Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ken-Hawaii

NKS Origami?

Recommended Posts

Sorry for slow reply.

Ken san,

I was trying to say that it is silly to ask the seller if he guarantee the blade pass Hozon shinsa. because, the paper and seller's description don't say the signature is genuine. The paper certificate the blade as "an art sword"....

It doesn't make sense for people who read Japanese.

 

I don't want to talk about the blade itself, because, it is on sale on line,

If you know the seller, you can always ask him his opinion,

All Japanese seller knows what they are selling.

 

Malcolm san,

The temple is not Zojoji, It is 宗福寺 (Sofuku ji) at Yotsuya near Shinjuku where Kiyomaro's grave located.

Kiyomaro used to live at Yotsuya as his well known nick name 四谷正宗 (Yotsuya Masamune).

 

Best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, maybe I’m getting a little paranoid with advanced age … :oops: … but yes, Brian „translated“ my post correctly. With “for a song” I didn’t mean $,$$$, even a Wakizashi with a couple of Hagire still sold for a stately sum some years ago if memory serves. And I have yet to see a “good” blade by him that went for less than $$$,$$$. Ginza Chōshūya published a list of average prices for top rated smiths 8 or so years ago, and Kiyomaro was rated well above Masamune. His swords usually don’t appear on the open market, and thinking of finding the real deal on eBay is simply absurd.

 

I’m sorry for the silly “most seen Kiyomaro” remark, but I have seen indeed at least 30 or 40 up close – most of them at the Sano Bijutsukan – and personally handled another 5 or 6. His best work is breathtaking, like the Nie consists of tiny flash lights. If I could own only one sword, it would be a Kiyomaro, and I would be happy with it forever. Alas, it’s just a dream, I never could afford one.

 

There are a couple of theories why some of his swords are sub-standard, e.g. that he signed swords by his students when he was too drunk to forge them himself. I’m afraid I have to disagree with Fujimoto-san that even his “drunk Mei” is on otherwise great swords. I clearly remember at least one that only got Hozon although the owner applied for Hozon and Tokubetsu Hozon at the same time (and it was Ubu). I’ve been offered two to buy while living in Japan, and I’m pretty sure the dealer(s) had no illusion about my financial status. That alone should be proof that there are swords carrying his Mei that are not worth collecting. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So what you're saying Chris & Kunitaro, is that NKS papers are essentially worthless, right? That's really what I was interested in knowing.

 

Ken

 

As far as validating the mei, I would think so. As for vouching for what Kunitaro san has mentioned, no.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello:

With reference to the Kiyomaro and paper in question, Kunitaro says: "The paper ... doesn't say that the signature is genuine." That omission, there and elsewhere, is a more important qualification on most papers we see than it is given credit for in my opinion. While I cannot claim to read Japanese in any real way, I do believe that only the papers of the NTHK, in both its representations, specifically boldly writes "Shoshin" (genuine), on the origami. Most other papers, including those of the NBTHK, do not say that, or any reasonable synonym, in so many words. I have seen explanations of NBTHK paper meaning, wherein genuine is referred to as an operational decision criteria, but it is not on the papers as far as I can tell. To me that omission has always opened the door to speculation, and one wonders if an outstanding blade in all ways except for a bad or uncertain mei, might be rationalized as worthy of a paper. One could even make an argument as to why that should be done, and the absence of "Shoshin" would make it easier. It is for that reason that the papers of the NTHK carry more weight than might be thought in the eyes of some collectors.

Arnold F.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arnord san,

Sorry, i didn't explain enough...

 

NBTHK (Tokubetsu) Hozon paper says

 

右は当協会の審査の結果(特別)保存刀剣と鑑定しこれを証する

 

This(right) is prove of Kantei as (Tokuebetsu) Hozon token after result of Shinsa by our organization.

 

and you can find at NBTHK home page.

審査規程 Examination regulation

and

審査員規程 Exterminator regulation

http://www.touken.or.jp/pdf/touken_shin ... -07-03.pdf

 

保存刀剣 Hozon Token

1江戸時代を下らない格時代、格流派の作で銘の正しいもの、若しくは無名であっても年代、国、系統を指摘し得るもの。

1 Genuine Signature of each period, each school earlier than Edo period.....

 

(maybe full translation of the regulation is somewhere in NBTHK US and Euro branch ??)

 

The signature must be genuine to pass Hozon shinsa.

 

and I have never heard NKS and if you google 日本刀鑑定審査会, Nothing comes out, can not find them, no address no phone number,,, can not locate responsibility.

plus, the sentence of "右、美術刀剣と鑑する" is mean nothing., it is same as Torokusho.

Furthermore, the handwriting of that paper is infantile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aha! Finally! That's exactly what I wanted to know, Kunitaro-san - it just took awhile to get the answer framed so I could understand it! Arigatou gozaimasu!

 

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello:

Thank you Kunitaro san for the post about the NBTHK papers and their meaning with respect to signed swords. If you will recheck my post you will see that I had said there that the operational documents that establish the criteria of genuineness, quality, etc., of NBTHK papers, is public as does not allow for the certification of a false mei, however the point I tried to make was that the papers do not say, as do those of the NTHK, in both is versions, that the paper declares "Shoshin", which I take to say, literally, "genuine". I do not mean to say that the NBTHK awards papers to blades they believe carry false mei, just that the paper itself fails to specifically state that. To say that a blade is a "precious object" or "especially precious", etc., is not the same thing.

The paper, the origami, will tend to stay with the sword, however the supplementary document spelling out the meaning of NBTHK papers is not distributed with the papers. Most of us respect the NBTHK very highly; I just wish they would close the window of ambiguity. I have been told that the NTHK in years past would testify in a legal setting to the validity of their issued papers. I don't know if that is so, but if it is so I wonder if any other authority has or would do the same?

Arnold F.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...