5 Comments

  1. Andrew, thank you for another wonderful interview!

    I love this man’s work and am really happy he has chosen to make Texas his home. I think the white backgrounds are interesting when they are used in white painted churches and also in hot climates like Dallas. It seems to work well as as a memorial chapel to be intended to appear like a Roman catacomb. I think it works as an experiment – and we should do experimental things these days that don’t conflict with our faith and traditions. This doesn’t conflict with anything. I am not sure the silica paints look like fresco to me. Are they absorbed into the surface or just dry on top? Of course I have never seen Vladimir’s work up close. I hope he will return to traditional colors for his backgrounds. His Neo-Byzantine works are exceptional and he has developed his own unique and distinct interpretation of the style. I think is is very hard – even lonely – for iconographers in the USA to work without the support and input of fellow artists. It must be hard for Vladimir to convince OCA churches to commission good work at reasonable prices when they have nothing to compare it with. In Russia, Belarus and Ukraine there as so many projects to use as reference points for styles, artistic quality and cost.

    1. Thank you, Bob, for the comment.
      The surface of fresco painting can look quite different depending on the time, style and technology used.
      KEIM Silicate paint, when applied on thin lime plaster, creates a mineral matte appearance without distracting reflections, which is much closer to the look of fresco on the wet plaster than it is possible with Acrylic paint.
      Unlike Acrylic, Silicate penetrates to substrate and does not create a film on top of it, so there is nothing to peel off.
      You can find more information and some close-ups on my website http://www.orthodox-icon.com

  2. jim of olym

    I have heard from one of that group, that Old Ritualist temples often have only a few icons, as they will not use reproductions.

  3. Thank you Vladimir for your balanced input on the issue of reproductions.

    One of the aspects of your work I’ve always appreciated is it’s clear logic and directness. I suppose that’s one of the reasons why you enjoy working on murals, since it calls for a broad, more painterly approach to the handling of form, line and color application.

    Do you have the time to teach pupils in this stage of your professional career? I think making your knowledge accesible to serious seekers will help bring some balance to the state of icon painting in the US.

    1. Fr. Silouan, Thank you for the kind words about my work. I think that the main problem with the icon painting in the US today is the lack of interest in iconography amongst the general population of Orthodox faithful.
      In order to solve this problem, a joint effort of the Church as whole is required, which includes, first of all, the work of our Seminaries, theologians, priests and then, iconographers.

      It is relatively easy to teach the technological aspects of icon painting, but you cannot make one an iconographer in a “six days icon class”.
      At this time, I believe, professional seminars, discussions and collaboration on actual projects would have bigger impact on the development of the iconographic community in our country.
      But then, again, from my experience, most parishes don’t see any difference between good or bad iconography, since the main criteria still are price and expedience.

      In any case, if you wish to discuss this more, we can do it through email.

Comments are closed.