Crane motif on Kyo Sukashi Tsuba

[FlorianB]

Hello all,

while researching a Kyo-Sukashi-Tsuba with Tsurumaru I recognized that there are two kinds of this particular motif: One with 36 feather openings, a slim head and bent headfeathers, the other one with 42 feather openings, a rounded head with a crown-like extension.
(Examples here taken from the Oeder collection (left) and Mr. Tsuruta’s Aoi-site)

 

I haven’t found anything about this difference yet.
IMHO the “36-feathers-type” must be probably an early version which has been replaced by a more sophisticated variation because on later Kyo Tsuba only the “42-feathers-type” was reproduced.

Any other ideas concerning this difference?

Florian

[Bugyotsuji]

Both lovely.

[Oshy]

So delicate, I like them both as well

[Spartancrest]

Nothing better in lockdown than counting feathers on a 'chook' [ chicken for all you non Aussies]

 

You notice the birds crest on your examples? Not represented on all examples, why?

[FlorianB]

I’m not sure if I made myself clear.

I was just talking about the two Kyo sukashi types and wanted to know if one of them was the forerunner, the other the successor as I suspect or came they into existence at the same time but one of them was abandoned shortly after?

Florian

[Pete Klein]

Florian - I would say the Oeder one would be earlier simply due to the finer craftsmanship.  The other one is, shall we say, 'heavier'.

The one from the Oeder collection (I have the first ed. book) is listed there as Owari.  I also thought Heianjo Sukashi or Kyo Sukashi due to the fine carving more typical of early Kyoto work but the seppa dai does have an Owari feel to it by shape and the tagane.  The second one is not in best condition, unfortunately.

[Ford Hallam]

Pete,

 

not to simply be a contrarian but I have never been able to square the notion that age, with regard to tosogu, is in any way related to finer craftsmanship. This general notion seems to suggest that because standards are perceived as having slipped over time therefore fine work is, de facto, earlier. Surely the obvious self referencing fallacy is self evident here? 

 

When faced with this notion I'm always reminded of something Shoji Hamada, the first National Living Treasure potter, said about his work and his habit of not signing it. He said his poor work would be attributed to his students and their best work to him.....

 

 

 

When I start making tsuba and not signing them one of my students will have received my final benediction    ....but not yet 

[Spartancrest]

Ford.

This is taken from: Terry's Japanese Empire, [COPYRIGHT 1914]

Terry, T. Philip (Thomas Philip), 1864-1945. 

 

This extract from a section on Curios - tsuba, sword fittings and netsuke:

 

"In this connection it is worth remembering that many modern works of art are in reality much superior to those of the past. The present-day craftsman is often much defter than his groping prototype, and where equally good materials are employed, new work is not infrequently preferable to the old."

[FlorianB]

IMHO “finer craftmanship” refers here not to quality itself but simply to thin sukashi lines, a trait of early Kyo-sukashi works, later they become thicker.

Florian

[Pete Klein]

Florian - thanks for explaining the point I was attempting to make.

[Pete Klein]

Ford,

 

     After all the years that you have known me do you really believe that I of all people do not know the difference in quality between say an Ichijo and a Tokujo and that the Ichijo is a quantum leap forward from the Shirobei master's work?

 

Common, get real already!

 

Pete

[Steve Waszak]

"In this connection it is worth remembering that many modern works of art are in reality much superior to those of the past. The present-day craftsman is often much defter than his groping prototype, and where equally good materials are employed, new work is not infrequently preferable to the old."

 

Dale,

 

This is an interesting opinion.  I'm sure there must be examples to suggest the truth of it; however, we should also recognize that frequently, not just sometimes, the "groping prototype" exudes originality and the potent vitality that accompanies it, while the "defter present-day" craftsman's "much superior" work, despite this deftness, comes across as lifeless.  We all value various characteristics and aspects of art differently, of course.  So, for those who see mastery of intricacy and super-human abilities in the fine detailing and flawless finishing of a piece as the zenith of artistic achievement, "superior artistry" is thus realized, and we may see this in the present-day craftsman.  But for those of use who, while still appreciating the technical virtuosity of such works, strongly prefer the resonant energy of the "groping prototype," the (much) superior art is to be found in this latter. 

 

I might add here that something profound is lost when "present-day craftsm[e]n," however technically skilled, produce works that simply copy the designs of the "groping" artist whose works emerged organically, and with piercing resonance, out of the zeitgeist of a time and place.  The resulting authenticity of the latter, with vanishingly few exceptions, simply cannot be captured by the former, regardless of his "superior" abilities. 

[Spartancrest]

Steve W. 

 

"I might add here that something profound is lost when "present-day craftsm[e]n," however technically skilled, produce works that simply copy the designs of the "groping" artist whose works emerged organically, and with piercing resonance, out of the zeitgeist of a time and place.  The resulting authenticity of the latter, with vanishingly few exceptions, simply cannot be captured by the former, regardless of his "superior" abilities. "

 

 

Does this opinion include the miriad utsushi or only  "present-day craftsm[e]n," (noting the original quotation was taken from 1914 and not the present time). It is my understanding that a great deal of utsushi have added qualities that often surpass the original, being not mere copies but emulating the spirit. A further quote from Wikipedia - "Utsushi is simply not copying or reproducing a masterpiece or motif from the past. Instead, Utsushi promotes a dialogue between the artist and the masters of the past, connecting past, present, and future."

[Steve Waszak]

My views include utsushi, yes, if we are speaking of utsushi of original early tsuba that many would agree are masterworks borne of the dynamics of their time.  In saying this, and in saying what I will below, I am assuming that by "prototype," Terry means an original work (design, treatment, etc...) created by a highly worthy, if not master smith.  After all, i doubt we would use such a term to refer to just any old early sword guard ("prototype" wouldn't really fit, then, would it?).  Likewise, I don't suppose we would see many utsushi being made of mediocre pieces...

 

Dale, you make a distinction between "mere copies," on the one hand, and (works) "emulating the spirit (of the original)," on the other.  I'm not quite sure I see a clear, actually effective difference here.  If the "spirit" of a work can even be perceived and felt (this does get a little mataphysical), how would/could that be "emulated"?  The form of a work can be emulated or copied, and the same material used, the same motifs, etc....  But a great deal of the vitality, the energy, the power of a master work is generated from the circumstances of the artist/smith who makes it, both personal and cultural.  This, I would say, is a big part of the "spirit" we (believe we) sense when we encounter and connect with their work.  The sheer act of copying, or emulation, must immediately be lacking in that same spirit, if for no other reason than because that later artist's own unadulterated individual spirit and the cultural zeitgeist giving rise to him/her is not present in the emulation (or if it is, it is necessarily watered down).  This leaves us with only the copy, then, that is, the form, the design, the motif, even the surface finish...the sum of the parts, perhaps, but far from the whole. 

 

Your quote from Wikipedia is intriguing, too.  When it asserts, though, that "Utsushi promotes a dialogue between the artist and the masters of the past, connecting past, present, and future," it is being generous in calling the interchange a "dialogue."  A dialogue should be understood, I think, as an exchange between equals.  An artist copying/emulating the work of a past master cannot in doing this equal that master's work for the reasons I give above.  So, this "connecting" that the quote mentions is more along the lines of derivation than it is any sort of exchange between equals.  Which is to say, as we move from "past" to "present" to "future," what we get is an increasingly watered down version of the original, due to what is lost in derivation.  Perhaps "homage" is a better term to describe the efforts of the artist creating the utsushi, since these efforts are, I believe, inspired by a profound respect and admiration for the original work being honored.  Even this term, though connotes, if not denotes, a tacit admission of at least some derivation in the resulting work, I would say. 

 

Having said this, I need to make a distinction, too, between the work of a later artist simply copying/emulating/"homage-ing" that of the earlier master, and the work of a later artist expanding from what that earlier master expressed in his work.  We can find good examples of this in certain tsubako groups, where a later smith generated his own ideas based on the potent sensibilities of the earlier smith(s), and produced work quite original to him, while still retaining the character of the original (I can think here of the tsuba of the "Nidai" Yamakichibei and the Sandai Shimizu Jingo as two such examples). 

 

One good case study in this discussion might be the Norisuke tsubako of 19th-century Owari.  Both generations were/are celebrated for their utsushi, but these utsushi do not come close to the original masterpieces they paid homage to.  They are very skillfully done, to be sure, but they are missing that resonant vitality so palpable in the originals.  Their own original designs, though, sometimes do possess this strength, much more so than any of their utsushi (in my opinion, of course). 

 

Anyway, it's an interesting topic, Dale.  Thanks for bringing in that quote. 

 

By the way, I'd be very curious to see any examples that could be provided of an utsushi that might illustrate Terry's words as presented in his quote.  I do wonder what Terry would see as just such a "groping prototype," as well as what he then would present as a later work that is a "much superior" example of that prototype.    Perhaps I am missing entirely what he intended to express...

 

Steve

[DirkO]

Just as a book tip - please read the following - it explains Steve's point very well imho

 

The Unknown Craftsman: A Japanese Insight into Beauty

Yanagi, Soetsu,