Good work or not?

[raiden]

cyrus has the note copies, will post later when he sends them to me.

[raiden]

I'm not sure what Natsuo taikan you have Ford ( I hope they aren't making more bad copies in China - and yes that IS true Japanese sword and fittings books have been faked from China), but here is the info that you requested. The copy from the Taikan, the order and inverntory info. Only because we have to send this info to who is interested anyway, otherwise I wouldn't do this.

[raiden]

The inventory record for the Naginata Fuchi with date of manufacture - this research was done by a good friend of mine from the NBTHK as a favor.

[raiden]

I think the workmanship is as good or better than Yasuchika, but hey what do I know.........

[Pete Klein]

See! I told you -- painted wood.

[Marius]

I go with Pete, just that I say it is tinny, and not woody.

 

To quote a classic: "Nothing beats wood!"

[Pete Klein]

Mariuszk -- I was referring to the paper... BWA-ha-ha-ha!

[Brian]

How do you compare this workmanship with Yasuchika if we don't have the missing fittings that he was matching to compare with?

I expect the fittings all had to match, so he would have done the style and workmanship as close to the originals as possible? Maybe they were never united, since this piece isn't with the rest of the fittings.

Personally, I am not overwhelmed by the piece itself. It's an interesting piece, thanks for sharing.

 

Brian

 

PS - If I wanted to stir a giant pot...I would suggest that the plans in the book appear to show waves, and not clouds Same fuchi?

[raiden]

looks like he made it with clouds to match the fiting on the left page.....enough I have work to do!

[Bob M.]

Should have no problems getting high level papers from NBTHK - I assume that it will be submitted ?

 

Nice discovery!

[cabowen]

Personally, I am not overwhelmed by the piece itself. It's an interesting piece, thanks for sharing.

 

Brian

 

 

Definitely interesting and it is nice of Mike to post this along with the documentation. I have seen several Natsuo pieces in hand and I would agree with you Brian, not the usual impact of his work...

[Brian]

Doesn't the Taikan have just about every piece he made? Just wondering, because I had assumed the 2 facing pages had nothing to do with each other, and the left page doesn't concern a fuchi, and the right one is a different work. Don't want to always question things, since that seems to be a contentious issue...but if we are going to be a discussion forum and not just an appreciation group, we have to freely discuss work with the goal of being able to identify and evaluate stuff ourselves.

And if I cannot see this same work in the Taikan, and the order just mentions a naginata fuchi, then what is left is a piece that isn't really up to his usual standard of work, with a mei that isn't 100% to the regular mei examples and is a little skew.

Hopefully it has papers or will paper and all my hesitation can be put to rest. It's a nice piece, better seen in its entirety than in close-up.

 

Brian

[Marius]

What about the technique - is that repoussé with carving? And what material is that?

[Pete Klein]

I believe this is the tsuba referenced in the painted wood:

and is the same one referenced here by Robert Haynes:

 

I remembered this tsuba from the Ginza Joho magazine, March 2008. If not the exact one then possibly one of a Dai-Sho? Since the Haynes article is from the 1970's it's hard to say if the person he visited is still alive but if so he might hold the key to what happened to the original koshirae?

 

Something which I feel needs mentioning is that the piece had to fit into an existing koshirae so the workmanship had to match which possibly is why it doesn't look like typical Kano Natsuo work. It is an interesting investigation.

 

PS: Perhaps Elliot or someone else can send the Taikan plate to Robert Haynes to answer his long standing question?

PPS: Fuchi kashira (kozuka?) by Shozui?

[raiden]

Actually "No" the Taikan doesn't show all of his pieces, however, there is a very exact inventory record some that include the complete time the piece took to make from start to finish. I showed an example of this record in the posted pic. The kozuka that passed Juyo last year by Natsuo also isn't shown in the Taikan, but IS listed in the inventory record. - Just so you know, the kozuka and teh Fuchi came from the same source, but neither was papered yet. But the kozuka required shinsa for Juyo submission. Another example of items that did not have any kanteisho, but are known in other situations.

[kaigunair]

Thanks Mike for posting this piece, as well as the other pics of the taikan and papers. Really neat to see the research done. I understand that not all Mr. Natsuo's pieces were done to show case his talents. Pieces like this one, a commissioned replacement, show that making a living doing this required taking on requests (from probably influential and rich patrons).

 

I wish the yasuchika pieces were kept with this one, just to see how closely (or not), he followed the original fittings. More importantly, where he deviated from the original work would really be educational. I don't think the original assessments before the signature was revealed have cause to necessarily be revised in light of this being a work by Natsuo (well, maybe one of them ), since this was made as a replacement fitting; he wasn't pulling a design out of his mind's eye but merely trying to match an pre-existing set and style. Really should be evaluated in the context of the original fittings....if those original fittings were in fact genuine yasuchika. I wonder if that's the bigger question here. If a wealthy or perhaps aristocratic/well connected patron asked Natsuo to make a replacement fitting for items which were questionable yasuchika, would Natsuo have said anything knowing the originals were fake? Or would he just have executed the order in deference to the status of the patron?

 

Its amazing that Natsuo kept such detailed records. I hope other current tosogu smiths do this as well, especially on the off chance that they start winning top Gold prizes in recognized Japanese competitions, gaining even wider acknowledgement of their talents and abilities. Do we know anyone like that around here...? :lol:

[Brian]

Pete,

Well done, I think you are spot on about that tsuba being the one in the paperwork. Darn good memory

However, I must point out that it is unrelated to this fuchi. The one on that page depicts waves, and the size is wrong. I think it's safe to say that is a totally unrelated set.

Then we have the page on the left. That appears to be for another work entirely, although having a cloud theme. But no mention of a fuchi there, and to tie it to this work is a stretch, no? Unless the writing says something I am missing.

Mike...glad to hear not all the pieces are in the Meikan. That certainly opens the possibilities.

I would still like to see some paperwork linking this piece to Natsuo besides the mei though. Does the inventory sheet clearly describe it or give dimensions? That would be great for sure. I assume the order/inventory sheet describes the Yasuchika piece it was made for?

Love disecting work like this, as is is the thought process we should be going through when looking at pieces like this. We collect art, not signatures.

We always said the work must confirm the mei...yet everyone agreed the work wasn't of a top level, so are we now trying to make the mei confirm the work?

Btw..there are my own thoughts on the subject, I promise I am not channeling anyone else who would prefer not to comment :D

Of course, we are working from pics, which we all know is not an ideal situation. Would love to see this in hand.

Btw..we have some great info on Natsuo as well as mei examples in a prior thread here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4965

 

Brian

[Pete Klein]

I went through the six volumes of, 'Tagane no Hana', Yagi Fuji, Kobe, I - IV - 1903/5 and V & VI - 1911/12, vol. IV, unpaginated, and found the Dragon head:

 

PS: Tagane no Hana was reprinted around 1970 and that is what I have as the first editions of which I have one volume tend to have foxing (brown stains in the paper). This is a problem with many of the early books, along with worm holes in Japanese texts primarily.

[Brian]

Going to change your rank to "tosogu detective" :lol:

So that accounts for the piece on the left, and I think you have the tsuba for the one on the right pinned down.

This is an interesting dragon piece. What part of a koshirae was it made for? Looks solid at the base. I wonder where it is nowdays?

 

Brian

[Pete Klein]

I have no idea where it is but at least we see it existed. I feel the two pages are actually of the same work as you can see both sides of the nakago, one on each page. My first thought was that it was the kashira but this being a pole arm the kashira is seen on the right page, upper right. Perhaps it is an end cap for the saya? I'm admittedly confused on this. It's also possible that these pages are composites of ideas. More research necessary.

[Pete Klein]

I received a PM from Tanto 54, George M. who suggested this dragon head is the habaki and although I had difficulty seeing it at first I believe he hit the nail on the head. It would make sense in the diagrams also. Having no experience with naginata I could only think in terms of katana habaki but as this was an ornate pole arm koshirae it works. Pretty cool, what?