How long did it take....?

[Brian]

A traditional kantei is run a bit differently than those I have seen done in the US. Normally, several items are put out for in-hand inspection. Each participant views the items and then submits a bid for the maker. The judge then either accepts the guess, or returns it with a note (wrong period, wrong "road", etc. and the participant has another chance, based on the feedback, to try again. At the end of the allotted time, the answers are given and the judge discusses each blade, the guesses made, and the merits/demerits of the more popular wrong guesses.

 

Not only do you need good swords but you need expert judges who can quickly reply to the guesses with the appropriate note to help guide the participants.

Who cares if it is 100% traditionally done, or how it is done, or by whom? The fact is that they are doing something towards advancing kantei skills and are making an effort. Sorry, but this comment makes it seem as though you are putting down the efforts of those who are making an effort in the USA. Let's not be our own worst enemy in the West when it comes to Nihonto study. We should be praising and encouraging anyone who goes to a lot of trouble to put on an event like this. Comments about experts and good swords do little to thank the efforts of people like Mike and others. I know I would be over the moon to have something like that here in SA.

It doesn't have to always be the Japanese way. I think I would prefer to be put into a group and be able to discuss among ourselves actually. Less intimidating. We all know how kantei is done in Japan, it is well covered everywhere. Highlighting the differences between "us" and "them" is not very constructive or encouraging, and that last line is particularly demeaning to those running these events in the US as far as I am concerned.

 

Brian

[paulb]

Hi Brian

I absolutely agree with you that any effort to help people in the west learn should be encouraged. I am an advocate of kantei both physical and Shijo-Kantei such as that run by the NBTHK in their monthly journal. I am convinced that taking part in this type of exercise is one of the best ways to learn. However there are a couple of points to consider.

 

1. Quality of example blades. It is important that a blade under study should be representative of the period, school and smith and exhibit those features which identify it as such. To see these feature it should be of good quality and in a good polish.

 

2. When carrying out these exercises in the absense of an expert the sword should have been authenticated by one of the recognised bodies, NBTHK, NTHK etc. together with their description where possible. On too many occassions in the past when witnessing such events held at club level participants have been exposed to what the owner thinks rahter than what they know, i.e. "This is a Bizen smith working in a Yamato style on a wednesday and using different iron". If you are using something to illustrate features and to learn from there should be little or no doubt as to what it is.

 

3. For a very long time I avoided participating in such events, even with the relative anonymity of Shijo kantei, for fear of being wrong and looking silly. However the point in taking part and submiting answers, at least for me, is that it forces me to study with a level of discipline and commitment that I would otherwise lack. The chance of getting an answer right or having a wrong answer exposed (even if it is only to your self) is a great focus. Not taking part means that I would browse rather than study.

I am totally convinced that kantei is an essential tool in developing understanding, at least it is for me, and I have learned far more in the relatively short time I have regularly taken part in such activity that I did in years before.

So while I agree with Brian that the format in such events does not have to slavishly follow the pattern used in Japan, the basics of quality swords and personal challenge should be an integral part of such an exercise. Fortunately from the descriptions I have heard the events orgainsed by the NBTHK-AB are very much inline with these principals and I am sure those who participate gain from them immensley.

[Brian]

Paul,

The comment was made that there are no kantei sessions at US shows. This was countered by the fact that NBTHK-AB holds kantei at most shows. This was then followed by the statements about kantei outside of the US, and the level of experts and swords needed. Therefore everything relates to these kantei sessions, and that is what I am addressing.

The quality of swords, state of polish and need for conforming specimens is obvious...not really needed to emphasize.

This subject is addressing only one thing. The current organized shows/kantei sessions, and the way they are done.

Based on the pm's I have received..the comments and the way they are presented are an issue for a few people, and justifiably in my view.

 

Brian

[seattle1]

Hello:

In that I think my mention of Kantei was the observation that somewhat redirected the theme of this thread; perhaps I could be allowed one more post on the topic.

Kantei sessions have come and gone in the US, both at major shows and not always under the aegis of the NBTHK - AB, and at other locations. Some of them have followed the Japanese style of Kantei very closely, and others have been more informal, perhaps fitting the limitations of the situation and group at hand. Barry Hennick mentioned the sessions held by the Rochester Study Group. Those sessions started in March of 1993 and were dedicated to the memory of Allan Pressley, the founder of that group. Those sessions, which continued until a few years ago, were very much in the model of the Japanese kantei nyusatsu, lit. "bid for judging," and were done in the fashion found in Nagayama Kokan, To-ken Kantei Dokuhon, translated by Kenji Mishina. Contestants were initially individuals, later, as Barry says, small competitive groups, guesses were made in writing and in three rounds, first, second and third place winners were designated. The idea was to name the smith right on the button, and a correct guess got Atari. Atari Dozen was a lower valued score indicating that the miss might be between teacher and student, father or son, older or younger brother, etc. Less valued yet would be recognition of at least the correct province and period, Kuni Iri, and so forth down the list of increasing error in the guess. The role of the judge, the hanja, usually filled by Chris Sly and Jeffrey Wang, was to give helpful clues at each round so that the contestant could make a closer guess in the next round. That Rochester Study Group system worked just great. At the final unraveling the test sword owners would discuss their blades, all of which would be papered examples, and show how a correct inference as to maker could have be reached in the first round. A detailed discussion of one of these sessions can be found in the Newsletter of the JSS/US, Vol. 35, No. 2 (April, 2003), pp.8-21. Those were great learning sessions and lots of fun for all.

The other sort of Kantei that has and does take place in America is the sort referred to by several posters. I believe those sessions even antedated the current ones run by the NBTHK - AB, but they are alike and are also highly educational. The first that I recall at national shows was where blades were laid out for examination and viewers were invited to make a guess, just one guess, as to the makers of the displayed blades. Michael Hagenbusch, in his masterful and somewhat loquacious way, acting as the demonstrator of who made which blades, would select a "guess slip" from the collected pile and then focus in on the guess and the intended blade. Michael's fund of knowledge and its extremely discriminating elaboration of a particular smith or school was something to behold. Groups were large and time constraints tight, so the stricter and longer system used in Japan and by the Rochester simply would not have been practical, but the end result was the same: a terrific amount of learning. In more recent years the NBTHK - AB would carry on this more "free style" sort of Kantei to equally good effect. I have only had an opportunity to attend a few and in those Bob Benson demonstrated an equal ability to unravel the puzzle of who made what. No particular winner is designated, but all attending "win" in another sense

Either of the systems discussed above can be run at any show or local club. The style done at Rochester fitted a group of a dozen or so just fine; obviously for large show group, the current NBTHK - AB system is more efficient.

Arnold F.

[cabowen]

A traditional kantei is run a bit differently than those I have seen done in the US. Normally, several items are put out for in-hand inspection. Each participant views the items and then submits a bid for the maker. The judge then either accepts the guess, or returns it with a note (wrong period, wrong "road", etc. and the participant has another chance, based on the feedback, to try again. At the end of the allotted time, the answers are given and the judge discusses each blade, the guesses made, and the merits/demerits of the more popular wrong guesses.

 

Not only do you need good swords but you need expert judges who can quickly reply to the guesses with the appropriate note to help guide the participants.

Who cares if it is 100% traditionally done, or how it is done, or by whom? The fact is that they are doing something towards advancing kantei skills and are making an effort. Sorry, but this comment makes it seem as though you are putting down the efforts of those who are making an effort in the USA. Let's not be our own worst enemy in the West when it comes to Nihonto study. We should be praising and encouraging anyone who goes to a lot of trouble to put on an event like this. Comments about experts and good swords do little to thank the efforts of people like Mike and others. I know I would be over the moon to have something like that here in SA.

It doesn't have to always be the Japanese way. I think I would prefer to be put into a group and be able to discuss among ourselves actually. Less intimidating. We all know how kantei is done in Japan, it is well covered everywhere. Highlighting the differences between "us" and "them" is not very constructive or encouraging, and that last line is particularly demeaning to those running these events in the US as far as I am concerned.

 

Brian

 

 

Who cares how or by whom? Really? I care and I would think anyone serious about learning should care. I have never said anything about it "needing" to be done in the traditional way, I simply pointed out the way it is and has been done to highlight the differences in approach as I think it is indeed both important and relevant.

 

I have not "put down" the efforts of anyone and there is no need to take my observations personally or to try and twist them into some sort of personal criticism. The last line about needing expert judges is a statement of fact. If you read my followup I specifically wrote that I would think there are people in the West that are capable of this role. It's about the process, don't make it about the people. It is stating the obvious and should go without saying that I believe in education and applaud all efforts in that direction.

 

The Japanese approach has five components: top quality learning materials, learned teachers, student input, quality feedback to help guide the student, and a formal structure for it all to function efficiently. It works quite well. Each of these parts is a vital part of the process. And, as Paul has noted:

 

However the point in taking part and submiting answers, at least for me, is that it forces me to study with a level of discipline and commitment that I would otherwise lack. The chance of getting an answer right or having a wrong answer exposed (even if it is only to your self) is a great focus. Not taking part means that I would browse rather than study.

 

I know the Japanese system works and works well, mostly because I participated in it several times a month for more than a decade. I think I have a legitimate basis for comparison when judging the merits of the differing approaches. I have not, and am not, saying that the approach being used in the US is not providing a learning experience. I am saying that by adopting some of the elements of the Japanese approach, it might provide a richer, more efficient learning experience. I would like to think that most people recognize the constructive nature of my comments and are more interested in improving their knowledge than they are in wasting time with pettiness and imagined slights.

[cabowen]

The first that I recall at national shows was where blades were laid out for examination and viewers were invited to make a guess, just one guess, as to the makers of the displayed blades.

Arnold F.

 

That is called "ippon nyusatsu" in Japan and is usually done when there are time constraints (large crowd/before an end of year party etc.).

[Jean]

Rules of Nyusatsu kantei are given in Paul Martin eponym booklet "Nyusatsu Kantei"