Review of Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords

[huntershooter]

Finished "Facts and Fundamentals..." last night. I really enjoyed it.

I agree with Andreas on the "other than mainstream opinions", yet the message of "a good blade is a good blade" is on the mark.

 

The section on polishing made me smile as it reminded me of some on this board (you'll know who you are). I was in agreement with the opinion stated.

 

Certainly I know substantially less than many (possibly most) here. ANY knowledge I've obtained on the subject of Nihonto has been through reading or the internet. I've yet to attend a sword show or meet/speak with another person that has knowledge of this subject.

 

I can't think of another book I would recommend before this one to anyone in a similar position. The book absolutely cleared up some questions I've had.

 

Thank you for your effort Paul.

[Stephen]

Todd

 

not 100% sure but think Chris is setting up for and 2011 show in the twin cities, hope you can make it up.

[Surfson]

Just ordered - thanks for the recommendation. B

[lotocoti]

I can't think of another book I would recommend before this one to anyone in a similar position. The book absolutely cleared up some questions I've had.

Being in that exact position, I couldn't agree more.

 

Geoff Mc

[nagamaki - Franco]

Notification received today from Amazon of ship date moved up to to 8/5/10.

[paulb]

Dear All,

I am part way through this volume. As said before it is well written (translated) and presented. It certainly contains some useful information and interesting theories. But rising to the challenge in one of Stephen's earlier emails regarding board members not being afraid to express their opinion can I introduce a note of caution.

As said by virtually everyone here (often in euphoric tones) this is an interesting work. The author has many interesting theories and opinions which he expresses often with considerable passion. However they are by his own statement theories. Regrettably because of the nature of some of them, particularly those relating to shape, they can never be proven or disproven as examples in original form no longer exist.

The author appear to enjoy being controversial, there is nothing wrong with that, but being cynical doesnt make you right.

 

As said above I think this is an interesting, possibly an important piece of work which makes you (me) think and question ideas that have been regarded as fact for some time. However just because it is the latest theory it doesnt make it right or all that went before wrong.

To draw a comparison I heard a lecture on surgical treatment of bowel cancer recently. The surgeons concluded that after nearly 100 years of trying inovative new theories they came to the conclusion that the method prescribied for surgery in 1910 gave far better resolution than the more recent practices.

Just because it is a new idea it doesnt mean it is right or better. It is another idea/opinion.

 

I am a little concerned when some of our newer members are recommended this as the first choice of a book on the subject. It is a very useful addition to a library but for me it would not be a first choice for someone starting out. I would have thought it far better to learn the basics from a traditional and conventional view point (such as this gentleman's teacher's teacher, Honami Kozon) before going on to this volume.

Radical and out of the box thinking has its place and offers value but only against the background of conventional wisdom/theory.

 

Regards

paulb

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

they are by his own statement theories. Regrettably because of the nature of some of them, particularly those relating to shape, they can never be proven or disproven as examples in original form no longer exist.

 

Maybe not definitively proven or disproven, but material both against or in favour of the theory can be gathered, and indeed it is.

I'm working on an article about this very matter. We should consider that this specific opinion is not shared only by the author. Hence my curiosity to dig in more. The level of plausibility will probably remain a personal matter of each reader.

 

As per the fact that it's not a beginner's book, maybe, but exclusively if this is the *only* entry level book the beginner read. I guess everybody here has read at least 3 different entry level sources, and if we set apart the specific issues you're referring to, the work is still full of good and "traditional" information. Not sure it can be of harm to beginners, especially if they have Nagayama's or Sato's works, that are pretty universally owned, to compare with.

[paulb]

Hi Carlo,

I dont disagree with anything you say and certainly there is good information here as well as the more controversial points raised. I think my concern, and this may be my interpretation of what was being said here was that:

a) These theories were more or less valid than those that had gone before, I assume simply because they were the newest

and more importantly

b) The implication/suggestion that if you only bought one book on the subject this would be the one to buy.

This certainly has its place and I agree alongside Nagayama is a good place for it to sit. That offers some balance in view points as would Nihonto Koza.

Regards

Paul

[Carlo Giuseppe Tacchini]

Hi Paul.

 

I get what you mean. Let say that nowaday beginners are lucky to have not just Yumoto and

Hawley to rely on as it once was.

[paulb]

those were the days. When I got my copy of Yumoto I thought I had gone to heaven!!!

[Jean]

When I got my copy of Yumoto I thought I had gone to heaven

 

Here are a few comments about this book made by Paul Martin after talking over some issues :

 

Many of the theories are pre NBTHK. Mostly of Hon'ami origin. Part of

Nakahara's thing is that the Hon'ami have a long history, whereas the

NBTHK are only 60 years old, yet had the monopoly on spreading

information. The saki-zori theory has also been touched upon by

several scholars and swordsmiths, its all about mechanics of the

blade. Fujishiro Matsuo also subscribed to this theory. If a healthy

blade is straight in the upper part, when drawn it will destroy the

saya very quickly as the straight part cannot bend around the part of

the saya that was made for the koshi-zori. I am saving an article

about this for my magazine when it eventually comes out.

 

Ikubi-kissaki: It is the first time that I had heard about this, but

several swordsmiths tend to agree, as the amount of punishment the

kissaki takes from actual use means that ikubi kissaki would only last

a very short amount of time. It was probably the standard way of

repairing chu-kissaki at the time is the short answer. However, there

are swordsmiths and scholars who support the previous theories too

(obviously), saying that swordsmiths just made what was requested of

them. I too investigated these theories when translating them and

discussed them with various swordsmiths and polishers etc. It was very

interesting.

 

Uchi-zori: again Hon'ami standard teachings. Makes a lot of sense and

stands up to the (professional) polishers way of repairing such

things. Also, when applied to the saki-zori theory it stands up too,

'If they were straight in the first place, they would have become

uchi-zori.'

 

The research and study in the translation at first made an extreme

change in my critical thinking towards swords (including national

treasures), but then gradually I calmed down and came back to a more

even, but slightly more critical approach.

 

 

 

I am not sure if this is a Hon'ami theory or a Nakahara theory. You don't have to accept all of his theories, but just take them onboard.

 

It may well be that it doesn't apply to all furisode nakago, but then, some straight nakago may have been adjusted to look like furisode nakago to hide the wear. Then you can apply the theory in this instance. However, Nakahara believes that furisode nakago do not make sense practically, as tanto were worn with the cutting edge uppermost, therefore furisode nakago make them difficult to draw.

[paulb]

Thanks Jean,

I feel a bit like a panel game "here is the answer try and guess the question" However reading the responses and subjects covered I think your questions are pretty much the same as my initial concerns. I think the key here is one of balance. As Paul said if it makes us look a little more critically then it will be a good result

Regards

Paul

[Jean]

Hi Paul,

 

I just realized I forgot to complete your quote about the Yumoto book. My feeling was the same when I bought it forty years ago.

 

What I like in the Pauls (yourself and Martin) is that you are kind of thorough guys when studying a matter.

 

Paul M. has discussed with a lot of polishers and smiths while translating this book, in order to have an opinion or balanced the opinions he translated.

 

What I like in this book is at the end of each chapter the Q&A sessions.

 

I don't think I would recommend this book straightforward to a beginner. He would not be able to grasp half the implications of what is stated.

 

The easiest one is the Yumoto, just to open the appetite, then Sato, then the Connoisseur's and once assimilated and after having seen some Nihontos this one .

 

Though sensible in what is expressed, I disagree totally on his opinion about O suriage blades.

 

Were I not, I should be compelled to resell all my juyos (kidding) and make seppuku with my Kanetomo tanto, this being my only "piece of steel" with a mei

[paulb]

I would be kneeling beside you. 75% of my swords including all that I regard as important ones are Mumei and suriage!

I agree with you regarding shortenned blades but also have concerns about some of the views about Utsuri. But at least they make you look again

[Ford Hallam]

Having finally received my copy today, co-incidentally while speaking with Paul M on Skype, I look forward to reading about all these controversial opinions...well....you know me

 

I think what this publication does show, and this is possibly something most non Japan residents would generally not be too aware of, is that the "official" theories on things as expressed by various authorities is only a partial view of the broader picture. Outside of Japan it is all too easy to get the impression that there is a consensus on most matters surrounding the sword but this has rarely been my impression. There's a saying that goes; "if everyone is saying the same thing only one person is doing the thinking"....there's a lot of thinking going on in Japanese sword circles....so you can be sure there are many conflicting theories about most things. It's almost like real life :D

 

Much of what was uncritically accepted in the past, merely because Sensei said so, is now being reappraised and found to be less than certain. In my view this is a healthy and encouraging development.

 

What I do like about this book, and I think this is exactly where it should be essential reading for everyone, advanced student and beginner alike (perhaps even more so for the beginner) is the emphasis on recognising what makes a particular sword a good one....personal preferences and taste aside. It's this recurrent theme that makes this book so valuable, I think.

 

regards,

 

ford

[Jean]

these controversial opinions

it should be essential reading for everyone...perhaps even more so for the beginner)

 

I love to be controversial too. Let's be controversial, Ford, if a beginner has not seen quite a few good swords how can he appreciate habuchi/nioi guchi, how can he know anything about different sori in the same blade, uchi sori, what is an utsuri, what is a tight hada .... Basis are necessary to appreciate this book.

[Ford Hallam]

Hi Jean,

 

naturally the student must make the effort to see swords in hand but there he's often at the mercy of another opinion that is not completely objective. Let's say that getting one's education from the people selling the stuff may present something of a clash of interests :? In any case, I'm not suggesting this book is a substitute for studying good swords in hand but that it is quite a useful resource in terms of helping the student better appreciate the various aspects that make any given sword a good blade.

 

By understanding, for example, that what constitutes a good hamon is not the total amount of hataraki or the flamboyance of the pattern but rather more fundamental aspects of the actual creation of the nioi guchi the novice may be less likely to over estimate superficially more "interesting" and obvious hamon.

 

In fact I think this book does go quite a way to provide good examples of the sorts of things you refer to. In this it provides a much needed reference from which the student can proceed and of course he must then attempt to apply this technical information to his assessment of real blades. To be honest I don't know what other book in English provides the novice with any really practical material with which to begin his exploration of the subject.

 

Certainly some basis is necessary to fully appreciate this book but where else would you suggest one start in terms of books after Yumoto's handbook....or Sato's book? and really, how practical are either of those books?

 

Anyway, I really don't know what you're trying to be controversial about ...you seem to have created an argument out of nothing.

 

Here's my opinion of the book;

What I do like about this book, and I think this is exactly where it should be essential reading for everyone, advanced student and beginner alike (perhaps even more so for the beginner) is the emphasis on recognising what makes a particular sword a good one....personal preferences and taste aside. It's this recurrent theme that makes this book so valuable, I think.

"

[Jean]

that it is quite a useful resource in terms of helping the student better appreciate the various aspects that make any given sword a good blade.

 

Fully agreed

[Jean]

how practical are either of those books?

 

As much as any mathematic books, not much. but if you don't have them you won't be able to solve an equation

 

By understanding, for example, that what constitutes a good hamon is not the total amount of hataraki or the flamboyance of the pattern but rather more fundamental aspects of the actual creation of the nioi guchi the novice may be less likely to over estimate superficially more "interesting" and obvious hamon.

 

In fact, all depends on what we call "a beginner", if nobody had shown me swords in hand what was an hataraki, I would have been unable to say what it was, same for nioi guchi and even less for Habuchi, in fact I had to discover them after years of interest in Nihonto.

 

Take a beginner (a true one) he will be unable to tell you if the nioi guchi is good or not or even distinguish the habuchi (and if it is an hadori polish...). How can you appreciate something without the base. I see the Tosogu section and the difficuly for people to distinguish a good from a medium/low quality tsuba. You need to have seen quite a few and have people explained you the details tsuba in hand to open your eyes to quality.

 

You must have been able to compare swords in hand to compare the nioi guchi and the habuchi and be explained why this one is good and not the other one.

 

I do agree on the hataraki being the tree which hides the forest

[Ford Hallam]

Having now read a bit more of the book I have to say I find Nakahara's theories regarding mumei o-suriage blades to be very convincing indeed. I saw this poster this morning too....and thought it was quite apropos :D

 

[paulb]

Hi Ford,

I read the same piece last night and thought the opposite. While I can accept the logic of what he is saying regarding the mechanics involved, it is the fact that he suggests or implies that his theories apply the vast majority or in some cases all swords.

Taking this point of view to a simplistic conclusion we can assume that

a) All Yamato blades that are unsigned and have Yakatsume boshi are fakes that have had their Kissaki reshaped.

b) The vast majority if not all of the O-suriage mumei National Treasure, Tokubetsu Juyo and Juyo pieces are also not what they claim to be.

 

Interestingly I have spent a lot of time looking at an O-suriage Kamakura blade which doesn't show tiredness (according to Nakahara-san all Koto blades are tired) Has jifu Utsuri, according to the book this isnt a feature of manufacture and kantei point for Aoe or Ko-Bizen it is a result of tiredness and polishing technique.

Incidently this blade has Juyo papers and more interestingly here a sayagaki from Hon'ami Kozon who this gentleman claims as his major influence. Hon'ami Kozon who not only agrees with the NBTHK attribution but goes further naming the smith.

 

As I said there are a number of interesting and very beleiveable points in this work and for them alone it is valuable. However to me it has the impression of the work of someone who enjoys being controversial (is that why it appeals Ford? ) or someone who has an axe to grind with the establishment, however you define that.

I repeat that my concern is that if people of little or no experience read this they can get a very confused or distorted view.

 

I am sure much of what he says has value, equally I am sure some of his more blanket theories don't. As with most things the reality probably lies between the numerous possibilities discussed. Unfortunately with regard to some of his more radical claims there is no way with current technology to prove or disprove what he is saying.

[nagamaki - Franco]

To be honest I don't know what other book in English provides the novice with any really practical material with which to begin his exploration of the subject.

 

I'm still eagerly awaiting for this new book to arrive, however, I'd still like to comment on Ford's post here.

 

I would suggest that the NTBHK JOURNALS (English), and Yamanaka Newsletters (revised) are two. But, in both examples, especially with Yamanaka's, even more so than with the Journals, it will be essential for well polished good swords to be available for study (form or join study groups). And, by good swords, that means close to textbook mainline school examples. So that when such and such is being described the student can look directly at an example with their own eyes. Even then it will take critical thinking, analysis, familiarization, sometimes experienced help, plus time, to figure out some of the meaning in language being used. For example, what does Yamanaka mean when he says something like, "the hamon will be executed in nie, but will be totally lacking nie". Once this sort of thing is understood, doors begin to open .........

[Ford Hallam]

Paul,

 

I don't know what Nakahara's motives may be, perhaps he is just a critical thinker, but never the less, as I said, I find his argument persuasive. I don't think, however, that his view needs to be regarded as being the final word at all. I merely feel he has presented a well reasoned opinion and one that I think ought to be taken seriously in coming to our own, individual, understanding of the subject.

 

His view regarding mumei O-suriage does stand at odds with conventional opinion but this in no way makes it less persuasive, especially when we consider the actual evidence for the accepted wisdom.

 

The appeal, for me, of such fresh ideas (call them controversial perhaps) is precisely because they force a more critical reassessment of what we have hitherto taken as fact.

 

Franco,

 

what does Yamanaka mean when he says something like, "the hamon will be executed in nie, but will be totally lacking nie". Once this sort of thing is understood, doors begin to open .........

 

He means it's magic...and can only be grasped by deep Zen meditation under freezing waterfalls he's being quintessentially inscrutable

 

...of course, it may just be a typo

[Jean]

The appeal, for me, of such fresh ideas (call them controversial perhaps) is precisely because they force a more critical reassessment of what we have hitherto taken as fact.

 

 

I agree 100% with this Ford, even if I disagree on some of his statements

[Clive Sinclaire]

Gentlemen

I am very surprised how this topic has developed since my little "book review" and I am a little concerned that the emphasis on looking at actual swords may have, in some minds, been largely ignored. Indeed, I think someone even said that all their info had come from the internet, which concerned me somewhat.

I guess I have been very lucky over the years in not only seeing, studying and handling good swords, including National Treasures, but have also been taught by those considered as experts in the subject. The reference books that I rely on most frequently, such as Fujishiro's Koto and Shinto Jiten (AFU Watson's translations) and the Koto, Shinto and Shinshinto Taikans seem not to have been mentioned so maybe I am doing it all wrong.

I think my point is that the ONLY way to gain any understanding of Japanese swords is to go to Japan and study GOOD swords rather than be diverted by Showa-to and the like, simply because they are affordable. Yes, it is difficult and expensive, but I am convinced it is the only way and this is the best advice to beginners. I do not totally subscribe to the "don't buy any swords just buy books" advice, to beginners, I would rather say "buy books and read them on the plane to Japan".

By the way, well done Ford with the tsuba in the NBSK book - it looks very good. It was also good to see Brian Tschernaga's habaki and David McDonald's tsukamaki - congrats to all three!

Clive Sinclaire

[Ford Hallam]

Thanks, Clive

 

will try and do better for next year

 

regards,

ford

[Kurogasa55]

Ordered it from Amazon.ca and told will not be available until September

 

I ordered the book about 3 days ago and it is already shipped and should be here tomorrow or so. A lot of other people told me that it is on back order now until at least september.

[jason_mazzy]

Paul any other place than amazon to get this? direct?

[David Flynn]

amazon is probably the cheapest. $26.37 us