"Futuristic" Icons

[Ebor]

<applause emoticon here>

You get it too, BrotherAiden. 

You also caught some of the very particular differentiation between the various angels in the first set.  One thing that interests me is that you see Gabriel as an east Indian woman and I saw it as male/somewhat neutral.  Intriguing. 

Ebor

[LBK]

I don't know about "clearly" since there are not photos of Michelangelo to show how he really looked.  I've also read that it is supposed to be someone else, a poet whose name I'd have to look up.

Michelangelo did produce some sketches and studies which were self-portraits, so there is a historical record of what he looked like.

As Orthodox, we should not get so uptight over any and every presentation of religious art that we become anti-art like some protestatnt fundamentalists are.

Brother Aidan, I have a great appreciation for a broad variety of art, across many periods. However, when artists begin to blur the boundaries of art and iconography, this prompts me to speak out. Let's not forget that the artist behind the futurikons still suggests these works can be used in religious devotions (her words), as well as regarded as simply "art".

Those who aren't Orthodox (OO or EO) or Catholics and Anglicans who venreate icons as part of their devotional practice are not going to understand icons and icon painting and the theology behind icons. So there is no use trashing these "icons' from the Orthodox theological perspective.

I find this comment rather condescending, if not insulting, to pious non-Orthodox folks who have "discovered" icons, and would like to use them as part of their devotions. Is it so difficult to educate such people on what an icon is, and, just as importantly, what is not an icon? No, it is not, as I regularly speak to groups of such people. Invariably they are amazed and humbled by the depth and richness of our sacred art. With a few, it sets them on the road to conversion to Orthodoxy.

It must also be said that two of the most notorious and prolific producers and peddlers of uncanonical icons are Roman Catholic (one a Jesuit priest, the other a Franciscan friar). I have no problem whatsoever with their religious denomination, but I do have a problem with their modus operandi. Both these men use their religious vocation as a means of asserting their credibility as "master iconographers" among the unsuspecting pious public. Vile.

[_Seraphim_]

does that violate her copyright one wonders...?

The only reason we can see these images is because they already exist online... they're just visually being "linked" to.  If someone doesn't want their art being "linked" to than they shouldn't have them on the world-wide-web.

[_Seraphim_]

Is there any point you are trying to get across by posting so many of her pictures... without personal comments please?

I don't have much to say about them, but I'm curious to know what others think.

[Asteriktos]

I think they're interesting, though I probably wouldn't buy one of them.

[BrotherAidan]

You also caught some of the very particular differentiation between the various angels in the first set.  One thing that interests me is that you see Gabriel as an east Indian woman and I saw it as male/somewhat neutral.  Intriguing. 

Ebor

I thought Michael looked like a Native American Ninja! 

And with Rafael, Sir Isaac Newton came to mind. 

[BrotherAidan]

I find this comment rather condescending, if not insulting, to pious non-Orthodox folks who have "discovered" icons, and would like to use them as part of their devotions. Is it so difficult to educate such people on what an icon is, and, just as importantly, what is not an icon? No, it is not, as I regularly speak to groups of such people. Invariably they are amazed and humbled by the depth and richness of our sacred art. With a few, it sets them on the road to conversion to Orthodoxy.

I thought about protestants and even non-Christians who are attracted to icons or incorporate them into their prayer lives. Sometimes you just don't have time to type everything that's on your mind.

But it is not at all condescending in that 90%, probably more, of people who venerate icons are from the communions I mentioned.
It was just an observation of fact. There are always exceptions to prove the rule.

If you are encouraging people from these other backgrounds to venerate icons, God bless you and keep doing it!

[CalloftheTor]

They are beautiful. And it is interesting to think of the Holy Angels being active in the "modern" world.
Obviously not Orthodox, but entertaining.
Lord, have mercy!

[Tzimis]

I think they are heretical. Reminds me of the pagan gods. In that they have control over certain elements.

[_Seraphim_]

Reminds me of the pagan gods. In that they have control over certain elements.

Ironically it is only the holy (not fallen) angels that DO have control over the elements. 
The problem lies in worshiping the servants/ministers/messengers of God instead of God Himself. 

Satan really can't fully invent anything... just distort the Truth.

Holy angels always refuse any worship given to them
(even though they actually do have magnificent power over creation)...
while the demons (who have no real power) toil endlessly for any attention from humanity.

[Amdetsion]

I took another look having some time to think about my first response.

I conclude:

Absolutely ridiculous.

Not for orthodox use at all...period.

Side show art.

[Anastasios]

The artist has a scholarly interest in the Zoroastrian religion and culture, just as some others may have an interest in other cultures or religions not their own.  Is there any point you are trying to get across by posting so many of her pictures (and does that violate her copyright one wonders) without personal comments please?

Ebor

Linking has already been declared protected by courts. I don't know about "hotlinking" though. I would not be too concerned about the law though when someone is making images of demons. That is what one really needs to be concerned about--someone making images based on icons also makes images of Zorastrian "angels" (ie. demons).

[Anastasios]

BTW, I think the images look appealing, but I can't support what they are about.

[_Seraphim_]

That is what one really needs to be concerned about--someone making images based on icons also makes images of Zorastrian "angels" (ie. demons).

Exactly.

[_Seraphim_]

The artist has a scholarly interest in the Zoroastrian religion and culture, just as some others may have an interest in other cultures or religions not their own.  Is there any point you are trying to get across by posting so many of her pictures (and does that violate her copyright one wonders) without personal comments please?

Ebor

Ebor, Father just answered your question very well.

[Pravoslavbob]

Linking has already been declared protected by courts. I don't know about "hotlinking" though. I would not be too concerned about the law though when someone is making images of demons. That is what one really needs to be concerned about--someone making images based on icons also makes images of Zorastrian "angels" (ie. demons).

I'm just curious, Father.  I don't know that much about the Zoroastrian faith at all.  My feeling would be that these beings might be demons, but that they might not be too...I don't presume to say what they are or are not.  Perhaps you know more about Zoroastrianism, and that is why you are sure that they are demons?  I don't know.  I've certainly seen spirits in other faiths and worldviews that appear to be demonic, but others in the same faiths  that don't appear to  be so....figures in shamanistic beliefs come  to mind.

[Salpy]

I guess any angel who isn't Christian would be a demon.  That only makes sense.

The Zoroastrians have very elaborate beliefs about angels:

http://www.avesta.org/angels.html

The "futuristic icons" in the original post do remind me of them, especially the way they seem to be "presiding" over different things.

[Quinault]

I find them appaling and offensive. It is taken the sacred and making it clipart.

[Ebor]

Linking has already been declared protected by courts. I don't know about "hotlinking" though.

Thank you.  I link to sites that provide supporting information frequently, sometimes with small quotes to show that they are relevent, so that was not my concern.  It was the "hotlinking" which in effect "copies" a piece of art to another site that I was wondering about.

Ebor

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Free-For-All > Religious Topics > Topic: "Futuristic" Icons