Carved lines in Japanese Traditional Prints - How
do they differ from the 'originals'? ... a discussion.
Editor's note: The comments you are about to
read have all been 'clipped' from a discussion on this topic that
took place on the Shogun Gallery 'Chats on Japanese Prints'
discussion forum in the autumn of 1998. They are reproduced here with
the permission of the contributors, and of Mr. Gary Gestson of the
Shogun Gallery.
The Shogun discussion board, which is highly
recommended to anyone with an interest in Japanese prints, is located
at:
http://www.shogungallery.com/wwwboard/wwwboard.html
(This discussion is actually the continuation of one that
started on a different topic -
the 'balance' between the designers and the craftsmen who made the
prints. We pick things up at the point where the topic 'morphed'.
John Fiorillo is responding to comments by
David Bull about the beauty of prints ...)
Posted by John Fiorillo on October 31, 1998
...
A few other thoughts:
(1) You say that print lovers admire the "clarity and definition
of the incised lines, and the beauty of the fluid 'brush' strokes -
the indescribable delicacy of the colours, and the way that two
colours side by side 'blend' with each other perfectly." You are
basically correct, of course. I think, for example, of late period
Osaka prints (after c.1855) where many of the compositions were
standard fare, but when they were issued in deluxe editions that
employed luxurious pigments (including metallics) and advanced
printing techniques (gradated shading, embossing, overlapping
colors), the art of the carver and printer raised those works of art
to higher levels in spite of the artists' merely conventional
designs.
(2) I would partly modify, however, your statement about the
'fluid' brush strokes you cite in woodblock prints. While it is true
that master carvers and printers could achieve amazing results in
translating the nature of the Japanese brushed line into woodblock
prints, the lines in block prints typically did not match the
fluidity of the brushed line and were in many, if not most, cases
rather rigid in comparison. In fact, I think you put you finger on it
when you also mentioned the 'clarity and definition of the incised
lines.' While the lines in block prints could be sweeping and
beautifully curved, block lines nevertheless tended to be sharply
defined because they are cut into wood.
Hokusai is a case in point. If you compare his drawings to the
final prints, you will see far greater energy and noticeably more
'calligraphic' qualities to his lines than those in the prints (this
is somewhat apparent in your website illustrations, though it's
harder to demonstrate this point using only digital scans). Another
example involves prints and drawings of the same designs by the Osaka
artist Hirosada, where it can be demonstrated that the lines in the
drawings possessed a calligraphic, slightly uneven, and more lively
quality than did the carved block lines, which were quite uniform and
had the appearance of 'banded wires' rather than brushed lines. This
is especially obvious when observing the lines of the drawings and
prints under slight magnification.
I would say that the nature of the woodblock medium requires that
the incised lines be clear and uniform rather than lively and
expressive because the engraver must carve his lines into a very hard
surface and cannot possibly achieve the freedom of the brush. Thus
what passes for fluidity in prints is different from the fluidity
created directly by the artist's brush.
Posted by an unidentified contributor on October 31, 1998
An amendment to John's second point: it certainly wasn't always
the case that the sweeping lines of the original brushstroke were
translated into uniform lines. Interestingly, that seemed to come
with the introduction of color printing, when the importance of line
took second place to color. The primitives often have expressive,
brushlike line quality, as do many works of book printing
(particularly outside of ukiyo-e). But there were exceptions to this
general translation of wavering brushstroke to uniform printed line
throughout the 19th century as well. One of my favorite prints from
my collection is an early (1814) Kunisada with wonderful
brushstroke-like qualities.
My hunch is that in commercial printing, particularly as demand
rose, it became easier to carve unwavering straight lines rather than
the thick and thin expressive style of a brush. Just look how stiff
and angular the later prints got.
I suppose Dave could give us some insight about this. How about
it?
Posted by John Fiorillo on November 1, 1998
Yes, I agree, there were exceptions to the rigid, precise lines
often found in woodblocks, and you offer a good point about the
effect of color printing on the styles of line carving. The so-called
nishiki-e (brocade prints) often required precise registration
of many color blocks, so the carvers could not be free or too
expressive with the contours of their lines. Generally the carvers
formed lines that were either quite uniform (as in middle and late
period Osaka printmaking) or varied only to a modest degree in
thickness or shape. When they wanted to imitate a brushed line, they
would typically eliminate the hard outline and print only the color
in a more dilute wash.
There are certainly many examples of 'painterly' effects in
woodblock printing - many privately issued surimono include marvelous
printing effects, as do many prints that employed landscapes or
backgrounds influenced by the Shijo or Kano schools of painting. Some
ukiyo-e prints were interesting hybrids of styles in which, for
example, the actors were portrayed in the precisely outlined, densely
colored ukiyo-e style while backgrounds were executed in washes of
color areas without any outlines at all. There are also examples of
very expressive block printing techniques well into the twentieth
century.
Still, my point was that what has been called (in James Michener's
fanciful phrase) the 'singing line' of woodblock prints typically had
its own qualities that differentiated it from lines put down by an
artist's brush. No matter how skilled the block carvers and printers
were, if you compare the same design done in both a block print and
in a painting or drawing, you would still see a difference in how the
pigment spreads across the paper, regardless on how effectively the
artisans imitated the effect of the brush. This would seem to me to
be the result of the essences of the two media: in brush painting the
pigment is placed on the sheet via bristles of varying stiffness or
flexibility, and by a hand that controls the loaded brush with
varying tension, which results in variable densities and coverage
throughout the stroke; in block printing, the paper is rubbed on the
wood surface after pigment is applied to the block. While it is true
that the printer can apply the pigment to the block differentially
(in gradated shading, for example), or rub with different degrees of
pressure, the act of pressing down the paper and then rubbing it from
the back necessarily results in an effect different from a line
brushed directly on the paper. In block printing there is still
greater uniformity in the application of pigments to the paper.
I, too, would be interested in David's comments on this
discussion.
Posted by Dave Bull on November 1, 1998
Hmmm... Again, I have perhaps an extreme view of this. I've spent
the past ten years carving some of the most fluid Japanese
calligraphy into hard cherrywood blocks. Maybe I've succeed, and
maybe I've failed, but I certainly hope that 'rigid' is not the term
that describes what I've been doing! And judging from the comments
that I receive from collectors of my prints, many of whom buy them
specifically because they love calligraphy, I'm perhaps not too far
off ... Here's an example. Rigid? Fluid?
But block lines too can be as uneven and lively as needed. This
next example is not from my own work, but from a Meiji-era print.
'translating the nature of the Japanese brushed line into woodblock
prints ...' Yes!
What we need is for someone to come along and write a
well-balanced book that delves deeply into this topic of the
collaborative process. I am far too much tilted to one side to be
that person. John, maybe you're the man to do this? Or are you
perhaps too much on the 'other' side? Boy I'd love to read it!
Posted by John Fiorillo on November 2, 1998
David, your examples are, of course, quite compelling. Your own
calligraphy carving is certainly not 'rigid' in the sense of it's
being 'without life' - rather, what I meant was that by carving the
line into a block there is a tendency for carvers to define precisely
the outline or edge of the line in a rather uniform manner. Still,
the Meiji example really does show what can be done when an expert
carver decides (or is directed) to imitate the brush, particularly a
brush loaded with drier pigment or less dilute pigments, which when
applied give a broken quality to the forms of the line.
I suppose I overstated the idea of 'rigidity' in block carving,
although I did use the term 'typically' and did not mean to say all
examples of block printing were 'rigid.' I was also thinking of the
standard repertoire of ukiyo-e carving in which the keyblock lines
were 'typically' done in a uniform manner and were meant to enclose
color areas. These lines were partly derived from conventions in
traditional yamato-e ('Japanese painting') used in handscrolls
of the Heian period (794-1185) where highly decorative effects were
achieved, characterized by areas of opaque colors set within strong
outlines. Its stylistic conventions included the
hiki-me-kagihana ('slit-eyes and hook-line nose') for the
drawing of the face, adapted by ukiyo-e artists five centuries later.
After the Heian period the yamato-e tradition of painting flourished
particularly in the Tosa school, and even the Kanô painters
(followers of Kanô Masanobu, 1434-1559), who worked primarily
with modulated brushwork in the Chinese manner, had by the sixteenth
century incorporated elements of yamato-e into their paintings.
Nevertheless, ukiyo-e artists and artisans frequently worked in
eclectic styles, both cursive and 'controlled,' and thus we can see
elements of both approaches in surviving woodblock prints.
I would still repeat my earlier follow-up statement (posted 11/2),
for I would wager that if you compared the details of the Meiji
hairdo done in blockprinting with the sketched original, you would
still see a difference in how the pigment spreads across the paper,
regardless on how effectively the artisans imitated the effect of the
brush. This is the result of the nature of the two media: in brush
painting the pigment is placed on the sheet via bristles of varying
stiffness or flexibility, which turn, flare out, separate, and fold
under each other as the brush travels across the sheet. This gives
the brushed line a different character, and the edges of the lines
are often quite different. The hand that controls the loaded brush
does so with varying tension, which results in variable densities and
coverage throughout the stroke, whereas in block printing the paper
is rubbed against the wood surface after the pigment is applied to
the block. The act of pressing down the paper and then rubbing it
from the back necessarily results in an effect different from a line
brushed directly on the paper. In block printing there is still
greater uniformity in the application of pigments to the paper,
despite even such wonderful examples as the Meiji coiffure in your
second picture.
Posted by Dave Bull on November 3, 1998
Yes of course the two things - a painting ... and a print - are
completely different animals, and I don't quite know how this
discussion got turned around so that I seem to be arguing the
opposite viewpoint! I love prints for what they are and not
for what they imitate.
I had a specific reason for choosing those two particular examples
of calligraphy. The first is from my current series of Katsukawa
Shunsho's Hyakunin Isshu prints. The second is a Meiji-era
kuchi-e that will be included in my new series that starts
next year. For ten years now I have had no choice but to follow the
same carving style and the same printing style as I
worked on the long series. There are actually dozens of different
ways to carve lines and calligraphy, and many more than dozens of
different ways to put the pigment on the paper. But I have been
unable to explore these techniques, due to the fact that I have had
to maintain consistency in the series. But starting next year I have
no such restriction.
Whether or not I will be able to successfully reproduce the
sabi-bori ('dry brush') effect in that Meiji print remains to
be seen. But I'm going to have a lot of fun trying!