Established ideas that need to change - 4: Shodai must be the best quality examples

[Iekatsu]

When there are multiple Mei for an artist that is not particularly well documented, they are generally grouped into different "generations", Shodai, Nidai etc. Generally this is done on the basis of perceived quality or mastery. I believe that this is an erroneous assumption that has more to do with Japanese hierarchical social conventions than logic, and that generally there is no evidence to determine which artist was the founder or primary artist and what order they worked in.

[GRC]

Nice one Thomas 

I couldn't agree more.

It's definitely based on a Japanese social construct. 

 

I think in some cases the order should be re-evaluated into a more logical "progression of development" rather than the perception of "best first".

... and to make matters worse within the existing system,  "best" can sometimes be subjective 

[Iaido dude]

Please see attached Steve Waszak's paper on the Yamakichibei atelier that is uploaded on NMB. It addresses precisely some of the points raised by Thomas, but Steve uses stylistic relationships in addition to well established features of mei to suggest an alternative theory on the chronologic relationship of the 5 masters of the Yamakichibei workshop. So, it isn't necessarily true that there isn't evidence "to determine which artist was the founder or primary artist and what order they worked in." Rather, it is important to use the inductive approach that begins with the features of the tsuba in hand, rather than "received wisdom" from older scholarship that is not based in factual evidence.

The Yamakichibei Group of Tsubako.pdf

[Iekatsu]

I have read it, I think it does a good job of outlining some of the issues that prompted this thread, there are similar issues with Nobuie etc.

[Spartancrest]

I have a problem with the idea that the first to develop a design or style is automatically the "Best" - Why wouldn't subsequent artists improve on the workmanship? After all they have a baseline on which to improve.

[Steve Waszak]

Good point, Dale.  There is a lot of sense in what you state here.  I suppose, though, that Shodai masters were seen as innovators, and therefore, as more creative, which seems to be highly valued.  Since Japanese tradition often sees students/apprentices as working diligently to copy the master's works/designs, at least at first, the perception that following generations' works tend to be derivative may prevail.  Of course, as you indicate in your post, what counts as "best" is a philosophical rabbit hole.  But if innovation is a key component (if not the key component), this may explain why the Japanese default to "Shodai as best" in their evaluations.  

[Iekatsu]

16 hours ago, Spartancrest said:

I have a problem with the idea that the first to develop a design or style is automatically the "Best" - Why wouldn't subsequent artists improve on the workmanship? After all they have a baseline on which to improve.

This is exactly what I was getting at, I think that it is very much the by-product of Japanese tradition and Confucian thought.

[Mark S.]

So, before I add my response, I do not quote the following or the response to belittle, or make a mockery of this in-depth and intellectual discussion.  I simply think it addresses some of the ideas discussed.  So with all respect:

 

“We are what they grow beyond. That is the true burden of all masters." 

- Yoda

 

And in an on-line discussion of the meaning of the quote: 

 

“But to sum it up: firstly, I don’t think Yoda is meaning that their students automatically SURPASS their teachers’s achievements/abilities…the “true burden of all masters” (or, in other words, the difficulty all teachers make for themselves) is that their legacy is not directly created by themselves, but by how their students use the knowledge that the teachers imparted on them. Some students excel, performing beyond what even their master ever could. Others falter, and fail. As a mentor and teacher, a Master’s burden is to accept both outcomes equally.”

 

I think the reverence for the Shodai has to do with the respect and tradition of the Sensei/student relationship.  Also, the idea that the better the student the better the Master must have been.  Unfortunately, the student’s work can sometimes be overlooked or undervalued.  I know much of what I state has already been mentioned in one form or another.  

[Spartancrest]

As much as I like Star Wars - I won't take philosophical advice from a CGI. But I do like the human sentiment behind it. 

 

Just as a father hopes his children can surpass his own achievements - it is a truth that many children tend to wither in their parents shadow. 

[Kanenaga]

There are several prominent groups of swordsmiths in which the nidai is considered more skilled than the shodai (and priced accordingly):

 

Seki Kanemoto (Magoroku)

Kawachi (no) kami Kunisuke (naka-Kawachi)

Settsu Tadatsuna (Ikkanshi)

Kunisada (Shinkai)

Sengo Muramasa

 

So it's not a blanket "shodai was best."

 

[Iekatsu]

This thread pertains to early Tosogu in particular, which has far less documentation to draw from than sword smiths. But your point is definitely valid.