There are several threads at monachos.net on non-canonical icons. They are very useful, detailed and instructive.biro said:Over at monachos.net, there's an entire thread on non-canonical icons. I'll post some of the pictures later. Just goes to show that Orthodox artists make mistakes, too. :
I like that in the way it elaborates on the truly symobolic nature of religious imagery. I was discussing of all things the merits of Egyptian icongraphy of strange and mismatched animal-men which some folks have said are representations of the Reptilian shape-shifting aliens as part of the said conspiracy. I had to explain that religious imagery is not meant to be taken literal, the images are symbols. Each abnormal or different representation takes on a symbolic significance, and I especially like to see the Dog-headed Saint Christopher icons to drive the point home.Cognomen said:
My first thought when I saw the icons on the iconostasis was "Night of the Living Dead". They all look like zombies, absolutely hideous to behold. If icons reflect the spiritual state of the iconographer, this work does not reflect well on the one who panted them.LBK said:^ They're horrible! The holy ones on the iconostasis look ghastly, emaciated, ravaged, with a deer-in-the-headlights look in their eyes, bordering on naked terror. Might be OK in a medieval Gothic church, but there is no place for such travesties in an Orthodox church! Whoever painted these images has NO idea of what iconography is. Where is the gravitas, stillness, dignity, reverence and spiritual power that good and proper icons possess and proclaim? What a crying shame that a beautiful iconostasis, made by skilled hands, has been spoiled by these artistic flights of fancy. Shameful.