Still Tadamitsu

[ShuShinKan]

Hello all,

I would like to discuss one more aspect concerning a blade (tadamitsu) that I'd like to purchase in the near future, the hamon.

What about suguh(suguba?)-hamons? The seem to be quite "simple" compared to the artistic hamons with their nice patterns. I also caught up that a pattern in the hamon keeps the blade more flexible.

Is a patterned (not suguha/suguba?) hamon thought to be of much higher artistic avalue and "better" craftmanship?

 

Thank you in advance for your points of view.

[Brian]

Actually...a well done suguha hamon is supposed to be harder to create and more refined than a wild hamon.

It is a fact that people do like a wild hamon though, and those with flames or choji tend to often fetch more money when talking about entry level to mid range blades. But in advanced collecting, people soon get over the "eye candy" aspect of the wilder hamon, and some of the most important swords out there have suguha hamon. Look at the Hizen school for example.

Of course, not all suguha hamon are well done. Experience will teach you what is good and what is not. It has to be well controlled and straight, and even a suguha hamon can contain a wealth of hataraki.

Think about it...when doing the clay coating and firing...which is easier to do? A wild, all-over-the-place hamon, or an expertly done and perfectly straight temper line?

Same applies to choji though. Close examination and experience will show you if a hamon is well done or not.

 

To sum up...many beginners go for a wild and fancy hamon, while many collectors, as they gain experience, start to appreciate a well done suguha.

 

Brian

[ShuShinKan]

Brian.....

 

 

.... you make my day!

 

:-)

Thanks a lot!

[loiner1965]

you think alot like me in asking what seems to be silly questions but you want to know the answers too like......why different file marks or nakago jiri shapes...hamon shapes even mune shapes too

[Ted Tenold]

Actually...a well done suguha hamon is supposed to be harder to create and more refined than a wild hamon.

It is a fact that people do like a wild hamon though, and those with flames or choji tend to often fetch more money when talking about entry level to mid range blades. But in advanced collecting, people soon get over the "eye candy" aspect of the wilder hamon, and some of the most important swords out there have suguha hamon. Look at the Hizen school for example.

Of course, not all suguha hamon are well done. Experience will teach you what is good and what is not. It has to be well controlled and straight, and even a suguha hamon can contain a wealth of hataraki.

Think about it...when doing the clay coating and firing...which is easier to do? A wild, all-over-the-place hamon, or an expertly done and perfectly straight temper line?

Same applies to choji though. Close examination and experience will show you if a hamon is well done or not.

 

To sum up...many beginners go for a wild and fancy hamon, while many collectors, as they gain experience, start to appreciate a well done suguha.

 

Brian

 

Not necessarily true in the most general aspect though. I've asked this question of a Japanese smith in the past and the response was that it was the *easiest* to do, so much so that it is generally the first yakiba that an apprentice smith attempts.

 

When you consider the number of possibilities of things that can go wrong in more complex hamons, it's a point of fact that some are *much* more difficult than others. As an example, Ono Yoshimitsu has mastered Juka Choji (stacked clover) and his copies of the Yamatorige require a huge amount of time for preperation. It takes him multiples of the normal time (I'm told days) to lay the tsuchioki (insulating clay/material) for the pattern to develop properly. He also is very particular about outcome and only accepts the very pinnacle works. Any minor flaw or unsatisfactory characteristic is cause for destruction and starting all over again.

 

Going back to suguha, I would also add this though; There are a great many hamon that are in basic form, quite attainable. The real skill is the development and control of the *finer* things within that particular hamon that make the grand differences. Features such as the brightness of the hamon, the hataraki elements, the consistancy of the nie if any, their quality and development, the depth of penetration and consistancy of the nioi into the yakiba, ashi, etc., all make the profound difference. Arguably the quality of the steel is the major contributor to the outcome as well, but the forging is also an extension, indeed the very basis, of the smith's skills to make a qualitative yakiba. Hamon and steel must harmonize for a sword that in the end, looks greater than just a sum of parts, suguha or otherwise.

 

Details, details, details, and thats what really contributes to the enjoyment some (myself included) have for sugu based hamons.

[Ted Tenold]

you think alot like me in asking what seems to be silly questions but you want to know the answers too like......why different file marks or nakago jiri shapes...hamon shapes even mune shapes too

 

Steve,

 

Keep in mind that the Japanese sword is essentially a provincial creation, and development of changes are measured more in terms of evolution over generations. The basic differences evolved over long periods of time as schools developed within provinces or regions, then over time expanded, migrated, branched off, and even deteriorated to the point of dying out. Each generation perhaps changing some things in the form of baby steps in most cases, though there are examples of radical changes in workstyle for reasons not fully clear. As warfare, politics, and even economic influences changed, so did the sword with them. The most elementary of this is the shape which evolved with changes in warfare, or the lack thereof.

 

Entering the 17th century, there was a greater confluence of travel and interaction of smiths that mixed the provincial elements into more general ones, and smiths changes smaller details a bit more rapidly, and this included things such as nakago shapes and yasurime styles. These features are halmarks of the smith, the school, the period, and sometimes even the timeline of the particular smith's working life. Smiths also made works inspired by, or even copies of, older works that would dictate implimenting the elements of that origin work, even if not their normally executed workstyle. Then again you may have a smith that copies the style of an earlier period but puts some small element of their normal style into it as a recognizable hallmark of their standard tradition.

 

Clear as mud, eh? Over time, the haze starts to settle, but don't ever expect crystal clarity. :lol:

[Brian]

Thanks Ted, good points.

Being one who still loves an active and wild hamon, I fully agree. However the main point as you noted is to not underestimate a suguha (or any other) hamon and learn to see more than just the shape.

 

Regards,

Brian