NEVER have the Latinized Sacred Heart! This was obviously produced by someone in Rome's Brodo Asogian metropolia.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on July 22, 2013, 11:51:43 AM
The ET icon really bothers me.  Everyone knows his finger glowed yellow/white, not red.  

Otherwise, perfectly acceptable.  

Anathema! Everyone knows a proper canonical ET icon should NEVER have the Latinized Sacred Heart! This was obviously produced by someone in Rome's Brodo Asogian metropolia.

Pfft. If it's good enough for the Antiochian Extra-Terrestrial Rite, it's good enough for me.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 22, 2013, 12:02:14 PM
The ET icon really bothers me.  Everyone knows his finger glowed yellow/white, not red.  

Otherwise, perfectly acceptable.  

Anathema! Everyone knows a proper canonical ET icon should NEVER have the Latinized Sacred Heart! This was obviously produced by someone in Rome's Brodo Asogian metropolia.

Pfft. If it's good enough for the Antiochian Extra-Terrestrial Rite, it's good enough for me.

 ;D ;D ;D

As for ET's finger glowing yellow-white, look at the "icon" closely: that's a halo around the fingertip. The artist was right all along! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Aedificare on July 22, 2013, 09:55:57 PM
I'm no expert but something seems a bit off about this Swedish Coptic icon of St.Erik.

(http://www.arken.se/images/products/large/00036772.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on July 22, 2013, 10:05:45 PM
The ET icon really bothers me.  Everyone knows his finger glowed yellow/white, not red.  

Otherwise, perfectly acceptable.  

Anathema! Everyone knows a proper canonical ET icon should NEVER have the Latinized Sacred Heart! This was obviously produced by someone in Rome's Brodo Asogian metropolia.

Pfft. If it's good enough for the Antiochian Extra-Terrestrial Rite, it's good enough for me.
That's the problem with the AE-TR; they don't vet the heterodox alien devotions in light of proper Orthodox practice! The Sacred Heart devotion clearly arose well after the schism of stardate 41153.7.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on July 22, 2013, 10:35:34 PM
Anathema! Everyone knows a proper canonical ET icon should NEVER have the Latinized Sacred Heart! This was obviously produced by someone in Rome's Brodo Asogian metropolia.

Pfft. If it's good enough for the Antiochian Extra-Terrestrial Rite, it's good enough for me.
That's the problem with the AE-TR; they don't vet the heterodox alien devotions in light of proper Orthodox practice! The Sacred Heart devotion clearly arose well after the schism of stardate 41153.7.

But it organically developed out of the legitimate tradition of the Brodo Asogian (http://aliens.wikia.com/wiki/Children_of_the_Green_Planet) Church! Why should we force them to give up their heritage that, when properly understood, is fully Orthodox? That's just anti-ET hyperdoxy! Remember what the Holy and Pious St. John, Apostle to the Extra-Terrestrials said:

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must be an Earthling. The Brodo Asogians were fully Orthodox for millenia, and their venerable liturgy is far older than any of their heresies."
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on July 22, 2013, 11:53:16 PM
Anathema! Everyone knows a proper canonical ET icon should NEVER have the Latinized Sacred Heart! This was obviously produced by someone in Rome's Brodo Asogian metropolia.

Pfft. If it's good enough for the Antiochian Extra-Terrestrial Rite, it's good enough for me.
That's the problem with the AE-TR; they don't vet the heterodox alien devotions in light of proper Orthodox practice! The Sacred Heart devotion clearly arose well after the schism of stardate 41153.7.

But it organically developed out of the legitimate tradition of the Brodo Asogian (http://aliens.wikia.com/wiki/Children_of_the_Green_Planet) Church! Why should we force them to give up their heritage that, when properly understood, is fully Orthodox? That's just anti-ET hyperdoxy! Remember what the Holy and Pious St. John, Apostle to the Extra-Terrestrials said:

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must be an Earthling. The Brodo Asogians were fully Orthodox for millenia, and their venerable liturgy is far older than any of their heresies."
Ecumenist garbage! Everyone knows that Orthodoxy is the faith that founded the universe, and if the u-word Brodo Asogians — and I would call them much worse than u-words, if the forum rules would allow us to speak of the ETs as they have been historically known — truly wanted to be Orthodox, they would return to it in its most fully preserved form, the EASTERN, EARTHEN TERRESTRIAL form. I would rather be an atheist than worship in a church that allowed reunion with the aliens without them abandoning their disgusting Sacred Heart icons.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 23, 2013, 01:37:27 AM
I'm no expert but something seems a bit off about this Swedish Coptic icon of St.Erik.

(http://www.arken.se/images/products/large/00036772.jpg)

You're learning, Grasshopper!  :D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 23, 2013, 01:38:19 AM
Anathema! Everyone knows a proper canonical ET icon should NEVER have the Latinized Sacred Heart! This was obviously produced by someone in Rome's Brodo Asogian metropolia.

Pfft. If it's good enough for the Antiochian Extra-Terrestrial Rite, it's good enough for me.
That's the problem with the AE-TR; they don't vet the heterodox alien devotions in light of proper Orthodox practice! The Sacred Heart devotion clearly arose well after the schism of stardate 41153.7.

But it organically developed out of the legitimate tradition of the Brodo Asogian (http://aliens.wikia.com/wiki/Children_of_the_Green_Planet) Church! Why should we force them to give up their heritage that, when properly understood, is fully Orthodox? That's just anti-ET hyperdoxy! Remember what the Holy and Pious St. John, Apostle to the Extra-Terrestrials said:

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must be an Earthling. The Brodo Asogians were fully Orthodox for millenia, and their venerable liturgy is far older than any of their heresies."
Ecumenist garbage! Everyone knows that Orthodoxy is the faith that founded the universe, and if the u-word Brodo Asogians — and I would call them much worse than u-words, if the forum rules would allow us to speak of the ETs as they have been historically known — truly wanted to be Orthodox, they would return to it in its most fully preserved form, the EASTERN, EARTHEN TERRESTRIAL form. I would rather be an atheist than worship in a church that allowed reunion with the aliens without them abandoning their disgusting Sacred Heart icons.

Great stuff, guys!  :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Ridicule and wit are sharper than knives in the right hands.  ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on July 23, 2013, 02:35:26 AM
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8a/Radonezh_Sergiy.jpg?uselang=ru)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Asteriktos on July 23, 2013, 02:36:39 AM
Is this Skyrim?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 23, 2013, 02:52:20 AM
It's supposed to be a statue of St Sergius of Radonezh. The peasant boy sporting a halo hovering in front of him is the boy Bartholomew, who grew up to become the saint. Weird juxtaposition.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on July 27, 2013, 07:52:43 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/kate-middleton-painting-photos_n_3598713.html

Georgiotokos Galaktotrophousa
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on July 27, 2013, 08:52:49 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/kate-middleton-painting-photos_n_3598713.html

Georgiotokos Galaktotrophousa


that is the worst one I have seen in this thread!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Asteriktos on July 27, 2013, 10:46:06 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/kate-middleton-painting-photos_n_3598713.html

Georgiotokos Galaktotrophousa

Icon of Kate = beauty will save the world!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on July 27, 2013, 11:50:33 PM
I'm no expert but something seems a bit off about this Swedish Coptic icon of St.Erik.

(http://www.arken.se/images/products/large/00036772.jpg)

You're learning, Grasshopper!  :D

1. St. Eric was a martyr and needs a cross, not a Gospel book
2. St. Eric lived after 1100, so why is there a Coptic icon of him
3. Also, the position of the Swedish flag is uncanonical. He should either be wearing the flag, or holding one
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on July 27, 2013, 11:53:04 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/kate-middleton-painting-photos_n_3598713.html

Georgiotokos Galaktotrophousa

Icon of Kate = beauty will save the world!

But that ain't it. Somewhere in Holy Russia, Dostoyevsky is sobbing.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Asteriktos on July 28, 2013, 12:09:07 AM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/kate-middleton-painting-photos_n_3598713.html

Georgiotokos Galaktotrophousa

Icon of Kate = beauty will save the world!

But that ain't it.

Well I agree with that... certainly there was a failure of execution in this case... nonetheless, I have faith that some day such an icon will be produced!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on July 28, 2013, 12:21:49 AM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/kate-middleton-painting-photos_n_3598713.html

Georgiotokos Galaktotrophousa

Icon of Kate = beauty will save the world!

But that ain't it.

Well I agree with that... certainly there was a failure of execution in this case... nonetheless, I have faith that some day such an icon will be produced!

Shouldn't canonical icons of Duchess Kate have her dressed as the Queen of Hearts?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 28, 2013, 06:46:47 AM
I'm no expert but something seems a bit off about this Swedish Coptic icon of St.Erik.

(http://www.arken.se/images/products/large/00036772.jpg)

You're learning, Grasshopper!  :D

1. St. Eric was a martyr and needs a cross, not a Gospel book
2. St. Eric lived after 1100, so why is there a Coptic icon of him
3. Also, the position of the Swedish flag is uncanonical. He should either be wearing the flag, or holding one

Almost right, Shanghaiski. Number 3 is where you went wrong: national flags have no place in iconography.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on July 28, 2013, 03:45:47 PM
I'm no expert but something seems a bit off about this Swedish Coptic icon of St.Erik.

(http://www.arken.se/images/products/large/00036772.jpg)

You're learning, Grasshopper!  :D

1. St. Eric was a martyr and needs a cross, not a Gospel book
2. St. Eric lived after 1100, so why is there a Coptic icon of him
3. Also, the position of the Swedish flag is uncanonical. He should either be wearing the flag, or holding one

Almost right, Shanghaiski. Number 3 is where you went wrong: national flags have no place in iconography.

But I was mentioning their part in schlockonography.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on July 29, 2013, 12:46:39 AM
I'm no expert but something seems a bit off about this Swedish Coptic icon of St.Erik.



You're learning, Grasshopper!  :D

1. St. Eric was a martyr and needs a cross, not a Gospel book
2. St. Eric lived after 1100, so why is there a Coptic icon of him
3. Also, the position of the Swedish flag is uncanonical. He should either be wearing the flag, or holding one

Almost right, Shanghaiski. Number 3 is where you went wrong: national flags have no place in iconography.

But I was mentioning their part in schlockonography.


Schlockonography!! Brilliant! LOVE IT!!  :laugh: :laugh: :-* :-*
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: W.A.Mozart on August 02, 2013, 07:28:38 PM
And? The article you've linked to states clearly that the book where these illustrations feature is a work of "creative fantasy". In other words, a product of the writer's and, therefore, the artist's, imaginations. Further evidence that these pictures cannot be considered to be icons. Folk art, yes, as I wrote before. Cute pictures to illustrate a book, yes. Icons, no.

where did I write that they are icons?  ???
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Iconodule on August 02, 2013, 08:13:23 PM
It's supposed to be a statue of St Sergius of Radonezh. The peasant boy sporting a halo hovering in front of him is the boy Bartholomew, who grew up to become the saint. Weird juxtaposition.

I assumed it was the boy Bartholomew and the mysterious hermit he met.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Fabio Leite on August 04, 2013, 09:26:00 PM
And what about this? It depicts the nine celestial hierarchies.

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on August 04, 2013, 09:33:29 PM
The middle ones in the top row look like some sort of insect.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on August 06, 2013, 01:46:22 AM
Ophanim?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on August 06, 2013, 01:48:52 AM
The middle ones in the top row look like some sort of insect.

here orthodox depiction

orthodox as in orthodox building ;p

(http://i.imgur.com/3TPrSCS.jpg)

those are eyes on there by the way ;)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 06, 2013, 02:35:43 AM
And what about this? It depicts the nine celestial hierarchies.



Of the nine orders of heavenly hosts, only the angels, archangels, seraphim and cherubim are given any sort of biblical description of their appearance, or have been revealed in a form visible to human eyes. There seems to be nothing revealed in Tradition which allows us to make an image of thrones, dominions, principalities, powers or virtues.

The iconographer here has simply depicted these "unknown" ranks in the same way as angels and archangels. His depiction of seraphim, cherubim, angels and archangels is quite in order. Schlock? Not really. Just an honest, if not entirely correct, attempt.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on August 06, 2013, 04:06:19 AM
I had an idea of a shlock icon while I was sinning on this forum


An icon of the Devil, with halo and all, triumphing over God

To my surprise, I cannot find an icon of this on the internet.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 06, 2013, 04:23:00 AM
I had an idea of a shlock icon while I was sinning on this forum


An icon of the Devil, with halo and all, triumphing over God

To my surprise, I cannot find an icon of this on the internet.

Your point?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on August 06, 2013, 04:29:46 AM
I had an idea of a shlock icon while I was sinning on this forum


An icon of the Devil, with halo and all, triumphing over God

To my surprise, I cannot find an icon of this on the internet.

Your point?

i don't know, but I made FOUND a shlock icon for you all, here it comes
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on August 06, 2013, 04:31:18 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/wkKqZ7m.jpg)

That is original text right there
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 06, 2013, 04:36:58 AM


That is original text right there


Original text? Yeah, right ....  ::)

Amateurish, childish, and not even funny.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on August 06, 2013, 04:41:23 AM


That is original text right there


Original text? Yeah, right ....  ::)

Amateurish, childish, and not even funny.

Sure it is childish and not funny, but it is definitely not amateurish! I used fancy text rather than some new modernist font, also red text to stay faithful to the original! Further, I used the pipette to use original background colors to smear the incorrect text
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 06, 2013, 04:50:31 AM


That is original text right there


Original text? Yeah, right ....  ::)

Amateurish, childish, and not even funny.


Sure it is childish and not funny, but it is definitely not amateurish! I used fancy text rather than some new modernist font, also red text to stay faithful to the original! Further, I used the pipette to use original background colors to smear the incorrect text

Gimme a break. A six year old child using a 15-year-old version of Paintshop Pro could have done it.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Iconodule on August 06, 2013, 08:20:51 AM
And what about this? It depicts the nine celestial hierarchies.



Of the nine orders of heavenly hosts, only the angels, archangels, seraphim and cherubim are given any sort of biblical description of their appearance, or have been revealed in a form visible to human eyes. There seems to be nothing revealed in Tradition which allows us to make an image of thrones, dominions, principalities, powers or virtues.

Aren't the winged/ eyed wheels thrones?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 06, 2013, 08:44:28 AM
And what about this? It depicts the nine celestial hierarchies.



Of the nine orders of heavenly hosts, only the angels, archangels, seraphim and cherubim are given any sort of biblical description of their appearance, or have been revealed in a form visible to human eyes. There seems to be nothing revealed in Tradition which allows us to make an image of thrones, dominions, principalities, powers or virtues.

Aren't the winged/ eyed wheels thrones?

No. They are cherubim, as described in the vision of Ezekiel in ch.1:

15 Now as I looked at the living creatures, behold, a wheel was on the earth beside each living creature with its four faces. 16 The appearance of the wheels and their workings was like the color of beryl, and all four had the same likeness. The appearance of their workings was, as it were, a wheel in the middle of a wheel. 17 When they moved, they went toward any one of four directions; they did not turn aside when they went. 18 As for their rims, they were so high they were awesome; and their rims were full of eyes, all around the four of them.

The phrase many-eyed cherubim features in various liturgical prayers, including the anaphora of both St Basil's and St John Chrysostom's liturgies. They are also thus described in the November 8 feast of the Assembly of the Bodiless Hosts:

Ezekiel saw the ranks of Angels in varied form and in his opening proclaimed: Among them stand the six-winged Seraphim, and the many-eyed Cherubim circle round. With them he saw the Archangels shining like amber as they glorified Christ to all the ages.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Iconodule on August 06, 2013, 01:39:46 PM
And what about this? It depicts the nine celestial hierarchies.



Of the nine orders of heavenly hosts, only the angels, archangels, seraphim and cherubim are given any sort of biblical description of their appearance, or have been revealed in a form visible to human eyes. There seems to be nothing revealed in Tradition which allows us to make an image of thrones, dominions, principalities, powers or virtues.

Aren't the winged/ eyed wheels thrones?

No. They are cherubim, as described in the vision of Ezekiel in ch.1:

15 Now as I looked at the living creatures, behold, a wheel was on the earth beside each living creature with its four faces. 16 The appearance of the wheels and their workings was like the color of beryl, and all four had the same likeness. The appearance of their workings was, as it were, a wheel in the middle of a wheel. 17 When they moved, they went toward any one of four directions; they did not turn aside when they went. 18 As for their rims, they were so high they were awesome; and their rims were full of eyes, all around the four of them.

The cherubim are the "living creatures" with four faces, not the wheels.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: JamesR on August 06, 2013, 02:43:24 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/wkKqZ7m.jpg)

That is original text right there

Hey, now that's not funny.

Everyone knows I am the Devil, so how could I send myself?  :D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Gunnarr on August 06, 2013, 04:10:34 PM


That is original text right there


Original text? Yeah, right ....  ::)

Amateurish, childish, and not even funny.


Sure it is childish and not funny, but it is definitely not amateurish! I used fancy text rather than some new modernist font, also red text to stay faithful to the original! Further, I used the pipette to use original background colors to smear the incorrect text

Gimme a break. A six year old child using a 15-year-old version of Paintshop Pro could have done it.

well, ok. but! It was a new fancy version of microsoft paint, very confusing all the buttons are in different places. I wish I had the 15 year old version

At least it is schlock!  ;D



That is original text right there

Hey, now that's not funny.

Everyone knows I am the Devil, so how could I send myself?  :D

Everyone's a critic!   ;D
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 06, 2013, 06:35:56 PM
And what about this? It depicts the nine celestial hierarchies.



Of the nine orders of heavenly hosts, only the angels, archangels, seraphim and cherubim are given any sort of biblical description of their appearance, or have been revealed in a form visible to human eyes. There seems to be nothing revealed in Tradition which allows us to make an image of thrones, dominions, principalities, powers or virtues.

Aren't the winged/ eyed wheels thrones?

No. They are cherubim, as described in the vision of Ezekiel in ch.1:

15 Now as I looked at the living creatures, behold, a wheel was on the earth beside each living creature with its four faces. 16 The appearance of the wheels and their workings was like the color of beryl, and all four had the same likeness. The appearance of their workings was, as it were, a wheel in the middle of a wheel. 17 When they moved, they went toward any one of four directions; they did not turn aside when they went. 18 As for their rims, they were so high they were awesome; and their rims were full of eyes, all around the four of them.

The cherubim are the "living creatures" with four faces, not the wheels.

Read the above passage again. It clearly distinguishes between the "living creatures" and the wheels. Your position is not supported by the liturgical references, nor by the many icons in existence of "polyommata kherouvim", deicted as many-eyed winged red circles.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Fabio Leite on August 07, 2013, 09:17:18 AM
What form, then, did the Cherubim on the Ark have? I always imagined they were sphynx-like shaped.

And what about this? It depicts the nine celestial hierarchies.



Of the nine orders of heavenly hosts, only the angels, archangels, seraphim and cherubim are given any sort of biblical description of their appearance, or have been revealed in a form visible to human eyes. There seems to be nothing revealed in Tradition which allows us to make an image of thrones, dominions, principalities, powers or virtues.

Aren't the winged/ eyed wheels thrones?

No. They are cherubim, as described in the vision of Ezekiel in ch.1:

15 Now as I looked at the living creatures, behold, a wheel was on the earth beside each living creature with its four faces. 16 The appearance of the wheels and their workings was like the color of beryl, and all four had the same likeness. The appearance of their workings was, as it were, a wheel in the middle of a wheel. 17 When they moved, they went toward any one of four directions; they did not turn aside when they went. 18 As for their rims, they were so high they were awesome; and their rims were full of eyes, all around the four of them.

The cherubim are the "living creatures" with four faces, not the wheels.

Read the above passage again. It clearly distinguishes between the "living creatures" and the wheels. Your position is not supported by the liturgical references, nor by the many icons in existence of "polyommata kherouvim", deicted as many-eyed winged red circles.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Iconodule on August 07, 2013, 09:29:50 AM
And what about this? It depicts the nine celestial hierarchies.



Of the nine orders of heavenly hosts, only the angels, archangels, seraphim and cherubim are given any sort of biblical description of their appearance, or have been revealed in a form visible to human eyes. There seems to be nothing revealed in Tradition which allows us to make an image of thrones, dominions, principalities, powers or virtues.

Aren't the winged/ eyed wheels thrones?

No. They are cherubim, as described in the vision of Ezekiel in ch.1:

15 Now as I looked at the living creatures, behold, a wheel was on the earth beside each living creature with its four faces. 16 The appearance of the wheels and their workings was like the color of beryl, and all four had the same likeness. The appearance of their workings was, as it were, a wheel in the middle of a wheel. 17 When they moved, they went toward any one of four directions; they did not turn aside when they went. 18 As for their rims, they were so high they were awesome; and their rims were full of eyes, all around the four of them.

The cherubim are the "living creatures" with four faces, not the wheels.

Read the above passage again. It clearly distinguishes between the "living creatures" and the wheels.

*Sigh* That's what I just said... And later on, in Chapter 10, Ezekiel identifies the "living creatures", not the wheels, as cherubim.
14 Each one had four faces: the first face was the face of a cherub, the second face the face of a man, the third the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle. 15 And the cherubim were lifted up. This was the living creature I saw by the River Chebar. 16 When the cherubim went, the wheels went beside them; and when the cherubim lifted their wings to mount up from the earth, the same wheels also did not turn from beside them. 17 When the cherubim stood still, the wheels stood still, and when one[c] was lifted up, the other[d] lifted itself up, for the spirit of the living creature was in them.

The cherubim are clearly distinct from the wheels, albeit closely connected. Note that the River Chebar is where Ezekiel has his vision in Chapter 1.

Quote
Your position is not supported by the liturgical references,

What liturgical references? I have not seen any describing cherubim as winged wheels.

Quote
nor by the many icons in existence of "polyommata kherouvim", deicted as many-eyed winged red circles.

Could you provide an example?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: ilyazhito on August 07, 2013, 04:39:55 PM
The middle ones in the top row look like some sort of insect.

here orthodox depiction

orthodox as in orthodox building ;p

(http://i.imgur.com/3TPrSCS.jpg)

those are eyes on there by the way ;)
What the heck are those? Wheels with wings? IMHO, angels are not wheels, at least most icons represent angels as humans, or at least faces with wings, as the seraphim on ripidas.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: sheenj on August 07, 2013, 04:46:35 PM

What the heck are those? Wheels with wings? IMHO, angels are not wheels, at least most icons represent angels as humans, or at least faces with wings, as the seraphim on ripidas.

ilyazhito, see LBK:


No. They are cherubim, as described in the vision of Ezekiel in ch.1:

15 Now as I looked at the living creatures, behold, a wheel was on the earth beside each living creature with its four faces. 16 The appearance of the wheels and their workings was like the color of beryl, and all four had the same likeness. The appearance of their workings was, as it were, a wheel in the middle of a wheel. 17 When they moved, they went toward any one of four directions; they did not turn aside when they went. 18 As for their rims, they were so high they were awesome; and their rims were full of eyes, all around the four of them.

The phrase many-eyed cherubim features in various liturgical prayers, including the anaphora of both St Basil's and St John Chrysostom's liturgies. They are also thus described in the November 8 feast of the Assembly of the Bodiless Hosts:

Ezekiel saw the ranks of Angels in varied form and in his opening proclaimed: Among them stand the six-winged Seraphim, and the many-eyed Cherubim circle round. With them he saw the Archangels shining like amber as they glorified Christ to all the ages.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Iconodule on August 08, 2013, 04:16:51 PM
I'm really glad that our iconographers have not ignored some of the weirder aspects of scripture.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Elisha on August 08, 2013, 04:31:59 PM

What the heck are those? Wheels with wings? IMHO, angels are not wheels, at least most icons represent angels as humans, or at least faces with wings, as the seraphim on ripidas.

ilyazhito, see LBK:


No. They are cherubim, as described in the vision of Ezekiel in ch.1:

15 Now as I looked at the living creatures, behold, a wheel was on the earth beside each living creature with its four faces. 16 The appearance of the wheels and their workings was like the color of beryl, and all four had the same likeness. The appearance of their workings was, as it were, a wheel in the middle of a wheel. 17 When they moved, they went toward any one of four directions; they did not turn aside when they went. 18 As for their rims, they were so high they were awesome; and their rims were full of eyes, all around the four of them.

The phrase many-eyed cherubim features in various liturgical prayers, including the anaphora of both St Basil's and St John Chrysostom's liturgies. They are also thus described in the November 8 feast of the Assembly of the Bodiless Hosts:

Ezekiel saw the ranks of Angels in varied form and in his opening proclaimed: Among them stand the six-winged Seraphim, and the many-eyed Cherubim circle round. With them he saw the Archangels shining like amber as they glorified Christ to all the ages.

Actually, I'm pretty sure they're Thrones.  Cherubim have flaming swords.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Fabio Leite on August 08, 2013, 04:43:30 PM
I don't remember seeing eyed-wheels on icons of the Expulsion from Eden. Nor sphynx-like creatures either. Usually it's a "normal" angel or something that looks like a Seraphim.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: W.A.Mozart on August 09, 2013, 11:25:13 AM
how about this 1... not to mention the painter's signature

(http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/2664/ztmh.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on August 09, 2013, 12:05:34 PM
Frankly, I've got no idea why anyone would want that image enough to have it painted, but it is interesting.  It would've been cooler, though, if the painter included the bursting open of his insides and the gushing out of his bowels. 
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on August 09, 2013, 01:09:22 PM
Good grief, that thing is creepy.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Asteriktos on August 09, 2013, 01:32:47 PM
Looks painful...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: FatherGiryus on August 09, 2013, 06:59:02 PM
I would have one commissioned (if I had the money) complete with the gut spilling...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 09, 2013, 08:55:00 PM
how about this 1... not to mention the painter's signature

(http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/2664/ztmh.jpg)

Where did you get this image, W. A. Mozart? The artistic style is very much of the Skliris "school".

Ridiculous and pointless. A tiny bit of comfort in that there's no halo, unlike the "Saint Judas" travesty someone posted earlier in this thread, complete with him holding his innards and the rope ...  :P :P

(http://firstlightforum.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/the_gospel_of_judas_iscariot_by_testingpointdesign.jpg?w=627)

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: W.A.Mozart on August 10, 2013, 05:20:19 AM
a friend of mine sent it to me...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 10, 2013, 06:28:47 AM
What with the astigmatic left eye, and the dark circles under His eyes, Christ must have had a heavy night ....  :P :P

(http://www.pasya.gr/images/sobipro/entries/97/PANTOKRATOR-web.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on August 10, 2013, 06:31:38 AM
Yeah, wedding in Cana ^
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 10, 2013, 06:33:56 AM
Yeah, wedding in Cana ^

 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 10, 2013, 06:37:34 AM
The impressionistic painterly style is bad enough. But what's with the figure of the Baptist being surrounded by darkness, with the light trying to get in?? The complete opposite of a light-bearing, deified saint.

(http://www.pasya.gr/images/sobipro/entries/187/PIC00001-web7.jpg)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Eurasian on August 14, 2013, 10:19:40 AM
(http://www.pravmir.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/kingDavid.jpg)

What is he doing?

It's an iconographic representation of this passage from 2 Samuel:

12And it was told king David, saying, The LORD has blessed the house of Obededom, and all that pertains to him, because of the ark of God. So David went and brought up the ark of God from the house of Obededom into the city of David with gladness. 13And it was so, that when they that bore the ark of the LORD had gone six paces, he sacrificed oxen and fatted calves. 14And David danced before the LORD with all his might; and David was girded with a linen ephod.

The mural is in a church dedicated to Prophet David the King, in Tblisi, Georgia. This is one of many murals showing scenes from the life of the prophet.

Are you sure? I don't see the Ark in the icon. I do see bread, wine, and the temple. It looks to me like it portrays king David taking the consecrated bread (showbread) from the Table. See, for example, Matthew 12:3-4 : "But he said to them: Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, and they that were with him: [4] How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the loaves of proposition, which it was not lawful for him to eat, nor for them that were with him, but for the priests only?"
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on August 16, 2013, 10:22:38 PM
(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Yeshu-Rasta-Fari-Rastafarian-Ethiopian-Jesus-Christ-Yeshua-Postcard-/00/s/MTEyNFg4NDI=/z/9SwAAOxyrxZRzQay/$(KGrHqJ,!oIFGvmRIfqrBRzQ,yoZUQ~~60_57.JPG)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on August 16, 2013, 11:10:56 PM
(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Yeshu-Rasta-Fari-Rastafarian-Ethiopian-Jesus-Christ-Yeshua-Postcard-/00/s/MTEyNFg4NDI=/z/9SwAAOxyrxZRzQay/$(KGrHqJ,!oIFGvmRIfqrBRzQ,yoZUQ~~60_57.JPG)

Is it a mirror image?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 17, 2013, 11:45:41 AM
(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Yeshu-Rasta-Fari-Rastafarian-Ethiopian-Jesus-Christ-Yeshua-Postcard-/00/s/MTEyNFg4NDI=/z/9SwAAOxyrxZRzQay/$(KGrHqJ,!oIFGvmRIfqrBRzQ,yoZUQ~~60_57.JPG)

The artist is trying to show this "saint" giving a clerical blessing, i.e. with the fingers arranged in an IC-XC configuration (fatuous and wrong, given the subject of this painting). Someone oughta tell him or her that it should be the right hand, not the left, which gives the blessing.  :P :P ::)

EDIT: Just found out this picture is supposed to be Christ. My comment on which hand gives the blessing still stands. There is also a great deal I could post on the error of painting Christ as a Rasta and claiming it to be an icon, but time and bandwidth are against me.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on August 17, 2013, 12:43:01 PM
(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Yeshu-Rasta-Fari-Rastafarian-Ethiopian-Jesus-Christ-Yeshua-Postcard-/00/s/MTEyNFg4NDI=/z/9SwAAOxyrxZRzQay/$(KGrHqJ,!oIFGvmRIfqrBRzQ,yoZUQ~~60_57.JPG)

The artist is trying to show this "saint" giving a clerical blessing, i.e. with the fingers arranged in an IC-XC configuration (fatuous and wrong, given the subject of this painting). Someone oughta tell him or her that it should be the right hand, not the left, which gives the blessing.  :P :P ::)

EDIT: Just found out this picture is supposed to be Christ. My comment on which hand gives the blessing still stands. There is also a great deal I could post on the error of painting Christ as a Rasta and claiming it to be an icon, but time and bandwidth are against me.

That ain't Christ. That's Bob Marley.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on August 17, 2013, 02:12:16 PM
That ain't Christ. That's Bob Marley.

I figured as much, but was reminded of this when I first saw the post:

(http://24.media.tumblr.com/9bc1c2b88df587eb4ac47989d5fc0938/tumblr_mh1llm412d1rghpgso1_500.gif)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on August 17, 2013, 03:54:36 PM
Okay, that is seriously disturbing. As a penance, Mor, you will write up for me just how you're supposed to use the Shi'mo when one is a layperson praying at home. There are lots of options in my Gorgias Press version, but no rubrics. Far more complicated than the Agpeya.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on August 17, 2013, 04:29:46 PM
Okay, that is seriously disturbing. As a penance, Mor, you will write up for me just how you're supposed to use the Shi'mo when one is a layperson praying at home. There are lots of options in my Gorgias Press version, but no rubrics. Far more complicated than the Agpeya.

PM me if you're seriously interested.  It's more complex than the Agpeya, but really not by much, especially if all you're doing is "reading" rather than chanting.   

Otherwise, I stand by my post.  Dave Chappelle is awesome. 
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on August 17, 2013, 04:30:53 PM
Now I want pancakes.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on August 17, 2013, 04:31:58 PM
Pancakes are awesome.  They are one reason I'm glad my parents emigrated to the US. 
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: ilyazhito on August 17, 2013, 04:37:04 PM
(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Yeshu-Rasta-Fari-Rastafarian-Ethiopian-Jesus-Christ-Yeshua-Postcard-/00/s/MTEyNFg4NDI=/z/9SwAAOxyrxZRzQay/$(KGrHqJ,!oIFGvmRIfqrBRzQ,yoZUQ~~60_57.JPG)

The artist is trying to show this "saint" giving a clerical blessing, i.e. with the fingers arranged in an IC-XC configuration (fatuous and wrong, given the subject of this painting). Someone oughta tell him or her that it should be the right hand, not the left, which gives the blessing.  :P :P ::)

EDIT: Just found out this picture is supposed to be Christ. My comment on which hand gives the blessing still stands. There is also a great deal I could post on the error of painting Christ as a Rasta and claiming it to be an icon, but time and bandwidth are against me.

That ain't Christ. That's Bob Marley.


Now that takes the cake of all the ridiculous icons.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Asteriktos on August 17, 2013, 04:42:55 PM
[/cake]
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 17, 2013, 09:27:56 PM
(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Yeshu-Rasta-Fari-Rastafarian-Ethiopian-Jesus-Christ-Yeshua-Postcard-/00/s/MTEyNFg4NDI=/z/9SwAAOxyrxZRzQay/$(KGrHqJ,!oIFGvmRIfqrBRzQ,yoZUQ~~60_57.JPG)

The artist is trying to show this "saint" giving a clerical blessing, i.e. with the fingers arranged in an IC-XC configuration (fatuous and wrong, given the subject of this painting). Someone oughta tell him or her that it should be the right hand, not the left, which gives the blessing.  :P :P ::)

EDIT: Just found out this picture is supposed to be Christ. My comment on which hand gives the blessing still stands. There is also a great deal I could post on the error of painting Christ as a Rasta and claiming it to be an icon, but time and bandwidth are against me.

That ain't Christ. That's Bob Marley.


That's what I thought at first. Only to discover that the image is intended to be that of Christ. Ridiculous and blasphemous.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on August 17, 2013, 10:05:20 PM
(http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Yeshu-Rasta-Fari-Rastafarian-Ethiopian-Jesus-Christ-Yeshua-Postcard-/00/s/MTEyNFg4NDI=/z/9SwAAOxyrxZRzQay/$(KGrHqJ,!oIFGvmRIfqrBRzQ,yoZUQ~~60_57.JPG)

The artist is trying to show this "saint" giving a clerical blessing, i.e. with the fingers arranged in an IC-XC configuration (fatuous and wrong, given the subject of this painting). Someone oughta tell him or her that it should be the right hand, not the left, which gives the blessing.  :P :P ::)

EDIT: Just found out this picture is supposed to be Christ. My comment on which hand gives the blessing still stands. There is also a great deal I could post on the error of painting Christ as a Rasta and claiming it to be an icon, but time and bandwidth are against me.

That ain't Christ. That's Bob Marley.


That's what I thought at first. Only to discover that the image is intended to be that of Christ. Ridiculous and blasphemous.

I think the intention must have been a mistake. It IS Bob Marley. Although canonical icons of Bob Marley need to have him holding a microphone in one hand.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on August 17, 2013, 10:06:30 PM
Pancakes are awesome.  They are one reason I'm glad my parents emigrated to the US. 

You like those bready American things better than dosas? Even the dosas made with buttermilk?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on August 17, 2013, 10:42:42 PM
Pancakes are awesome.  They are one reason I'm glad my parents emigrated to the US. 

You like those bready American things better than dosas? Even the dosas made with buttermilk?

It's not a matter of preferring pancakes to dosas, they are two different things.  I love dosas, but they are savoury, and I don't always want savoury for breakfast.  Sometimes, I just want bready American things with maple syrup, fruit, and maybe a Western omelette.  Indian food is awesome, but I thoroughly enjoy Anglo-American breakfast.     
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on August 17, 2013, 11:06:46 PM
Pancakes are awesome.  They are one reason I'm glad my parents emigrated to the US. 

You like those bready American things better than dosas? Even the dosas made with buttermilk?

It's not a matter of preferring pancakes to dosas, they are two different things.  I love dosas, but they are savoury, and I don't always want savoury for breakfast.  Sometimes, I just want bready American things with maple syrup, fruit, and maybe a Western omelette.  Indian food is awesome, but I thoroughly enjoy Anglo-American breakfast.     

You mean you don't put maple syrup on dosas? Here I thought I was doing it right...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on August 17, 2013, 11:36:08 PM
That would be pretty gross!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on August 17, 2013, 11:44:01 PM
That would be pretty gross!

It wasn't bad. But they were dosas I'd made myself--not nearly as good as those I'd had in a restaurant. Of course, I later got food poisoning at that restaurant...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on August 17, 2013, 11:53:36 PM
The food poisoning was God's penance imposed on you for using maple syrup on dosas.  I've eaten a lot of weird things in my life, but I can't imagine a greater affront both to dosas and to maple syrup.  :P

What is your preferred dosa? 
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on August 18, 2013, 07:44:26 AM
I think the intention must have been a mistake. It IS Bob Marley. Although canonical icons of Bob Marley need to have him holding a microphone in one hand.

And a joint in the second one.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Shanghaiski on August 18, 2013, 03:21:17 PM
The food poisoning was God's penance imposed on you for using maple syrup on dosas.  I've eaten a lot of weird things in my life, but I can't imagine a greater affront both to dosas and to maple syrup.  :P

What is your preferred dosa? 

I used to get the mysore masala dosai because the only time I had them was on a fast day. (I only put maple syrup on my own dosas because their consistence was more like American pancakes. I need an Indian cooking intervention. About the only things I can make are vindaloo and rogan josh. And saffron rice. And the pilaf wasn't bad, but it wasn't Indian, but Uzbek.)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on August 18, 2013, 10:57:18 PM
Although canonical icons of Bob Marley need to have him holding a microphone in one hand.

And a joint in the second one.
It can hang next to the icon of Chesterton that some overzealous neophyte is surely painting.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 19, 2013, 12:38:29 AM
Although canonical icons of Bob Marley need to have him holding a microphone in one hand.

And a joint in the second one.
It can hang next to the icon of Chesterton that some overzealous neophyte is surely painting.

.... and there's sure to be one of CS Lewis in the pipeline as well.  :P

Robert Lentz has painted Tolkien painted as a "saint" in iconographic style, as many of us know. His justification for painting this fiasco is this, in his own words:

"He [Tolkien] is best known as the author of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, stories that began as entertainment for his two young sons, but developed into a vast work of mythology. As a devout Catholic intellectual, he felt that such creative use of our imagination was a reflection of God’s own creative activity, and eloquent proof that we are made in God’s image and likeness. Millions have read his books, which have now been translated into many different languages, and have rediscovered in themselves the childlike gift of imagination that belongs to all of us as icons of God."

Hmmm. It appears that writing a series of well-loved children’s books full of mystery, magic and imagination is a means to sanctity. Perhaps we shall soon see “icons” by the hand of Robert Lentz of Lewis Carroll, the Brothers Grimm, JK Rowling and Hans Christian Andersen.  :P :P :P
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Mor Ephrem on August 19, 2013, 12:48:09 AM
I used to get the mysore masala dosai because the only time I had them was on a fast day. (I only put maple syrup on my own dosas because their consistence was more like American pancakes. I need an Indian cooking intervention. About the only things I can make are vindaloo and rogan josh. And saffron rice. And the pilaf wasn't bad, but it wasn't Indian, but Uzbek.)

You are not far from the Kingdom.  :)

The Mysore is a personal favourite.  Rava dosa is also good.  There is a great restaurant on Long Island that specialises in dosas.  Fast or no fast, I always eat there when I'm in the area.   
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 19, 2013, 02:11:33 AM
Truly incomprehensible that this "icon" of Pentecost, aka the Descent of the Holy Spirit, is missing an enormously important detail:

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-t1Wjps3zock/UZpc1i9vkNI/AAAAAAAADU4/d0IjIdlIZ1Y/s1600/pentecost-icon.jpg)

Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Hawkeye on August 19, 2013, 02:34:03 AM
Truly incomprehensible that this "icon" of Pentecost, aka the Descent of the Holy Spirit, is missing an enormously important detail:

Sort of defeats the whole purpose of it, don't it?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 19, 2013, 02:42:16 AM
Truly incomprehensible that this "icon" of Pentecost, aka the Descent of the Holy Spirit, is missing an enormously important detail:

Sort of defeats the whole purpose of it, don't it?

Yup. More's the pity, the technical skill of the artist is rather good.  :P Competently-painted, the gold leaf has been applied well, but it's practically worthless as an icon.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on August 19, 2013, 05:40:55 AM
Truly incomprehensible that this "icon" of Pentecost, aka the Descent of the Holy Spirit, is missing an enormously important detail:

Sort of defeats the whole purpose of it, don't it?

Yup. More's the pity, the technical skill of the artist is rather good.  :P Competently-painted, the gold leaf has been applied well, but it's practically worthless as an icon.

Someone just forgot. It happens, you know...
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 19, 2013, 05:56:07 AM
Truly incomprehensible that this "icon" of Pentecost, aka the Descent of the Holy Spirit, is missing an enormously important detail:

Sort of defeats the whole purpose of it, don't it?

Yup. More's the pity, the technical skill of the artist is rather good.  :P Competently-painted, the gold leaf has been applied well, but it's practically worthless as an icon.

Someone just forgot. It happens, you know...

Nonsense, and you know it.  >:(
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on August 19, 2013, 11:43:52 AM
I posted this one earlier in the thread, but I would like to see someone discuss why it might just fall somewhere on the spectrum of weird icons rather than schlock. Sorry that I couldn't find a copy without the magazine boilerplate.

(http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=47878.0;attach=11830;image)

What is the symbolism of the person from Hades breaking the scroll in Christ's hand? And why are the people in Hades gray? Are they damned? Or demons? I've never seen another icon of the harrowing of Hell that depicts the damned or demonic.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Orthodox11 on August 19, 2013, 11:48:01 AM
What is the symbolism of the person from Hades breaking the scroll in Christ's hand?

I can't make out what's written on the scroll, but in quite a few of our prayers, there is stuff about Christ tearing up the 'handwriting of our sins', most notably at the 6th Hour, though the context there is the crucifixion not the resurrection.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: hecma925 on August 19, 2013, 11:49:42 AM
Truly incomprehensible that this "icon" of Pentecost, aka the Descent of the Holy Spirit, is missing an enormously important detail:

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-t1Wjps3zock/UZpc1i9vkNI/AAAAAAAADU4/d0IjIdlIZ1Y/s1600/pentecost-icon.jpg)



Looks like they're just chit-chatting.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Orthodox11 on August 19, 2013, 11:50:59 AM
Truly incomprehensible that this "icon" of Pentecost, aka the Descent of the Holy Spirit, is missing an enormously important detail:

This was what they were doing at 8:55am.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Agabus on August 19, 2013, 11:52:34 AM
What is the symbolism of the person from Hades breaking the scroll in Christ's hand?

I can't make out what's written on the scroll, but in quite a few of our prayers, there is stuff about Christ tearing up the 'handwriting of our sins', most notably at the 6th Hour, though the context there is the crucifixion not the resurrection.
Someone offered that interpretation here, but the writing on the scroll doesn't really lend itself to that -- "He went and preached to the spirits in prison." Likewise, it appears that the gray-bodied fellow (Satan?) is reaching up and grabbing the scroll rather than Christ tearing it up.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: mike on August 19, 2013, 12:38:20 PM
Truly incomprehensible that this "icon" of Pentecost, aka the Descent of the Holy Spirit, is missing an enormously important detail:

Sort of defeats the whole purpose of it, don't it?

Yup. More's the pity, the technical skill of the artist is rather good.  :P Competently-painted, the gold leaf has been applied well, but it's practically worthless as an icon.

Someone just forgot. It happens, you know...

Nonsense, and you know it.  >:(

So you have never left light turn on or something like that. Good for you but not everyone can say so.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 19, 2013, 08:02:58 PM
Truly incomprehensible that this "icon" of Pentecost, aka the Descent of the Holy Spirit, is missing an enormously important detail:

Sort of defeats the whole purpose of it, don't it?

Yup. More's the pity, the technical skill of the artist is rather good.  :P Competently-painted, the gold leaf has been applied well, but it's practically worthless as an icon.

Someone just forgot. It happens, you know...

Nonsense, and you know it.  >:(

So you have never left light turn on or something like that. Good for you but not everyone can say so.

Either you have no idea on what is involved in painting an icon (preparation and actual painting), or you're being a smart-aleck.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Deacon Lance on August 19, 2013, 08:54:30 PM
Although canonical icons of Bob Marley need to have him holding a microphone in one hand.

And a joint in the second one.
It can hang next to the icon of Chesterton that some overzealous neophyte is surely painting.

.... and there's sure to be one of CS Lewis in the pipeline as well.  :P

Robert Lentz has painted Tolkien painted as a "saint" in iconographic style, as many of us know. His justification for painting this fiasco is this, in his own words:

"He [Tolkien] is best known as the author of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, stories that began as entertainment for his two young sons, but developed into a vast work of mythology. As a devout Catholic intellectual, he felt that such creative use of our imagination was a reflection of God’s own creative activity, and eloquent proof that we are made in God’s image and likeness. Millions have read his books, which have now been translated into many different languages, and have rediscovered in themselves the childlike gift of imagination that belongs to all of us as icons of God."

Hmmm. It appears that writing a series of well-loved children’s books full of mystery, magic and imagination is a means to sanctity. Perhaps we shall soon see “icons” by the hand of Robert Lentz of Lewis Carroll, the Brothers Grimm, JK Rowling and Hans Christian Andersen.  :P :P :P


JRR Tolkein was a devout Catholic who used his talents for the glory of God.  In that regard, he is as good a candidate for sainthood as anyone. 
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on August 19, 2013, 09:28:15 PM
JRR Tolkein was a devout Catholic who used his talents for the glory of God.  In that regard, he is as good a candidate for sainthood as anyone. 

If I were Catholic, I'd be all for his canonization. 8)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 20, 2013, 02:09:14 AM
Although canonical icons of Bob Marley need to have him holding a microphone in one hand.

And a joint in the second one.
It can hang next to the icon of Chesterton that some overzealous neophyte is surely painting.

.... and there's sure to be one of CS Lewis in the pipeline as well.  :P

Robert Lentz has painted Tolkien painted as a "saint" in iconographic style, as many of us know. His justification for painting this fiasco is this, in his own words:

"He [Tolkien] is best known as the author of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, stories that began as entertainment for his two young sons, but developed into a vast work of mythology. As a devout Catholic intellectual, he felt that such creative use of our imagination was a reflection of God’s own creative activity, and eloquent proof that we are made in God’s image and likeness. Millions have read his books, which have now been translated into many different languages, and have rediscovered in themselves the childlike gift of imagination that belongs to all of us as icons of God."

Hmmm. It appears that writing a series of well-loved children’s books full of mystery, magic and imagination is a means to sanctity. Perhaps we shall soon see “icons” by the hand of Robert Lentz of Lewis Carroll, the Brothers Grimm, JK Rowling and Hans Christian Andersen.  :P :P :P


JRR Tolkein was a devout Catholic who used his talents for the glory of God.  In that regard, he is as good a candidate for sainthood as anyone. 

Sentimental nonsense. Gimme a break!
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 20, 2013, 04:50:08 AM
This is so full of fail, I don't know where to start ....

(http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1108/1417929039_99ff6b2fe3_z.jpg?zz=1)
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 20, 2013, 04:59:38 AM
.... and, from the same artist:

(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5065/5879239371_cff0f82d90_z.jpg)

In iconography, the saint will often gesture with one hand towards Christ or a motif of Him, or to a cross they may be holding, as a sign of their faith, in supplication, and to point to Christ as the Way, the Truth and the Life. Here, St Cecilia is pointing to the pipe-organ of salvation.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Deacon Lance on August 20, 2013, 04:55:54 PM
Although canonical icons of Bob Marley need to have him holding a microphone in one hand.

And a joint in the second one.
It can hang next to the icon of Chesterton that some overzealous neophyte is surely painting.

.... and there's sure to be one of CS Lewis in the pipeline as well.  :P

Robert Lentz has painted Tolkien painted as a "saint" in iconographic style, as many of us know. His justification for painting this fiasco is this, in his own words:

"He [Tolkien] is best known as the author of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, stories that began as entertainment for his two young sons, but developed into a vast work of mythology. As a devout Catholic intellectual, he felt that such creative use of our imagination was a reflection of God’s own creative activity, and eloquent proof that we are made in God’s image and likeness. Millions have read his books, which have now been translated into many different languages, and have rediscovered in themselves the childlike gift of imagination that belongs to all of us as icons of God."

Hmmm. It appears that writing a series of well-loved children’s books full of mystery, magic and imagination is a means to sanctity. Perhaps we shall soon see “icons” by the hand of Robert Lentz of Lewis Carroll, the Brothers Grimm, JK Rowling and Hans Christian Andersen.  :P :P :P


JRR Tolkein was a devout Catholic who used his talents for the glory of God.  In that regard, he is as good a candidate for sainthood as anyone.  

Sentimental nonsense. Gimme a break!

Give me a break.  Do you know anything about the man?  He led a devout life and is a good example of holiness in everyday life.  There are more nonsensical sentimental canonizations in both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches than Tolkein.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: LBK on August 20, 2013, 07:55:04 PM
Although canonical icons of Bob Marley need to have him holding a microphone in one hand.

And a joint in the second one.
It can hang next to the icon of Chesterton that some overzealous neophyte is surely painting.

.... and there's sure to be one of CS Lewis in the pipeline as well.  :P

Robert Lentz has painted Tolkien painted as a "saint" in iconographic style, as many of us know. His justification for painting this fiasco is this, in his own words:

"He [Tolkien] is best known as the author of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, stories that began as entertainment for his two young sons, but developed into a vast work of mythology. As a devout Catholic intellectual, he felt that such creative use of our imagination was a reflection of God’s own creative activity, and eloquent proof that we are made in God’s image and likeness. Millions have read his books, which have now been translated into many different languages, and have rediscovered in themselves the childlike gift of imagination that belongs to all of us as icons of God."

Hmmm. It appears that writing a series of well-loved children’s books full of mystery, magic and imagination is a means to sanctity. Perhaps we shall soon see “icons” by the hand of Robert Lentz of Lewis Carroll, the Brothers Grimm, JK Rowling and Hans Christian Andersen.  :P :P :P


JRR Tolkein was a devout Catholic who used his talents for the glory of God.  In that regard, he is as good a candidate for sainthood as anyone.  

Sentimental nonsense. Gimme a break!

Give me a break.  Do you know anything about the man?  He led a devout life and is a good example of holiness in everyday life.  There are more nonsensical sentimental canonizations in both the Catholic and Orthodox Churches than Tolkein.

Ok, then, name some of these "sentimental canonizations" within the Orthodox Church. Name some, or withdraw your statement.  >:(
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: PoorFoolNicholas on August 20, 2013, 08:57:26 PM
Quote
Ok, then, name some of these "sentimental canonizations" within the Orthodox Church. Name some, or withdraw your statement.

Czar Nicholas anyone?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on August 20, 2013, 10:05:36 PM
Quote
Ok, then, name some of these "sentimental canonizations" within the Orthodox Church. Name some, or withdraw your statement.

Czar Nicholas anyone?

Peter the Aleut might fit the bill as well, although for very different reasons.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Deacon Lance on August 20, 2013, 10:20:44 PM
Yes, both of those come to mind.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: hecma925 on August 21, 2013, 06:49:30 AM
Quote
Ok, then, name some of these "sentimental canonizations" within the Orthodox Church. Name some, or withdraw your statement.

Czar Nicholas anyone?

Peter the Aleut might fit the bill as well, although for very different reasons.

Is being considered a passion bearer or a martyr sentimental enough to be canonized a saint?  Isn't sainthood considered for a person generally after something as sentimental as local veneration?  Is Tolkien being venerated (not by literary fans)?
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on August 21, 2013, 09:36:56 AM
Quote
Ok, then, name some of these "sentimental canonizations" within the Orthodox Church. Name some, or withdraw your statement.

Czar Nicholas anyone?

Peter the Aleut might fit the bill as well, although for very different reasons.

Is being considered a passion bearer or a martyr sentimental enough to be canonized a saint?  Isn't sainthood considered for a person generally after something as sentimental as local veneration?  Is Tolkien being venerated (not by literary fans)?

For Peter the Aleut, I think the well-documented doubt (within the Church, even) to his very existence is a good reason to consider it a "sentimental canonization." Peter the Aleut ends up being the canonization of anti-Catholic sentiment, so-to-speak, rather than a plausible martyr.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: hecma925 on August 21, 2013, 10:10:31 AM
Quote
Ok, then, name some of these "sentimental canonizations" within the Orthodox Church. Name some, or withdraw your statement.

Czar Nicholas anyone?

Peter the Aleut might fit the bill as well, although for very different reasons.

Is being considered a passion bearer or a martyr sentimental enough to be canonized a saint?  Isn't sainthood considered for a person generally after something as sentimental as local veneration?  Is Tolkien being venerated (not by literary fans)?

For Peter the Aleut, I think the well-documented doubt (within the Church, even) to his very existence is a good reason to consider it a "sentimental canonization." Peter the Aleut ends up being the canonization of anti-Catholic sentiment, so-to-speak, rather than a plausible martyr.

Here's a pretty good analysis of well-founded doubt:
http://orthodoxhistory.org/2011/01/31/is-the-st-peter-the-aleut-story-true/
I believe that there aren't as many details as we would like or want, but I do believe he existed and was killed.  Maybe he was killed for different reasons than as to what was reported, but, nevertheless, he's considered a martyr.  The Church doesn't say that we must venerate every saint canonized.  Going back to the painting of Tolkien, it doesn't matter that some hack wants to paint in an iconographic style, but please don't call them icons or try to elevate or glorify a person of your own accord.  If Tolkien was being venerated by many Catholics and the Vatican was considering the beatification/canonization process, more power to them.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Nephi on August 21, 2013, 10:27:23 AM
Is being considered a passion bearer or a martyr sentimental enough to be canonized a saint?  Isn't sainthood considered for a person generally after something as sentimental as local veneration?  Is Tolkien being venerated (not by literary fans)?

For Peter the Aleut, I think the well-documented doubt (within the Church, even) to his very existence is a good reason to consider it a "sentimental canonization." Peter the Aleut ends up being the canonization of anti-Catholic sentiment, so-to-speak, rather than a plausible martyr.

Here's a pretty good analysis of well-founded doubt:
http://orthodoxhistory.org/2011/01/31/is-the-st-peter-the-aleut-story-true/
I believe that there aren't as many details as we would like or want, but I do believe he existed and was killed.  Maybe he was killed for different reasons than as to what was reported, but, nevertheless, he's considered a martyr.  The Church doesn't say that we must venerate every saint canonized.

I wouldn't take it as absolutely authoritative on its own, and it doesn't deal with all (or even try to, since it's in response to a now-dead post) of the problems (e.g. Jesuits not being in the region at the time).
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: hecma925 on August 21, 2013, 11:09:26 AM
Is being considered a passion bearer or a martyr sentimental enough to be canonized a saint?  Isn't sainthood considered for a person generally after something as sentimental as local veneration?  Is Tolkien being venerated (not by literary fans)?

For Peter the Aleut, I think the well-documented doubt (within the Church, even) to his very existence is a good reason to consider it a "sentimental canonization." Peter the Aleut ends up being the canonization of anti-Catholic sentiment, so-to-speak, rather than a plausible martyr.

Here's a pretty good analysis of well-founded doubt:
http://orthodoxhistory.org/2011/01/31/is-the-st-peter-the-aleut-story-true/
I believe that there aren't as many details as we would like or want, but I do believe he existed and was killed.  Maybe he was killed for different reasons than as to what was reported, but, nevertheless, he's considered a martyr.  The Church doesn't say that we must venerate every saint canonized.

I wouldn't take it as absolutely authoritative on its own, and it doesn't deal with all (or even try to, since it's in response to a now-dead post) of the problems (e.g. Jesuits not being in the region at the time).

Neither would I.  I like source documents and this article led me to some that I need to research further.
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: W.A.Mozart on August 22, 2013, 01:40:31 PM
(http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/9738/si7e.jpg)

saint Nikola Tesla
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: biro on August 22, 2013, 01:53:08 PM
Oh, wow. I like Nikola Tesla a lot, but that is a bit much.  :laugh:
Title: Re: Schlock Icons
Post by: Elisha on August 22, 2013, 02:13:17 PM