DOI Heft:
No. 227 (February 1912)
DOI Artikel:Studio-talk
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.21156#0091
Studio-Talk
Japanese paintings in the form of kakemono, byobu
(folding screens) and gaku in frames, thirty-one oil
paintings and fourteen pieces of sculpture—proved
to be a revelation to a large number of people.
To be sure, surprisingly few of the visitors were
able to understand them, especially our paintings.
However, I was interested to hear from the lips of
many that they felt calm and restful when they
were among the Japanese pictures, though they
were unable to understand them. To them there
was something soothing, some quieting influence,
in our pictures. This, at least, was an attraction ;
and the striking peculiarity, the novelty of it all,
drew to the Japanese pavilion an unexpectedly large
proportion of those who visited the exhibition.
The Retrospective Section gave a comprehensive
survey of the changes and development of Japanese
painting from the time of Nobuzane (1177-1265)
down to Hashimoto Gaho, who died about
three years ago. There was, for instance, the
Kwannon, by Mokuan (1318-1372), with its ex-
quisitely graceful lines ; and the same subject by
Chodensu (1352-1431) and also by Takuma
Shokei; and Hotel, by Sanraku (1559-1635).
Then there were some works showing a remark-
able precision of touch and economy of stroke,
such as the Group of Horses, by Sesshiu (1420-
1506); Wild Geese, by Motonobu (1476-1559);
Tivo Horses under a Willoiv, byTsunenobu (1636-
1713); and Puppies, by Okyo (1733-1795); and
such wonderfully decorative paintings as Eagles,
by Chokuan; A Phoenix and An Eagle, by
Tannyu; A Catfish, by Kenzan (1663-1743); and
A Carp, by Jakuchu (1716-1800).
It was was with an extreme interest that I
awaited the decision of the committee of judges
composed of art critics of different nationalities,
and formed for the purpose of deciding upon a
certain number of modern pictures and sculptures
for which prizes were to be awarded. It gave me
an excellent opportunity of ascertaining the relative
value the Western critics place upon Japanese
painting, as compared with the works of their
own artists. There was no Japanese representa-
tive either among the judges themselves or other-
wise at hand to explain peculiarities, to expound
ideals, or to advocate the merits of our painting:
the European critics were left to themselves to
decide. Of course the adjudication was made solely
upon the works exhibited, and the judges knew
practically nothing about the life and other works
of the artists who produced them, some of whom
have won for themselves an unqualified recognition
in Japan, but were far from being worthily repre-
sented at the exhibition. Such being the case, I
for one had a fear that the decision of the judges
1
Ilf f m V
l . Jill
It s
-x. ,• iJm
FROM AN OIL PAINTING BY JAKUB OBROVSKY
71
“spring
(See Prague Studio-Talk, t. 68)
Japanese paintings in the form of kakemono, byobu
(folding screens) and gaku in frames, thirty-one oil
paintings and fourteen pieces of sculpture—proved
to be a revelation to a large number of people.
To be sure, surprisingly few of the visitors were
able to understand them, especially our paintings.
However, I was interested to hear from the lips of
many that they felt calm and restful when they
were among the Japanese pictures, though they
were unable to understand them. To them there
was something soothing, some quieting influence,
in our pictures. This, at least, was an attraction ;
and the striking peculiarity, the novelty of it all,
drew to the Japanese pavilion an unexpectedly large
proportion of those who visited the exhibition.
The Retrospective Section gave a comprehensive
survey of the changes and development of Japanese
painting from the time of Nobuzane (1177-1265)
down to Hashimoto Gaho, who died about
three years ago. There was, for instance, the
Kwannon, by Mokuan (1318-1372), with its ex-
quisitely graceful lines ; and the same subject by
Chodensu (1352-1431) and also by Takuma
Shokei; and Hotel, by Sanraku (1559-1635).
Then there were some works showing a remark-
able precision of touch and economy of stroke,
such as the Group of Horses, by Sesshiu (1420-
1506); Wild Geese, by Motonobu (1476-1559);
Tivo Horses under a Willoiv, byTsunenobu (1636-
1713); and Puppies, by Okyo (1733-1795); and
such wonderfully decorative paintings as Eagles,
by Chokuan; A Phoenix and An Eagle, by
Tannyu; A Catfish, by Kenzan (1663-1743); and
A Carp, by Jakuchu (1716-1800).
It was was with an extreme interest that I
awaited the decision of the committee of judges
composed of art critics of different nationalities,
and formed for the purpose of deciding upon a
certain number of modern pictures and sculptures
for which prizes were to be awarded. It gave me
an excellent opportunity of ascertaining the relative
value the Western critics place upon Japanese
painting, as compared with the works of their
own artists. There was no Japanese representa-
tive either among the judges themselves or other-
wise at hand to explain peculiarities, to expound
ideals, or to advocate the merits of our painting:
the European critics were left to themselves to
decide. Of course the adjudication was made solely
upon the works exhibited, and the judges knew
practically nothing about the life and other works
of the artists who produced them, some of whom
have won for themselves an unqualified recognition
in Japan, but were far from being worthily repre-
sented at the exhibition. Such being the case, I
for one had a fear that the decision of the judges
1
Ilf f m V
l . Jill
It s
-x. ,• iJm
FROM AN OIL PAINTING BY JAKUB OBROVSKY
71
“spring
(See Prague Studio-Talk, t. 68)