1700-1850 A.D.
THE Tokugawas, in their eagerness for consolidation and
discipline, crushed out the vital spark from art and life. It was only their
educational institutions which in later days reached the lower classes, and to
some slight extent redeemed these defects.
In their prime of power, the whole of society - and art was
not exempt - was cast in a single mould. The spirit which secluded Japan from all foreign intercourse, and regulated every daily routine, from that of the
daimyo to that of the lowest peasant, narrowed and cramped artistic
creativeness also.
The Kano academies - filled with the disciplinary instincts
of Iyeyasu - of which
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
the work of the Kanos, as the pictures of Mitsuoki and
Gukei show.
The sordid aristocracy of the day looked upon all this as
natural, for their own lives were regulated on the same basis. The son would
order a picture from a contemporary Kano or Tosa as his father had done from
the preceding academician. Meanwhile, the life of the people was entirely apart.
Their loves and aspirations were utterly different, though their round of
existence was equally stereotyped. Forbidden the high honours of the court and
intercourse with aristocratic society, they sought their freedom in mundane
pleasures, in the theatre, or in the gay life of Yoshiwara. And as their
literature forms another world from that of the writings of the Samurai, so
their art expresses itself in the delineation of gay life and in the
illustration of theatrical celebrities.
The Popular School, which was their only expression, though
it attained skill
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.
The bourgeois art of Yedo (Tokyo), under the dread shadow
of the Shoguns, was limited thus to a narrow round of expression. It was due to
the freer atmosphere of Kyoto that another and higher form of democratic art
was evolved. Kyoto, where the imperial seat remained, was on that account
comparatively free from the Tokugawa discipline, for the Shoguns dared not
assert themselves here as openly as in Yedo and in other parts of the country.
Here it was, therefore, that scholars and free-thinkers flocked to take refuge,
so making it, a century and a half later, the fulcrum on which would turn the
lever of the Meiji restoration. It was here that artists who disdained the Kano yoke could venture to indulge in wilful deviations from tradition, here that the rich
middle classes could permit themselves to admire their originality. Here was
Busson trying to formulate a new style by illustrating the popular poetry; here
was Watanabe-Shiko, who tried to
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
[paragraph continues] Sesshu and other artists used to do. The occasions when Okio rises
to great heights are when he reverts unconsciously to those methods which
governed the old masters.
Kyoto art, since the death of these
three great workers, consists only of attempts by their followers to combine in
different proportions the individual excellence of their respective styles.
Yet, up to the rise of contemporary Japanese art, in the second decade of the
Meiji restoration in 1881, the Kyoto artists were the leading creative spirits
in pictorial art.
NOTES
Kano Academies. - These owe their name to a family of artists who
were appointed painters-in-ordinary to the Tokugawas.
Inros. - Small lacquer medicine-cases, to be
hung on the obi or girdle.
Netsukis. - Ornamental buttons by which the inro or
the tobacco-pouch was hung.