Help on a chawan

[Bernard]

Hello everybody,

This is, I believe, a Japanese chawan (9.3 cm diameter).

IMO it looks nice, with its glazed cover and stylized birds.

Can you give me your expert opinion and informations on it (school, age,...) ?

Regards.

Bernard D

[ROKUJURO]

Bonjour Bernard

 

If your CHAWAN is a hard fired item it is probably an E-SHINO bowl. It is signed as far as I can see, and specialized collectors may be able to relate it to a potter.

 

A very renowned contemporary artist working in this style was ARAKAWA TOYOZO. I attach a photo of a CHAWAN of one of his pupils.

 

As to the age of your CHAWAN, it looks like a more recent piece. The shape with it's very uneven rim and the footring display an intentional roughness which was part of the aims of the potter to produce the famous WABI-SABI appearence.

 

A very nice item and another proof of the qualified taste of your late father! Congratulations!

 

[John A Stuart]

Very nice pottery. A dull clunk when pinged. White over-glaze. Check the mark against Kato Kozo. John

[Bernard]

Thank you very much, Jean and John, for your kind and informative replies !

I need your help on second chawan, which is a kind of an enigma for me.

I know that it was purchased in 1956 from a French dealer of some repute (Le Véel in Paris). I found a small note written by my father with that information and the following succint description : "grès rakou, 18ème". At the end of the 1980s, I sent a photo of this bowl to an auctioneer (one of the two bigs) for a valuation. The photo was sent back with this statement :

"Ne semble malheureusement pas ancien, donc de faible valeur" "Unfortunately doesn't look old, so valueless". Strange statement !

Now, what do you think, as far as you can judge from the pics : does it look like a genuine raku ware (it has no seal, nor signature),or like a modern fake, or something else ?

Bernard D

[Marius]

Bernard,

 

this raku bowl does look old. I don't think you can reproduce patina easily on ceramic items like this one. The kintsugi looks old, too. A very charming chawan - congratulations

[kusunokimasahige]

It is most certainly Raku ware, and valuable.

 

The kintsugi (filling cracks with Gold) is well done. I would think this might even be late Edo period.

 

KM

[ROKUJURO]

Yes, AKA-RAKU, and doesn't look like a recent piece.

 

A close look with a magnifying glass down in the bottom of the bowl and on the foot should show signs of use (scratches), so you can find out yourself about the probable age. Of course there are new scientific methods to determine the exact age (e.g. Thermoluminescence Technique).

 

By the way, a modern RAKU CHAWAN would not be considered a fake, unless someone applied a famous signature.

 

It is difficult to find out about the value. Famous well-known pieces in Japan have their own CURRICULUM VITAE, in some cases they have proper names, and they are incredibly expensive (when and if they are at all for sale). A 'nameless', but authentic old CHAWAN with a certified age will mostly have a price tag related to the market.

[Bernard]

Many thanks for all these informations, gentlemen. I really appreciate your help.

 

@ Jean : you are right, I shouldn't have used the term "fake". If a dealer sells an aliud for a genuine item, it is not correct to blame the item (I'm happy that it was not the case for this chawan). I tried your method with the magnifying glass, but it was not so easy to spot scratches representing specific signs of use. I also made the test with the other chawan and some genuine old chaire, with the same difficulties.

 

Thanks again and best greetings.

 

Bernard D

[runagmc]

Is it most likely the crack (and gold filling) happened during manufacture?

[kusunokimasahige]

Hey Adam, probably not. Pottery which went wrong was highly likely discarded.

 

This type of filling was often done when a breakage occured.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kintsugi

 

KM

[ROKUJURO]

Gentlemen,

 

if a crack occurred while using a bowl, you would very probably see a KINTSUGI repair around a shard which broke off. In this case it looks like a fissure which opened up in the rapid cooling process - RAKU ware is taken out of the kiln while still red hot and immediately quenched in water. Cracks like the one shown are frequently seen, and a CHAWAN which was made by a well-known potter was perhaps not discarded because of this defect.

 

Henk-Jan is correct as far as stoneware pottery is concerned. Pots with cracks were/are considered as failed and were/are thrown away. This applies also to pots with artistically unsatifying results. ARAKAWA TOYOZO was known to destroy up to 85% of his pottery coming out of his kiln in the presence of a lawyer (!) and only the very top quality items survived. Of course this had also to do with the prices of his ceramics - if you can sell a CHAWAN for USD 2,500.-- you don't need so many to survive. . His prestige also required that there was no 'second choice' ceramics on sale.

 

The CHADO people found their pleasure in possessing 'old' ceramics and their used look, so in some cases KINTSUGI repairs were even done on an intact pot or an intentionally broken one to make it look more 'interesting'.

[Mark S.]

Like anything... 'value' can be subjective and a bit esoteric...

 

The true value of a chawan is based on many things and none are easy to define:

 

1) The most simplisitic (except to someone who follows Chanoyu... it is the MOST important) is 'how well does the chawan do it's job'?... ie, as a vessel to make tea. Does it keep the tea warm long enough for the guest to enjoy properly (especially koicha - 'thick tea')?... how does it 'feel' in the hand?... can the host handle it properly throughout the ceremony?... how does it co-exist with the other tea utensils presented?... etc.

 

2) In the case of the types of chawan you have, do they present the wabi 'feeling' that is sought so highly in wabi-chanoyu? In some case, very formal utensils are required, but for wabi style Chanoyu, finding bowls that perfectly capture that 'feel' is not as easy as it seems... old, imperfect, or subdued is not always the sole criteria... it's as if one is seeking the 'perfectly-imperfect'.

 

3) Provinence or age are only important for people concerned with those types of things, but they shouldn't be discounted as well if the piece is 'important'.

 

4) Personal taste of the host

 

5) Many, many things I am sure I am overlooking.

 

My personal taste leans toward the second bowl... but each person is different. I would love to see the green color of the tea in the bottom of that bowl, feel the warmth rise and smell the tea as I raised it to my lips, feel the bowl in my hand... how does one put a $$$ figure on that? I leave that to others...

 

Sorry if this doesn't help with your 'identification' questions. They are wonderful bowls...

[Steve Waszak]

I would agree with what Mark says here... And I agree, too, that this second bowl is not a modern work. A nice piece for sure.

 

Cheers,

 

Steve

[Eric H]

Swords and Ceramics...two worlds totally different...the sword as a result of strived perfectness, the chawan's beauty in its imperfectness.

 

The worlds most famous Chawan, Kokuho: the "Kizaemon Ido"

H 8.9 cm - D 15.4 cm - F 5.5 cm

Choson period 16th c.

Koho'an - Daitokuji - Kyoto

 

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=17412

 

Eric

[John A Stuart]

Mine of similar characteristics, but, definitely less character. John

[ROKUJURO]

You never know, John! In 400 years from now, yours might become KOKUHO as well! We'll talk about it then....

[John A Stuart]

I plan on it. See you there. John

[kusunokimasahige]

Agree with Mark here. And for me the first two are the most important.

 

If provenance is known, all the better.

 

Also like your second cup the best. The most famous cup posted is gorgeous, but the model I do not like. And that is again very personal.

 

KM

[Eric H]

"Ido" chawan is considered the first of three famous types of chawan.

First Ido, second Raku, third Karatsu... according to Japanese Connoisseurs.

 

I appreciate John‘s chawan.

 

Eric