According to Henre Malraux, art allows man to become better acquainted with himself and to face his doubts, fears, weaknesses and needs with greater confidence.  Consequently, since prehistoric times man has rendered images of his world, thus attempting to make sense of it, to express his joy and his hopes and to exorcise worries and fears.

This essential and primary desire of man to create through shapes and colours an image of himself and, by extension, of his world, was sincerely expressed by the primitive people, driven by a personal instinct.  With the passage of time, things of course changed.  Man has cultivated spontaneous expression through image, via specialised workshops and schools.  Direct and spontaneous expression now becomes a sophisticated creation.

But there never ceased to be people who, despite the fact that they never went to an art college, continued to create with their artistic instinct as a guide and to produce exquisite images of a world as seen through the eyes of their souls.

These artists were called naive - a term which has of course been called into question at times.  In Greek several translations have been proposed, such as "simple", "painter of instinct", "spontaneous artist" etc, but finally the term "naive" is the one that prevailed.  Bearing in mind that the root of the word naive is the Latin "nativus", which means from birth (native), natural and spontaneous, we conclude that the term naive is undoubtedly the best to express the innate, spontaneous and carefree form of art in which the world of the imaginary, of the magical co-exists with the world of reality, both rendered with the sincerity and innocence of a young child.

Naive artists have always existed and still exist, but the international community has only recently discovered their work.  It was only in the late 19th and early 20th century that Europe and subsequently the U.S, discovered the hidden fascination and significance of naive painting in the renewal of an ageing visual language.  In this same period, the international art community also recognised the importance of children's art and the art of primitive peoples, a fact not in the least accidental, since both these forms of art constitute figures of expression much affiliated to that of the naive artist.  The truth and sincerity of expression, the innocent view of the world and the free negotiation of the subject-matter - since the naive artist, the primitive artist and the child are not bound by established visual rules as dictated by Schools of Fine Art - have all facilitated this return to the roots of artistic expression.  Therefore, the first ones to embrace the art of the naive artists, children and the primitives, were avant-garde artists of the early 20th century.  These artists discovered that the conquests of the Renaissance art had been analysed to such a degree that their magic was demystified and their vitality was lost, giving way to a barren academicism.

The avant-garde artists approached these three forms of expression with love and the intention of studying them, a fact which helped their revolutionary orientations, while also leading to the revaluation of many established rules and the renewal of themes and the morphoplastic language of artistic creation.

The occasion which led to the creation of an intense interest in naive art from a large number of well-known avant-garde artists and intellectuals, was the discovery of the French naive painter Henri Rousseau.

But what are the main characteristics of naive art?  A fundamental question the answers to which will facilitate a better understanding of the works of this particular exhibition of the father of Cypriot naive art, Michael Kashalos.

Naive art is a form of art which des not evolve, that is, its style does not change through time.  It is therefore a form of art which remains outside the limits of time, a form of art "beyond time".  Looking at naive paintings of fifty or a hundred years ago, we realise that they move within the same framework of stylistic value as the ones of today.  The style of naive art is not affected, except only in the least bit, by the factor "space" either.  The French, the Greek, the Polish or the American naive painter expresses himself within a related stylistic visual language.  But "space" does affect the subject matter, which makes sense since each painter draws his inspiration from the world which surrounds him.

These observations lead to the conclusion that naive art is a form of art which does not make history, since we know too well that the history of art is the history of the variation of the style of works of art.  Of course, this ascertainment concerns only the general stylistic characteristics, the shared direction of manners.  But, this does not mean that some stylistic differences do not develop, and these stem from the particular essential nature of each artist, the natural environment and the tradition of the country they live in.  As we study the work of Theophilos, for example, we notice some particular characteristics which distinguish it from the work of Kashalos.  These personal differences prove that each artist, whether naive or educated, is unique because he expresses himself and his own special relationship with the world.

Another important characteristic of the naive painter is that he attempts to render his surrounding world with a narrative disposition, and for this reason gives great emphasis to detailed description.  But, precisely because he relies upon his personal relationship with his environment and upon the way he sees and feels about things, his paintings are unrealistic because they are intensely subjective and not naturalistic, as he believes them to be.

There is a distortion of visual reality in naive paintings and a distortion of figures, a thing entirely natural, since these painters have never attended Art College, have never been taught the rules of realistic depiction of objects and therefore are not in a position to render true proportions of form.

Often one observes another phenomenon, that of some figures or objects being depicted much larger than they are in reality or they would be depicted had the artist followed the scales of proportion.  This can be explained by the fact that the naive artist renders size in terms of the importance which he himself gives.  Thus we have semantic-symbolic scales and not naturalistic ones.

The lack of artistic education is also the reason why in naive works of art, apart from the lack of true perspective, there is also a lack of true rendering of volume and light/shadow.  Another feature of naive artists is their intense decorative mood in the depiction of their subject matter and the bright, clean, joyful colours.

In general, once could say that through his art the naive painter embarks on a personal dialogue with the world around him, recording with his innate artistic talent that which the eyes of his soul observe and not that which is dictated by logic or the knowledge of artistic rules.  The naive artist had indeed the soul of a young child and it is with this soul that he captures and expresses his world.

This of course does not exclude the possibility that the naive artist may be educated and cultured.  In the Greek world one often observes a confusion of the terms "folk" and "naive", as Yiannis Ghikas pointed out early on in his book "Folk and naive art".  Folk art can be naive, but it constitutes a separate category.  The folk artist does not depict his subject matter on the basis of his personal creative view, but rather on the patterns of the cultural tradition of a people, patterns which he has inherited from his forefathers and which he will hand over to the next generation.  For this reason the folk artist moves within specific frameworks and his freedom is limited.  He has of course the freedom to alter thee traditional patterns, but he cannot forget them.  On the other hand, the naive artist has unlimited freedom and is not committed by any older pattern or paragon of expression.  On these grounds, painting on glass which reproduces standardised presentations with minor alterations, belongs to the category of folk art.  Michael Kashalos, with his authentic and innovative creations, the result of an entirely personal view of the world, is a typical naive painter, despite the fact that we can discern some folk elements in his work.  As already mentioned, the first internationally acclaimed naive painter is the French customs inspector Henri Rousseau.  Rousseau's art was especially embraced by the avant-garde artists of the early 20th century, and this led to his worldwide recognition as the patriarch of naive art, with works of his featured in the world's biggest museums.

In Greece the art of the naive painters surfaced in 1929 with the discovery of Theophilos by Eustratios Eleftheriades, more commonly known as Teriade, an art critic who lived in Paris.  Teriade, influenced by the climate prevailing in Paris and by the general enhancement of the importance given to naive, children's and primitive art, had the ability to distinguish the uniqueness of the art of the painter from Mytilene.  Theophilos's work was much appreciated and loved by Greek men of letters and art, who recognised that it constituted the lost bridge between archaic and modern Greek art.  Indeed, Theophilos's work influenced the artists of the famous 30's generation, the generation which pursued the reinstatement of the spirit of Hellenism in art.  A great admirer of Theophilos was, among others, the important 30's generation artist Yiannis Tsarouhis, who actually made a portrait of Theophilos drawing upon the style of the latter's painting.

In Cyprus the discovery and appreciation of local naive painters was somewhat delayed.  Painter Adamantinos Diamantis was one of the first to track down Michael Kashalos in the late 50's, and was impressed by the work of this self-taught painter.  It was then that the life and art of this first known Cypriot naive painter came to light.

Kashalos was born in 1885 in the village of Asha.  He first tried his hand on painting while at school with teacher Kyriakos Pierides.  His innate talent became apparent and so did his love of painting.  His attraction to creativity then led him to regular attendance of the icon painting of the village church by fathers Kyrillos and Nyphon.  At the age of thirteen, following his father's advice, he learned the craft of shoe making, and worked as a shoemaker for many years.  But Kashalos never forgot his first love of artistic creation.  Therefore he started decorating mirrors, painting beautifully on glass, making tasteful decorative and handy objects, making pottery which he later sold in various fairs.  It was then that he discovered his talent in sculpture and particularly his gift in making true copies of ancient finds.  His great skill helped him make true replicas using primitive tools and materials, which he would then sell with great ease as antiquities to local and foreign visitors.  It is no coincidence that one of his creations was kept for a short while in the Cyprus Museum.

Kashalos made many replicas, most of which are now lost, a sad thing indeed, since as Adamantios Diamantis maintained these were not just true copies, but bore the seal of their creator as well.  Around 1957 Michael Kashalos turned exclusively to painting.  A new and highly significant chapter began for the painter and for the island's naive art.  In 1960 he mounted his first one man show which paved the way for more, both in Cyprus and abroad.  He also participated in numerous group exhibitions.  His work gained favourable criticism and the press praised his art.  A landmark was his exhibition at the Commonwealth Institute in London, which was favourably commended in the English press.  Of importance was also his participation in the 2nd Bratislava Triennale of naive Art where he was awarded one of the most significant prizes, a fact which led to his international recognition.  Yet despite all the success and recognition in Cyprus and abroad, Michael Kashalos did not lose his authenticity and did not adulterate any of the characteristics of the true Cypriot villager.  He never parted with his traditional "vraka", the broad sash, the typical head scarf and his carved walking stick, which made him an authentic figure of the Cyprus plain, bound to the roots, customs and traditions of his land, all of which he masterfully and sincerely depicted in his paintings.

Through his art, Michael Kashalos was able to give an image of unadulterated Cyprus, a world seen through the eyes of his soul, capturing it on his canvas where it shall remain forever unaffected by the changes of this world.  His subject-matter is entirely drawn from daily life, the way he experienced it.  He paints the customs and traditions of his land, particularly those connected with the cycle of life and religious festivities.  Traditional Cypriot wedding holds a special place in his work, since it is a subject he returns to again and again.  Dressing the bride, sewing the bridal bed, the wedding party, the church ceremony where the entire village is present, expressing their happiness for the young couple through dancing and singing with the accompaniment of traditional musicians; the customs of the Monday after the wedding and the bride's virginity; childbirth and all that is connected with it.

An important place in his thematography holds all farming activities and scenes of the daily lives of the people in the village.  Men and women working in the fields or at home.  Work becomes a ritual and each person has his/her role which is depicted with great accuracy.  Young women at the loom weaving with multi-coloured threads, the way they've been taught by the older women to prepare their dowry.  Parching, ploughing, harvest, threshing and the making of bread.  Watering the fields, tending the animals, returning from the fields, lime-twigs and picking locust.  He also paints traditional professions, such as that of the blacksmith.  More rare are his paintings of symbolic figures and heroes.  Each painting looks like a fairy-tale, like those told by our grandmothers, the heroes of which are men from our tradition; men whose daily lives constitute the stuff that made the history of this island.  Fairy-tales filled with charm and magic.

These paintings are characterised by all typical features of naive art as mentioned above.  But, even though Kashalos always signed his paintings, he very rarely put a date on them.  The oldest painting with a date is "Erotokritos and Aretousa" which bears the signature M. Milis Kashalos and the date 1950.  It is only on some of his early works that he uses the surname Milis.  Afterwards, it was dropped in favour of just "Kashalos", which he sometimes spelt with a double "K".  Even though his style is largely unchanged, his early paintings depict fewer figures, the colour range used is rather limited, with larger surfaces of unified colour, there is greater simplification and less detail.  These paintings are closer to folk glass painting, from which he started.  As his work progressed, he became more familiar with his material and was able to use painterly space with greater confidence.  His colours then become richer and brighter and he begins to use some tone gradations, especially in his backgrounds.  Unified colour spaces are broken down with the use of other colours or decorative elements.  In general, his decoration is sometimes rather lavish.  He also attempts some form of primary play of light and shadow.  In all his paintings he attempts to remain faithful to his subject matter which is rendered in as much description as possible.  This is judged on the basis of the importance he gives to things.  This results in the co-existence of, on the one hand, realistic detailed descriptions and on the other hand, much abstraction, especially in the depiction of space which thus becomes unrealistic; all within the same painting.

Composition of the elements within the painting is arbitrary and instinctive and resembles the manner in which children compose their work.  There is no perspective, the rules of which he is totally unaware, and his subject matters are rendered in graphic description.  When for example, the width of the painting is not enough to fit his description, he does not hesitate to continue the narration on the top part of the painting.

Figures are rendered with much schematisation.  They are vertical and static.  Tranquil and still figures in their depicted movement.

His drawing is harsh and the outlines of the figures are intense and black.  His figures are depicted frontally or in profile and seem independent of the space around them.  Often they look like figures of shadow-theatre stuck on the surface of the painting.  Very often proportions are distorted and rendered on the basis of a semantic scale.

Some elements - mostly decorative - or elements which concern the space in which the figures are placed - reappear in many of his paintings.  This repetition shows Kashalos's previous relationship with folk art, from which it seems he has not been entirely liberated.

Just like Theophilos, also our own Kashalos, should be considered a link connecting the past and present of our art.  In his work we recognise some elements of our archaic, Hellenistic, Byzantine and folk art, yet all rendered with the freedom of his own innocent sincerity.  Kashalos connects us to our past also in the sense that he was not influenced by any foreign element.  Uneducated and of working-class stock he drew only from his own country.  With his paintings he converges with popular naive artists if post-byzantine iconography and the painters pf popular murals, through the work of whom the painting tradition of our country has been preserved "in popular form".  Yet all of these seen through the eyes of his own soul and rendered in his own individual manner.  That is why his art is - and I borrow an attribute given by Odysseas Elytis to Theophilos - "both ancestral and direct".

DAPHNE NIKITA

Source: Michael Chr. Kashalos, the hidden fascination of painting, Daphne Nikita, Copyright © 2000, Larnaka Municipality, Pierides Foundation.

press to see Michael Chr. Kashalos gallery 

press to see all related articles