reminder

[paulb]

 

Over recent year I have been very lucky and friends and colleagues within the Token Society of GB have loaned me swords to study and write up. Many of those write-ups are stored here and on the token of GB website.

One of the advantages of this is that I am often presented with work that I haven't previously studied or only looked at in a limited way. they also force me to confront so of the many prejudices I have built up over the years regarding certain schools and periods.

I have often said that my period of interest is the Kamakura and early Nambokucho periods. I still regard this as the golden age of sword manufacture. However that doesn't mean there weren't good swords made at other times and in other places.

I have recently studied two Sukesada blades dating from the last quarter of the 16th century, A mumei sue-Seki work and a Gendaito made in Seki during the second world war.

In all of these cases I anticipated that I would not like these works. I expected to see at best bland semi mass produced bundle swords and more likely crudely forged with bad shape and lifeless hamon (I did say I had prejudices) .

Well I was wrong on all counts. Each of these proved to be far better than I anticipated and all were of very good quality. I felt suitably chastened.

Once again I was given a stark reminder not to prejudge swords. This is especially true when we seem to increasingly rely on soundbites appearing amongst the mass of information on the internet.

Each sword should be judged on its' own merits and not dismissed because we "think" pieces made in a certain place and time were less good than others. There are some staggeringly good works in existence from all periods and traditions. What we need to do is study more to be able to identify what features make a sword "good". Also remember not liking a sword doesn't make it bad any more than liking it necessarily means its good. We all bring our own preferences, likes and dislikes to the table and need to take that in to account when assessing a sword.

 

[mywei]

Thanks Paul for sharing your experience. Wise words in regards nihonto and other things also to not easily dismiss out of preformed ideas or prejudice I think! I guess smiths like the Sukesadas that made kazuuchimono also made custom order work for the Daimyos so it was not like they lacked skill!

 

[Brian]

Words to remember. Thanks Paul. I remember a write-up about how senior Japanese experts were amazed when they actually took a close look at some of the Gendaito made during the war. I think that was the start of a new perception.
By the same token, it is also a reminder that age does not equal quality. Many are fixated by Koto. They will pass up a stunning Gendaito or Shinshinto in favour of a kazu uchimono made in the 1500's, because they think that old swords are just better.
Thanks for a good read, as always.

[jesse]

Paul, great and enlightened thoughts indeed.

I still enjoy taking the Kiyomitsu katana, that I bought from you, and studying it.

 

Warm Regards,

Jesse

[paulb]

Hi Jesse,

That must have been some years ago. I'm glad you still have it and are enjoying it.

Best Regards

Paul

[Ooitame]

Wise words Paul! Applicable beyond Nihinto.

[Paz]

@paulb

Paul as a fellow member of the society am i able to loan you a sword for study ? As im struggling myself to determine its nature. 

 

Thanks 

Regards 

Paz

[paulb]

Hi Paz,

I have sent you a pm

 

[Bryce]

Quote

On 7/12/2023 at 8:25 PM, paulb said:

crudely forged with bad shape

 

G'day Paul,

You and others on this forum in the past have mentioned blades having a bad shape. I assume this refers to aesthetics and has nothing to do with the practical performance of the blade. As you have said you like early koto blades does this mean you prefer the blade shapes that were common in this time period? What is a bad shape and what is a good shape? I am not trying to take the piss or anything, but am simply trying to learn. One thing I do know is that what we like is very subjective and changes over time. Below are three examples of Gassan Sadakatsu's blades. How would you describe the shapes of these blades, good, bad or indifferent? I like all three.

Cheers,

Bryce

[paulb]

Good Morning Bryce,

Just some thoughts/opinions and I am sure others may have alternative ideas. As a non-practitioner of any form of martial arts nothing I say is based on practical experience.

On the basis that "form follows function" we assume that the basic shape of the nihonto developed through the smith's attempts to improve performance. What we see today goes well beyond functionality and as you suggest I think it has a lot to do with aesthetics and to a lesser extent personal taste . ( I think a shape can look right and good even if I don't particularly like the blade).

So a good shape results from all of the elements within the construction working together in harmony. Its like a well composed painting or photograph where no specific subject stands out but all come together to create a beautiful whole. In the case of a sword the balance between length, sori and kissaki, if there is a hi does it fit naturally to the shape and add to the overall aesthetic of the blade. Is everything in proportion.

is  it in harmony. Of course there cant help but be an element of subjectivity in assessing this.

 

 

 

 

 

Regarding the gassan images I don't think any of them have a bad shape and all look to be good. If I was being picky (which I am) I like the last one the least. I think the hi, especially the short soe-hi look a little fussy and clumsy and the sori is a little too deep. As said I'm being picky and that has much more to do with personal preference than pure aesthetics.

 

 

[Bryce]

Thanks Paul,

I appreciate you taking the time to explain it to me.

Cheers,

Bryce