Token of Gb second virtual meeting

[paulb]

Dear All

I just wanted to share with those here from other societies that like us have been unable to meet as normal our experience using Zoom

We held our second meeting yesterday which was joined by 38 members predominantly from the UK but also from other parts of Europe and Japan (sorry for the late night again!!). Overall I think the meeting went well and certainly people seemed more confident with the technology. A couple of rules and things we did

1. All attendees were muted while the presentation was on and asked questions at the end when we had an open discussion.

2. We recorded the presentation only. This ensured attendees privacy and meant we did not have to seek individuals permission to release the recording.

3. The link to the recording was made available to members on request and held on Zoom for 30 days.

 

I think this technology has great potential for our different societies not only during the current problems but later when we return to normal. They should not be seen as a replacement for face to face meeting but certainly are a very useful additional tool to help us learn together.. 

 

[raaay]

Paul 

 

it was a very interesting topic ,on shape , and again many thanks to the Token Society for hosting the event.

 

A question i should have asked yesterday , you said a sword with good shape potential means it could be  a good sword !  but we never asked what is  a good shape or defined it ? 

 

 i know it must be difficult  to recognize for most collectors classic or good shape or to know what even to look for ,   and also what to look for  throughout the different schools and  time periods .

 

probably opened a can of worms 

 

sorry , just my late thoughts on yesterdays zoom meeting 

[Babu]

To add to the above good shape may be compromised by suriage or osuriage certainly as we have to guess how much blade may have been lost. So a tachi with a wonderful sugata that was greatly shortened may have become almost straight.

So does this then suggest that only ubu or slightly suriage blades could be recognised as quality?

Regards Adam

[paulb]

Unfortunately I don't think there is a direct or single answer to either of the points raised gentlemen.

From a purely personal perspective let me answer what I think is the easiest one first.

No quality and good are not limited to ubu or slightly suriage blades. I have seen numerous O-suriage blades that have been shortened in such a way as to maintain or create an excellent sugata.  

As said in the meeting there are two areas I would consider regarding defining a good shape:

1. First and foremost is functionality. Regardless of what else we value in a sword it's primary function is to cut. And the various shapes developed over the last 1000 years are all aimed at improving cutting efficiency in specific ways. If the shape of the blade inhibits this function, or makes it less efficient it is not a good sword. (as said before personal opinion)

2. From an aesthetic point of view the shape should enhance and harmonise with all other aspects of the it jars the senses. The shape is effectively the frame for everything else and should work in unison to present an attractive whole.

So I think I am saying two things. If it doesn't perform its function it isn't good. Regardless of what the shape and form is it should compliment the other features and enhance the whole.

If it fails in these aspects then I don't think it is a good sword.

[raaay]

Paul 

 

 i suspected that would  be pretty much the answer .  

[Bugyotsuji]

Thank you Paul and Ian for organizing this, which I found very useful.

 

(You reminded me in your talk of how my sword-appreciation sensei repeatedly tells us to imagine the original whole sugata, with full nakago, before suriage surgery was ever performed.)

[Ken-Hawaii]

I agree that's the most-difficult part of kantei, Piers.