Have you ever reflected or asked yourself: What is the most asked question in my life? What is the question I myself had to answer? I did. Here it is, that is, you have it already in the above title – Naive Art.
In the 70’s was the “definition” of Naive Art extremely short, simple and superficial: Paintings by the self-taught “farmers-painters” without any formal instruction or art education. Most and best of them from the so called “Hlebine School” in Croatia within former Yugoslavia. That’s it. And in fact their non-academic charm took me in storm. Purchasing paintings from the painters, instead of making shows with the borrowed paintings, opened me the doors of all painters: from the youngsters to the world top veterans. And their hearts as well.
So I got much essential information about whatsoever was important for me. I never asked them. But I have been a careful listener. Real friendships were born. That treasury of information and knowledge was very helpful in order to transfer it to my customers. They have asked a lot. So I had to answer that there are many books about that “new art”. Furthermore many symposiums were held and many fine art museums welcomed that new trend. It was in the 70’s & 80’s, the era before IT, searching machines and in general much before PCs. Even before the internet ,but nowadays on this website you have the chance to buy my naive art collection which is for sale right now.
In frequent, sometimes endless discussions with the Gallery visitors and customers I found out that it takes so much time to explain what Naive Art is. And that was not the most efficient way to present my points of view. So I started to use two additional means of my own original method to help art fans to get familiar with my personal formulation what Naive Art is. I counted what Naive Art is not: children’s paintings or drawings, Primitive Art, Folk Art, Religious Art like for example icons, peasant’s paintings, ethnic paintings, paintings by mentally deranged persons, therapy paintings, Disney-like imitations, to name the most used styles, “schools”, movements and streams.
Regardless of that there were many naive painters painting themes and subjects from the above mentioned styles and schools. But the naive painters painted everything in their own individual naive way, without themselves becoming that way primitive or folk or any other painter, but remaining, what they used to be: the naive painters. This way I gave a plausible and understandable brief verbal answer to the most frequent question.
The second novelty was even more individual, although verbally not so descriptive. I simply helped my Gallery visitors to realize and understand what I consider what is Naive Art, by stating: “Have a look around in the Gallery and you’ll certainly recognize which paintings here are naive and which not.” The great majority of all paintings hanging in the Gallery have been painted by naive painters, (whereas no one could overlook my only abstract artist, the late Roberto Paganoni) and the remaining “not naive paintings” were so distinctive in their own way. For this reason everyone realized at the first glance which artworks are and which are not “naive”. Almost never – since then – my visitors and myself would disagree in our judgments regarding the classification. Because everyone has his own views and can accept and live with different or divergent opinions of other people.
And now before you manage to ask me the eternal question, I am rushing to give you my direct, honest and informative answer: “More than three quarters of my Collection are naive paintings. Check them, study them,enjoy them without being disturbed by my comments. Have good time!”
This is meant as a brief and sketchy description of one of the painting techniques many of the so called “Yugoslav Naive Painters” have been using from their very beginnings in the late 1920s till nowadays. By painting on the reverse of the glass sheet they got very bright, intense and shiny colors. To my knowledge this contributed considerably to their world breakthrough in the late 1960s and early 1970s.
The way I saw it myself. Having the desired glass panel size, the painters draw a pencil sketch or draft on the paper. Without detail work. Showing the most important composition elements only. You can correct or change that paper/pencil sketch by erasing till it has its final shape. Considering the required and important adaptations for the reverse painting. For example: What is on the left on the sketch, will be on the right on the painting. Starting by painting on glass the small and precise details, which can be added and added by painting for example on canvass. What is impossible here on the reverse, because the details represent in that situation the upper paint layer on the reverse or back.
Therefor all that remains invisible, whatever you paint afterward. Because – looking through the glass – the paint layer “behind” or “under(neath)” the details paint layer is covered, i. e. not visible from the front/upper side of the glass. The painters lay their glass on that paper sketch, paint on the upper side of the glass. They turn it now and then to see their work and put every time the glass exactly on the sketch paper in the same, previous position. This way is the painting in fact on the reverse side of the glass. So we see through the glass the painting that is on the reverse of this very same glass. No second glass, no wonder, no trouble, no hassle, no gimmicks, no secret, no magic, no trick.
Click to read more about the reverse painting on glass technique on wikipedia.
Apart of my principal and most brief description, there are numerous variations of some parts of technical procedure or working phases or steps. And a variety of the ingredients used. To all persons interested in a detailed and profound information about “Reverse Painting on Glass”. I most warmly recommend to read the one and a half page excellent description I got long ago from the painter RALF AUF DER HEIDE.
His practical experience can help to anyone using his expertise and applying his method to avoid all technical mistakes and cardinal mishaps that have troubled – according to my knowledge – each & every “reverse glass painter”. I am very grateful for his engagement on this subject. He would never object my publishing his valuable treasure. Hoping that he is still going strong, regretting not to have any of his paintings. I wish him only the best. Or perhaps he could drop me a line. Let’s see.
Click to zoom:
