george trotter Posted February 12, 2010 Report Posted February 12, 2010 This thread reveals more and more... First John Stuart mentioned tagane-mei were struck on "art-piece' or "export" tsubas never intended for mounting and then John L mentioned that seki-gane were also inserted...now we have Jean's "made as art" piece demonstrating clear evidence (seppa kage?) of having been mounted on a sword for some considerable time...that is the the only real dule with Japanese swords...no rule is absolute. Now...if only an NMB member can find another identified Hisanori piece to help us place Tin's Hisanori... Gotta love the horses... George.
george trotter Posted February 12, 2010 Report Posted February 12, 2010 dang...my spelling stinks...sorry Tim (not Tin) and I meant rule, not dule...baka desu! George.
sensei215 Posted February 12, 2010 Author Report Posted February 12, 2010 I thank everyone for their considerable opinions. I think this is why I first started to collect nihonto. It animates and enlivens the mind and senses. The imput is wonderful and very stimulating. I wish I had found this site so much earlier. Tim S
drbvac Posted February 12, 2010 Report Posted February 12, 2010 Yes Tim - like any democratic open speaking forum when everyone gets a turn and speaks freely it is quite amazing what can be accomplished in terms of information exchange
reinhard Posted February 16, 2010 Report Posted February 16, 2010 Simply repeating an opinion without providing any sort of example to help illustrate your point is very frustrating because it doesn't allow me to really understand what you are seeing. Dear Ford, The recently presented "sho" tsuba is illustrating my point very well, don't you think? I'm looking forward to argue with you about principles of Japanese aesthetics (no sarcasm). See you on the road. best regards reinhard
george trotter Posted February 16, 2010 Report Posted February 16, 2010 Reinhard, How does this "sho" illustrate your point? (do you mean prove your point?). Reading back to your posts your "point" (opinion) was that the westernised aesthetics of the "dai" leads unquestionably to the conclusion that the tsuba was hamamono of the Meiji era. Would it be fair to say, following on from your words, that as the European art form of "Art Nouveau" was unquestionably influenced by Japanese ukiyoe prints, that all Art Nouveau pieces made in Paris and London during the Meiji era were unquestionably made as "export mono" to Japan? Regards, George.
Eric H Posted February 16, 2010 Report Posted February 16, 2010 This unknown Hisanori, pre Meiji or later, built up to a question of faith, seems to have had in his assortment of tools only one chisel, when looked at the execution of the design and the mei. The mei looks blurry and differences between the dai and sho can also be seen. A clearly, sharp cut mei can draw conclusions about the craftsman skill, such an indication should not be overlooked. The exact attribution can only be done by the Shinsa. Eric
Jacques D. Posted February 16, 2010 Report Posted February 16, 2010 Hi, Since the pictures posted by Tim are blurred, i think it is quite impossible to say anything about the mei and its engraving.
Eric H Posted February 16, 2010 Report Posted February 16, 2010 Since the pictures posted by Tim are blurred Well, if so, then I can only wonder what's all has been read out and interpreted on the basis of such images... Eric
sensei215 Posted February 16, 2010 Author Report Posted February 16, 2010 I have stated from the beginning that I was having trouble photographing the tsuba. Just as I seem to be having the same problem with getting sharp photos of several blades I own. I have scanned the the tsuba and that may be part of the problem. I would appreciate any possible suggestions on improving the images I am taking. Tim S
Mark Green Posted February 16, 2010 Report Posted February 16, 2010 I would take these "pompous and theatrical" tsuba any day!!!!! They are wonderful. Hisanori? Maybe? Late period? for sure, I would think. Made for export? I doubt it!!!! More likely costom made for someone. Very pretty. Gotta love the horses. Mark G
Eric H Posted February 16, 2010 Report Posted February 16, 2010 I would take these "pompous and theatrical" tsuba any day!!!!! The fleeing horse showing it's hooves and the other Tsuba with the hoof traces are, in my understanding, an exceedingly well realized artistic composition, the date of production is of minor importance. The previously strongly guided debate on pre Meiji made or affected by western sources was informative, both have forwarded good arguments. It's up to a Shinsa to decide what is right. Mark, a good choice :D Eric
drbvac Posted February 16, 2010 Report Posted February 16, 2010 I would love to have them as well but almost as much considering the differences in opinion expressed so eloquently and with little animosity, a shinsa on these would be most welcome. Not that it would change my opinion on owning them - just for interest .
Ford Hallam Posted March 28, 2011 Report Posted March 28, 2011 I was just looking through the links to out of copyright books relating to our subject that Malcolm Razer just posted. I was quite amused to find the following page (page 29) in a 1966 catalogue of an exhibition held at the Cooper Hewitt Museum, New York. The items from the collections of members of the Japanese Sword Society of New York. Chikuza Hisanori (Omori School 1725 ~ 1795) Legend: "Pray do not tie your spirited horse to my cherry tree - for the blossoms will fall" This was also noted by Ian Bottomley in an earlier post. Page 2 lists the members from whom the exhibition pieces were borrowed. Some names may be familiar.
drbvac Posted March 28, 2011 Report Posted March 28, 2011 Ford: Great memory for previous posts but that is the artists eye for sure - so considering the level of detail in these tsuba are we going to get in to a comparison with the original postings ? Even to my eye, " IMHO" the expertise and detail presented in these is way ahead of the first ones we looked at
Ford Hallam Posted March 28, 2011 Report Posted March 28, 2011 Brian, there's no question in my mind, this is the same tsuba. The clarity of the image from the catalogue compared to the relatively bland colour digital image is something I've seen a few times now. I'm sure Richard George could offer a more technical explanation as to how this is. There is one unmistakable correlation though; if you examine both images you will find, in the inverted "V" of the fore leg a small round blemish in the patina. Someone else can mess around in photoshop and overlay the images if further confirmation is needed What the b/w image does show, though, is that this is no hamamono but the work of a serious artist...and one working well before the Bakamatsu and Meiji periods.
John A Stuart Posted March 28, 2011 Report Posted March 28, 2011 And here although I thought a very good work was sure it wasn't Chizuka Hisanori. Sweet!! John
drbvac Posted March 28, 2011 Report Posted March 28, 2011 Geese you guys - did u just "happen" to be looking at a catalogue from 45 years ago !! OK - wonder what the exact provenance is to the latest owner in 2010 ?? Any chance in a hundred years same smith - same theme - different set? Stuff moves doesn't it !
george trotter Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 Show me any tsuba, as pompous and theatrical as this one, predating Meiji-period and this discussion will eventually start to make sense. A "HISANORI"-mei on it would be nice to see as well, adding at least some credibility to former statements. Go on, convince me. I wonder if this talk is still about this particular tsuba or just about establishing profiles? reinhard
reinhard Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 I was quite amused to find the following page (page 29) in a 1966 catalogue of an exhibition held at the Cooper Hewitt Museum, New York. Don't waste your time, Ford. I'm sitting on tons of exhibition- and auction-catalogues from the 60ties, 70ties and 80ties. They don't count much anymore. Big names of collectors and "experts" were cut down to size in the meantime. There was a HISANORI trained in the school of Omori TERUHIDE, but he was in all probability not the maker of the pair in question. (see attachment) reinhard
george trotter Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 Hi Reinhard, are you saying that the original posted tsuba and this second posted tsuba (from the catalogue) are both Meiji hama-mono made for the western market? Are you saying that the depiction of the horse on both tsuba derive from western influence and taste? Maybe as Ford said these are in fact the same tsuba? George.
reinhard Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 Reinhard, are you saying that the original posted tsuba and this second posted tsuba (from the catalogue) are both Meiji hama-mono made for the western market? No. I'm saying that the tsuba presented on the forum and the tsuba shown in the 1966 catalogue are probably the same objects. And yes, both tsuba, dai and sho, were made for export and are not the work of the HISANORI trained by Omori TERUHIDE. reinhard
Ted Tenold Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 I'd add that while finding such pieces in old catalogs is good for lighting a warm nostalgic glow, they rarely lend credible authenticity to the piece as an original work unless authoritative and reliable provinance accompanied them prior to their illustration. Old books are filled with questionable pieces and most times tell us more about their travels than what they truely are.
george trotter Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 Well, Ted and Reinhard, that is fair comment. I agree that this Hisanori is probably not the Hisanori trained by Omori Teruhide, but I am less sure about the Meiji period hamamono description ( as has already been discussed above, I think this work has more merit than that). As for old catalogues etc, of course things change...new catalogues will probably become obsolete in 40-50 years time also...the message here is that no-one should rely ENTIRELY on such things, even origami. Interesting thread, George.
Ford Hallam Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 It seems to that the whole issue being debated here rests on rejecting the possibility that this tsuba is by THE Chikuzen Hiranori simply because some people believe this is an example of overt, late 19th cent, Western influence in the composition and design. I don't agree and have tried to provide examples to support my opinion. I'd be very interested to see counter examples of western art that late 19th cent. Japanese artists may have been influenced by that would have produced this particular tsuba. If, as some maintain, this is an obvious example of Western influenced hamamono it should be relatively easy to provide some pictorial evidence to support that claim. Reinhard, would you care to show me some? Reinhard, Ted, yes, it may well be true that many old catalogues are now regarded as being less than reliable and somewhat out of line with current scholarly thinking however this statement cannot be used to dismiss every bit of information or opinion expressed in them. That's just not logical. It's a bit like saying that books that stated the earth was flat are also wrong about fire being hot and water wet. :D It's intellectually lazy to simply resort to that argument because it doesn't even bother to address to point being discussed.
Ford Hallam Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 For a more nuanced appreciation of one aspect of Japanese artists I'd recommend this publication. I think this quote, regarding the influence of Maruyama Okyo, is worth considering. Shijo artists, following the lead of the celebrated painter Maruyama Okyo (1733-1795), incorporated elements of imported Western pictorial methods but nonetheless elected to remain faithful to traditional Japanese media, formats, and subjects. They further refi ned Okyo's achievement by incorporating a brushwork-oriented aesthetic derived from Japanese literati painting (nanga or bunjinga) to evolve a style, often described as soft and lyrical, so appealing that it continued to reverberate in paintings throughout the Meiji (1868-1912), Taisho (1912-1926), and Showa (1926-1989) periods.
Ted Tenold Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 Ford, please don't misinterpret the intent of my post. I am neither confirming nor denying this particuluar piece as a work of the maker as signed, and the opinion I expressed initially does no more to vet it than does the book in which it is illustrated. I like the work and the signature it carries holds little importance to me. My comment is directed at readers less attuned to the advancement of studies since a particular publication was first circulated. It's nice to encounter a piece that was considered exemplary of school or style, or (regardless of authentication) enjoyed enough by others to be included in the catalog. I personally don't know enough about the artist or his work to make a determination about it's authenticity, and even if I did, my opinion would still carry little weight. My point is that it's okay for us to take the information that's out there, compile it, compare it, and then think for ourselves. But it's no more appropriate for us to take everything in them as faulted, as it is to consider them gospel. Water is wet, fire is hot, and we find that out the first time we fall into a lake or put our hand on the stove. But without truely taking someone else's word for it, one must sail the world to find out you won't fall off. As far as your examples are concerned, I find them quite intriguing and informative, but as I mentioned before... I do hope I'm wrong, and it's not my intention to criticize as much as it is to confess what my intuitions say. However, I wouldn't be surprised if little about this maker could be found based on my observations, which are just that; my observations and opinions. and... I thought that I should clarify that I also like it very much, and re-emphasize the skill in which the image was rendered. Having never seen anything comparable in period work, my mental reference then shifts me to classify it stylistically as I described. That said, I would love to see other examples of this artists work so I could add them to my christmas list. So please do post some if you find them Ford. So, fully recognizing that you are a respected craftsman your opinion is also thus respected, but arguably, remains yet another opinion in this work. Referencing to the influences and trends of artisanal inspiration of the period, while building a backdrop for the scene, provides us little more about *this* maker and whether this piece is exemplary of his body of work. After all, the OP wanted to know more about this tsuba and it's maker. Thus, I feel all the discussion surrounding authenticity, workstyle, *and* the surrounding environment of the period is in context of the thread, especially in the absence of other works by this maker that demonstrate the same characteristics and inspirations. Is it righteous? Who knows. Send it through shinsa of any particular group of choice, and get yet another opinion.
Ford Hallam Posted March 29, 2011 Report Posted March 29, 2011 Thanks for your clarification, Ted. I would add, that although I appreciate your comment about my opinion being perhaps respected due to my work achievements, I would hope that any opinion I offer, is rather, considered on the basis of the supporting evidence I offer and the persuasiveness of my argument. regards, Ford
george trotter Posted March 30, 2011 Report Posted March 30, 2011 It seems that some people believe this is an example of overt, late 19th cent, Western influence in the composition and design. I don't agree and have tried to provide examples to support my opinion. If, as some maintain, this is an obvious example of Western influenced hamamono it should be relatively easy to provide some pictorial evidence to support that claim. Reinhard, would you care to show me some? . I think the depiction on this piece is entirely consistent with the Japanese artistic expression of the horse, the leaves and the hoofprints. I see nothing western in "influence" in the artistic depiction and certainly not in the conceit of the horse, leaves and hoofprints and what they represent. I think the skill is high, and if, as has been stated, the influence and conceit are purely a cynical "construct" to appeal to the western buyer of Meiji times, I am willing to see evidence to support the statement. regards, George
Recommended Posts