Late 40-ties: Dark Tones
The works created immediately after the war were marked by expressive, fleshy colours, sometimes dominated by dark tones, sometimes bearing the stigma of an expression of grim forces (Scream, 1943). It was actually written at that time that Nowosielski was a man of a "pessimistic psychological disposition" (Maria Majka). Generally however, the 1940s and 1950s were a non-homogeneous period when the artist searched for his own way, as evidenced by the already mentioned works, as well as the period's Cubist Abstractions - a series of drawings (1942) and compositions (including drawings) heralding a shift towards conventionality, or even formal asceticism.
During that time Nowosielski remained also under the influence of other tendencies that were inspiring Kantor's circle. Those were, among other things, geometric abstraction, in a somewhat milder, sometimes almost lyrical, version. We will find traces of that inspiration in the work from the period of both Kantor as well as Jonasz Stern and Andrzej Wróblewski. It seems that a groundbreaking period for the metamorphosis and stabilisation of the poetics of Nowosielski's painting occurred between 1945-1948, when he made stylised nudes, still lifes (highly pared-down now), and Utrillean cityscapes, and above all, paintings almost unequivocally abstract. He made a series of paintings at the time (Archangel's Wing, Winter in Russia, both 1947; Nude and First Snow, 1948), with the perhaps most well-known of them all - The Battle of Addis Ababa (1947), which to this day remain his showpieces. He combined in them, with utmost skill, a thin black line outlining figures (squares, triangles, or, less often, circles - the latter will gain a fully standalone status only in 1970s paintings) with pure, luminous colour whose intensity often produces the effect of glowing forms (he thus often achieved the illusion of a deep space, "leading" the painting "beyond", as it were, the visible, opening it to the viewer's extrasensory perception - see Bathroom Floor, Fire, both 1948).
Eschatological Realism: The Icons
The ultimate formation of the means of expression in Nowosielski's painting owed also to his interest in surrealism. As a result of complex inspirations the characteristic features of his art developed, in which the apparent simplicity of a two-dimensional "modelling" typical of icon painting coexists with unusual solutions for perspective and composition, often accompanied by a thematic boldness (e.g. eroticism) characteristic of provocative surrealism. Moreover, Nowosielski's "icons", considered by Mieczysław Porębski to be examples of "eschatological realism", bespeak of a continued striving to transgress the border between the "physical" and the "spiritual", the "secular" and the "holy", the "profanum" and the "sacrum"... As far as the visual aspect is concerned, besides the elements already mentioned, the viewer is enchanted by a heavy, characteristic (with its own duct, tension, and rhythm), clear line and an attachment to a warm colour palette. The painter himself is convinced that had he not been familiar with innovative modern art, the results of his artistic meeting with Orthodoxy would have had an entirely different appearance.
Nowosielski's art is not only based on the motif, but also, it is built around a conscious "language" with which the motif is depicted. A "language" that has evolved, starting with the figurative paintings and drawings from the late 1940s, some of them perhaps still formally awkward, but already signaling the clear thematic vistas that in the following decades will be defined and consolidated by the artist. Changes in Nowosielski's art occurred under the influence of the afore-mentioned geometric-lyrical abstraction (the artist's going through the experienced twice, at the turn of the 1940s and 1950s, and, fascinatingly, in the late 1990s, going radically against the grain of current artistic trends) as well as surrealism. Further evolution took place, by means of the icon, in the area of representative, figurative art. Abstraction (he initially made compositions closely related especially to the poetics of Mondrian, and in the latest period, paintings bearing an affinity with Mark Rothko's chromatic abstraction) produced simpler modeling, a rejection of a "painterly" quality on behalf of a style closer to drawing - flatter spaces, fresher and lighter colour tones - to put it simply, a move away from the concreteness of realistic narration, detail, descriptiveness, towards generalisation, conventionality. At the same time, in figuration, protected by the testimony of the eye, Nowosielski often seemed to regain his naivety, whereas in abstraction he remained constrained by the discourse, the compulsion of harmony. There was a paradox in this: though, as can be supposed, he identified more closely with figuration (peculiar, "spiritual", yet still figuration), it is abstraction that is closer to convention in his case. Generally however, his painting as a whole "derives" from the observation of nature, or its personal perception, but, in order to be closer to convention, depicts it using abstract, geometric simplifications. Hence its perspective distortions, narrow compositions and aggressive framing of figures, simplified modeling, rhythmised compositions of virtually two-dimensional forms (patches of colour), and a limited palette (dominated by the basic colour spectrum).
Still, despite the relative systemisation of Nowosielski's works, one can hardly call this set of common characteristics a convention - the creation of which was the artist's great dream. It is precisely for creating a convention that he respected the surrealists and held them in higher esteem than other 20th-Century artists, or even considered surrealism to be the only chance for art. He himself searched for a canon, while at the same time trying to create his own. That is why he turned towards convention, that is, the icon. He modified the canon in all kinds of ways. He kept referring to it, even though he knew, because he talked about it, that the "canon has to exist within rather than be imposed for the outside" (one could add that neither can it be borrowed from the outside). He called the canon "...an externalisation of the spiritual reality of the icon painter. A canon limited to instructions what to paint and how is useless" (conversations with Zbigniew Podgórzec from the volume "Mój Chrystus").The icon was not his "nature", but a choice; he stylised his painting to look like the icon, cleansing it of emotions, perhaps even "sterilising" it. Perhaps this is why his art did not influence others. It remained separate. It is its strength, but also a weakness. Resulting from its confinement to a "language" that is not systematic or orthodox enough to become a canon. This, however, does not seem so important in the context of the artist's main goal, which was to represent the "reality of transfiguration", that is, to show the word as it existed in God's intention, at the moment of creation, and as it will on its last day of existence. At the same time, his art fulfils Kantor's thesis-postulate formulated in 1945 following the first exhibition of the Group of Young Artists, among them Nowosielski:
They bring with them a fresh artistic vision, unpolluted by naturalistic stereotypes - a sense of contemporary reality and an awareness of their own ground. And I am convinced... that above the pure construction of a picture built at its foundations of rigorous abstraction and a growing superstructure of an individual vision of a climate - one's own temperature - and extended throughout with the elements of form - but only through it will they be able to capture the subject of today's reality.
Still, despite its members' common interests, the Kraków Group remained a cluster of individual personalities. Nowosielski's uniqueness, or even separateness, long noticed, was made fully apparent by an exhibition staged in 2003 at Warsaw's Zachęta by Kraków's Galeria Starmach.