Frequently asked questions

To be an iconographer is to be almost anonymous. This fact is taken for granted in the East from where I am from but, as I have learnt, is a quite alien concept for the West where I live now. The very nature of this vocation makes it difficult, for an iconographer, to speak about herself and impossible – to do this in a way that is expected from an artist in the West i.e. in the language of “achievements”, “exhibitions” etc.  Why it is so, I hope, will be clear by the end of this reading. I was asked to provide some information about myself so below are some facts about the time and circumstance of my life which I believe are helpful for the understanding what my work, icon painting, is about.

I was born in 1969 in Moscow, U.S.S.R. in the family of a Soviet scientist. Because I have been drawing as long as I remember myself the decision to become a professional artist did not take a second thought.

Professional education

1984 - 1988 Moscow Art College – Matriculation (Diploma of Graphic Arts)
1993 - 1998 Moscow State University of Printing Arts – Master’s Degree in Graphic Arts

The Soviet system of art education was quite unique. We were told that an artist of any kind bears a responsibility for recognizing true beauty and making it visible thus making the world a better place so they themselves had to be fit for such a task. Regardless of the particular specialisation chosen by a student – book design or painting, restoration or teaching, sculpture or theatre art, etc – they must have a solid foundation in fine arts taught according to the principals of the 19-20 cc. Russian Academy of fine arts: in depth study of human anatomy, world art history, philosophy, years of drawing and painting in studio and en plein air, etc. In my case it meant that, although I entered the Moscow Art College to become a graphic designer and, later, the Moscow State University of Printing Arts to become an artist working in book design/illustration/printmaking, the nine years training in fine arts I received were absolutely indispensable for becoming an iconographer. The study of the peculiarity of the composition of a book was especially helpful because it employs principals similar to the composition of icons.
 

Becoming an iconographer

The time of my study in the Art College overlapped with Perestroika. It meant that for a first time during the 20c. Russians could discover not only their own prohibited literature (like Pasternak, Mandelstam, Akhmatova) but also their own prohibited faith, Eastern Orthodox Christianity. For the first time since the 1917 Revolution the Russian Orthodox Church could preach freely; people streamed into the opening churches; numerous monasteries were revived, restored by enthusiasts (many of my teachers in Art College participated).  I was hugely formed by that very exciting time of brief freedom. The person of faith who influenced me most was Fr Alexander Men (whom I did not know in person but whose books and lectures shaped me as a Christian). Noteworthy, while being entirely traditional Orthodox he was very open to the Western Church (Roman Catholic and Protestant), a factor which proved to be important for me, later.

My path to becoming an iconographer is quite typical of that time. The absolute majority of my peers, older iconographers, were professional artists first (many of them avangardists). Only then, after their conversion to Eastern Orthodoxy, would they become iconographers embracing this vocation as the most natural way of living their faith. I think that precisely because they were already professional artists they were able to work out their intrinsic styles of icon painting more easily than those who do not have artistic education and thus do not feel so free to experiment. Interestingly, the formal art education in Soviet Russia provided an extensive course “History of ancient Russian art” and many would come to faith in Christ via their exposure to Russian icons.

After my fully conscious conversion to the Eastern Orthodoxy in my twenties (while in the University) I gradually became more and more involved with the study of the theology of icons and of icon painting. As a result of that process, following the suggestion of my confessor (in Moscow) I eventually became an iconographer. “Eventually” means that, just like the artists I mentioned above, I was gradually becoming an Orthodox and an iconographer i.e. I was an artist who was learning to put together her faith and her art while fully accepting the teaching of the Church regarding the holy images (icons) as my rule and guide. Eventually I reached the point when, I believe, I could call myself “an iconographer” – purely by the grace of God. Archimandrite Zenon, one of the best modern Russian iconographers, holds the view that it takes minimum fifteen years to become one and I tend to agree with him now.

FAQ

While living in the West since 1999 I have been asked a typical set of questions which my icons seem to raise. I will address those questions now because they are essential for the understanding of what icon painting is.
 

Where did you learn icon painting?

As I said above, in my case icon painting was built on the basis of a formal education in fine arts. Because the Church in our time only began coming out, the artists of my generation did not have an opportunity to study icon painting in the Church schools or other Church institutions. We studied icons in the museums and churches and art books; some happened to meet the older iconographers and learnt from them. We also understood icons via our participation in the life of the Church. Some of iconographers of my generations became priests like Archimandrite Zenon (that is said to highlight the utmost importance of the life in the Church, for an iconographer).

“In which style do you work?”

Just like iconographers of the past, I work in “my style”. It is quite usual, for an artist, to begin working in a style or styles which appeal to them most but with the years, eventually, he or she absorbs them and comes with her own style or, better to say, the style “happens”. In the case of iconographer, the style is of course shaped by her or his spiritual life, private and liturgical.

“My style” (although I do not think about “style” at all) then is influenced by the Moscow style of icon painting, the earliest examples of Christian art and also of the Siena school (a late Western medieval style). Because now I live in the West and because spiritually I draw not only from my Eastern Orthodox Tradition but also Roman Catholic (medieval mysticism to be precise) it is not at all surprising that “my style” comes close to the style of medieval icon painting that happened around the border between Greece and Italy. (I also find this style arguably more suitable for the Western Churches than typical “Byzantine style” with which the Westerners are most familiar.)  All that said, the rendition of each of my icons is different, in accordance with the concrete task.

“But aren’t only Byzantine icons are “canonical”?

No, because the lesser (style) cannot determine the greater (Canon) and Canon does not prescribe any style. It prescribes certain rules for a proper visual expression of the theological truth. For example, while painting an icon of Our Lord I have to follow the examples of His likeness, prescribed symbolism of colours of His clothes, gestures etc. which are the expression of the Church’s knowledge of the Person of Jesus Christ. The Canon is a safeguard of the knowledge of Christ; an iconographer bases her work on it and adds something of her own knowledge, always verified by the Church teaching (it is very similar to how Christian theologians work; if their ideas contradict the Church dogma they are rejected). However, one can paint His icon in Byzantine or Coptic or Romanesque styles or a mixture of any – as long as the icon fits into the Tradition of Christian Church i.e. as long as it can be used in the context of the Liturgy. The notion of “a canonical = true icon” can be fully understood only from inside the Eastern Orthodox Church, one’s own experience of prayer. This is why there was an ancient tradition of showing the newly painted icon to the Bishop for his approval so he, as a guarantor of faith, would judge its truthfulness to the faith. Hence “canonical” is “theologically true” or “faithful”.
 

“I am interested in iconography, do you teach workshops?”

Icon painting cannot be taught in such a format, if one looks at it in accordance with the teaching of the Church. Apart from the most obvious, to any professional, consideration that to become an iconographer takes not weeks but decades, such courses facilitate a wrong attitude to the icon which bars the way to any progress. In the Eastern Orthodox Church, icon painting is a liturgical vocation of grave responsibility, which occurs only within the Church. The required attitude for this work is that of humility and service, not “the icon is for me” but “I am for the icon” or even “I am nothing”. This realization of “nothingness” of an iconographer is something that with the years of practice only becomes deeper, and such an attitude of self-denial and humility is what is indispensable – and what the idea of a “short course” kills instantly.  To put it simply, when I began painting icons I had shaky hands, not because I did not know how to hold the brush but out of fear coming from the realisation of Whom it is that I dare to paint. This is the norm for other Russian iconographers whom I know.

On the other hand, there is nothing wrong with studying icons, their composition etc. (such study does not require any courses or workshops). Some artists were influenced by icons and incorporated some of the principles of organizing the space and forms in icons into their own work (Matisse for instance) but they never called themselves “iconographers”. If one wishes to become an iconographer it is an entirely different story.

So how can you define an iconographer? – I heard you “write” icons?

We do not “write” icons. It is a poor translation form Greek and Russian into English. These two languages have one verb for writing and painting (of anything, from commics to painting to icons) but someone seemed to decide to convey the “esoteric” nature of the work of an iconographer via ascribing to it a very unnatural verb.

As for the definition of the iconographer and his work, iconographers are those who put their lives into the service of God and His Church via the talent God gave them and treat the product of their activity, the icons, not as their own but as belonging to the whole Church. While painting they are not thinking about themselves but trying to listen to what God wants them to do so it is an occupation entirely at odds with the world. I will conclude with the quote from the book ‘The Work of an Iconographer’ by one of the most important iconographers of 20 c., nun Yuliania (Sokolova):

“Before conducting a study of materials and techniques, one who approaches icon painting must first understand the holy character of this art, its sublime purpose and intimate connection with the life of the Church. Icon painting is not just art but the art of the Church.
The icon is a book about faith. Via the language of lines and colours it reveals the dogmatic, ethical and liturgical teaching of the Church. The purer the life of a Christian the more understandable to him the language of an icon.
The icon, first of all, is a holy object. If it is treated without due respect, carelessly, it is not the icon that is being abused but the icon’s prototype, The One who is depicted on it. This is why the beginner must first and foremost, before he starts doing anything else, acquire the attitude of awe before icon painting.
The icon is a visually expressed prayer and can be understood, primary, via prayer. It is made only for one who is prayerfully standing before it. Its purpose is to aid prayer and this is why the one who is working on an icon must not forget to pray. The prayer during the work will explain much about painting the icon without words; it will make many aspects of the work understandable and clear. Prayer will reveal what is spiritually correct, and the truth itself.”


‘Christian Art-2018: Catalogue of modern Christian Art’, the Moscow Patriarchy Publishing Office, Russian Orthodox Church.