fritaly Posted April 11, 2011 Report Posted April 11, 2011 Hello, Please find below some pics from 2 kozukas I bought several months ago. I'd like to share them with you. First kozuka: Two horses on a nanakoji with gilted back. I don't know the metal the horses are made of (I suppose it's gold but I could be wrong) Second kozuka: A traveller writing with a paint brush on a column. The written kanjis are the artist's name (I guess since I didn't translate it). Any comments appreciated.
ububob Posted April 11, 2011 Report Posted April 11, 2011 You're new to the forum so take time to read the rules and sign all your posts.
fritaly Posted April 12, 2011 Author Report Posted April 12, 2011 Signature updated. Sorry and thanks for the reminder
John A Stuart Posted April 12, 2011 Report Posted April 12, 2011 I wonder if this is 車両 or something to do with rain 雨? John
fritaly Posted April 12, 2011 Author Report Posted April 12, 2011 Here is a closer shot Does it mean that these kanjis are not the maker's name ?
reinhard Posted April 12, 2011 Report Posted April 12, 2011 Kanji read: TOU This is the alternate artist name of Tsuchiya YASUCHIKA. He is probably not the maker of this kozuka. I like the sense of humour though. reinhard
John A Stuart Posted April 13, 2011 Report Posted April 13, 2011 I didn't know he signed Touu, Reinhard. 東雨 Touu, eastern rain. John
Lorenzo Posted April 13, 2011 Report Posted April 13, 2011 That is the latter (monk) name of Yasuchika, Reinhard is spot on. There are few tsuba signed like that, one of the most famous being this one: I don't think the kozuka is made by Tsuchiya Yasuchika though. The kanji could be a tribute by a latter artist.
fritaly Posted April 13, 2011 Author Report Posted April 13, 2011 Thanks for your informative comments. I doubt the second kozuka is from this known artist simply because it was a bargain on ebay and I can't imagine being so lucky
Lorenzo Posted April 13, 2011 Report Posted April 13, 2011 You are welcome. While we are on this topic just another thing you can see on the tsuba about his name; while the mei Yasuchika was signed using Kaisho 楷書, the regular script calligraphy, Touu 東雨 is often (always?) written in Tensho 篆書. Tensho is the seal script calligraphic style.
Brian Posted April 13, 2011 Report Posted April 13, 2011 I don't think the kozuka is made by Tsuchiya Yasuchika though... Let's not be so diplomatic in the name of education. The kozuka isn't made by Yasuchika. No chance at all I'm afraid. But then I suspect that the OP knows this and won't be crushed. It is average work, nice enough but late Edo probably. I think it is better than the 1st one which looks more touristy. Good examples of useable kozuka of the type that were commonly used. Brian
Lorenzo Posted April 13, 2011 Report Posted April 13, 2011 Brian, you got me At least this kozuka gave us an opportunity to discuss about the alternative yasuchika name.
fritaly Posted April 13, 2011 Author Report Posted April 13, 2011 Let's not be so diplomatic in the name of education. The kozuka isn't made by Yasuchika. No chance at all I'm afraid. But then I suspect that the OP knows this and won't be crushed. It is average work, nice enough but late Edo probably. I think it is better than the 1st one which looks more touristy. Good examples of useable kozuka of the type that were commonly used. Brian Regarding the first kozuka: I got to show it once to a person who sells Japanese antiques here in France and noticed his face when I handed out to him but (unfortunately for me) he didn't comment on it. So thanks for your comment, at least I have an idea of what's it's worth.
Brian Posted April 13, 2011 Report Posted April 13, 2011 Francois, I think the key is in the nanako. To the untrained eye, most nanako looks good. But when you study it close up, you can start to get an idea of what very good work looks like. An example of poor to mediocre nanako: Then you have pretty good nanako And finally...what to look for in great nanako: All the dots should line up, and be almost perfect. You will know it when you see it. Brian
reinhard Posted April 14, 2011 Report Posted April 14, 2011 Touu 東雨 is often (always?) written in Tensho 篆書. Tensho is the seal script calligraphic style. Lorenzo, the TOU mei is found in both writing styles. Tensho style is most commonly found on his tsuba, whereas the "regular" style is often found on the backside of kozuka (see attachment). Francois, although this is probably not the work of great YASUCHIKA/TOU, it is a nicely crafted piece of work with a good sense of humour. It is much better and far more interesting in many respects than the poor horse-theme kozuka. I would love to see a sharp image without reflections, if you please. reinhard
estcrh Posted April 14, 2011 Report Posted April 14, 2011 Francois,I think the key is in the nanako. To the untrained eye, most nanako looks good. But when you study it close up, you can start to get an idea of what very good work looks like. An example of poor to mediocre nanako: Then you have pretty good nanako And finally...what to look for in great nanako: All the dots should line up, and be almost perfect. You will know it when you see it. Brian Brian, This is a great way to get the idea across, by not only explaining the difference but by also posting images of each type at the same time. Anyone seeing this will have no doubt if they are looking at poor, medium or excellent nanako in the future.
Lorenzo Posted April 14, 2011 Report Posted April 14, 2011 Thank you Reinhard For my education, can you please tell me if I am seeing correctly your image? Are the two traits I marked in red not written or very short? (could be a kantei point) and is the blue trait done as I marked? Thank you in advance Lorenzo
fritaly Posted April 14, 2011 Author Report Posted April 14, 2011 Francois, although this is probably not the work of great YASUCHIKA/TOU, it is a nicely crafted piece of work with a good sense of humour. It is much better and far more interesting in many respects than the poor horse-theme kozuka. I would love to see a sharp image without reflections, if you please. reinhard Reinhard, thanks for your feedback. Here are the shots. I hope they'll be sharp enough this time.
george trotter Posted April 15, 2011 Report Posted April 15, 2011 Although you have been advised that this TOU kodzuka is probably not/isn't the work of the great Yasuchika/Tou, please be aware (perhaps you are already?), that more than one artist used "Tou". See page 504 of Wakayama "Toso Kinko Jiten" 1984. Regards, George.
fritaly Posted April 15, 2011 Author Report Posted April 15, 2011 No I didn't know that but I saw your thread So it's Gimei? What do we do with it? and understood that you had your own opinion about the author of this kozuka. As I don't have the aforementioned book, may I ask you to tell me (in substance) what the "Toso Kinko Jiten" says about artists signing TOU ? Many thanks for your knowledgeable answer.
Lorenzo Posted April 15, 2011 Report Posted April 15, 2011 François, I would forget that Tou to be the signature. Believe me, it's not. Do not concentrate on it; you have an average Edo Jidai Kozuka, which exhibit a nice humor and a clear "kesho" copper grain. Be happy with it but don't fool yourself in trying to establish any link with any great artist of Japanese history. That Tou isn't the signature of the piece, it is a decoration Regards, L
Muki Posted April 15, 2011 Report Posted April 15, 2011 Will someone elaborate more on other one as well? What is the metal it is made from and what makes this a "tourist" creation? jim
Lorenzo Posted April 15, 2011 Report Posted April 15, 2011 In my personal opinion, I don't think it is a tourist item. It is a simple kozuka, but genuine of the period. The material may be gold gilded shakudo, and the horses probably gilded copper or silver (can't figure out by that picture alone)
george trotter Posted April 15, 2011 Report Posted April 15, 2011 No I didn't know that but I saw your thread So it's Gimei? What do we do with it? and understood that you had your own opinion about the author of this kozuka. As I don't have the aforementioned book, may I ask you to tell me (in substance) what the "Toso Kinko Jiten" says about artists signing TOU ? Many thanks for your knowledgeable answer. Actually no, Francois...I don't have an opinion on the author of this kodzuka. I just have an opinion on the focus of the advice you are receiving. All I said on the other thread was that Wakayama listed two other artists who used TOU. If, as has been said, this TOU has nothing to do with the great YASUCHIKA/TOU...then what about the other TOUs? The existence of other possibilities should have been mentioned IMHO. As for the details of the other TOUs you reqested, the information on one from Haynes has already been posted on the other thread and as members here have been advising you on this kodzuka, I think it would be impolite of me to intrude at this late stage. They should be the ones you ask to give you the information on the TOUs from Wakayama or any other sources they have. Regards, George.
reinhard Posted April 16, 2011 Report Posted April 16, 2011 I don't have an opinion on the author of this kodzuka. Francois, that's about all you have to know from this particular corner. In short: There was a great and very famous artist named Tsuchiya YASUCHIKA. Later in life he turned his artist name into TOU. Seeing his work in hand make his outstanding skills visible immediately. Since this man's skills were recognized instantly, creating a thundering echo throughout Japan for generations, many "followers" and fakers tried to take advantage of this brand. No matter what older sources say: There was only one TOU. Kinko Meikan, a nice Japanese book with authoritative title and golden Kanji imprinted on its back, is mentioning a second and a fifth generation YASUCHIKA using TOU mei. - It's all nonsense; not to speak of Wakayama. (Ab-)using famous names was common. Remember all the "SA" and "KAENUJI"-signed blades made during Muromachi-period. They are not worth discussing. reinhard
george trotter Posted April 16, 2011 Report Posted April 16, 2011 Hi Reinhard, Can you tell us the name of the source you have which says there is only one TOU, that all other sources are nonsense? Geo.
nagamaki - Franco Posted April 16, 2011 Report Posted April 16, 2011 When it becomes recognized that a 'big name' may be involved with nihonto pieces, one of the first questions should be whether the piece is attempting to emulate the workmanship/mei of the master artist. Most of the time this fact becomes readily apparent with a little research, even when the artist's work and mei are unfamiliar. This approach can go a long way towards not having to chase your own tail around looking for answers.
reinhard Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 Hi Reinhard,Can you tell us the name of the source you have which says there is only one TOU, that all other sources are nonsense? This is getting somewhat off topic, but I'll try to explain my point of view. First of all we must distinguish between mei and real person/artist. There were six generations of Kinko from the Tsuchiya family between Genroku and Kaei era. Each one of them is substantially documented as as real person. Their mei however are not. There are old records telling of mei and their features, but as we know by now, these old records need to be questioned. In the case of shodai YASUCHIKA the situation presents as follows: He was a more than outstanding artist and a genius, taking the name TOU when second generation YASUCHIKA officially took over family-business. Like so many families starting on a fortune built on talent and ingenuity, the Tsuchiya Kinko couldn't keep up with expectations. Lacking talent and ingenuity of the founder, they administered the name YASUCHIKA as best as they could. TOU, the very unique trademark of the shodai, appeared again later. Wether it was the godai (fifth generation) YASUCHIKA initiating this or just a no-name Kinko doesn't really matter. There wasn't another real and identifiable artist signing TOU entering the scene. It was probably just a way to make money out of legendary name. It was done by a otherwise mediocre and unidentifiable artist. He may have been a member of the Tsuchiya-family or not. It doesn't really matter. I'm aware of the fact that there are old records and books attributing later mei of TOU to the godai (fifth generation) YASUCHIKA like Kinko Meikan or Kanzan Token Koza (vol.5). However there are good reasons to doubt this theory. One more thing. Just because some text was printed at some time, it is not necessarily true. Not even when it comes in hard-cover, is full of kanji and looks good on a book-rack with golden letters on its back. reinhard
george trotter Posted April 18, 2011 Report Posted April 18, 2011 Reinhard, as you quoted me in your post, I am assuming your response is directed to me. My original comment was simply to advise the poster that Japanese sources note more than one artist named Tou. You contradicted this quite strongly, saying the sources were nonsense, Bearing this in mind, here is what I think you are now saying: (1.) your position is now a "point of view" (opinion?). It is not the previous statement of fact "there is only one TOU". (2.) you are acknowledging that there were others who used the mei TOU "done by a otherwise mediocre and unidentifable artist" or artists. (3.) you acknowledge that although "later mei of Tou" are recorded, scholars still differ on their opinions/knowledge of who these other TOU were? (4.) your position is still that the sources I/we gave to support my comment that there were more than one Tou recorded are just pretty books of no consequence. (5.) you're saying that "there are good reasons to doubt" the above sources, but you will not name your source/s for your comment. If I am incorrect please clarify. In view of the books we use being nonsense, may I then ask this necessary question...Which books are really just nonsense? (just Wakayama and Haynes?). Is there any point in continuing to give advice when that the advice is often referred from these books? Which sources should we use? Hope this can be answered... George.
reinhard Posted April 19, 2011 Report Posted April 19, 2011 In view of the books we use being nonsense, may I then ask ..Which books are really just nonsense? This would be an interesting new topic which is overdue. It should not be "either...or"-polemics though, but more of a differentiated analysis. Which sources should we use? All of them, if you know HOW to use them. reinhard
Recommended Posts