|
context: painting > printsTechnicalI'm afraid I repeat the usual habits of people writing about Japanese prints, of writing as if they are the product of one person, termed 'the artist'. This is less true in this area than perhaps anywhere else in the world history of fine art. The difficulty is that none of the books I've read name anyone else* (bar the odd major publisher), which makes it very hard to make any attempt to assess the contribution of the other people involved in the production of the finished work - impressions of any print varied, but whether that was due to different printers I have no way of knowing. So we are left with an auteur approach, for better or worse. *Okay, I've found one mention - follow the Cutter link below. Anyway, besides the artist, we shouldn't forget: The calligrapher: sometimes when there was any amount of text, a separate calligrapher might have been involved in the initial B&W image. It's a secondary role in the prints we're discussing (there were purely calligraphic prints made too), but I'll say now what I'll say on this site a lot: calligraphy was maybe the one art that had higher status than painting in Japan, so it was very much noticed. The publisher: there are two levels of credit here. Firstly, sometimes the publisher commissioned work, so they had an influence on subjects and intentions. Secondly, on a business level they made it possible for the prints to exist and reach an audience, and therefore make money for the artists. Business skills shouldn't be neglected or undervalued here. The paper-maker: this has been a respected skill in Japan for a very long time, and the quality of paper was very important to the history of Japanese art. It was hand-made from a type of mulberry. Paper for prints was soft and absorbent. And some matters need their own page... The CutterThe PrinterFadingbackwards: Originsforwards: Subjects |