Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Dear Milt

 

I am convinced that if you submitted this tsuba for shinsa it would be labelled Hikone-bori. But perhaps you, like me, feel that this label is frequently a cop-out. After all, it merely describes work that TAS calls ‘a combination of low relief, line carving, some shishiai, detailed iroye inlay and elaborate openwork ... in reality but one type of ubu-sukashi.’

 

Some months ago I posted an iron tsuba of the ‘SÅten style’ in which many members identified a ChÅshÅ« influence , but agreed unanimously to label as Hikone-bori; I am re-posting it here. This bears some resemblance to your own tsuba, being mumei; in a black patinated iron; and demonstrating a formality and aloofness in the depiction of the figures that is completely absent both from SÅten work and its recognised copyists. This is thus set apart from many of the groups that ‘copied’ the SÅten style and will, I am sure, eventually be identified as emanating from a specific area or school.

 

Regards, John L.

post-64-14196744736296_thumb.jpg

Posted

Hi Milt, I have some pics of recognised Soten tsubas with one being so similar in style to yours that it makes me attribute it to that style. Not knowing if yours is by the man himself but in the style of. The one that is so similar I will have to photograph as it is a print not electronic but shall post it. John

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...