seppadai

[John A Stuart]

Hi All, Finally I have got my new up-link installed and may now join in again. My question for comment is a reprint of "TSUBA" by R.B. Caldwell in JSSUS newsletter, Dec 2007. In that article is 'A great master said, " If it doesn't have a seppadai it isn't a tsuba". Now, I know that some tsuba during the Meijijidai and onwards were without seppadai and have metalwork in that area that would preclude their use mounted on a sword, but, many tsuba previously show no defined seppadai and were made to be mounted. This statement seems, to me, to be fallacious or is there something I have missed? John

[docliss]

John, I sppose that it depends upon what you mean by seppa-dai. A generally accepted definition is 'that part of a tsuba on which the seppa rests', and this does not imply that the area should neccessarily be either raised or clearly defined. If there is a decorative and proud area close to the nakago-hitsu which would preclude the presence of seppa, one might well claim that it is not a 'proper' tsuba, since it was not intended for mounting on a sword. But one sees many tsuba with a low-relief decoration extendings onto this area that also show signs of having been mounted. Several of the presumed Joi tsuba illustrated in WW Winworth's article in The Antique Collector, Vol.39 No.6, demonstrate such a feature. The low-relief and shishiai-bori work of this artist would not have presented any such problems.

 

One of the constants in our interest is that any such dogmatic statement is likely to be subsequently seen as unwise!

 

Regards, John L.

[John A Stuart]

Yes, John. Generalisations can be misinformative, I think, sometimes. As well, I dislike statements that are premised with ' a great master, an expert, etc. says'. Too ambiguous. Better to name the person from whom the statement came. John

[Pete Klein]

After finding the mentioned quote in the booklet 'Tsuba' by Caldwell which was a reprinting from the magazine 'Arts of Asia' article of January 1993 there is a captioned addition I would presume by Caldwell. Here is the sequence of paragraphs which include the quote which I find to be an interesting look into Caldwell's thinking on the subject; (I took the liberty of correcting some flaws such as lack of question marks)

 

"When you meet a challenging Tsuba for the first time what are the things to look for to appreciate or to depreciate? At the risk of leaving something very important out, here are a few guidelines to follow.

What is the message of this Tsuba? What is it that the artist was trying to convey? Call it the tone, theme, message. There are endless subjects that fascinated such an artist down through the centuries. How well did he present to the viewer that which concerned him as an artist?

How well did the artist accomplish his mission -- or do I I not comprehend the message because of my lack of knowledge?

Were the technical skills he used adequate, magnificent, or inferior? Was the metal used well worked or mass-produced?

How well has this art been used and preserved? Has it been cared for or neglected, altered to an extent to destroy it's integrity?

How does it fit into the overall scheme of things? The school, the period it was made, was the artist proud enough to sign his work for all to know?

Is this a tsuba? Silly as it sounds it is a legitimate query. Would I be comfortable going into battle with this to protect my right hand? A great master said, "If it doesn't have a seppa dai it isn't a Tsuba" (it's a hunk of decorated metal made to extract money from a tourist in Yokohama).

And finally, will this look as good to me a decade from now as it does today? That's the test of art."

 

As for the quote in question I get the feeling he was asking whether the piece in consideration was really a 'Tsuba' or an artwork in the shape of a tsuba. As mentioned previously there were many presentation pieces made toward the end of Edo and into Meiji Jidai which really were not designed for use. Either shiiremono from the docks of Yokohama or magnificent art pieces by masters, they are not recognized as tsuba today and do not paper as such by the NBTHK or NTHK to mention just two organizations issuing origami. The time this article was produced was also the time of the Compton Collection auctions, the publication of Sasano's last great book(IMHO), at the height of collector interest and when the attitude of many had moved in favor of the 'iron' pre-Edo tsuba as being the finest representation of the art. Looked at in perspective I think Caldwell's article, although a bit pontifical, is insightful to the time and is good reference to today's collector.

 

Just my two drachma.