four were under the direct patronage of the Shoguns and
sixteen under the Tokugawa government, were constituted on the plan of regular
feudal tenures. Each academy had its hereditary lord, who followed his
profession, and, whether or not he was an indifferent artist, had under him
students who flocked from various parts of the country, and who were, in their
turn, official painters to different daimyos in the provinces. After graduating
at Yedo (Tokyo), it was de rigueur for these students, returning to the
country, to conduct their work there on the methods and according to the models
given them during instruction. The students who were not vassals of daimyos
were, in a sense, hereditary fiefs of the Kano lords. Each had to pursue the
course of studies laid down by Tannyu and Tsunenobu, and each painted and drew
certain subjects in a certain manner. From this routine, departure meant
ostracism, which would
reduce the artist to the position of a common craftsman,
for he would not in that case be allowed to retain the distinction of wearing
two swords. Such a condition of things could not but be detrimental to
originality and excellence.
Besides the Kanos, the house of Tosa, with its younger
branch, Sumiyoshi, was re-established with hereditary honours at the beginning
of the Tokugawa rule, but the Tosa inspiration and tradition had been lost ever
since the days of Mitsunobu, who had clung heroically to his old school during
the Ashikaga period. In thus standing out against the national stream, he had
shown a weakness, it is true. Yet we must not forget that, when all other
artists were painting in ink, he had still maintained the glorious tradition of
colour. The new Tosa School, however, imitated only the mannerisms of their
ancestors, and any vitality which they threw into this was reflected from
in colour and drawing, lacks that ideality which is the
basis of Japanese art. Those charmingly coloured wood-cuts, full of vigour and
versatility, made by Outamaro, Shunman, Kionobu, Harunobu, Kionaga, Toyokuni,
and Hokusai, stand apart from the main line of development of Japanese art,
whose evolution has been continuous ever since the Nara period. The inros, the
netsukes, the sword-guards, and the delightful lacquer-work articles of the period,
were playthings, and as such no embodiment of national fervour, in which all
true art exists. Great art is that before which we long to die. But the art of
the late Tokugawa period only allowed a man to dwell in the delights of fancy.
It is because the prettiness of the works of this period first came to notice,
instead of the grandeur of the masterpieces hidden in the daimyos' collections
and the temple treasures, that Japanese art is not yet seriously considered in
the West.
revive Korin's style, and Shohaku, who, with Blake-like
instinct, revelled in wild imagery based on Jasoku of the Ashikaga period; and
here, finally, was Jakuchu, a fanatic, who loved to paint impossible birds.
Kyoto, however, had two real
influences. First was the introduction and revival of the later Ming
(1368-1662) and earlier Manchu-Shin style, which had been inaugurated in China by dilettantes and æsthetes, who considered a painting to he worthless when it came
from the hands of a professional, and prized the playful sketches of a great
scholar above the works of a master-artist. In its own way, even this must be
understood as a demonstration of the immense power of the Chinese mind in
breaking away from the formalism of the Gen academic style imposed during the
Mongol dynasty. Artists from Kyoto crowded to Nagasaki, the one port then open,
to study from Chinese traders this new style, already
hardened into mannerism before it reached Japan.
The second important effort of Kyoto was the study which it
initiated of European realistic art. Matteo-Ricci had been a Roman Catholic
missionary, who had entered China during the Ming dynasty, and given the
impulse which had now made the new school of Realism prominent in the cities at
the mouth of the Yang-tse. Chinnan-ping, a Chinese artist of this school who
was noted for his birds and flowers, resided in Nagasaki for three years, and
laid the foundation of the Natural School of Kyoto.
Dutch prints were eagerly sought and copied, and Maruyama
Okio, the founder of the Maruyama School, devoted himself in his youth to copying
them. It is pathetic to note that he copied the lines of the engravings with
his brush. It was due to this artist that the movement was brought to a focus,
for he, with an early Kano training, was able to combine the
new methods with a style of his own. He was an ardent
student of nature, serving her moods in all their detail, and his delicacy and
softness and exquisite gradation of effects on silk give him his right to be
called the representative artist of this period.
Goshun, his rival, the founder of the Shijo School, follows closely in his steps, though his Chinese mannerisms of later Ming differentiate
him.
Ganku, another realist, ancestor of the Kisshi School, differs from the first two by his closer similarity to Chinnan-ping.
These three streams of tendency together constitute the
modern Kyoto School of Realism. They sound a different note from the Kanos,
yet, with all their dexterity and skill, they also fail to catch the truly
national element in art, as their brethren in Yedo failed to do in the Popular School. Their works are delightful and full of grace, but never grasp the essential
character of the subject as