C
Chris_McAvoy
Guest
My episcopal friend Peter Pearson has a fine book but it limits one to instructions for acrylic paint.
As acrylic did not exist until very recently, it is not used by many iconographers or churches. For those unable to use acrylic it is best to use these other books which capture the full spectrum of the tradition using egg tempera paint (which is not as difficult to use as you may think)
“The Painter’s Manual of Dionysius of Fourna” as well as Theophilus’ “De Diversis Artibus” (On Diverse Arts/The Various Arts) best capture the tradition of sacred art in the first millenium of Christianity as it was actually practiced in antiquity.
I had a good week recently as I feel that I was guided by God to stumble upon another book which answers many questions I had for months. The title is:
Likeness and Presence: A History of the Image before the Era of Art By Hans Belting
books.google.com/books?id=H8i…TGl_kg#PPA1,M1
I now believe that this is the single best book to understanding western iconography practiced up to the year 1200. I recommend purchasing it if you are seriously interested in this subject. It is worth the price. This book is so good it should be required reading for all Catholic-Orthodox ecumenists. I feel as if it has the potential to help end the partial schism. The partial schism is not just about papal infallibility and original sin (something the east has in a very different form), it is also about what has become too different of a culture, particularly concerning sacred images.
If the west can return to using its original iconography this would be a profoundly important influence in allowing it to regain some of the mysticism of its past. Many other wonderful traditions would fall into place.
“Likeness and Presence” does not have quite as many pictures as “Pictorial Arts of the West” but it does help one understand in great detail how people in the west actually thought about icons much more so than Pictorial Arts does. It also focuses strictly on panel paintings, relics and wall paintings and avoids illuminated manuscripts which is a very important difference because far too many books rely on manuscripts (although they are useful as well, and I love them they do need other forms to counter-balance the focus put on them).
To any admin who reads this I hope that I have not violated any rules of charity in this forum and have not said anything I should not have.
Thank you all for the priviledge of using this forum.
As acrylic did not exist until very recently, it is not used by many iconographers or churches. For those unable to use acrylic it is best to use these other books which capture the full spectrum of the tradition using egg tempera paint (which is not as difficult to use as you may think)
“The Painter’s Manual of Dionysius of Fourna” as well as Theophilus’ “De Diversis Artibus” (On Diverse Arts/The Various Arts) best capture the tradition of sacred art in the first millenium of Christianity as it was actually practiced in antiquity.
I had a good week recently as I feel that I was guided by God to stumble upon another book which answers many questions I had for months. The title is:
Likeness and Presence: A History of the Image before the Era of Art By Hans Belting
books.google.com/books?id=H8i…TGl_kg#PPA1,M1
I now believe that this is the single best book to understanding western iconography practiced up to the year 1200. I recommend purchasing it if you are seriously interested in this subject. It is worth the price. This book is so good it should be required reading for all Catholic-Orthodox ecumenists. I feel as if it has the potential to help end the partial schism. The partial schism is not just about papal infallibility and original sin (something the east has in a very different form), it is also about what has become too different of a culture, particularly concerning sacred images.
If the west can return to using its original iconography this would be a profoundly important influence in allowing it to regain some of the mysticism of its past. Many other wonderful traditions would fall into place.
“Likeness and Presence” does not have quite as many pictures as “Pictorial Arts of the West” but it does help one understand in great detail how people in the west actually thought about icons much more so than Pictorial Arts does. It also focuses strictly on panel paintings, relics and wall paintings and avoids illuminated manuscripts which is a very important difference because far too many books rely on manuscripts (although they are useful as well, and I love them they do need other forms to counter-balance the focus put on them).
To any admin who reads this I hope that I have not violated any rules of charity in this forum and have not said anything I should not have.
Thank you all for the priviledge of using this forum.