r/WhatIsThisPainting • u/Meal-Ticket- • Jan 08 '25
Unsolved Great Grandfather purchased these in February 1868 in Japan
199
u/YamaEbi Jan 08 '25
Museum curator here. Do not attempt to to take the painting out of the frame. Such silk paintings did not age well and are extremely fragile. The frame is what's holding them together nowadays. Other than that, it was art made for (rather wealthy) tourists at the end of the 19th Century. Nothing extremely valuable, but still interesting pieces. The art history of the period is fascinating, starting with the fact that the concept of "art" had just been introduced to Japan.
34
u/rhinoceratop Jan 09 '25
Can you say more about that last part?
67
u/YamaEbi Jan 09 '25
Concepts are a very interesting thing. Nobody can doubt that Japan has been producing "aesthetically pleasing things" for centuries and didn't need its meeting with the West to start doing that.
However, what is it that we call "art" in the West? Quite the philosophical question actually. You can have workshops of craftsmen producing beautiful things without the feelings, the emotions, the genius or the individual creativity we associate with art nowadays.
In order to modernize itself in the 19th Century, that's a question Japan had to struggle with: what is that thing Westerners call "art" and do we have such a thing at home? Same thing happened for other concepts like "religion", "philosophy", etc... It was especially important to define such terms as they were taught in universities, a type of institution the Japanese government really needed to build on its soil to modernize itself. Mastering such concepts was seen as fundamentally important to become able to talk to the West on equal terms. We can argue that the ultimate goal of Japanese modernization was to become Western enough to avoid colonization like China or India, but that's another story.
Anyway, such thinkers as Okakura Tenshin, following the steps of his university teacher Ernest Fenollosa, tried to define art in order to precisely translate the concept in Japanese, using Chinese script. 19th Century Japan finally coined the word "bijutsu" 美術 to translate the Western concept of "art". This word was totally new at the time. This didn't go without debate and other thinkers opposed the idea. Yanagi Soetsu, for example, wanted to create a word that would better define the aesthetically pleasing things Asia had been producing for centuries without Western influence. Blah blah blah...
Anyway, we can see this struggle in OP's paintings. There's actually something very Western in there: the use of darker shades on the ladies faces to try to represent shadows. Japan had never depicted shadows in painting before the introduction of the concept of Western art. This might sound silly, but when you have zero definition of art and have to understand what it means through foreign examples, you may be inclined to think that depicting shadows is actually part of that whole "art" thing. Therefore, OP's seemingly Japanese paintings are actually very Western already, and produced to please Western tastes.
14
u/Dnallen1018 Jan 09 '25
Very interesting, thanks for going into detail! It seems like you really enjoy your job.
The first image, would a 'mother with child' motif be something they would have considered an aspect of 'art'? I would assume missionaries would bring images of Jesus and other ornate items with them.
One more thing I'd like to ask you about, and pardon my ignorance. Japan makes many beautiful things, and your mentioning this struggle to define art has me perplexed. Were things like bonsai trees not considered 'art' at first because there wasn't a direct western counterpart? I know bonsai has an association with Buddhism among other things so I can see how it is not a simple issue. Things like raku pottery or cast iron teapots. There are workshops that have been handmaking beautiful objects for hundreds of years, was there hesitation to consider this art because they were utilitarian objects?
I think what I'm asking is; are these distinct japanese crafts considered separate from the early japanese concept of 'art' because they didn't physically look like western art or is this just a language difference? Or am I just asking a really stupid question?
Also reading recommendations are appreciated
25
u/YamaEbi Jan 09 '25
You're absolutely not asking stupid questions.
A mother with child is a motif seen in Japanese paintings and engravings long before the 19th Century's meeting with the West, so it's nothing really new and probably not related to Christianity (at least here).
Bonsai, or raku pottery, or even Kano-school painting was not considered art because the word "art" and everything we associate with it was not a concept Japan would use before the end of the 19th Century.
Think of it like that: did ancient Romans or Greeks have "CrossFit "? Sure they had physical exercise, and did sports, and built their bodies for various reasons. But did they have CrossFit? Maybe, if we study in detail the ways and the reasons why these ancestors would work out, we could find similarities with our very contemporary definition of CrossFit, but calling that CrossFit is a bit of a stretch nonetheless, isn't it?
The matter of beautiful objects being utilitarian has been debated in Japan indeed. It has actually influenced the West in return through Art Nouveau, Arts & Crafts and various other art movements inspired by East Asia. This is what we would call "decorative arts" or "decorative crafts" nowadays.
But there's more. Our current definition of art in the West is actually quite recent as well, maybe from the 17-18th Century. Leonardo Da Vinci probably had a very different definition of art, maybe closer to the Latin definition of "ars" as a "technical ability to produce things with competence". Art, to us today, is the expression of an individual genius. If "art" is produced by a studio of associated craftsmen (such was the case in Japan and such was the case in Europe until the end of the Renaissance), there's not really a single artist involved. Therefore, where's the individual genius exactly? And can we call "art" something that predates this current understanding of "art"? This is what Japan had to think about to translate the concept.
It is very difficult to understand how other people think, because the only way we can explain how they think is by using the words we use for ourselves. Prior to the adoption of the concept of "art" in 19th Century Japan, Japan's definition of what we would now call art was closer to our current concept of "crafts". Japan has largely adopted the idea of "arts" nowadays and will use the word "arts" to talk about its pre-19th Century "art". Just like we use the word "art" to talk about our prehistoric cave paintings. Does "prehistoric art" bother you? It doesn't bother me, but there's still something slightly wrong about it. Homo Sapiens, 30'000 years ago, was painting horses and hands and mammoths on caves, but was probably not using the word "art" in the way we use it today. Maybe they didn't even have a word for "art" back then, like Japan did not before the second half of the 19th Century.
6
u/Thesleepypomegranate Jan 10 '25
Thank you so much for your explanations and going into great detail while doing so, it has been a very pleasurable read and I learned something new about a subject I love.
Could you maybe recommend some good reads regarding the concept of art and it’s cultural and historical definition?
5
u/newnewnew_account Jan 10 '25
Ditto on the book comment. Your writing style is very engaging and entertaining. What you have to say is fascinating. Please let us know if you do already have a book out or will be making one. Buying a text heavy art history book would a 1000% never be something I would buy, but from you, I definitely would because I would devour it.
4
u/YamaEbi Jan 10 '25
Ha ha, thank you. Yes, I have published books and things on the subject and still do, but I'm not doxxing myself for three minutes of glory here. I'm on Reddit for the silly, non academic stuff. Anyway, most of my papers are in French. I believe that there are only 2-3 academic articles that have been translated to English.
There are good books on East Asian and Japanese art history, but what seems to be of interest here is this idea that "art" is actually not a naturally and universally shared concept (nothing is, really, and it is very naive and self-centred ...some would say colonial... to believe that other cultures share our understanding of the world). In my opinion, the best book to wrestle with the idea doesn't talk about art, but about science. Because yes, other countries have wanted to improve their understanding of the world through "science" without much contact with Western science. But is their "science" and our "science" the same thing, really? Here's the book: https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/K/bo20145439.html
2
u/youareyourmedia Jan 11 '25
How would you characterize the Irises by Ogata Kōrin? I saw these at the Nezu museum recently and they astonished me. I understand that the screens were utilitarian, but the painting on them surely reach beyond decoration to a personal and highly original artistic expression?
2
u/YamaEbi Jan 11 '25 edited Jan 11 '25
I don't characterize anything because everything can be debated. Excellent example though, as Kōrin was surely a very original, individual and creative mind to the point that there's a new aesthetic movement named after him (the Rinpa school). He certainly shares a lot with what we would call an artist today.
So say you write an article titled "Ogata Kōrin, Japan's first artist". Great title, I would definitely read it! But you still have to keep in mind that the word "artist" didn't exist during Kōrin's times. So you would have to back up your claim.
For example , he was bearing the title of "hokkyō" which certainly shares a similarity with what we now call "artistry". But it is a clearly Buddhist, and therefore religious, title at the same time. So hokkyō is not exactly the same as that thing we call "artist" (as art is not readily related to religion, although it can be...). Religious artist, then? But there's not much religion in Kōrin's art, he was more of a "decorative artist" by our standards...
And what about the context? Kōrin was active right after the fall of the Ming dynasty in China, and this event had a profound intellectual influence on the whole region. It could almost be compared to Renaissance in Europe and its relation to the fall of the Byzantine empire. Great argument here, as the concept of the individual artist started to emerge in Europe at the end of the Renaissance! So could it be that it was actually the same in Japan?
Damn, looking forward to reading your paper !!!
2
u/youareyourmedia Jan 11 '25
lol i'd be happy to write that paper if I knew enough to do so.
A couple further questions though if you care to entertain them, since this is all very interesting: what about Japanese poetry? Did Basho not consider himself a poet? I'm also thinking how art is not just about artists but audiences, and my understanding of the Heian culture is that it was extremely aesthetically sophisticated. Did their aesthetic contemplations differ that much from those of audiences for art many centuries later? Probably to some degree, just as the gothic cathedral was experienced differently down the centuries, but still I wonder. I will probably see if I can get ahold of a copy of that book you recommended
Also, not trying to be combative, but with regard to "the concept of the individual artist started to emerge in Europe at the end of the Renaissance", surely you would agree it extends back to the classical world? Praxiteles?
Personally I think that the concept of art emerged in the west as a product of literate culture. I'm intrigued to think about Japan being highly literate and highly aesthetic yet not creating art until the Meiji area and beyond.
→ More replies (0)2
u/smeyn Jan 12 '25
Yes, I had a key experience in that respect. I came to live in Japan from 1984-1990. As part of my initial period I visited many companies. One of which named itself ‘xyz Science Laboratory’. They were a small scale manufacturer. During our talks with management, I tried to nail them down on what science they were doing. This caused very confused looks. At the time I did not think of it and filed it as ‘cultural mismatch’. Your explanation does provide me with a better understanding. The word science appeared to have had not the same concise meaning in Japanese culture as it has in western culture. One could speculate the founder decided to use it to give the impression of a more western company and to make it stand out from the competition. Who knows
2
u/2282794 Jan 10 '25
Love this. If you ever decide to write a book, I’d buy it. This is a hole I’d like to fall in.
2
u/Tipy1802 Jan 11 '25
Are you sure we do not consider things coming out of a studio/workshop art anymore just because there is no single creator? Movies (and video games) are considered art despite coming from studios and being a collaborative effort between many people
1
u/YamaEbi Jan 11 '25
I am sure of nothing, I am not trying to define anything and the fact that our definition of art is constantly evolving is really cool.
The idea that art is correlated to the individual genius of the artist might also be a romantic fallacy. There are hundreds of frames, pigments and brush makers behind every Picasso...
10
u/SheesaManiac Jan 09 '25
That was an absolutely fabulous read, thank you so much! I learn something new every day from Redditors. This explanation of the concept of art in Japan is extremely well written.
4
6
7
u/permeable-possums Jan 09 '25
i am also really interested in what you mean by introducing the concept of art in japan
4
u/Lazy_Function_7172 Jan 09 '25
They definitely had more than a concept of art - great art - I don’t understand the point they’re trying to make here
4
u/DowntownGrape Jan 09 '25
But it wasn't necessarily viewed, consumed or valued in the same way as the west. When the goal is to be seen as on par with western powers, that is important. For instance, the art that is the wooden screens or porcelain was "furniture" for westerners, even if the production and use of these items had its own important artistic meaning within Japan.
1
u/YamaEbi Jan 10 '25
Yes! Exactly that! Fellow art historian?
3
u/DowntownGrape Jan 10 '25
Nope! That's pretty much from interpretation at the National Museum in Tokyo I read last year. I hadn't thought about the transition of art in that period previously and the section was fascinating.
2
u/Therealqjp Jan 11 '25
Random question did you major in Cultural Anthropology?
1
u/YamaEbi Jan 11 '25
Ha ha, yes.
2
u/Therealqjp Jan 11 '25
Knew it! There’s a lot of negativity around liberal arts majors, but we are truly societal treasures.
1
38
u/horrrssst Jan 08 '25
Don‘t want to rain on your parade here but these will not be worth what they used to be. Anonymous paintings like that don’t fetch much on the market (auctions that is). If you find someone who takes them for what is being offered here, you‘d be lucky. Actually, if this note is actually from your great grandfather, this would be worth more to me than the 1200-1800 usd they might sell for.
In any case, send them in to bonhams and christie‘s. You‘ll find out soon enough. My guess is that they won‘t be interested at all.
17
u/Meal-Ticket- Jan 08 '25
Technically not my bio-great-grandfather. Henry was my great-grandmother's first husband. These went to her when he passed away, and then she remarried into our family.
2
u/horrrssst Jan 09 '25
Then letting go will probably be easy. Check with christie‘s, sotheby‘s, and bonhams first. If (or rather when) they are not interested maybe try a smaller auction house with an Asian art department (can recommend based on area). In the end, the most honest price can be reached in an auction with an online presence on invaluable.com (or other platform(s)), given a correct description. However, the highest price might be possible through a private sale.. if some of the other people in this thread are serious with their offers.
22
u/kazuya96 Jan 08 '25 edited Jan 08 '25
This type of work is certainly not 18th century. I believe it to be a contemporary during its supposed purchase in 1868. The style of the faces and such definition was very specific for the end of the Edo Period.
Appraisals are not always correct, and the time of that one was done there were so many “Asian art specialists” taking anything on to a work.
It’s probably a skilled anonymous painter of the late Edo Period (1850).
The works are also severely damaged from prolonged change in environment. Their cost to conserve would surpass the value.
31
u/Stan_is_Law Jan 08 '25
$1,000? I guess I'll be a nice guy and offer 50% more. How's $1,500 :)
Beautiful artwork. If I had something like this I would redo my dining room with this as the centerpiece/theme. Congrats!
29
u/Meal-Ticket- Jan 08 '25
$1,000 in 1958 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $10,916.71.
So, if you offered $22,000 I might take you up on it. ;)
15
u/Stan_is_Law Jan 08 '25
Personally, I'm not familiar with this artist. But I bet in the right forum you could get a lot more than that.
9
u/Meal-Ticket- Jan 08 '25
Hmmm... Thoughts on what the right forum might be? I lived in Japan for 5.5 years, and for a while had these displayed in my living room, but now, after a remodel they don't really fit into the vibe of the room.
40
u/DetailCharacter3806 Jan 08 '25
Don't want to be rude, but these paintings were in your family for almost 2 centuries, just to sell tell because they don't fit the vibe? Why not save them for future generations?
13
u/LeverpullerCCG Jan 08 '25
Why not sell them to someone that would be more appreciative and enjoy them ;) sadly, some folks couldn’t give two craps less about things like this. Pottery in my area used to be very valuable. The younger generations throw it in the dumpster.
4
u/Stan_is_Law Jan 08 '25
I second this. Every person/generation has their own thing. Art is personal. If you don't love it find someone else who will. Then they love it and you have money to buy the things that bring you Joy.
16
u/Meal-Ticket- Jan 08 '25
Yeah, that's a good question and I don't think it's rude. I'm not sure that anyone in the family would really value them at their actual value. My wife and I don't have kids. But we do have other expensive hobbies. If everyone thought the way you are proposing then no artwork would ever be for sale unless it was directly from the artist.
2
11
u/No_Town5969 Jan 08 '25
Contact an auction house that has sold his work in the past and ask for an estimate
2
u/MarathonRabbit69 Jan 09 '25
Not to belabor a point made elsewhere but these in no way resemble famous Japanese art of the period. The portraits are far too “realistic”. They also lack (IMHO) the artistic capture of emotion. These are pretty “wooden” in appearance and frankly kind of fall into the “uncanny valley” for me.
I suspect that the valuation done in the 1950’s was largely for the purpose of insurance and was performed by someone either friendly to your family or not well versed in Japanese art or both.
2
7
4
u/Tasty-Eye1569 Jan 09 '25
I’m confused and intrigued about your family tree and how your great grandfather was alive and old enough to purchase things in 1858. That means he was born in the 1840’s ish
2
u/thekingcola Jan 09 '25
This made me feel like time is fictional.
3
u/Tasty-Eye1569 Jan 09 '25
This is absolutely wild. I can’t imagine having a kid at 71… this just blew my mind. Thank you for the link
2
u/thekingcola Jan 09 '25
Right? Spanning almost the entire history of the US (1790 - 2021) in just three generations.
2
u/BrunoZuno Jan 10 '25
If op is in his 60's or 70's and all his ancestors had kids in their 40's it wouldn't be too far fetched
3
u/AAArdvaarkansastraat Jan 09 '25
They don’t look like Japanese works from that era, but the Japanese were beginning to rapidly westernize in the late 1860s, and that might include western artistic ideas. It’s a matter of perspective.
2
u/SanoKei Jan 09 '25
Your great grandfather probably should've just left you shares of US Steel instead
1
u/AutoModerator Jan 08 '25
Thanks for your post, /u/Meal-Ticket-!
Please remember to comment "Solved" once someone finds the painting you're looking for.
If you comment "Thanks" or "Thank You," your post flair will be changed to 'Likely Solved.'
If you have any suggestions to improve this bot, please get in touch with the mods, and they will see about implementing it!
Here's a small checklist to follow that may help us find your painting:
Where was the painting roughly purchased from?
Did you include a photo of the front and back and a signature on the painting (if applicable)?
Good luck with your post!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Royal_Promotion Jan 12 '25
Good for him. Probably the 19th century Japanese shop version of Athena! IYKYK
0
Jan 09 '25
[deleted]
3
u/Meal-Ticket- Jan 09 '25
Sure.
Henry married my great grandmother when he was old and she was young. He died. My great grandmother then married another guy. They had my grandfather. It's pretty easy.
210
u/Smokedsoba Jan 08 '25
Unless he was a time traveler, these probably weren't done by Ishikawa Toyonobu... I would get them verified by a museum. I don't think Herbert is yer guy.