Contemporary tsuba...can they be valid?

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

Thanks Pete for at least reminding us of what a real tsuba looks like. Gee I'll bet the samurai who used that is pleased that it served its primary purpose as a hand guard to protect his fingers!

 

Ford -- a very good friend allowed me this picture which I have reoriented into the position it would have been in to receive the cuts shown. This is off of a papered pre-Edo uchigatana koshirae and is a good example of a piece used by an actual Samurai in battle. The fact that it is Kinko might help to explain why we see the cuts as opposed to steel tsuba which would have been much more resistant to such lacerations.

 

[IanB]

I have read this thread, and the questions it has raised, with great interest. In my humble opinion the Japanese sword and its fittings belongs to past eras, and these cannot be revisited. This is why we divide blades into nihonto, gunto and shinsakuto. However skilfully made and however artistic a shinsakuto may be, it cannot be a true nihonto or gunto since it has been made 'out of its period' so to speak. If one takes the analogy of say a recently made flintlock duelling pistol, however similar or however exactly it replicates the work of Manton, Egg or Nock, it is still quite rightly regarded as a copy, and accepted as such by all in the field of gun collecting. Why? for the simple reason that duelling pistols belong to the late 18th and early decades of the 19th century and not to the present day. In view of the fact that we differentiate between eras of blade production, perhaps we need terms to describe tsuba and other fittings made in different eras.

Having said all that, I regard the work of Ford and other present masters as being just as valid in terms of artistry and craftsmanship as the work done in earlier years - but recognise that they are now superb works of art rather than functional objects.

Ian Bottomley

[Ford Hallam]

Ford -- a very good friend allowed me this picture which I have reoriented into the position it would have been in to receive the cuts shown. This is off of a papered pre-Edo uchigatana koshirae and is a good example of a piece used by an actual Samurai in battle. The fact that it is Kinko might help to explain why we see the cuts as opposed to steel tsuba which would have been much more resistant to such lacerations.

 

[attachment=0]kirikomi.jpg[/attachment]

 

Pete,

 

I was just considering the cut on the right hand side, If we imagine the blade orientation as it made that cut ( I assume the cut is less deep on the other side) it appears the handle of the attacking blade would be in the same place as the blade of the defending blade. Do you know what I mean?

 

I'm having a little difficulty seeing how the cut at top was made too...if there were 2 long blades attacking each other.

 

Admittedly, without the tsuba in hand...better still, on a blade and with another mounted blade with it's cutting edge correctly aligned in the cuts I'm merely speculating but I do think we need to be more rigorous in analysing the evidence. Just because it looks like it doesn't mean it is ...and those cuts still look quite hard edged for something that was apparently done so long ago...and remarkably superficial.

 

I still can't help feeling that these sorts of "scars" are cosmetic, later additions to enhance the desirability of the items,.

 

sorry for having succumbed to my churlish nature... :?

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

I would add to Ian's good post that "obsolete" weapons and military items has been created also in the past with artistic intentions or as status symbols (things that often overlap).

Now they are treasured in museums side-by-side to the more ancient examples they were inspired to.

[David Price]

To be honest, as an artist, I do find terms like "homage" and "tsuba like object" to be quite dismissive....implying, as they do that the pieces are somehow not real in any meaningful way in relation to the sword. That they are merely pale imitations of the forceful objects of the past.

 

Ford

Just for the record...I personally hate the term "XXX like object" and only used it here to invoke discussion. Even the worst made decorative “wall hanger” sword (another term I dislike) is still a sword. Just a very poor example that that has no place in my house!

 

Ford's tsuba have been awarded full recognition in the NBTHK tsuba making contests, a sanctioned event. Which makes Ford a legitimate tsuba maker.

 

Surely, no one is suggesting that Brian Tschernega's habaki, that twice have been judged to 1st place in the NBTHK habaki making contests are something less because of ...... , what?

 

I for one certainly do not think that the work of western or non-Japanese artisans is any less just because of where they were born or where they live/work.

 

For these other artisans, if they're truly interested in being recognized in their field, they too will submit their work for the experts to judge. Until that time, which might never come, they remain what they are, no less, no more, which is just fine.

 

AFAIK Barrett, DiCristofano, Sorrells and other smiths are not allowed to submit their work because they are not licensed sword smiths and by law, their work is not allowed into Japan. If this is true, then does it not show a double standard? Hallam, Hastings, Tschernega (the habaki on my DiCristofano is one of Tschernga’s ) and others may submit their work, but only swords made by licensed Japanese sword smiths are allowed into Japan.

 

I freely admit that I do not know if there are rules for who may submit tsuba and other items that are not swords for judging so I may be embarrassing myself . It wouldn’t the first time nor unfortunately will it be the last time!

 

Dave P

[Steve Waszak]

Okay, let's see...

 

First, Ian, nicely stated... :D

 

Next, Ford, you say:

 

"I would argue that the symbolic role of the Japanese sword has always been it's most powerful presence, whether on the field of battle, on a katana-kake in a tokanoma in a private residence or on display in an International museum. The complexity of what it represents depends, as Steve rightly points out, to a great extent, on context. This context has always been in flux. To survive, all traditions must remain in flux and evolve to provide meaningful expression... one that is expressive of the times. I believe that is still happening as in the work of the finest swordsmiths at work today...and if I may be so bold as to count myself in their company, I like to believe my own work also speaks to a beauty that is much loved still and provides a vehicle to further develop new beauty within the context of this tradition. This is the crux of what I was getting at in terms of 'legitimacy'."

 

Well now if you had just said this... :D In all seriousness, we may wrestle (rather fruitlessly, I would imagine, since we have no ultimate judge to say who's right) about whether "the symbolic role of the Japanese sword has always been it's most powerful presence (italics added)," including on the "field of battle," but I certainly do agree that its symbolic value, its semiotic function :D has always been of great weight. The rest of what you say here, for me, anyway, more clearly expresses your true aims in starting this thread, I think, and I can be quite open to and appreciative of the pursuits you describe in your last few sentences here. I find it interesting that you boldtype the phrases you do; that's what I'd have done, too...

 

It's interesting to me that you find the term homage dismissive. I certainly don't see the term this way at all. For me, it's simply a recognition of what Ian gets at in his post... Perhaps the word has different connotations in South Africa than it does in the U.S?

 

You also say, Ford:

 

I think there is a whole new topic to wrangle over in relation to our evaluation of the qualities that these artefacts exhibit and the need for some sort of objectivity in assessing these aesthetics. I fully appreciate Steve's points regarding the ultimate impossibility of true objectivity but I would maintain that this is precisely where the study of aesthetics, [as a tool, not a dogma as some seem to fear, with which we can begin to more effectively analyse and study this art form], provides a framework for a more mature and balanced appreciation."

 

Hey, if you can find the objectivity you speak of here, I think that would be wonderful. I am not being sarcastic at all. I remember, as a graduate student some years ago, being knocked off balance by the arguments made for the illusion of objectivity. It's very uncomfortable for many to accept. Quite frankly, if somehow we could arrive at "some sort of objectivity in assessing these aesthetics," as you say, that would be terrific. I just don't see how this can be done...

 

Now, Franco, when you say, "Steve, don't expect answers if you're going to rant and take an argumentative tone, simply go find you're own answers," in the first place, I am most certainly NOT ranting (you'll know it when I'm really ranting), and secondly, "an argumentative tone"? LOL...we're debating here, are we not? Sheesh...

 

You say:

 

"Kantei is how experts are determined. People like Mr. Hagihara with tosogu (please correct and excuse if misspelled) and Mr. Tanobe with nihonto are able to demonstrate repeatedly their expertise in kantei, plus their immense knowledge of nihonto history, that's what makes them experts."

 

You need to dig deeper, Franco. Kantei are focused strongly on identification of pieces and determination of authenticity. We are not discussing this aspect of "expertise." We are discussing (or arguing about) "expertise" in the realm of aesthetic quality, excellence, and validity (and how one becomes "expert" in this area). These are very, very different things. I for one would find kantei (and the whole shinsa process) much more intriguing and enlightening if it did focus (more) on the latter, rather than simply the former.

 

Finally, you say:

 

"We are talking about Japan and nihon-to here aren't we? Truthfully, I wouldn't expect to find any non Japanese on the shinsa teams, you see its their party, their culture, their history, they set the rules and standards and have every right to do so! Just like you wouldn't go to Venice and expect to find non Italian Gondoliers."

 

A perfect example here, Franco, of projected ethnocentrism. Your sentiments here seem to say that because someone is Japanese they are therefore automatically more qualified to assess aesthetic quality in nihonto/tosogu than a non-Japanese would. Your words almost say that cultural knowledge is passed down genetically. I know you're not really saying this, but can't you see that you are building (or reinforcing) a wall of privileged exclusivity that would create or buttress an automatic deference to Japanese opinion simply because it is Japanese opinion? All I am saying is that what should matter in assessing aesthetic quality is the strength of reasoning and clarity of articulation in one's opinion, NOT the fact that one is Japanese or not. Otherwise it's something like saying that Italians are naturally better gondoliers than others would be, and I know you're not implying that, right?

 

Cheers,

 

Steve

[David Price]

...mmm.. "tsuba-like-object"...reminds me a post in another board in which a nice XIX century Goto Ichijo Tsuba was no more considered a tsuba because of the design entered the Seppadai

 

I have difficulty, philosophically; with these types of tsuba (I think hama-mono is a correct term this style). They where clearly never intended to be mounted and thus are nonfunctional as a sword fitting. They are tsuba only because they have a nakagoana. Perhaps by having the design purposely encroach on the seppadai the artisan was stating that their work had transcended that of being parts for a weapon and have become purely art.

 

Don’t know…just the ramblings of a low ranking student.

 

Dave P

[Ford Hallam]

Hi Dave,

 

don't worry...I wasn't really taking offence at anyone's use of the term "tsuba-like-objects" as such...unless you meant mine I refer to lot's of other things by that term myself

 

With regard to the design impinging onto the seppa-dai. As long as the design is below the actual plane of the seppa-dai so that it does not interfere with it being mounted it cannot be judged as Hama-mono or otherwise regarded as not a real tsuba. While not terribly common one does occasionally see perfectly legitimate older examples, even by big names, where the artist has taken liberties with the canvas....but still ensured the tsuba would be usable.

 

 

 

Steve,

 

I quite like how our "little chat" has been going :D

 

I'll freely admit my thinking has been refined a little as a result of this debate here, with everyone's input. As I said much earlier, my opinions are always works in progress ...and I ought to have been far more specific and taken the time to lay out all my intended and implied meanings at the outset. But hey!...look at the fun we've had

 

The word homage would probably not be used much here in SA at all really.... and almost certainly not pronounced correctly An homage in my, English , understanding would imply a certain degree of reverence and a "paying of respect" so to speak. While I have the utmost respect and love for the work of the past, even Momoyama iron, I'm not intend to be a groupie...I intend to perform in my own right. No ABBA tribute band for me.... :D

 

As for the next exciting instalment a la your query here;

if somehow we could arrive at "some sort of objectivity in assessing these aesthetics," as you say, that would be terrific. I just don't see how this can be done...

 

and this next bit in reply to Franco;

 

All I am saying is that what should matter in assessing aesthetic quality is the strength of reasoning and clarity of articulation in one's opinion

 

Lets get to it and see what common ground sound reasoning and clarity of articulation in our opinions may reveal.

 

best regards,

 

Ford

[Steve Waszak]

Bravo, Ford. I'm with ya!

 

Cheers,

 

Steve

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

AFAIK Barrett, DiCristofano, Sorrells and other smiths are not allowed to submit their work because they are not licensed sword smiths and by law, their work is not allowed into Japan. If this is true, then does it not show a double standard? Hallam, Hastings, Tschernega (the habaki on my DiCristofano is one of Tschernga’s ) and others may submit their work, but only swords made by licensed Japanese sword smiths are allowed into Japan.

 

Hi Dave.

 

I think the restrictions apply also to Japanese, so if there is a differentiation it is down to the nature of the item rather than the ethinicity of the maker.

But maybe this is what you meant.

 

Congratulation for your sword, I like Anthony's work.

[nagamaki - Franco]

Bad analogy Franco.

 

Two years ago a television news story aired in Australia about an English girl working for over twelve months as a gondolier in Venice. It was genuine enough. The story was by the BBC.

 

Hi Keith, I was well aware of that exception in making my statement, just as I'm well aware of Mr. Gordon Robson's efforts with the NTHK. You also cannot ignore the fact that the BBC made a strong point that is was a one and only exception according to the report. Come on guys what are we doing here now with this nitpicking.

[nagamaki - Franco]

You need to dig deeper, Franco. Kantei are focused strongly on identification of pieces and determination of authenticity. We are not discussing this aspect of "expertise." We are discussing (or arguing about) "expertise" in the realm of aesthetic quality, excellence, and validity (and how one becomes "expert" in this area). These are very, very different things. I for one would find kantei (and the whole shinsa process) much more intriguing and enlightening if it did focus (more) on the latter, rather than simply the former.

 

Steve, you, like many, are making the mistake Sato sensei writes about in the NBTHK Journals, and that is ignoring and/or overlooking the second step in kantei, which is quality kantei, that includes evaluating and taking into account the aesthetic quality of a piece.

 

How does one become an expert in this area? Hmm, ask the experts.

 

A perfect example here, Franco, of projected ethnocentrism. Your sentiments here seem to say that because someone is Japanese they are therefore automatically more qualified to assess aesthetic quality in nihonto/tosogu than a non-Japanese would. Your words almost say that cultural knowledge is passed down genetically. I know you're not really saying this, but can't you see that you are building (or reinforcing) a wall of privileged exclusivity that would create or buttress an automatic deference to Japanese opinion simply because it is Japanese opinion? All I am saying is that what should matter in assessing aesthetic quality is the strength of reasoning and clarity of articulation in one's opinion, NOT the fact that one is Japanese or not. Otherwise it's something like saying that Italians are naturally better gondoliers than others would be, and I know you're not implying that, right?

 

 

Dave, (edit: should read Steve, not Dave) I don't know where you come up with this BS, but please stop. It's not what I'm saying at all!

Where do I say " that because someone is Japanese they are therefore automatically more qualified to assess aesthetic quality in nihonto/tosogu than a non-Japanese would", huh, where?

Where do I say, " that Italians are naturally better gondoliers than others would be", huh, where?

Where do I say, "that cultural knowledge is passed down genetically", huh, where?

 

Stop twisting my words into what you would like them to mean to suit your own view points and arguments.

[David Price]

A perfect example here, Franco, of projected ethnocentrism. Your sentiments here seem to say that because someone is Japanese they are therefore automatically more qualified to assess aesthetic quality in nihonto/tosogu than a non-Japanese would. Your words almost say that cultural knowledge is passed down genetically. I know you're not really saying this, but can't you see that you are building (or reinforcing) a wall of privileged exclusivity that would create or buttress an automatic deference to Japanese opinion simply because it is Japanese opinion? All I am saying is that what should matter in assessing aesthetic quality is the strength of reasoning and clarity of articulation in one's opinion, NOT the fact that one is Japanese or not. Otherwise it's something like saying that Italians are naturally better gondoliers than others would be, and I know you're not implying that, right?

 

 

Dave, I don't where you come up with this BS, but please stop. It's not what I'm saying at all!

Where do I say " that because someone is Japanese they are therefore automatically more qualified to assess aesthetic quality in nihonto/tosogu than a non-Japanese would", huh, where?

Where do I say, " that Italians are naturally better gondoliers than others would be", huh, where?

Where do I say, "that cultural knowledge is passed down genetically", huh, where?

 

Stop twisting my words into what you would like them to mean to suit your own view points and arguments.

 

Sorry Franco but that "quote" is not from any of my posts!! It looks like part of one of Steve's posts above mine

 

Dave P

[nagamaki - Franco]

Sorry Franco but that "quote" is not from any of my posts!! It looks like part of one of Steve's posts above mine

 

My apology to you Dave.

[Steve Waszak]

I will e-mail Franco directly on this, so as not enter his sandbox publicly...

 

Steve

[b.hennick]

I have been following this thread checking for new posts several times a day. I enjoy what I have been reading.

I appreciate modern swords and fittings - tsuba, habaki etc. I do not own modern swords (except a kogatana by Yoshindo Yoshihara) nor modern tsuba. It is not that I do not like them, I do appreciate what I see. It is that, for the same money, I can buy a blade with history and wonderful steel that is not easy to find in modern pieces. My tsuba, both iron (I like mokume) and soft metal were chosen because I like each one. Some tsuba seem to talk to me. Some feel good in the hand - the iron bones especially are something I appreciate.

 

I have looked at and enjoyed Ford's tsuba. I considered buying one or two. Those specific ones were not for sale. I appreciate the modern tsuba on Aoi arts web-site by a 10th Dan master. I considered each of them as well.

 

Are modern swords swords - definitely. Are modern tsuba tsuba - definitely. Are they for everyone no. Some collect iron tsuba only. Others prefer soft metal. The decision on what to collect and enjoy is a personal one. On the other hand, a little education often results in a change in what is collected. More experience and more knowledge usually leads to further refinements in taste. Most new sword collectors do not appreciate a suguha hamon. Flamboyant hamons are what a new collector usually wants. Flashy soft metal tsuba and poor iron tsuba are usually picked up by new collectors. High quality soft metal tsuba and high quality iron tsuba usually come with learning and experience.

 

This thread and this Messageboard contribute to increasing members' knowledge. Often the tosogu is the most enlightening. Thank you to the contributors to this thread and others I have enjoyed.

[reinhard]

All I am saying is that what should matter in assessing aesthetic quality is the strength of reasoning and clarity of articulation in one's opinion, NOT the fact that one is Japanese or not.

 

You are calling for objectivity that cannot exist according to your previous posts.

 

Theoretically non-Japanese persons can adapt to Japanese criteria of quality, but they have a long way to go. Almost all of them trying never reach true mastery. Their Western point of view is obsolete anyway. Crying for democracy is premature and ignorant in front of an old and most sophisticated culture.

 

reinhard

[John A Stuart]

Democracy, obsolete!!?? Of course, we've been ruled by a plutocracy for over a hundred years. One only has to look at Japan's western neighbour, a paragon of democracy, in fact, so streamlined they only need one party. Much easier to decide that way. John

[reinhard]

Relax John,

 

I'm talking about the perception of art and craftsmanship, not politics.

 

reinhard

[Steve Waszak]

All I am saying is that what should matter in assessing aesthetic quality is the strength of reasoning and clarity of articulation in one's opinion, NOT the fact that one is Japanese or not.

 

You are calling for objectivity that cannot exist according to your previous posts.

 

Theoretically non-Japanese persons can adapt to Japanese criteria of quality, but they have a long way to go. Almost all of them trying never reach true mastery. Their Western point of view is obsolete anyway. Crying for democracy is premature and ignorant in front of an old and most sophisticated culture.

 

reinhard

 

Reinhard,

 

No, if you read my posts, including the segment you quote here, you'll see that I speak of "strength of reasoning and clarity of articulation in one's opinion," which is not a "call for objectivity."

 

As to your other comment, surely you realize that the majority of Japanese themselves know nothing of "Japanese criteria of quality" when it comes to the "classic" arts. Everyone, Japanese or otherwise, has "a long way to go" in learning aesthetic concepts in the Japanese sensibility as manifest in the sword arts. "True mastery," when we are speaking specifically of aesthetic assessment capability, is an exceedingly elusive thing, and it remains unclear who decides when someone has attained "true mastery" in this skill. I have no idea what you mean by "[t]heir Western point of view is obsolete anyway." Who is "their"? Are you speaking of ALL non-Japanese? And Western point of view? That is rather broad phrasing. Can you clarify? Obsolete? In what specific context? According to what criteria?

 

Your last statement is so bizarre and 18th-century in its sentiments that it's hard to take seriously. It sounds exactly like something a foppish English Lord would have said about that colonial rabble in America right around 1776. And yes, Japan's is an old and sophisticated culture. I suppose that's one of the reasons I've enjoyed my lifelong study of it, and my years living in it.

 

Steve

[John A Stuart]

Reinhard, 'not politics' and I was in such agreement too. :lol: John

[Steve Waszak]

Interesting topic, Ford. Thanks for bringing it up. I think it's run its course for me, though.

 

Adios,

 

Steve

[Ford Hallam]

Hi Steve,

 

it sounds exactly like something a foppish English Lord would have said about that colonial rabble in America right around 1776

 

you've seen though me!! This is exactly the tone I've been trying to cultivate myself.... It works here in South Africa

 

Thanks again for taking the time to engage. I've appreciated your intellectual rigour

 

I've been giving the whole matter of judging quality and artistic merit some serious though, admittedly more cautiously now thanks to the prickly issue of objectivity. I do have some initial thoughts that we might be able to build on and begin to formulate some sort of workable framework. I'll pm you with some ideas in a little while.

 

regards,

 

ford

[Stephen]

so we can call this thread closed? other rants to PM?

[Ford Hallam]

Why?...the odd minor ruffling of feathers aside I think this has been a pretty well mannered discussion. Others may still be pondering what "it all means" and may want to offer further observations and opinions

 

Surely it's not over 'til the fat lady sings :D

[Chishiki]

so we can call this thread closed? other rants to PM?

 

Why? It will die a natural death as most threads do.

 

Ford. Just curious. When you submit a tsuba to NBTHK do you sign it? or submit it mumei? Do they know it is a non Japanese submitting the work for appraisal?

 

Mark

[Stephen]

so we can call this thread closed?

 

nothing wrong with the original post but it sure took a sharp turn toward the last few post, so keeping on track is cool with me, I worded it wrong sorry, does a Fat Man singing count? LA LA LA just getting warmed up in case.

[Ford Hallam]

Ford. Just curious. When you submit a tsuba to NBTHK do you sign it? or submit it mumei? Do they know it is a non Japanese submitting the work for appraisal?

 

Mark

 

Hi Mark,

 

submitted work is always signed. Apparently the pieces in NBTHK competitions were judged twice. Once with the mei covered and once with the mei revealed....your guess is to why is as good as mine

 

...and who told you I wasn't Japanese?!!!

 

Hi Steven,

 

no worries...I take your point though...we'll keep an close eye on the rowdy elements

[george trotter]

Actually, the point of the mei on your tsubas is interesting. What do you put on your work? Could you give us a few words on your mei? I am way out of touch with modern developments in Japanese-Western art connections...is yours a case like Keith Austin where (I think) his sensei conferred a Japanese art name on him which entitled him to use kanji to sign his work, or...?

 

Regards,

George

[Mark Green]

Steve88,

Great posts. I agree with some of your points. As a truly awesome debator, you may want to think about your chopping up of peoples words, to swing them. You surely don't need to do that.

I was shocked to see you didn't get Reinhard's meaning about democracy. He is right on, with that one!

 

So, are shinsaku Tsuba valid yet? I know my Ford Hallam tsuba sits at the head of my small collection of old rusty iron.

 

I apoligize to everyone about my defensive marshal posturing.

If you want to learn to ride, and stab things, and you live in the SE US, pm me.

 

Great topic Ford!

Mark G