This is naive art, different rules, not schooled, with its roots
in Rousseau and Iconography, and image not illusion. Eikon means image. Traditionally
icons are considered “written”, not drawn so you have to learn to read the
lines. In Icons the process is as important as the product so what you see here
is a year of process. My paintings seem to be a fusion of modern naive and
medieval icon so I see them as secular icons. They do not belong to any art
school tradition.
I could talk about harmony and colour and line and symmetry and even use of pastel blue etc
but Id rather let Jessy, my daughter, talk about it because its more
illuminating:
“It’s bizarre Mum. It looks right but it’s all wrong. What have
you done to me? I don’t look like that. And why is the room moving? They seem
to be floating. And where’s the light coming from? There’s no real shadows. And
what’s the daffodil doing between the dark twins. It sort of goes up through
the man sitting bolt upright to the light above. That man’s leg is just an arch
and he has no hands. And why are their eyes all open? What are they looking at?
That bench is weighed down at one end which isn’t possible. Is that a young boy
or girl sitting next to the old man? They sit together but they look the other
way. Nothing is real and nothing fits, like things aren’t in proportion and
other bits are missing...and yet it does sort of fit and it feels calm and
peaceful.”
