Contemporary tsuba...can they be valid?

[Ford Hallam]

I trust everyone is gently regain some sense of normality ( if Nihontophiles can ever really approach that state ) after the exertions of the festive season and I hope the new year, the tiger' proves to be brilliant for all of us.

 

We engaged in some vigorous rearranging ( along feng shui principles ) on my own forum and while moving the furniture around I had a moment to reread some of my older posts. What follows is a sort of summation I came to after a brief discussion we'd had regarding the legitimacy of contemporary, particularly non-Japanese tsuba and I offer it here in the hope that it may stimulate further discussion or even perhaps a reappraisal of sorts. I had wanted to post this just before the DTI last year, when Mike Yamasaki initiated a discussion along similar lines...I had too much on my plate at the time, I'm up for a good discussion now though.

 

The first time I actually saw real tsuba they were behind glass in a museum in Cape Town, all pierced and carved steel. I was lucky, they were all quite decent examples. I've seen them since and it wasn't just a case of not having seen anything else to compare them to, I was already an apprentice goldsmith so I was getting design and technique drilled into me all the time. As intriguing objects I found them fascinating. The fact that they weren't mass produced industrial products, castings, made them seem all the more precious. But the thing that really resonated with me was the term "chiselled steel"

 

The very idea of being able to work steel in such a direct way was to me completely magical. I had no idea how to go about it but as I pored over every picture of tsuba I could find, and this was in the dark days before the internet spread the light, I became more and more captivated by this, apparently lost, craft tradition.

 

Like most of you, I was utterly amazed at this miniature world of metalwork, still am.The delicacy, skill and sensitivity not to mention the novelty was like a drug. At this stage it was the desire to "re-discover" these amazing techniques and methods that drew me on. The idea of actually making something original never entered my head. For me, then, it was all about the technique.

 

I was lucky, again :pray: , that as I was developing as a goldsmith my skills allowed me to make a few passable versions of tsuba. Piercing work and filing are basic skills of my trade so there seemed no reason that those sorts of tsuba couldn't be copied quite easily...but then I wanted to go further.

 

By the time I got to London I was ready to start getting into the metal, actually carving steel. I made a start by copying an older guard. The result was reasonably satisfying but it was suggested by a number of people, at the time, that there was no point copying older designs and that I should concentrate on original ideas.

 

This is where things start to get sticky. It is generally accepted, today, that artwork should be, by definition, original.

The problem with this particular format; ie, tsuba, is that it is not something we really have any instinctive awareness of. It doesn't really come out of the world that has shaped us. It is actually quite an alien object.

 

I took the, well meaning, advice and begun to create my own designs within the restraints of the "little metal disc with slot in the middle". In terms of design I think I learnt a lot at that time and most of the work I produced still pleases me. Different people have very different opinions, as we should expect, tsuba collectors in particular, seem to be the most difficult to please. In retrospect I think that my study would have been more effective at the time had I concentrated on good, classic examples but it is difficult to know for sure which approach would have served me best. Had I made decent copies I would have possibly been able to sell them more readily and thus been able to devote more time to my first love. Instead, I ended up specialising in the restoration of the very sorts of things I wanted to make. Something to bear in mind if you're as mad as me.

 

From my experience of collectors I would suggest it might be helpful to consider for a moment what actually appeals to them ( that's you lot :D ...forgive my oversimplifications and if I missed your own quirky approach ), as a way of trying clarify what tsuba are to different people. I think that generally speaking there are 3 main aspects we can identify and each view holds a part of the tsuba's identity. I am going to ignore the fact that most collectors hold a combination of these views because I want to focus precisely on these specific traits.

 

One type of collector is very aware of the tsuba as being a Samurai artefact. This is often not even conscious but the "purist" will insist on the functional criteria being of most importance, followed by it's aesthetic expression being that of the warrior class. This is generally the "wabi/sabi" ( how I dislike that term :snooty: ) feeling of the Kamakura and Momoyama periods ( roughly 1200 ~1600 ). An essential quality of these guards is, of course, their age. No getting away from it....old, iron ( mostly ) and once used by a warrior. It is obvious that these cannot be made today. Incidentally, many of these purist types are quite dismissive of even the fairly sombre iron guards that were produced in the Edo period. The claim is that they don’t reflect “true” warrior ideals and taste. The flaw in this little bit of romanticism is too obvious to elaborate on, so I won’t….unless you really want me to. :sneaky:

 

There is a sub-group of this first type of collector that I should also draw attention to. This is the person who believes that the age of the piece is the most important thing in it’s appreciation. This rather extreme view, in terms of art that is, states that old is good, very old is even better. Here we leave aside aesthetic concerns regarding tsuba and are in the realm of corrosion appreciation. Gnarled and severely corroded ancient metal artefacts, regardless of their possible attractions, are simply not in the same category as consciously produced art works. So we can safely discount this peculiar taste.

 

The second collector we might encounter has somewhat broader tastes. He ( there are some ladies but generally we're talking about men here ) appreciates a type of work called "kin-ko". This is work in non-ferrous metals and involves inlay work, carving and a fairly colourful palette. Although some schools did use iron grounds they are still considered as being kinko work ( Soten, Hamano, Tanaka etc ). The Kinko workers of the Edo period created a self contained art world that explores an incredible range of aesthetics and techniques. Some of the finest works of art in metal belong to this genre. Here too though, history adds its inimitable touch. A part of the allure of this work is also it's age, and the world that gave birth to it. The social conditions, the people who loved these objects. Warrior class and merchant taste. The very refined, or the ornate, taste of the upper classes of the governing warrior class. It should also be added that although technically not kinko the many schools of the Edo period that worked either only in iron ( Akasaka, Bushu, Choshu etc ) are often also well appreciated by this category of collector for their outstanding design and craftsmanship.

 

This brings us to the third aspect...

 

This is the appreciation of the pure technique and artistry in metal that these curious little objects display.

 

Here, the age of a piece is not a real consideration. The work is appreciated and enjoyed purely as metal art.

 

This view does inform most collectors to some extent but is extremely rare, if not non-existent, on it’s own within the so called “Japanese sword world”. In the greater “art world” however, there seems to be a growing awareness ( I truly hope… :pray: ) of fine metalwork’s purely artistic potential, or at least, aspirations.

 

By now it will be painfully obvious that any attempt to recreate any of the various types of tsuba, that collectors are drawn to, is bound to fail, if only because of the question of age. The many other aspects not withstanding.

 

I think though, that my description of the various views of the subject actually offers a way forward.

 

It is obvious that certain features are common to all views, except the lovers of gnarly corrosion products…but they have their own needs. :crybaby: This is the expression of meaningful aesthetics, and fine craftsmanship. The obvious, "purely mechanical” functional aspects of tsuba are in fact quite easily addressed so I’ll keep to the topic of artistic expression.

 

I maintain that an ongoing study and appreciation of these wonderful examples from the past may allow an artist in metal to develop their own, genuine, aesthetic response to the techniques, materials and constraints to this format; the tsuba.

 

I don’t believe much is to be gained by attempting to rework traditional subjects or themes. But do suggest that an awareness of the context of the guard is essential. Using “traditional” designs will inevitably draw comparisons with the original works, and sadly, the copies will inevitably appear awkward and contrived. This is not the same though, as copying an existing piece to better understand the subtleties of design and technique. What I’m warning against is the attempt to create “in the Japanese style” . This will only result in a superficial and unlovely mutation that will ultimately end up an orphan, belonging nowhere.

 

For myself, I have made my journey through this tradition, in a way that tsuba-shi of the past never did, nor could have done. I have had the privilege of surveying the entirety of the tradition and tried to breathe it all in. It is from this stance that I now attempt to find a language of my own, fully informed by this past, and one that is still part of that continuum.

 

There is no call for iron guards meant for Bushi ( warriors ) of the 1500’s, but there is an appreciation of the beauty of the jewel-like, kinko work of the Edo period, and perhaps even some contemporary appreciation for that old tea ceremony inspired taste…and fine workmanship will always be loved. Sensitive aesthetic expression is a valued commodity in the world of art collectors.

 

So... Yes, I think we can still make tsuba that are worthy of that name and that continue to explore what they are…or can be. These small sculptures in metal have a long and fascinating history, one that has never stood still. So why should they be relegated to museum cabinets now? I believe there is life in this beast yet... and we can draw on the richest tradition of art metalwork the world has ever seen.:biggrin:

 

We could go on to discuss the need for a tsuba to have a nakago ana in the same way that netsuke “need” to have himotoshi to qualify, but that is for another day I think.

 

I look forward to hearing your views.

 

regards,

 

Ford

[John A Stuart]

Ford, I think for those of you who like working with metals and other media like those on your forum, do it for the joy of making beauty out of dross. It's in the process. I can only guess at the feeling of accomplishment when a piece is finished. As a collector, degrees of which exist, I would love to have pieces of modern tsubako etc., they, after all, are the continuity of the tradition, however, given a particular lack of infinite resources must get pieces that meet certain criteria beyond the purely artistic one. Sad, I know, I'd love to sponsor by purchase our contemporary artist, but, priorities interfere. Mea culpa, John

[cspage]

Not being given to drawn out musings, I would simply offer the analogy of ceramic art as it relates to Ford’s position. There is a world of contemporary ceramics that emulate age-old functional objects, i.e. teapots, etc. that are practically non-functional, but do explore and represent the cutting edge of ceramic technology and design. These objects have a respected place in modern art. There’s no logical argument that could place the form of the tsuba outside of a similar consideration.

 

Colin

[Mark Green]

Hi gang,

 

Ford, great post.

As you likely know I fall into the third pile. As an infant tsuba-shi, I have come to love all tsuba for the 'ART'. I like to copy old tsuba, mostly for the practice, and do my own designs once in a while just to see if I can. I don't really care if anyone likes them, but I don't do it for a living.

I do feel that tsuba-shi of the past did do a bunch of 'copy work'. You see many copies of the same tsuba from Edo times that are not cast. Schools seemed to copy popular designs from other schools. I'm sure this was all about selling them. And once in a while you see nice old Ko-tosho designs that were made in the Edo period and beyond. You see masters, coping other masters. This is more likely their expression of an 'I would like to do that', much like the people that make tsuba today. Sometimes they succeeded, other times they didn't.

 

I would like to post one of those success stories now. As I have not seen it here yet, and that is only due to Fords humility.

 

This is the true work of a Master, by a modern Master.

 

For those of us that know the kind of skill this takes, it is truly awesome, and inspiring.

The sword world is very luck to have a person of your talent to carry on this fine art.

And, for those of us learning this art, you are a true hero.

Mark

[Bazza]

I've read all of this, have lots to say, but I'm exhausted already just by taking it all in. It might take me days to put it all together and respond, as it has taken Ford years of experience to be able to write his piece. A Tokubetsu Juyo reflection on the art of Tsuba, to be sure. Instead of spending a luxurious rest of the day cogitating on tsuba and creating a response to Ford's challenge, I now have to go outside and continue beating back the bush (i.e., mowing) that is part of our 2 acres of Heaven here in the mountains outside of Melbourne...

 

I'll be back!!

 

Bestests to all for 2010.

BaZZa.

Melbourne, Australia.

[Kevin]

Ford, in my opinion - based on what I've seen of your work and the tsuba, fuchi-kashira and menuki that you did for me - is that your contemporary tsuba are most definitely valid as both tsuba and as works of art. The set you did for me were, quite frankly, beautiful. :-)

 

Kevin

[Steve Waszak]

I, too, will be posting a rather long-ish response...but not tonight. Tomorrow, perhaps. I can say right now, however, that I find several areas of Ford's stance to be problematic, at least potentially. Some of these are relatively minor, others are not. He is essentially broaching ground philosophical, semiotic, and epistemological in nature, and none of these is a simple area to be flailing about in. Perhaps in the meantime, Ford would be good enough to reveal that "obviously flawed" aspect of the first collector type he noted, so we can have that on the table... )

 

Steve

[Jean]

Complex but for those interested in Sociology, here is an extract of a study of French philosopher, Gaston Bachelard : Epistemological obstacles - Sorry in French but can be babel fish

 

http://classiques.uqac.ca/collection_me ... texte.html

[Ford Hallam]

Well...I'm quite pleased my ramble has piqued some interest and I'm very interested to see how this discussion my evolve.

 

My intention with this (deliberately provocative :D ) post was to open up some sort of a dialogue, my own work and relationship to the tradition is of course an inescapable aspect for me but I'm very flattered by the extremely generous compliments many of you have paid me....

 

Steve, I hadn't intended my post to be a definitive philosophical manifesto, merely, a "jumping off" point and possibly a bit of self justification... having said that I'm quite looking forward to your critique so that I might be able to better analyse the formulation and credibility of my propositions. Not having had any sort of academic philosophical training I'll keep spell check on high alert

 

To address your first point, I assume you mean this bit;

 

the "purist" will insist on the functional criteria being of most importance, followed by it's aesthetic expression being that of the warrior class. This is generally the "wabi/sabi" ( how I dislike that term :snooty: ) feeling of the Kamakura and Momoyama periods ( roughly 1200 ~1600 ). An essential quality of these guards is, of course, their age. No getting away from it....old, iron ( mostly ) and once used by a warrior. It is obvious that these cannot be made today. Incidentally, many of these purist types are quite dismissive of even the fairly sombre iron guards that were produced in the Edo period. The claim is that they don’t reflect “true” warrior ideals and taste. The flaw in this little bit of romanticism is too obvious to elaborate on

 

The romanticism, in my view, consists of a neat and tidy projection by modern collectors ( I suspect it wasn't uncommon in the Edo period either) of what constituted proper "warrior taste". While it may well be true that a certain taste was officially approved of and maybe even encouraged, this narrow definition by no means encompasses the entirety of Kamakura and Momoyama period aesthetic expression. My own feeling is that much of the purist view has been "reverse engineered"...perhaps as a way of trying to bolster a fading image of this warrior class much in the same way the notions of warrior chivalry ( in Japan as well as Europe ) were ideals that could only be articulated after the fact.

 

I wasn't specifically referring the the apparent functionality of guards as being "romantic" but while I'm about it I might as well address that aspect too. I don't believe the primary function of tsuba was in any way related to issues of physical use. We've generally agreed, I think..., that the tsuba was not intended to act as a guard to protect the hand.

 

Instead we are now told ( by them....!?) that the function was to prevent the hand from slipping onto the blade. This seems to be to be an utterly contrived justification. Given the kind of wraps we see on battle swords, ie; lacquered same and doe-skin ( this often also lacquered) it seems clear to me there was little concern that the tsuka didn't provide sufficient grip to allow a sword to be wielded effectively. Surely you wouldn't make it all smooth with urushi if the whole wrap had a tendency to be slippery? We also note a passing fancy for long swords that were mounted without tsuba.

 

If for a moment we do allow for the notion the tsuba was there to stop the hand sliding forward when performing a thrust why was the guard so big? A disc extending no more than 10mm from the seppa-dai would suffice.

 

I believe that attempts to explain the use of tsuba in functional/mechanical terms are spurious and that it's true "function" was always, and primarily, aesthetic.

 

As such, the tsuba "functioned" in all periods, to display the status, cultural refinement and personal taste of the wearer. It also allowed for political loyalties and philosophical concerns to be signalled. It was in these contexts, that the tsuba as an art form expressive of the time and group who used them, developed. It is out of this analysis that I begin my own questioning as to what constitutes a valid expression in this art form today.

 

...now I need another cuppa.

 

regards,

 

Ford

[Ford Hallam]

Jean,

 

funny you should mention Gaston Bachelard...I've been working through his "Poetics of Space" over the last few months...in English translation ...naturellement

[Jean]

Ford,

 

In fact when talking about art, we are talking about Sociology and Gaston Bachelard, in this field, is anavoidable. Very interesting reading which gives the opportunity to grasp what are the obstacles to study/knowledge and thus what is objectivity, Historians are often facing these problems : Herodote or Thucidyde?

[Eric H]

Contemporary tsuba...can they be valid?

No question...a convinced YES !

For myself, I have made my journey through this tradition, in a way that tsuba-shi of the past never did, nor could have done. I have had the privilege of surveying the entirety of the tradition and tried to breathe it all in. It is from this stance that I now attempt to find a language of my own, fully informed by this past, and one that is still part of that continuum.

At this moment it's high time to visit Ford's site http://picasaweb.google.com/tsubaman/MyTsuba# displaying a meaningful selection of his fine Tsuba's, reflecting ideally Ford's highly set standards and intentions.

And then, who of us has ever seen a tsuba-shi at work ? Probably nobody. Here

you can watch Ford while working on that fantastic Tiger-Tsuba pictured above. WOW

So... Yes, I think we can still make tsuba that are worthy of that name and that continue to explore what they are…or can be. These small sculptures in metal have a long and fascinating history, one that has never stood still.

Totally agreed !

Eric

[John A Stuart]

Hmmm!! I think the tsuba is firstly functional. Not only to prevent the hand slipping onto the blade, look where your hand can move to when using bokken with no tsuba, but, also to balance the sword and to protect the hand as well. If you take the application away from the Japanese sword for a moment, you will see handguards on edged weapons of all periods and locales. It is only when status affects the adornment of these objects that your reasoning applies; some swords showing such effetism to be basically useless for their intended purpose, (court swords, jewel encrusted hilts, faux blades etc,). As to Bachelard, careful, continuity of the traditional Japanese method doesn't mesh well with his discontinuous epistemological breaks. I am of course a Nietzchean, "A thinker sees his own actions as experiments and questions--as attempts to find out something. Success and failure are for him answers above all. " John

[Ford Hallam]

John,

 

I don't think you can compare the smooth wooden handle of a bokken to that of a wrapped tsuka at all. In addition, I never found my right hand grip to have moved no mater how sweaty my hands became....must be the hairs :D

 

As for balancing a sword....how does that work? In no real way can adding a couple of hundred grams to that area, immediately in front of the grip affect the overall balance of the blade. All it will do is add weight...perhaps this is why those used by "working warriors" were often so light. Some additional weight at the kashira end may have an effect, no doubt, as will cutting grooves but the whole notion of tsuba being used to fine tune the balance of a sword has never sounded plausible to me.

 

Perhaps I can admit that tsuba served a psychological function by merely suggesting some form of protection ( wouldn't that be an aesthetic consideration again though ) but we've yet to see a single example with evidence of scarring that would indicate that was ever needed. The sword never was the main battlefield weapon anyway...and when not actually fighting, warriors...even Japanese ones, tended to be very image conscious so the use of tsuba as a "statement" would seem quite natural. Status was a major concern of warriors even in the midst of the bloodiest battles...for many it was the only reason to be there.

 

some swords showing such effetism to be basically useless for their intended purpose, (court swords, jewel encrusted hilts, faux blades etc,)

 

I haven't been considering these effete swords really but to be fair they were clearly fit for their intended purpose...which was to be flashy and effete at court.

 

But if you consider just tsuba, you'll be hard pressed to find many examples that are completely useless because however we define their function a simple, quite thin plate ( even lacquered leather apparently) will do the job.

 

As to epistemological concerns...my post was intended precisely to challenge conceptions and to ask why we believe what we do with regard to tsuba. Job's a good'un :D and I share your view...if I'm wrong I'm ok with that...I'm still figuring stuff out, a work in progress.

 

regards,

 

Ford

 

Ford

[Pete Klein]

Well, I don't feel like going back to review my college philosophy notes to enter this discussion but I will offer this tidbit. The tsuba is used to help in removal of the sword from the saya by the thumb-push.

[Jean]

The tsuba is used to help in removal of the sword from the saya by the thumb-push

 

Yes, in Iai do, nowadays, I remember having seen a lot of movie where tsuba were of no use, zaitochi, yakuza movies where blades are stored in shirasaya ...

 

Like in Kerys (where it is the handle), I think that they were the mirror of their owners and their swords, meaning I rather see a Kotetsu with an iron one rather than with a kinko one.

 

Yes, tsuba makers are artists and have their place in art market. I have seen really fantastic modern made tsubas and I'll have absolutely no problem having a tsuba made for a koshirae should I not found an antique one.

 

In fact it is a very good option and I am thinking equally to menuki.

[Grey Doffin]

Why would a modern tsuba be any less valid than a modern Nihonto?

Are neither of them valid?

Grey

[John A Stuart]

You are right Pete, I didn't mention it since Kenshin for example was famous for using swords with no tsuba. Ford also being correct that polearms and other weapons, such as projectile weapons, were used with the sword being secondary in battle. The quickdraw was a later development with the sword being already drawn in the case of battle, iai being really a Muromachi to Edo period technique. I simplify this point for ease. A few months ago an article appeared in, I think, a JSSUS journal describing damage done to tsuba by strikes. I shall look it up. Now, as to grip. I continually adjust my grip on the sword, the tsuba guides me by touch. When using the bokken I have to check visually from time to time, not because of slipping, but, my hand walks forward as I relax and tighten my grip. When I say balance, I do not mean as in the balance on a fulcrum, meaning bringing the weight from the tip to the hand assisting the arc of the cut. The closest analogy I can think of is the balance of my darts and looking for the weight and balance that is more comfortable for me. As to the philosophy aspect, I love it. It goes to the 'why' of things an then the 'how' of it. When we look at koshirae why do some swords have a quite light guard such as a really cut out kyo-sukashi tsuba and why do some have quite heavy tosho ones for example? I think it has a lot to do with the feel of the sword with the artistic sensibilities coming into play subsequently. Wouldn't one be denying the functionality as being the prime concern for tsuba if the artwork made them unusable, like some tsuba made after the restoration with carving etc. on the seppa dai and purely as an art object. Truly it is a departure from the original raison d'etre and becomes a slotted disc of metal albeit nicely decorated. As long as it can be mounted and serve it's original intent then any design, technique or whatever would be following the tradition and whether it sold the only defining criterium John

[Ford Hallam]

Hi Grey,

 

yes...if modern swords are accepted then is there any question regarding the validity of modern tsuba to address at all?

 

The truth is though, while swords have, however tentatively, managed to retain something of a continuity with the past and presently, contemporary smiths appear to have a very strong sense of what they are about the same cannot be said of tsuba.

 

As an art form, for the most part, it continues merely as a pastiche of the past. The tradition is in grave danger of becoming moribund. Tsuba-shi of the past, those who's art is most highly regarded at least, explored the medium and continually reassessed the inherent possibilities for expression. All within the context of their time, of course. For tsuba to once more be vital and relevant contemporary artistic expressions this tradition of continual growth and questioning must be revived. Simply reworking old and revered models alone only serves to preserve the past and the tradition as a living continuum ceases.

 

My real question, I suppose, ought to be; "what makes a contemporary tsuba a valid modern expression within the broader context of contemporary Japanese swords?"...not as pithy but more accurate. :D

 

respectfully,

 

Ford

[Pete Klein]

Tsuba could also be used on various polearms. On yari one could catch the opponent's shaft and force it upward then allowing a downward strike. On nagamaki the tsuba could act as a foot purchase when an opponent was on the ground thus allowing a deep cut into the body utilizing body pressure downward.

I also believe there is a tendency to forget that what we see in one on one Iai do combat has nothing to do with battlefield fighting where the tsuba could be used to stop an opponents sword and redirect it.

As for the original question of this thread I find absolutely no validity to any modern sword, fitting, or associated works if compared to those works created during their time of actual function. They serve no better purpose than the recreation of a medieval set of armor. The entire artistry to me is stagnated by unending attempts to recreate past glories. When Yoshindo Yoshirara had the temerity to carve a panther into the side of one of his katana he was vilified by the Japanese Nihonto Police. So much for artistic freedom and evolution. Now, having uttered these blasphemies for which I would be pulled before the dock in Ireland do I support the creation of these works? Emphatically yes. They stand to their own merit as works of art and beauty, allowing the continuance of craft and arguments of utilitarian value or utilization are of no consequence, at least to me.

 

IMHO

[Pete Klein]

PS: for those who do not believe in ESP I would point to the above two posts which were created at about the same time half a world apart. LOL!

 

This is a modern work which I find very interesting:

http://www.tsuruginoya.com/mn1_3/b00030.html

[Mark Green]

Fun posts gang,

I will start by saying that tsuba, "without a doubt" were mostly made to protect your hand. I can not say how many times my hands have been saved by my tsuba. I am a Knight of the SCA. We fight 'full on' with ratan weapons, in full 'real' armor. I use full steel gauntlets when I fight with my katana, as well as a good tsuba. If I used samurai style hand protection. My only protection from having all my finger broken, would be my tsuba. I know that I have taken hundreds of blows to my tsuba, that would have broken many fingers. I am sure that 'in the day' many a thousand hands were saved by tsuba.

I have done many a test on new tsuba, and chainmail, with an old beat up WW2 sword. And, tsuba do hold up very well. A 3mm ko-tosho style tsuba will save your fingers. All this silly crap about blocking with 'parts' of your sword, are just that. When a sword is coming at you, you block with whatever part of it will keep you alive. Period! That is why a lot of swords had to be made during the war years. Swords get chewed up in real combat.

As for the art. I am bias. I always looked at tsuba in amazement, and said "how the hell did they do that"? Well now I have a much better idea of that. So, now I look at tsuba from the other side. I know the hours that went into that old tsuba I hold, or see. And the skill involved in the artwork upon it. But, when I make a new one, and I'm sure Ford is the same. It is first, and foremost, a Tsuba, that will function as a tsuba, reguardless of the art upon it.

Are old tsuba better? Likely. But new tsuba art can be used, without the risk of destroying something old, and irreplaceable. Not that it would be better to loose something new that is irreplaceable.

And some are just plain pretty.

 

One of Ford's that I have.

One of mine that is made for an SCA Katana.

[Steve Waszak]

Let me begin this response by stating right up front that I find your work to be excellently rendered, Ford. For this tiger piece here, exquisite doesn’t begin to cover it. I am truly awed... This out of the way, then, I return to your original post. I will be addressing a number of points, about which I could say more, but for the sake of those whose eyes may glaze over, I’ll try to keep the points brief...

 

your leading question for this thread---can contemporary tsuba be valid?---depends entirely on one’s definition/understanding of “valid.” What, exactly, do you mean by “valid”? Valid how? In what context? For whom? Do you mean objectively, only? Without defining this term exactly, or explaining precisely how you mean it, the question cannot be answered.

 

We must all recognize that you, Ford, have a rather hugely vested interest in an affirmative response to your question (however “valid” is meant). I think the real question you’re asking here in any event is whether your creation of contemporary “tsuba” AS TSUBA is “valid,” and this being the case, what you’re ultimately asking is what the definition of “tsuba” is/should be. Here there are two (at least) considerations, the functional (that is, functional in terms of martial applications) and the semiotic (cultural “meaning” of the tsuba’s outward presentation as an aesthetic, social, and political sign within the system of signs comprising meaning in a culture). I will get to these considerations a little further down, but it seems that you have an investment in seeing the pieces you produce as “valid” in the same way that tsuba produced 400 years ago were valid. With this perspective, I cannot agree.

 

Before I get into why I cannot agree with that perspective, though, I have to get to your point concerning the “purist” collector and romanticism. In a word, your point here is problematic: probably 99% of us got into nihonto/the “samurai” due to romantic notions and imaginings, and remain “in the game” for these reasons. Romantic constructions of meaning, whether “reverse-engineered” or not, are virtually inescapable in the human experience; more importantly, their being romantic constructions does not invalidate them as real builders of meaning (one might ponder what a “better” base on which to construct meaning would be, one entirely devoid of any romantic tinges). Since all meaning is constructed socially and culturally, romantic constructions are no less “valid” than any other variety (assuming for the moment that there is any such thing as meaning with zero romantic associations). Your apparent dismissal of “this little bit of romanticism” is therefore very wobbly in its assumptions, and in fact, does not hold up to scrutiny. Further, your focus here on the “old” is misapprehended/misdirected: it’s not the age of pieces itself that matters to such “purist” collectors (except that subset you identify); rather, it’s the cultural relevance of warriors AS warriors in a given period, and the weapons, armor, and other objects they used in that period that is important (here we return, inevitably, to romantic imaginings). The fact that the period(s) in question is(are) older than subsequent periods does not mean that it is age itself that is relevant. To continue, then, by the time of the “settling” of the Tokugawa administration, and the ceasing of fighting men to actually be fighting men, the production of the “sombre iron guards” you mention becomes irrelevant, culturally and romantically speaking: a derivative, bland, relatively poorly-constructed and materially-deficient tsuba, whose motifs/subjects not infrequently reflect the rapidly accelerating decadence of the “warrior” and the often hopelessly cloying tastes of the plebian merchant class (and the merging of these), is not going to appeal to the collector whose romantic investment is in the bushi AS bushi.

 

Now onto the point of tsuba being primarily aesthetic and semiotic objects rather than functional protection: the falsity of this is belied not only by the fact that not all fighters were first-class swordsmen, and thus might rely more heavily on tsuba for protection, even if partly psychologically, but also by the fact that, if protection from cutting edges was not a concern for these men, the heavy industry of armor production over centuries would not have occurred. And if the material from which armor (and tsuba) were made should be understood not to matter (because sword guards were, in your view, not really martially functional), why all the time and effort invested by Muromachi and Momoyama armorers and tsubako in forging and folding iron/steel? Further, if a tsuba’s primary/sole function was aesthetic, even from earliest times, why do we see many early iron tsuba made as simple discs, without any decoration? And why fold the metal? Why would such tsuba be made, if the function of tsuba was, from earliest times, as you say, simply aesthetic? The either-or of your argument is a false dualism: tsuba were both functional in the directly martial sense and in the cultural, semiotic sense. It is silly to see them as either one or the other when they are so plainly both. The stress you place on the tsuba being “primarily” aesthetic is specious: there is no way quantitatively to measure the degree to which aesthetics mattered more than direct martial application, even if one were to accept your initial assertion that tsuba-as-functional-martial-accessory is a mistaken understanding of their use (which I, of course, do not).

 

Now, to matters of taste. Personally, I quite dislike Edo-kinko. This has nothing to do with “identifying with” the warrior class, or martial spirit, or any of that. Rather, my taste has entirely to do with aesthetics (the fact that my taste happens to coincide nicely with the romantically-elevated earlier periods, and the men who lived so colorfully in those periods, is a happy accident...). The majority (as in vast majority) of Edo-kinko is an orgy of cloying sentimentality. Designs are often conceived and rendered with painful obviousness as regards motif, subject, and placement of design elements, and then are also ostentatious, ornate, and gaudy in the materials used. Sometimes, they are exceptionally well made, exhibiting an almost miraculous execution, about which I couldn’t care less, except in the sense of a detached “appreciation” of the pure technical virtuosity. In other words, I don’t care about technical wizardry if the design itself is faulty. In my view, Edo kinko is faulty. I’m not even considering here its being so decidedly inappropriate as regards the martial functionality of tsuba (I maintain there is a martial functionality to some degree); I am speaking here solely of aesthetics. And incidentally, the degeneracy and decadence of Edo Period aesthetics in not limited to tsuba or even tosogu: we can see it manifesting in a variety of art forms in this time. The “wabi-sabi” term you so dislike is in fact a misnomer: during the actual time in which wabi and sabi aesthetics were most highly valued (they were valued separately, and in different periods), along with such aesthetic concepts as yugen and mono-no-aware, there was an elevation of aesthetic “meditation” and development, one that gave primacy to the subtle, the nuanced, the elusive, and the allusive, with few exceptions none of which is seen in Edo kinko. Works which manifest such aesthetics were highly valued, and rightly so: they present more energy, more strength, more “pathos,” more evocative quality than the hopelessly tired, derivative, obvious, predictable offerings coming out of Edo kinko workshops. The “wabi-sabi” (as you have it) aesthetic DOES look down on the gag-me sentimentality of so much Edo Kinko, as well it should, as far as I’m concerned. Is this “snooty” or elitist. You bet. Too bad. Perhaps an analogy would help: Edo kinko = McDonald’s burger, fries(chips), and a coke; Momoyama fine iron = five-star sushi. Again, if you want to call me elitist, or a snob, I’m fine with that.

 

Finally, there is this tension to weigh in on: Tsuba vs. tsuba-like object. In the end, I maintain that cultural context is CRUCIAL. Let me repeat that: cultural context is CRUCIAL. As in cannot be set aside. Tsuba AS tsuba have not existed for well over a century. Now, when I say this, I return of course to the first point above: what is the definition of “tsuba”? For me, these objects gain their greatest cultural relevance and resonance (romantic? Fine...) in pre-Edo times; they are far less relevant in terms of martial application, though still culturally relevant and somewhat resonant in the Edo Period. After this, however, their cultural relevance and resonance diminishes to the vanishing point (that is, in terms of their still being produced post-Edo). Removed from the times in which a sword guard had cultural meaning in both martial application and semiotically, contemporary tsuba are thus not really tsuba. Attempting to see them as such is anachronistic. In fact, it is hard to think of a better example of an anachronism than seeing a contemporary “tsuba” AS a real, contextually relevant and resonant sword guard. They are homages, perhaps, or “tsuba-like” objects, but they cannot and do not function in either of the ways specified above. There really can be no argument here. And this is what collectors recognize, which is why few will opt to acquire contemporary homages to tsuba instead of real, culturally- and historically-resonant sword guards. If you find yourself offended by this, you should examine your assumptions, namely, why you find it so important that a “contemporary tsuba” be identified/recognized AS a tsuba (rather than as an homage to tsuba, or as a tsuba-like object). If the work you do is brilliantly realized as an expression of metalwork (which it is), why is it so vitally important that it “count” AS a “real” tsuba? Why are you so invested in such an outcome? THIS is what you should be pondering, not whether contemporary tsuba are “valid” AS tsuba. Incidentally, there is nothing wrong with contemporary homages to tsuba, specifically, with their being recognized as such. Why some must insist that “this is not all they are” is a fascinating question to consider.

 

Steve

 

P.S. I am on Pete's side here, and echo his sentiments...if that weren't already evident... ;o)

[Pete Klein]

my brain hurts...

 

[Ford Hallam]

Hi Steve,

 

great riposte...and well worth waiting for. I'll now need a moment to reflect on what you've written also.

 

A few quick points I can make at this point though.

 

Firstly, as regards my own work ( and thanks for your kind compliments) I have no personal need to have what I do validated by collectors or anyone else for that matter. At this stage in my life as, firstly a craftsman and latterly an artist my inspiration, drive and aim is reasonably well understood by me. My questioning of the validity of contemporary tsuba had to do with the perception of the tsuba as a meaningful canvas of expression albeit one intimately bound to, and thus reflective of contemporary sword making.

 

The validity I enquire about is whether we, the makers of swords and tsuba today can in fact use these specific canvasses of blade and guard to explore forms of contemporary expression in metal that while being crucially informed by the past is never the less meaningful today. I am completely aware that this introduces an entirely new approach to creating in both traditions....however, I perceive that this is exactly what the finest artist swordsmiths today are doing. Your critique presumably negates the validity of what they are doing also though.

 

...I'll be back

 

regards,

 

Ford

[Steve Waszak]

Ford,

 

Well, I think if you look again at my last two sentences, you'll see that my critique does not negate the activities of contemporary blade or fittings artists; it simply questions the way those activities are understood in terms of cultural meaning/relevance. )

 

Steve

[Rich T]

Steven, that is one of, if not the best posts I have read on this forum.

 

Very well said

 

Richard

[Ford Hallam]

Hi Steve,

 

yes, I reread the last bit and apologies...I didn't fully appreciate what you were saying.

 

I've had a chance to consider the points you've made and think that in some, quite important ways I've not been clear enough in what I am presenting as you seem to have misunderstood my own fundamental position.

 

The validity I refer to has nothing, in my mind, to do with the past in the way you seem to intuit. Rather the contemporary validity is wholly to do with here and now. The impossibility ( and absurdity) of me, or anyone else, trying to make (for example) Kamakura period Owari guards, with all of the connotations they are redolent of, occurred to me many years ago.

 

Your assertion that tsuba begin to degenerate, for want of a better word, once the Edo period begins and continued to the point of nothingness today seems to bear out remarkably well the caricature of one of my hypothetical collector types. Similarly, your dismissal of all of Kin-ko work based on your own taste demonstrates a surprising (in a philosophical discussion) lack of objectivity.

 

Further, my own aesthetic preferences aside, your claim that the aesthetics of Yugen, mono no aware ...et al, are somehow superior to the decadence of Edo kinko work is something you simply cannot possibly prove. You are merely stating a preference of taste. My reference to and dismissal of that " bit of romanticism" was done exactly because I wanted to highlight exactly the sort of preferential bias you've just demonstrated. The words you use to describe Edo kin-ko are themselves very revealing, particularly when contrasted with he way the present the aesthetic you are moved by.

hopelessly cloying tastes of the plebeian merchant class...an orgy of cloying sentimentality...hopelessly tired, derivative, obvious, predictable...gag-me sentimentality...Edo kinko = McDonald’s burger, fries(chips), and a coke; Momoyama fine iron = five-star sushi.

To write off the remarkable art of so many truly great artists in metal, based on nothing more than what appears to be a very superficial appreciation of what was actually produced and your own overarching personal taste and value judgement does seem a tad biased...don't you think?

 

Again, if you want to call me elitist, or a snob, I’m fine with that.

I wasn't denying anyone's right to enjoy whichever aesthetic they choose...that's a personal matter. I don't think, however, you can then claim some sort of superiority for your preferences in an objective discussion.

 

btw; the reason I dislike that term; "wabi/sabi" is precisely because it's become such a vague "catch all" phrase that the real depth of the individual aesthetic components becomes muted and lacks refinement. It's also used too freely and often with a very poor appreciation of the real literary evolution of the terms and all the nuances that implies.

 

If I concede that perhaps tsuba did have some practical and functional purpose it never the less remains patently clear that by the Edo period this functional aspect was no longer a significant factor in the further development of the tsuba as art. Basic functional constraints were easily met and the meaning derived from tsuba evolved to meet the needs of a new class of users.

 

One of my opening points, and the rationale for my descriptions of the various interest groups was this;

it might be helpful to consider for a moment what actually appeals to them ( collectors ), as a way of trying clarify what tsuba are to different people. I think that generally speaking there are 3 main aspects we can identify and each view holds a part of the tsuba's identity.

 

I don't believe I made an "either/or" statement regarding aesthetics vs functionality. I merely posed the idea that in my view aesthetics was the primary driving force in the evolution of the tsuba.

 

You seem also to have run away with my "throw away" reference to unjustified romanticism. What I actually initially said was quite specific;

 

Incidentally, many of these purist types are quite dismissive of even the fairly sombre iron guards that were produced in the Edo period. The claim is that they don’t reflect “true” warrior ideals and taste. The flaw in this little bit of romanticism is too obvious to elaborate on

 

So if they didn't reflect true warrior taste who was buying them...surely they were made for the warrior class? ah! yes...but not the romantic, idealised bushi with his superior taste.

 

Finally, my intention in starting this discussion wasn't to seek approval or validation...I was looking to see how the tradition might successfully evolve as an expression that is true to the spirit of the makers of the past ( I'm not worried about long dead warriors now ), maintains it's integrity and for contemporary work to have some legitimate place in the continuum of art metalwork that is this tradition. This is the question I face each day. I've satisfied myself as to the legitimacy and integrity of what I do...I was merely wanting to hear what others thought... without being hugely invested in any particular response either way. Nothing you've expressed offended me....honestly :D

 

regards,

 

Ford

 

ps. It might be of interest to read the view of Mr Morihiro Ogawa in the new Metropolitan Museum Catalogue, 'Art of the Samurai" in reference to the function of tsuba.

 

"Contrary to some popular assumptions , the tsuba is designed not to protect the back of the hands but to protect the palms by preventing the hands from slipping down the hilt and onto the blade." pp.198

[Mark Green]

Steve, That was a great post, your post is well taken.

 

However,

 

A tsuba, buy any other name, is still a tsuba.

 

Even the massed produced, cast, crap, that comes out of china, are tsuba.

 

In 300 yrs., The "purist", cultural relevance, romantic, collector, will still feel that way. And the simple beauty of a folded steel disk, with maybe a few rough sukashi will always be his dream.

These tsuba, survived to these times, first because the Samurai of the Edo period felt it was likely good to have a good set of "war" fittings, to go along with their fancy 'go to town fittings'. And like some of us, many of them were likely "purist" collectors as well. Otherwise, most of those old tsuba would have been melted down into cannons, and machine guns. Their age, and simple beauty saved them.

 

In 300 yrs, the tsuba art collectors will look at the 20th, and 21st centuries, and see that there were still a few people making 'hand made' tsuba

They will be very rare.

Far more rare, then any other tsuba of quality. But I'm willing to lay down a bet to your great, great grandkids, that they will not only be very treasured for their rarity, but will be called TSUBA.

Mark G

[Steve Waszak]

Ford,

 

lol... Well of COURSE I'm biased! But we ALL are. The only difference is that some of us still labor under the illusion of the existence of objectivity. Several times in your response to me, you note my "personal preferences," my lack of "objectivity." There is no such thing as objectivity. We are ALL subjective beings. This is not debatable. Sorry, but it's just not. We can strive towards objectivity, but we'll not reach it. From the time we are born, through our rearing, we are subjected to countless shaping forces and mechanisms, all of which create the fully SUBJECTIVE beings we are. So for you to look to weaken/invalidate my views BY noting their subjectivity isn't exactly a convincing retort. In my post, I use phrasing such as "in my view" simply to stress my acknowledgment of my own INEVITABLY subjective bias (sorry for the redundancy there). At least I recognize it, though. Your response would seem to indicate that you believe objectivity to be possible.

 

As I said, too, I believe that the subtleties to be found in the finest Momoyama tsuba aesthetics make those aesthetics superior to the sorts of aesthetics found in the great majority of Edo Period guards. Is this my opinion? Sure. If I look down on the aesthetics of what I see in most Edo Kinko, and if that makes me elitist/snobbish, I'm fine with that. And despite what you say here, my understanding of Edo aesthetics is not superficial; just because one doesn't care for something does not mean he doesn't understand it. In fact, one cannot arrive at the first without the latter as requisite. It's interesting that you would assume a superficial understanding here...

 

Just a couple more things...

 

You say in your second post in this thread that "We've generally agreed, I think..., that the tsuba was not intended as a guard to protect the hand..." But then in your P.S., you quote Mr. Ogawa's thoughts on the tsuba's function being that to protect...the hand (whether the top or palm of the hand, what's the difference? It's still functional protection of the hand). So it seems that you tend to slip around your own words in these posts, no? You say right off the bat in your last post here that it is I who have misunderstood your "fundamental position." If this is so, this is due to the murkiness of the title of the thread (Contemporary tsuba...can they be valid?), and the meandering way in which you then address this question. The first thing I said in response was that everything depended on what was meant by "valid." The best I can figure be re-reading your posts is that you see the ideas expressed in the following passage from the end of your latest post as a clear explanation of what you understand to constitute that "validity":

 

"I was looking to see how the tradition might successfully evolve as an expression that is true to the spirit of the makers of the past ( I'm not worried about long dead warriors now ), maintains it's integrity and for contemporary work to have some legitimate place in the continuum of art metalwork that is this tradition."

 

But in this passage, the phrases "true to," "the spirit of the makers of the past," "maintains its integrity," and "legitimate place" are, again, murky to the point of near meaninglessness. Each of these phrases is descriptive, and the would-be meanings they have escape any sort of ready and clear apprehension. They SOUND good, but really, what do they MEAN? EXACTLY? Of course I am returning us here to my initial point above---the impossibility and illusory quality of "objectivity." The phrases you rely on in this passage MIGHT have some purchase if they could be objectively realized. Since they cannot be, however, for you to take aim at "validity" as regards contemporary tsuba VIA the pursuit of these mirages represents something akin to the pursuit of Atlantis. Of course, I exaggerate here somewhat. It is, however, disingenuous of you to make the initial post you do, and some of the points you make, in the particular TONE you do, and not expect some to offer points of rebuttal in response.

 

You also make this statement: "So if the['sombre iron guards' of the Edo Period] didn't reflect true warrior taste who was buying them...surely they were made for the warrior class? ah! yes...but not the romantic, idealised bushi with his superior taste."

 

Listen to your tone here! lol... So dismissive. Does anyone dispute the devolution of the bushi over the course of the Edo Period from actual fighting man to corrupt, decadent bureaucrat? They became a class who could scarcely defend their own existence. The writing of texts like Hagakure, among others, effectively document this devolution. How might we imagine these "warriors" would (endeavor to) see themselves? How might this perception then be projected socially? Why, by adorning their swords with "warrior's" tsuba made by various of the "iron schools" (Choshu, etc...) of the day. This isn't a reach at all, your tone here notwithstanding. And as for the "romantic, idealised bushi" you note here, see my original post regarding the function of romantic imaginings in meaning construction; you don't seem to want to acknowledge this as important, but it is...

 

Anyway, Ford, I think I've essentially said my piece here. If I get into it any more, I'll have to get into Saussure, Derrida, Levi-Strauss, Barthes, and the rest of the boys, and I'm not sure I have the energy to write a text book on a forum page...

 

Cheers,

 

Steve