Signature Removal Opinions wanted

[Nickupero]

I'm not sure if this topic has been visited in the past but I'd like to get a discussion going and the opinions from all types of collectors are welcome.

I've come across many people who have different views on Antique Gimei blades, and the process of removing the signature.

 

Some collectors believe that removing a false signature is a form of cleansing the blade as to what it should be, also making it able to pass for certification.

While others believe that by doing this you are erasing the history or historical prints of the blade, and altering the item for your benefit.

 

I'm interested to hear your views and why, even if they differ to the above mentioned.... Maybe even some feelings regarding personal experiences.

I'll keep my opinion to the end, curious to see where this goes :D

[runagmc]

It has been talked about before here...

 

The only time a gimei would potentially be worth leaving alone is in the case of the few well known forgers who are now somewhat famous for their quality forgeries.

 

In my opinion, if a sword has an obvious gimei (especially if it looks like it was gouged out by a blind man with a screw-driver), removing it only serves to restore the history of the sword . If you leave a horrible gimei, it will make the sword hard to appreciate for what it is everytime you look at it... pretty much the same way any other ugly flaw would...

[GARY WORTHAM]

Greetings Nick;

 

Well, a very diverse and controversial topic; with no clear rules to follow; as each sword would be a case within itself.

 

I would personally, only have a god awful signature removed, that defaces the quality of the sword; and only after consulting with several authorities, before creating an unreversable act.

 

If the gimei signature [ and are we sure it is ] is in the plan to have the blade papered, with an opinion; how important is that to the individual.

 

The blade is the blade, and opinions change over the years. Papers are great, if your plans are to sell the blade; as they, naturally, give more reliability to the sale.

 

Yet, a well cut signature, that is part of the blade's history, is a part of it's history; and a serious line to cross in tampering with a historical artifact.

 

I myself, would be interested in the thoughts of others, who have a clear concept of this.

[Andi B.]

Hello,

interesting topic...

But who is usually chiseling the gimei - the smith or a following owner / dealer?

[sanjuro]

There are so many aspects to this question.

 

There are instances where a sword has been estimated/judged as being gimei, has then had the supposed gimei removed only to find on resubmission to shinsa it is attributed to the very name that has been removed.

 

We must bear in mind that when a sword is judged as gimei it is only the best guess of some very educated people. I mean this as no criticism, but the plain fact is, they can be wrong.

Having said that, shinsa is the best way we have at our disposal to evaluate swords and their authenticity. It is not however infallible nor is it perfect. The papers that are issued against any sword are only as good as the organisation and the shinsa team that issued them.

 

I own papered swords. Those papers are kept in a safe, and I never look at them. The swords are another matter. I look at them frequently and they tell me what I need to know about them. The papers in the safe can only at best confirm what I see in the sword itself.

How important are the papers to you personally?

[Alex A]

I know a dealer who doesnt put his swords through shinsa, "it takes too long and costs too much", he says. Before i read all these posts i was under the impression that maybe its because most of his swords are gimei (still might be), now im thinking he may have a point. If his knowlege is as good as the shinsa team, then would it not be a waste of money?. As stated, they are only opinions (written opinions infact). There probably more important to newbies (like me) than to someone who is an expert. I suppose when im spending my hard earned cash i need something to put my mind at rest, maybe i just see it as some kind of reassureance!. From now on though im a bit more open minded, and cautious.

 

Alex

[sanjuro]

Two questions I always ask myself.

 

Am I buying this sword because the papers say it is a fine sword, or am I buying it because of what I can see in it? Do I see more in the sword because it has been submitted to shinsa and has papers.

Am I buying this sword to sell it again and the papers will possibly help realise a better price?

 

Is it good to have a sword with papers that verify its authenticity? Of course it is. Is it necessary?.......... That depends entirely on your point of view, and we all differ to a greater or lesser degree.

[cabowen]

The biggest customers of the various papering organizations in Japan are reported to be dealers. In Japan, where it is well known that fake signatures are everywhere, customers by and large want assurance that the signature is good. Dealers can charge a premium when they have a paper in hand. Most (Japanese) dealers know full well when a signature is good or not but without the paper, no premium price.

 

There are collectors in Japan, and perhaps a few elsewhere, who trust their own judgment and think that papers are a waste of money. Further, of late, scandals have reduced the reputation of papering organizations in many eyes, contributing to this self-reliance by an ever increasing number. Personally, as someone who collects primarily kindai/gendai-to, I have never had the need. I have papered older, signed swords and would continue to do so because at some point they will be sold and it is what most potential buyers want.

 

I would scratch my head if a dealer claimed papers are a waste of time and money, depending on the level of his merchandise. While papers are not cheap or easy to obtain, in most cases, for signed swords, they add value. Assuming most dealers are in business to make a profit, it is against one's self interest to not get papers, in general, at present. That may change at some point in the future if the reputations of papering organizations fall further.

 

As far as removing a signature is concerned, it is a case by case decision for me. Something obviously spurious I have no problem removing it as it is simply graffiti in my mind. Others I would be more hesitant to touch.

[leo]

Very reasonable statement, Chris.

 

I might add that for overseas customers like myself, who are not constantly travelling to Japan, the situation might be this:

 

I have bought a polished katana for a rather low price because it had no papers and I send it to Japan to be papered.

I have invested in shipping, insurance, import/export shinsa plus handling charges for a local agent anyway. Against all positive judgement the blade was pink slipped solely for gimei(no other problems like saiha, or fatal faults).

 

I would in this case prefer to additionally invest in a mei removal and another shinsa fee.

 

As other members have already mentioned the situation is not always as clear as that. It will get complicated if

 

....the blade is in need of a better polish

....it is a wakizashi(mei removal and paper is almost the same price, but market value much lower than for a comparable katana)

 

In these cases I would probably decide against the mei removal.

 

This is just one example. Like other members have stated, there are plenty of variations to this, which have to be handled individually. The best way to avoid a mei removal:

Make good pictures and get as many professional opinions as possible before you send a blade to Japan.

 

Best,

[Jean]

Make good pictures and get as many professional opinions as possible before you send a blade to Japan.

 

Martin,

 

I almost agree to your post till the last part of your sentence. It should end by "before you buy it".

[Alex A]

Theres a lot of folk out there who buy on impulse, i jumped in with both feet when i bought my first sword several years ago. I didnt have a clue (more clueless than i am now anyway :lol:)i had never read a book, never heard of papers, i just saw it and bought it. Luckily i bought a few books the week it came, worked out it was a mass produced koto blade, then returned it for something with papers!. What im trying to say is, swords dont need papers to sell, just naive folk. "Before you buy it", sums it up fine.

 

Alex.

[Nickupero]

Some very good points were made... Apologizes if my initial post was too vague, it will be narrowed down as you read.

 

Mistakes get made even by the most experienced eyes, and its unfortunate to hear situations where a signature is removed and later proven to be that same smith. I've heard some horror stories myself. But sword groups like the NBTHK and NTHK help us to be able to set a standard in this industry, the resale of a certified blade is no doubt easier and faster. Sales through the internet make us instinctively ask for paperwork since we are not able to examine the blade in hand, pictures can hide features that the eye would normally be able to catch. Chris hit the nail dead on regarding certification.

 

Alex, I would be careful with this, you pointed out that you know a dealer that does not like to put blades through Shinsa due to the expense and time required, I can sympathize with this because it is difficult as a dealer to hold up funds in an item for an extended period of time. This is why trust is needed and it is always best to deal with reputable dealers, even if they make mistakes they will own up to it in order to maintain their reputation. Just be careful who that dealer is though!

 

As collectors we all have different goals and interests but what I was really curious to know was the opinions and experiences of actually removing the Mei, I've never done so myself and I share my opinion close to Gary's. If an item is Gimei someone at some point in time did this for a reason and that remains the history of the item, now at this point in history I would feel bad to be the one making the final decision to alter this, something irreversible. I've had this opinion from when I first started collecting and I always though it would change as I evolved, but funny enough it has remained the same and I think it may be the Historian inside me and the appreciation of keeping things the way they were. I don't like to be the person making the decision to alter or modify the history of the blade. I've sold blades in the past that were Gimei and made my thoughts very clear to my clients, I always told them that if they insist I can point them in the direction for the alterations but I did not want to have direct involvement in the process. Good work is good work regardless of what on the Nakago. I know many of you might not agree and are eager to hit the "Post Reply" button, I am interested to hear your thoughts.

[cabowen]

If one is around long enough, you will eventually hear stories about how the signature was removed and then the blade papered to that exact smith, implying that the signature was in fact correct. What isn't often said in those cases is that more often than not the signature that was removed wasn't by the smith it purported to be but by someone else and that is the reason it was considered gimei and removed. I have seen that happen several times.

 

Also, sometimes a blade will paper to a better smith than the gimei after it is removed. I have seen that too.

 

Removing a spurious signature is a personal decision each collector has to make for himself. It is always better to do nothing if there is any doubt. By any doubt, I mean after soliciting the opinions of several shinsa teams, one receives a horyu determination or better. Sometimes it is a good idea to wait a few or more years and resubmit in the case of a big name and a very close signature. One has to be objective though and not be self-deluded. Many collectors can't accept it when they are told their favorite big name blade is gimei and simply refuse to believe it no matter how many times it fails shinsa. Hard as it may be, sometimes one just has to suck it up and move on.

 

Luckily, most gimei are fairly obvious to those that have experience and training and are not much of a conundrum. Personally, like I said, I have no trouble removing them because I consider them graffiti that is just defacing an otherwise honest sword. Knowing most sword smiths are rather proud, I like to think they would rather not have someone else's mei on their blade and receive credit for their work. I understand the historical artifact viewpoint; it has been well discussed here in the past, and respect it, but like a chip or scratch, I have no problem restoring a blade and removing these bumps and bruises.

[Jean]

Fully agreed with Chris. What would you do guys if I took my O suriage Naoe Shizu and signed it Kaneuji? It will be gimei, but would you keep it as part of history?

[John A Stuart]

Well, Jean, I would take it no matter what you signed on it and be very, very happy. John

[Clive Sinclaire]

Gentlemen

Some years ago, I had the mei removed "proffesionaly" from a tanto after it had been declared gimei at NBTHK shinsa in Japan. I then re-submitted it later to a shinsa outside of Japan and rather than any attribution to a maker, as I expected on a mumei blade, it received a pink paper, ie failed!. I was mystified how this could happen to an unsigned blade and was unable to obtain a clear explanation for this and still fail to comprehend. Shinsa panels work in a mysterious way, their wonders to perform.

Clive Sinclaire

[Nickupero]

Points very well made, I respect your opinions.

Referring it to as Graffiti is interesting, some people like a clean wall while others feel it adds character.

 

These items are highly regarded and they represent very well the Japanese mentality and the strive for perfection so I see how an ugly attempt at a signature can take away from the beauty of the item in some eyes. I guess I see it a little different, I find a false signature tells a story about the blade at one point in time, sort of like a physical record. I like to imagine who's hands it could have passed through, what the blade could have been through, reasons for doing such things and the people involved, and besides documented records there is not so much we can tell about a blades history and what it has seen.

We will all have a certain amount of time with the items we purchase until they pass onto the next custodian, will we leave our prints... maybe, or maybe not... a removal of a signature, a repolish, adjustment, or repair. Anything we do alters its history.

I guess the only way to slightly convince me to do such a thing would be out of respect to the original smith.

 

I've had discussions in person with friends for hours regarding this matter and I'm interested in hearing different views from both sides of the fence.

 

That's very odd Clive, first time I heard of that, never resubmitted it later?

[cabowen]

Shinsa panels work in a mysterious way, their wonders to perform.

Clive Sinclaire

 

It is no mystery that sometimes they simply don't work.....

[Jamie]

It probably depends on a few factors for different collectors.

Is the blade worth it? It's not cheap to have done.

Personally I would have to be very certain it was gimei. And it would have to have some benefit- like papering to some other well regarded smith.

[sanjuro]

I'm just throwing this out there for the sake of this discussion, and I guess playing devil's advocate to some degree.

 

In the long run the decision to remove a gimei signature will ultimately rest upon the merits of the individual sword.

How important is the signature in the general scheme of things? Whilst not demeaning the works of recognised masters, a good blade is a good blade regardless of whose signature appears on the nakago, and in the analysis, did you buy the signature or the sword?

A fine example of a swordsmiths work with a gimei signature (if you're sure its gimei) is not as desirable as a similar example that is mumei. However, is an attribution by a shinsa panel more desirable or in some cases more accurate so far after the fact, than simply accepting a sword for what it is.

 

Something that has bothered me in the past, is typified by some of the smiths in the Masahide school whose works are often pink slipped as gimei, in that the smith having worked in the style of an old master then signs that old masters name as a tribute rather than a deliberate forgery. Some of course are deliberate forgeries and both are equally gimei in the eyes of a shinsa panel. In the case of a tribute however, the signature in a way belongs on the sword. Would its removal be warranted though it forms part of the sword's history?

[raiden]

I will tell of one unusual situation that may relate to thisthread. A few years ago i bought a very nice sunnobi tanto with a kinzogan mei to the maker , and with a kinzogan by a honnami attributor. The blade did not look like the attributed mei, but I was puzzeled as the Honnami kinzogan looked ok. So I sent pictures to my teacher Tanobe sensei for his advice. He told me by phone that the attribution has to be determined after a shinsa team has seen the blade, but that the Honnami kinzogan was correct. Meaning the Honnami name and Kao . So I sent the blade to Tanobe sensei to see, and he said that in his opinion, the maker of the blade was different than what was written on the tang. But yet the Honnami gold sign was genuine. So in order to preserve the Honnami mei, I decided not to have the kinzogan removed, thus having a genuine Honnami mei to be used for study purposes. It is a great sword, and it can still be appreciated for what it is, rather than what it once was....some things need to be preserved, and some do not.

[watsonmil]

Dear All,

Somewhat in response to Keith's last post, ... I own a very nice Kanbun period Katana sword which is obviously Gimei ( signature of the famous NoSada ( Izumi ( no ) Kami Kanesada ). On the ura side is an inscription which translates : Seki San, the owner of this blade presents to MatsuDaira Hanjiro of Noshu Province in the Town of Takasu this blade as a gift or ( main prize ).

 

I believe I read somewhere and I believe the article was by the late John M. Yumoto that swords were sometimes ordered by individuals as gifts or presentation pieces for important individuals, ... and since it was important to give a valuable gift, ... the person ordering the sword would ask that the blade be signed by such and such famous smith. He went on to write that the recipient of the blade would quite possibly recognize that the sword was not made by the famous smith but would not embarrass the person presenting the sword, but would rather accept it as a most generous and precious gift and might well present it back to the gentleman who presented it at a point in the future at an appropriate time as a token of their mutual respect.

 

I hate paraphrasing, but I cannot lay my hands on that article to quote Yumoto San's exact words. I give this as an example where removing the Gimei signature would be destroying a bit of history and culture. I guess what I'm trying to say is that there were many reasons for a sword to be signed Gimei.

 

By the way, ... the sword is beautiful and flawless, and an example where the Smith who actually did the forging was a master craftsman. I only wish I knew the name of the actual Smith.

... Ron Watson

[sanjuro]

the sword is beautiful and flawless, and an example where the Smith who actually did the forging was a master craftsman. I only wish I knew the name of the actual Smith.

 

And you know what the sorry part of this situation is? Theres no way you can find out by submitting to shinsa until you remove the gimei. (if it is gimei). Even then, the shinsa team will not in all likelihood pin it down to the actual smith, and all you will get is some nebulous comment about the school it belongs to. Not real good value for money is it?

Why I wonder when they pink slip something as gimei do they not give some idea as to who actually made the sword. Is it a case of can't or just simply won't????????

[Alex A]

On the subject of blade style, maybe the smith decided to have a change, try something new, maybe he felt a bit exuberant that day and decided to copy a blade that he had seen for a change, on the subject of bad mei, perhaps he was an alcoholic and had hit the saki to hard before signing it , perhaps he was ill or simply he felt the blade wasnt upto standard and got his apprentice to sign it for him. We are only human, not robots, forgive my naiveness, and feel free to correct me?

 

Alex.

[sanjuro]

Alex.

 

Yes, swordsmiths are human, but they generally take the making of a blade very seriously. It is also the work of many days to produce a blade, its not simply a matter of tumbling out of bed after a night on the sauce, yawn and fart then turn to the wife and say "Oh well, off to work love, I think I'll churn out a blade today" sort of thing.

I think I'm right in saying that a smith is usually able to work in a number of styles quite confidently, and that a badly forged or substandard blade is more often destroyed, rather than simply given to an apprentice to sign. Remember, a signature only confirms the maker, his work even badly done, is identifiable in many other ways. As far as signatures are concerned, They are akin to handwriting in that though two signatures may not appear as identical, the way the ideograms are formed however is instinctive and a matter of the personal style of the smith. Therefore the way rather than the content does not differ greatly.

 

A substandard sword may rather be left unsigned however.

 

The trade simply doesn't work the way you might imagine. It is firstly tradition bound and a swordsmith wants only his best work seen, and obviously his signature goes on the blade he has forged with a great deal of pride. Not something you do if the hand is a little unsteady. Most gimei it is safe to say are deliberate forgeries. It is however the ones that are not intended as forgeries and the reasons they have the gimei, that gives us reason to pause before removing what may be an integral part of the sword's history. At the other end of the scale, there is also the commercial consideration of the swords worth either with or without a signature, and it is this that has given rise to many gimei being placed on mumei blades, since a signed blade is generally more expensive than an unsigned one.

 

On the other hand, maybe I'm wrong and someone who has actually 'been there' can put me right.

[Alex A]

Haha, keith, i know a sword is not made in a day , i was trying to see a swordsmith in a more human way, it all seems so idealistic. I take it they made money when they sold there swords, i can imagine a swordsmith being reluctant to throw one in the bin after 2 weeks work, as you say maybe sold unsigned, or if they thought the customer was clueless, sign it :lol: . Just the way i look at things i suppose, always looking for another take on things, knowing what i know about folk and there shananigans.

 

Alex

[cabowen]

While I can hardly speak for all smiths, nor those born pre-Meiji, I have spent untold hours with dozens of modern smiths, many who worked during WWII and who were trained by smiths with direct links to shinshinto smiths of note.

 

Additionally, I have spent years among traditional Japanese craftspeople of all sorts. While I have not been trained as a Japanese shokunin, or craftsman, I have observed them in their native environment enough to form certain opinions about their traits and tendencies, in general. Sword smiths are/were shokunin of a sort, and thus the basic system of their training and the ethics of their craft are shared with other craftspeople.

 

Most stick rather closely to the methods they were taught. The whole system is based on repeatability through the consistent following of a learned method. Some smiths were indeed able to work in several styles but this was the exception, rather than the norm. It is this characteristic of the "system" that forms the basis of kantei. It may be described as "when something works, stick with it". They don't just wake up one day and "change".... If you ask a temple carpenter to build a house, they will tell you they can't. If you ask a smith trained in Bizen den to make a Soshu den blade, most will tell you no. They do not, and in most cases will not, work outside their comfort zone.

 

Even today, in Japan, from hanging the toilet paper roll to wiping the floor, there is one universal "right" (Japanese) way to do just about everything. I learned this the hard way- I married a Japanese woman. You would be amazed at how consistent such small things are across generations and across the country. Once you experience this, you will have a real grasp on what they mean when they say Japan is a homogeneous culture. It is also another reason why non-conformity is much frowned upon and foreigners are seen as a threat to the system.

 

Are there exceptions? Sure, after all, we are talking about human beings. There are always exceptions.

 

Sword collectors are always looking to rationalize the differences in their blade from an authentic one: the smith was drunk/hung over when he signed it; the smith didn't sign it because it was made for the emperor; the blade was signed by his student; ad nauseum. With well known smiths, there are usually dozens, if not hundreds, of extant examples that have been appreciated for hundreds of years by many people. Today's experts can compare directly in most cases, with multiple blades of known authenticity. Furthermore, what most fail to realize is that most gimei can be determined at a glance by collectors trained to write Japanese much in the same way that an observant Westerner can spot poorly done fake autographs.

 

In a modern world, especially in the US, pride of workmanship is a very rare thing, not only because few people actually make anything anymore, but because the value of craftsmanship is no longer meaningful to most in a mass produced culture. To most Japanese, their most precious possession is their name/reputation and shame their worst fear. This is still true today, at least in my experience. This drives most craftsman, especially those that do not want to bring any shame to their teachers or their families. They are a proud lot. For most sword smiths, as much or more so than other craftsman, their work borders on the sacred. I have seen and heard this many times. Given that, it is certainly true that some smiths, when faced with feeding their families, have resorted to less than honest methods to sell their swords. They are in the minority. There are always shenanigans were people and money converge, but in my experience, most professional craftsman seem to be above most of that...the few I have known that aren't above cutting a few corners are known and aren't very well respected. Word gets around.

 

To address Keith's question about pink slips and the lack of any info from shinsa teams, I should clarify that "pink slips" are not given by the NBTHK, but were given by the NTHK under the former head, Yoshikawa Kentaro sensei, when they did shinsa in the US a few times. I think that is where this notion comes from.

 

Also, the NTHK-NPO, when doing shinsa in the US, from the first time they came, have given a period and potential school or group, when possible, for all rejected swords. I gave them specific instructions to do this from the beginning, and they have complied as best they could. I agree that one should get something more than "rejected" when one submits something for shinsa.

[sanjuro]

Thanks Chris.

 

I was hoping you might jump in and lend some of your insights on this subject.

 

Note:

Let us fervently hope that in this instance at least, your comments are not viewed as a threat to someone else's self perception of pre- eminence in this field. :D

[cabowen]

Thanks Chris.

 

I was hoping you might jump in and lend some of your insights on this subject.

 

Note:

Let us fervently hope that in this instance at least, your comments are not viewed as a threat to someone else's self perception of pre- eminence in this field. :D

 

 

Most welcome....

[Brian]

A reminder to all...under your profile you have a "friends and foes" section. Adding names to your foes list will ignore their posts, maybe bringing a little peace to the rest of us. Everyone is welcome to use it..in fact encouraged.

 

Brian