Why submit a tosogu to Hozon shinsa?

[Henry Wilson]

whatever judgment is rendered is only a starting point in ascertaining the actual origins/maker of the piece in question.

 

I find this comment very interesting and this is how I view papers for tosogu. With the Saotome tsuba in mind, I could be wrong but it seems that Steve was expecting a Yamakichibei call, but got something other than that so the conclusion of the kantei team has been dismissed.

 

Well, why not give them the benefit of your doubt, try to see if it is Saotome, meaning try to understand where they are coming from. If after trying your best to understand their rationale and the Saotome call still bugs you, why not resubmit to another shinsa team and see what conclusions they make? Imagine if they called Saotome as well...

 

This might have already been done, but my point is there seems to be a trend with some "advanced" members to dismiss information that does not fit their theories for no other reason than I can see than "Nah.... don't think so, coz I don't think so... " followed by an abrupt "end of story" if pushed on information that they have provided.

 

Going back to my remark about a gap in knowledge. My Nobuie tsuba that received papers last year, the lack of interest that the members who opposed the NTHK (NPO) conclusion showed to this composition, to me, says a lot:

 

For those who don't know, the oshigata on the right is of a Nobuie tsuba from the Ikeda book called "Nobuie Tusba". By publishing it in his book, as far as I can tell, this gentleman thinks that this tsuba and signature are genuine Nobuie. I think it is hard to deny that there are strong similarites between the two signatures which could in turn suggest a lot. This has not been discussed or considered by the NTHK (NPO) critics, and has been dismissed even thought it bears a striking resemblance to my Nobuie signature that has received hozon papers. This to me demonstrates a gap in knowledge, which is no crime because I believe we can't know everything about everything, but the hard part to take is the seeming reluctance to check this blip in people's theories out.

 

I have consulted Japanese collectors here in Tokyo about the tsuba and they agree with the hozon call. Not a very good quality Nobuie, but Nobuie none less. When I mentioned the conclusions made by members here to my Japanese associates, they said something to the effect of "what do they know..."

 

We are all entitled to our opinions, but it seems some are entitled slightly more than others, especially if you have read all the books, been to all the shows, know the collecting crowd and all the faces, seen all the bits of tosogu and so on. As a final thought, it might do some people some good to empty their cup once and a while.

 

Anyway, I don't mean to be annoying. I am just getting a few things that have been bothering me off my chest.

[cabowen]

It always strikes me as funny how people will pay money to submit an item to a shinsa team and then poo poo the shinsa if their call wasn't to their liking. If you can't trust the call when it isn't to your liking, how can you trust it when it is? You can't, so it is completely irrational to submit in the first place. These people aren't looking for the truth, they are looking for confirmation of their preconceptions.

 

Having been a part of many shinsa, I have on occasion had conversations with people who were certain they knew what they had and that the shinsa team was wrong. I usually ask why they submitted if they already knew what they had and had no faith in the team's judgment.

 

Remember: shinsa teams are only wrong when they tell you what you don't want to hear, and never wrong when they tell you what you want to hear...

[Steve Waszak]

Hi Henry,

 

A few things... First, the "Saotome" tsuba in question was/is not mine. It was presented for sale, with the paper attributing it to Saotome. Had it been my tsuba, I certainly would not have submitted it, as there would have been zero need to: it is 100% a Yamakichibei. Granted, the guard is in poor condition, and someone has messed with the hitsu-ana in a bad way, but it is Yamakichibei (not one of the two men that most scholars recognize as the only two working in the Momoyama Period, but one of the two others that these scholars refuse to recognize because it would upset the catechism). As I have mentioned, it is signed (the significantly abraded condition of the mei does make it hard to see, I realize...), so trying to "understand" a Saotome call for this piece would be futile (outside of something akin to morbid curiosity).

 

I also take some umbrage to your characterizing my resistance to accepting such papers as "Nah... don't think so, coz I don't think so." I have provided extremely specific, precise reasons why a call to Saotome makes no sense. It is ironic that you would characterize my response in this way, given that shinsa teams effectively expect us all to accept their conclusions for just those reasons: "We think so, coz we think so." How often do we see shinsa teams offer detailed, carefully delineated reasons for arriving at their conclusions for tosogu?

 

Further, I think it is inaccurate and rather curious, frankly, that you say (concerning your Nobuie guard) that "the lack of interest that the members who opposed the NTHK (NPO) conclusion showed to this composition, to me, says a lot..." Pete and I both spent no small amount of time considering your tsuba with care. I made the point, more than once, that to attempt to judge the authenticity of the work, especially the iron and the workmanship, from photos alone was fraught with difficulty, and so backed away from attempting to do so. On this score, it is a bit disingenuous of you to note that you have consulted with others in Japan about the tsuba: they have seen the guard in hand; this makes a huge difference. All that Pete and I could go on with some degree of confidence, therefore, was the mei. I spent considerable time detailing the reservations I had about the authenticity of the mei, essentially echoing Pete's observations. I stand by my reservations of the way the mei is done, for the reasons I detailed earlier. I said in response to this oshigata you've provided that there was not enough to go on from this reproduced oshigata to draw any firm conclusions. The initial two strokes of the "Nobu" ji are missing, so one cannot judge from this. Further, those missing horizontal strokes on the left side of the "ie" ji are very worrisome. They should not be absent. In any event, one of the comments I'd made to you, Henry, about your identifying this as a futoji-mei signature was that, if anything, it would certainly be a hanare-mei, were it genuine. It has virtually none of the identifying features that would produce a futoji-mei call for this signature. And as for its being a legit hanare-mei, well, as I stated in the earlier thread on this piece, there are three or four aspects to the way the mei is rendered, especially the "ie" part, that are problematic. One of these by itself might be shrugged off; but when multiples emerge, this, as I say, is worrisome. I also stressed in my posts before that I sincerely hoped I was wrong, and I may indeed be. I would much prefer that your tsuba was authentic. But instead of automatically assuming that the shinsa team "must be correct" and that therefore there must be "gaps in the knowledge" of those that find the shinsa conclusions dubious, you should be considering the actual points being raised to support the resistance to the shinsa results, and analyzing these yourself. I notice that you didn't respond to a single one of these highly-detailed points that Pete and I raised. He and I didn't make these up out of thin air. Why didn't you engage in a discussion about these points, Henry?

 

There is simply far too much deferring to shinsa teams as unimpeachable authorities occurring. There is no intrinsic Japanese trait that makes their analytical skills any more finely honed than ours. So let me turn the question back around onto you, Henry: what exactly in the shinsa team's judgment that the "Saotome" tsuba in question is, in fact, Saotome allows them to conclude this? Precisely what evidence supports this?

 

Steve

[Soshin]

It always strikes me as funny how people will pay money to submit an item to a shinsa team and then poo poo the shinsa if their call wasn't to their liking. If you can't trust the call when it isn't to your liking, how can you trust it when it is? You can't, so it is completely irrational to submit in the first place. These people aren't looking for the truth, they are looking for confirmation of their preconceptions.

 

Hi Chris B.,

 

I have read about this phenomenon it is referred to as Filter bubble. Here is more information about it from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_bubble. Generally I think people's ego becomes the algorithm that selectively picks information that supports their ideas and also separates them from information that disagrees with their viewpoints (i.e. shinsa results), effectively isolating them in their own ideological bubbles. Here is an appropriate model of me while in a filter bubble created by my own ego at shinsa.

 

 

P.S. Henry, very nice tsuba! Let me know if you ever get tired of it. :lol:

[Henry Wilson]

I also take some umbrage

No offense was intended but I knew I was going to get into trouble.

 

I said in response to this oshigata you've provided that there was not enough to go on from this reproduced oshigata to draw any firm conclusions.

What else do you need? It is what it is. What more is required?

 

There is no intrinsic Japanese trait that makes their analytical skills any more finely honed than ours.

I never said that there was but they do have access to source material written in their native tongue on a subject that is indigenous.

 

Why didn't you engage in a discussion about these points, Henry?

There seems to be not much to discuss at times. Just listen and be told. Maybe because I feel that cups are full....

 

Anyway, enough from me. Like I said, these are issues that have been annoying me and I wanted to air them. I hope that no love has been lost. I don't want to be spreading any more negativity so if it is better to delete my posts, I have no objection to that.

[Steve Waszak]

Henry,

 

Real quick here... You ask what more is required of the oshigata...as "it is what it is." Yes, but if what "it is" is insufficient to come to confident conclusions, due to specific lacks of information in that oshigata, one must set aside the oshigata as an instrument of "proof" or even of support...

 

You also note the access that shinsa teams have to source material... This is correct, of course. However, how often have we seen such source material be proven to be fictional (i.e. the "genealogy" of the Myochin...) or merely speculative? As concerns tosogu, when we remember that so many of the "schools" of tsuba were conjured out of thin air in the late 19th century by merchants seeking to make the piece they had for sale more appealing (and the sobering implications of this conjuring), then the "source material" you note these shinsa teams have access to becomes highly suspect to say the least...

 

Finally, I have to ask how many of the shinsa team members have actual formal training in critical thinking and inquiry, as the evidence too often suggests they don't. If all that shinsa team members are doing is essentially reflexively consulting a suspect library in the native language to arrive at their decisions, such a process is itself one that is dubious on its face... Again, it would certainly help things if shinsa results were substantiated by the transparent and public presentation of the team's reasoning... Since they're not, a healthy (and legitimate) skepticism of their conclusions is fairly held, given the errors that those conclusions have demonstrably come to at times.

 

Steve

[cabowen]

Finally, I have to ask how many of the shinsa team members have actual formal training in critical thinking and inquiry, as the evidence too often suggests they don't. If all that shinsa team members are doing is essentially reflexively consulting a suspect library in the native language to arrive at their decisions, such a process is itself one that is dubious on its face... Again, it would certainly help things if shinsa results were substantiated by the transparent and public presentation of the team's reasoning... Since they're not, a healthy (and legitimate) skepticism of their conclusions is fairly held, given the errors that those conclusions have demonstrably come to at times.

 

Critical thinking? Let's not forget we are talking about Japan. Feeeeeel the force.....

 

What separates the judges on a good shinsa team from most everyone else is experience. Usually a judge has been studying swords and/or kodogu for 40 years or more, each. That study has been facilitated by access to the best examples possible, in hand, at length, under the guidance and tutelage of experts. Of course native familiarity with the language, culture, and history also provides a knowledge base that those in the West will never have. Add to this the transmission of information that can not be found in books, online, or through critical thinking and only comes from teacher to student. Most of these people devote many hours every month studying and judging- for most it is a significant part of their life and not just a hobby. Now, multiply that by 5 and you have a shinsa team. I have spent countless hours around these people and I find their knowledge humbling. They do not know everything but I have no doubt that their knowledge and experience dwarfs that of most anyone outside Japan.

 

Surely though they are human and make mistakes and all they offer is a learned opinion. Many things aren't cut and dried and one can find differing opinions even among the experts. We see this in many fields. In many cases this simply means the item is second rate. In most cases, things are rather quickly and easily identified. In fact, probably 90% of the time, a judgment can be made in 10-15 seconds. That probably seems hard to believe for most but I know from my own experience with gendaito that it is quite possible. When you have handled thousands of swords, you know almost immediately if it is good, bad, or really good. Most gimei jump out to those with this level of experience and knowledge of written Japanese-there are few cases in which books need to be consulted. Mumei blades are where the team earns their money as these are more time consuming. They usually each throw in their opinion and a consensus is reached. They don't all agree in every case. Frequently a mumei blade will present features which may not be fully consistent with the normal characteristics of any one group or school necessitating that they make a considered best guess which is never made blindly or by consulting a suspect library but by careful consideration and weighing of each feature.

 

As Mike Yamazaki rightly stated, shinsa isn't for everyone and everything. For example, I have spent probably close to 30 years researching, studying, and collecting gendaito. I do not know of any shinsa team in Japan that has collected as much information and spent the amount of time on this area as I have.. As I result, I do not submit my swords to shinsa as it would be pointless. Similarly, there are other specialists in Japan that undoubtedly feel the same way. I do not know of such people outside of Japan but perhaps they exist, and for them, shinsa may well be pointless as well. Odds are however, that unless you have spent more time studying and researching an area than the shinsa team, have as many or more hours handling first rate examples, can read the language and have a thorough understanding of the culture and history, that their opinions are best respected.

[Brian]

...I don't want to be spreading any more negativity so if it is better to delete my posts, I have no objection to that.

I don't see negativity, I just see someone expressing an opinion. As has Steven, in a eloquent and explanative way. Thanks both for remaining civil and explaining your viewpoints without resorting to insults. I'm finding this eductional and more of a discussion than an argument. There is a lot of good to be taken from both points of view, without it becoming heated.

I think we are all allowed to "get it off our chest" occasionally instead of letting it build up. If we are going to go above the level of just posting stuff and everyone saying "wow..nice!" then we are going to have to deal with debates like this. Only way knowledge is going to move forward.

It's a pity knowledgeable collectors aren't allowed to sit with the shinsa panel and debate certain points..it would be very interesting.

 

Brian

[Steve Waszak]

Chris,

 

I can only say that without critical thinking, all else means very little. In particular, the sort of "information...that only comes from teacher to student" is highly suspect in Japanese art culture. The willful "twisting of truth" and/or simple (but hardly benign) misinformation resulting from the "iemoto-ism" rampant in Japanese arts makes confident reliance on the passing of "information" from teacher to student as veracious impossible.

 

Odds are however, that unless you have spent more time studying and researching an area than the shinsa team, have as many or more hours handling first rate examples, can read the language and have a thorough understanding of the culture and history, that their opinions are best respected.

 

These may be the "odds," but if facts prove shinsa opinions wrong, the odds don't amount to much. The example I have provided with the "Saotome" Yamakichibei is hardly the sole occurrence of such error, which appears to happen more frequently with tosogu than with blades. In any event, it really matters not how esteemed the backgrounds, learning, reputations, etc... of shinsa team members may be: if they make errors, they make errors. Since they're human, this will happen. And since it happens (as your own post states very clearly), to rely on shinsa opinion as infallible, as many seem to do, is simply wrong-headed. Far too often, I have seen connoisseurs and collectors say something to the effect of, "you should just go ahead and submit the piece to shinsa; then you'll know." Nope, in fact, you won't know. You'll know what the paper says, but to think this proves anything in and of itself is demonstrably false. There is no getting around this. This being said, I have to stress that it's not that I have zero respect for shinsa opinions; rather, I receive them, weigh their judgments against the evidence, perhaps conduct further research myself, etc..., all in the effort to try to understand how the shinsa team arrived at their conclusion (since they won't provide their reasoning process as they should). As I've said many times now, shinsa results are a starting point for researching pieces, not an end point. Rejecting shinsa results because they're shinsa results makes even less sense than accepting them uncritically. But again, their opinions must be critically weighed, rather than being blindly taken as gospel, I don't care how experienced the team may be. It is the ideas, the thinking, the reasoning that matters, not the illustriousness of those doing it.

[Rich T]

Hi all, it's been a very VERY long time since I posted here, and I have not even looked to be honest for god knows how long. Sorry this will be such a short visit.

 

This thread was bought to my attention because of a statement made by David Styles. I need to correct. I do so only because it is completely inaccurate. The state reads as follows and I quote

 

I have a really nice Owari Sukashi tsuba with a Hakogaki by Dr. Kazutaro Torigoye. Dr. Torigoye every states in the Hakogaki that the tsuba displays excellent workmanship. I purchased this tsuba from a long time collector that felt that a tsuba with such a high profile Hakogaki didn't need shinsa papers. Attached is a photo of the tsuba in question for your reference.

 

This comment was pointed out to me by a fellow collector and friend as it is pretty common knowledge it was me who sold the tsuba to David (It was posted on my version of Kodogu no Sekai on Facebook prior to me selling it on Ebay).

 

Now, I do not care one Iota if you like shinsa or not, agree with the process or not, that's your own outlook. But I would never ever state that any Hakogaki would be of such a high profile that it would outweigh a Shinsa. If I had said anything at all it would be something like Some people find that Hakogaki are enough for them. That would be all. I am not one of those people however.

 

That is how I see things, simply becuase the Hakogaki is the opinion of one man, and Shinsa the result of a collective opinion. It's well noted that Sasano, Torigoye and my main man Wakayama changed their opinions on some of these works almost as often as we change our underpants. As a result of that point alone, it is possible all hakogai from the 50's - 70's are worthless.

 

It is in fact, a fact that I told David on more than one occasion that I thought the Tsuba in question was far from Owari, and most likely Tosa Myochin, or late Akasaka. It's highly possible the Hakogaki is incorrect, or even that the tsuba was placed in another box.

 

So, as I noted at the head of this waffle, I don't care one way or another what you think about Shinsa That is your own personal opinion. I do care when I am misquoted and in fact mentioned in an out right falsehood. Thus I am here only to clarify that point.

 

And so ends my visit to NMB

 

Ciao

 

Rich

[Soshin]

I do care when I am misquoted and in fact mentioned in an out right falsehood. Thus I am here only to clarify that point.

 

Hi Rich T.,

 

I know you will likely not read this reply but I was misquoting you only from a inaccurate record of my memory. Thank you for putting the NMB record straight. I generally don't write down what everyone communicates to me via Facebook or eBay and my memory can be more than a bit inaccurate at times. This is one reason I have a website and record documents of my collection. This is also why I have and maintain research notebooks for different projects in my day job. :lol: I will go on the record saying that it is pointless in my opinion to shinsa this tsuba with the hakogaki therefore it does relates back to the original topic and question raised by Jean.

 

P.S. eBay might again be calling this tsuba if Henry ever decides to part ways with his papered Nobuie. The KTK photos of is tsuba is just awesome in my opinion!

[Pete Klein]

When I mentioned the conclusions made by members here to my Japanese associates, they said something to the effect of "what do they know..."

 

Read this well and ruminate on it. It screams out a truth seldom mentioned.

[cabowen]

Chris,

 

I can only say that without critical thinking, all else means very little. In particular, the sort of "information...that only comes from teacher to student" is highly suspect in Japanese art culture. The willful "twisting of truth" and/or simple (but hardly benign) misinformation resulting from the "iemoto-ism" rampant in Japanese arts makes confident reliance on the passing of "information" from teacher to student as veracious impossible.

 

Critical thinking is the indispensable foundation of Western science. Unfortunately, you are dealing with a process that is neither scientific nor Western.

 

Having spent many years living in this environment, conducting research and studying under the guidance of experts I can say that there is, in fact, a great deal of information passed from teacher to student that for the most part is not publicly available. This is an important part of the traditional Japanese educational method- passing along information only from master to disciple. The word for this is "hiden" 秘伝　meaning secret (teachings) of an art. Much of this teaching is experientially based and in many cases relies on more than just "thinking", critical or otherwise...I have shared many things I learned in Japan that were not found in print but rather orally transmitted. Contrary to what some may think, all knowledge in this field is not to be found in print; there is still, as I mentioned, a great deal that is closely held and not freely given.

 

Odds are however, that unless you have spent more time studying and researching an area than the shinsa team, have as many or more hours handling first rate examples, can read the language and have a thorough understanding of the culture and history, that their opinions are best respected.

 

These may be the "odds," but if facts prove shinsa opinions wrong, the odds don't amount to much. The example I have provided with the "Saotome" Yamakichibei is hardly the sole occurrence of such error, which appears to happen more frequently with tosogu than with blades. In any event, it really matters not how esteemed the backgrounds, learning, reputations, etc... of shinsa team members may be: if they make errors, they make errors. Since they're human, this will happen. And since it happens (as your own post states very clearly), to rely on shinsa opinion as infallible, as many seem to do, is simply wrong-headed. Far too often, I have seen connoisseurs and collectors say something to the effect of, "you should just go ahead and submit the piece to shinsa; then you'll know." Nope, in fact, you won't know. You'll know what the paper says, but to think this proves anything in and of itself is demonstrably false. There is no getting around this. This being said, I have to stress that it's not that I have zero respect for shinsa opinions; rather, I receive them, weigh their judgments against the evidence, perhaps conduct further research myself, etc..., all in the effort to try to understand how the shinsa team arrived at their conclusion (since they won't provide their reasoning process as they should). As I've said many times now, shinsa results are a starting point for researching pieces, not an end point. Rejecting shinsa results because they're shinsa results makes even less sense than accepting them uncritically. But again, their opinions must be critically weighed, rather than being blindly taken as gospel, I don't care how experienced the team may be. It is the ideas, the thinking, the reasoning that matters, not the illustriousness of those doing it.

 

Of course a shinsa team's opinion is not infallible, but in most cases it is the cumulative opinion of learned experts whose knowledge and experience is light years beyond what is available elsewhere. No one has said that any decision a team makes proves anything absolutely. That is not the nature of an opinion; it is a considered, learned, guess. Again, often times experts disagree. This isn't a cut and dried science which some may think, or want to make it.

 

I agree that there are those in the West that take the shinsa result as the word of god, which it isn't. On the other end of the spectrum are those that think they know better than the shinsa team which with very few exceptions, is equally ridiculous.

 

A shinsa opinion can be a first step if you choose to use it as a learning tool to further your own knowledge. In most cases, when one disagrees, it is because one's own knowledge is lacking, not because of a "mistake" on the part of the shinsa team. One only learns if one's mind is open to learning and one takes the time to understand why the shinsa team said X instead of Y. In most cases what someone calls a "mistake" is more accurately called a difference of opinion. If your critical thinking leads you to a differing opinion, publish your research, write a book, write your own origami, or whatever else satisfies you.

 

When one submits something to shinsa, it is implicit in this action that one values the experience and knowledge of the team; you are buying their learned opinion. If you think you have superior "evidence", "facts", knowledge and experience in comparison to the shinsa team, then by all means save your money. Maybe even start your own shinsa.

[BMarkhasin]

Gents,

This is a really entertaining and useful thread. Reading this thread got me thinking of all the times I have been in Japan, discussing pieces with Japanese collectors, as well as the purchase process in Japan from private collectors. In my memory, I honestly can not recall more than a handful of times, when an experienced Japanese collector (not affiliated with a dealer or shinsa organization), has been confronted with a difficult piece to attribute (tosogu, not blade), and has said '... well send it to shinsa for their opinion...'. Instead of suggesting a shinsa submission, they more often than not point to another individual who is considered as an expert and make the introduction for a future meeting. In addition, I have many times been told something to the effect of '.. submitting this to shinsa devalues/insults the piece..'. It sounds like bravado, but there is some foundation of reality in comments like this. I think this says something, and in my view, it suggests that in Japan, some consider shinsa as a process for the uninitiated who need independent verification, as well as those interested in a positive commercial result from attaining a shinsa paper. There is often also a direct knowledge of who is on the respective shinsa team, and a view on their qualifications to opine on a given submission -- if they are viewed as un- or under-qualified, statements like the one above come out.

 

Some of Chris Bowen's statements in this thread resonate. The exposure to items and access to experienced collectors with a deep understanding of specific groups is more attainable in Japan. A consensus is more quickly established, and the reliability of that consensus is greater, thus making a shinsa process somewhat irrelevant to many Japanese collectors. Japanese collectors view a shinsa simply as a peer opinion, and do not attribute any higher value (as we tend to do in the west). They also openly recognize that some papers out there are simply crap for a variety of reasons, and don't expend any energy debating them. As others have said repeatedly in this thread, a shinsa determination is an opinion, which is supposed to be a qualified opinion predicated on a thorough understanding of a group through hands-on experience, not 'picture book' education and third-party opinion. If a shinsa panel does not contain a member with that understanding of a particular group, what exactly is the point in submitting a piece by said group? For western collectors however, access to 'experts' is far harder. We rely on dealer opinions, boards and each other. The blind leading the blind? This situation naturally brings greater reliance on shinsa determinations. Unfortunately, I don't see a way to get beyond this rut. Unless western collectors can gain access to Japanese collectors / collections and interact as peers in discussion groups which contain experienced members willing to educate, we will never decrease our need / desire for shinsa determinations.

 

Best,

Boris.

[Pete Klein]

The blind leading the blind?

 

For me, the only time this is true is when the inexperienced or the arrogant take upon themselves the mantle of 'Expert'. As long as we collectors question our research and continue with our due diligence, we are doing our best. To be able to consult in person with those who actually are 'experts' in Japan is of course worthy of the effort. However, we must remain aware of the fact that many so called 'experts', even in Japan, can be nothing more than self promoting charlatans. How over utilized the title, 'Sensei' truly is.

[cabowen]

Gents,

This is a really entertaining and useful thread. Reading this thread got me thinking of all the times I have been in Japan, discussing pieces with Japanese collectors, as well as the purchase process in Japan from private collectors. In my memory, I honestly can not recall more than a handful of times, when an experienced Japanese collector (not affiliated with a dealer or shinsa organization), has been confronted with a difficult piece to attribute (tosogu, not blade), and has said '... well send it to shinsa for their opinion...'. Instead of suggesting a shinsa submission, they more often than not point to another individual who is considered as an expert and make the introduction for a future meeting.

 

Very true and I think I have made mention of this on several occasions. It is not possible for a shinsa team to be the foremost experts on every single group, school, artist, period, etc. When confronted with a puzzle, it is always best to seek out the foremost expert. Most times this person has spent decades researching and studying a particular group or artist. Unfortunately, we have few, if any, of these people in the West.

 

 

 

In addition, I have many times been told something to the effect of '.. submitting this to shinsa devalues/insults the piece..'. It sounds like bravado, but there is some foundation of reality in comments like this. I think this says something, and in my view, it suggests that in Japan, some consider shinsa as a process for the uninitiated who need independent verification, as well as those interested in a positive commercial result from attaining a shinsa paper. There is often also a direct knowledge of who is on the respective shinsa team, and a view on their qualifications to opine on a given submission -- if they are viewed as un- or under-qualified, statements like the one above come out.

 

I know exactly where that quote comes from...this person has also said he would never buy a piece with Juyo Token kantei sho because it has been "sullied". At his level of collecting, where few tread, there is no real need for shinsa. One needs to step carefully though as even monkeys can and do fall from the tree sometimes...

 

I have had similar experiences and have often said here that in Japan many advanced collectors have little need or use for shinsa. Most in the West point to the commercial value of kantei-sho as a reason for submitting. This can not be denied, though it is quite a different usage.

 

 

Some of Chris Bowen's statements in this thread resonate. The exposure to items and access to experienced collectors with a deep understanding of specific groups is more attainable in Japan. A consensus is more quickly established, and the reliability of that consensus is greater, thus making a shinsa process somewhat irrelevant to many Japanese collectors. Japanese collectors view a shinsa simply as a peer opinion, and do not attribute any higher value (as we tend to do in the west). They also openly recognize that some papers out there are simply crap for a variety of reasons, and don't expend any energy debating them. As others have said repeatedly in this thread, a shinsa determination is an opinion, which is supposed to be a qualified opinion predicated on a thorough understanding of a group through hands-on experience, not 'picture book' education and third-party opinion. If a shinsa panel does not contain a member with that understanding of a particular group, what exactly is the point in submitting a piece by said group? For western collectors however, access to 'experts' is far harder. We rely on dealer opinions, boards and each other. The blind leading the blind? This situation naturally brings greater reliance on shinsa determinations. Unfortunately, I don't see a way to get beyond this rut. Unless western collectors can gain access to Japanese collectors / collections and interact as peers in discussion groups which contain experienced members willing to educate, we will never decrease our need / desire for shinsa determinations.

 

Best,

Boris.

 

Again, it is important to remember that originally, the shinsa process was conducted for dealers to make it easier for them to sell their items. Serious Japanese students/collectors (keep in mind some of the most knowledgeable people in the field are not collectors), able to do their own research and study, with access to others with advanced knowledge, have for the most part been minor participants in the process. I agree with Boris- we have much more of a "blind leading the blind" situation here in the US. There is a rather unhealthy reliance by many on kantei sho that I have mentioned frequently, though as Boris mentions, I too see little hope in getting beyond this for those in the West as unfortunately, the reality is that unless you spend a decade or three in Japan, learn the language, and spend countless hours with the best examples in your hands under the guidance of experts, you will never approach the level of those who have. There is no way to do the type of research and study necessary with books and critical thinking alone. The other extreme, those who are deluded in their beliefs that somehow their knowledge is superior, is less frequently seen but equally counterproductive.

[raiden]

I often go by the background of the shinsa judges, my teachers have been trained and taught by people like Homma sensei and Sato sensei, Sasano sensei and Fukushi sensei. Of course the panel has a group of judges, but I find it helps when there is a knowledgable judge that has a proven background on the team. For example, Tanobe sensei has an excellent "eye" as well as unparralled knowledge. Hagihara sensei was a direct student of Sasano sensei when Sasano sensei was in his prime, as well as with Fukushi sensei. Those credentials always humble my opinions, especially when I have an items that does not pass or turn out what I thought - but then that just adds to my knowledge. I do not know of many people in the states that can compete with their knowledge, and they are always ready to prove their reasoning, rather than the upset collector that says"anyone can see it is a real_____" so why didn't it pass.....thats what they should be asking or why the judgement was not the "hoped for" one. Like everyone knows , when it passes with flying colors, there is no sound of a complaint.

[Steve Waszak]

Mike,

 

So what do you make, then, of pieces that are submitted to NBTHK shinsa more than once over the course of some months or years (as has happened, probably multiple times), with the outcome that different results (a different attribution) were obtained on each occasion? Which kanteisho would you accept, the first one, attributing the piece to X, the second one, attributing the piece to Y? Perhaps a third submission would hit the jackpot? Does one accept the result that one "likes," while ignoring the other? Or maybe, as you say in your post here, you'd look to see who was on those respective shinsa panels and go with the result that would have come from an (even more) educated team? What if the panel members were the same each time? How could the same "incomparably knowledgeable" shinsa team issue contradictory results for a given submitted piece?

 

The fact of the matter is that the whole contention that a deeply knowledgeable, experienced, trained, seasoned team of experts in their field will be far more likely to arrive at sound judgments than mere novices will is so obvious that it needn't even be stated. But this does not mean that this seasoned team will not arrive at incorrect/poor judgments from time to time. For the American members here, I will use the U.S. Supreme Court as an analogy. The U.S. Supreme Court is comprised of what many would agree is a deeply knowledgeable, experienced, trained, seasoned team of experts in their field. Their cumulative years of law experience amounts to centuries, centuries of legal knowledge. Yet this "incomparable" Court has arrived at decisions like Dred Scott v. Sanford, Plessy v. Ferguson, Korematsu v. U.S., Gobitis v. Minersville School District, and Bowers v. Hardwick (among others), outcomes so poorly reasoned and concluded that they are held up today in law school classrooms as "paragons of failure" in Supreme Court history. Simply kowtowing to the Court because it's the Court is a fine example of the Emperor's New Clothes syndrome, alive and well. Again, it doesn't matter how glowing the resume of the expert (or "expert"); what matters is the reasoning. And the whole well-known Japanese practice of hiden does not in the slightest obviate the absolute need for reasoning, especially given the all-too-often fanciful "knowledge" passed along via iemoto-ism. For a fascinating read on iemoto constructs, consult Morgan Pitelka's Handmade Culture.

 

Mike, you note that the shinsa team is "always ready to prove their reasoning." Really? Why is it, then, that so many seem to feel that shinsa results are not explained, not transparent?

 

Finally, you conclude your post by observing that "Like everyone knows, when [a piece] passes with flying colors, there's no sound of a complaint." Likely true, but as I have stressed many times now, if a collector at that point just sits back satisfied that "the mystery is solved," rather than using that result to pursue/deepen his own investigation, that is one helluva poor approach to take to the entire process.

 

Adios,

 

Steve

[Brian]

I'm not really sure where the debate comes from here, since I don't think there is a single person here who considers shinsa infallible. But also no-one who doesn't respect them and hold their opinion extremely highly.

So where's the disagreement? We all know that there have been, and will continue to be, mistakes made. But the percentage is small, and still far better than an uneducated opnion.

Using their opinions as a step towards further study also seems to me to be logical and obvious.

I am sure we all agree on these basic facts. Or are there people who think otherwise?

Yes..there is discussion about whether to submit at all or not, and which group to submit to. And the way explanations are given. But the basic facts as presented above seem sound to me.

Something that also must be mentioned is that a shinsa panel must try and have a huge collective knowledge about a wide range of subjects.

Sometimes, there are specific students of a single school or theme who might have dedicated their lives to studying that one particular aspect. Therefore it seems logical that they would be the go-to guys if approachable.

In other words, a person who has studied Akasaka school tsuba their whole lives...or Hizen-to....their opinion might be very highly considered when compared to a panel of experts that have to have learned about all schools and all periods.

 

Brian

[Henry Wilson]

What an interesting thread. Even Rich T dropped by. Thank you one and all for your input.

[cabowen]

And the whole well-known Japanese practice of hiden does not in the slightest obviate the absolute need for reasoning

 

I don't think anyone has said that there isn't a need for reasoning. It is difficult though to form a thoroughly reasoned opinion without a complete information set. And without the benefit of hiden, or inside information, you are not playing with a full deck, so to speak...

 

Of course a "glowing resume" is not all that is necessary but without the experience and knowledge it indicates, critical thinking and "reason" only gets you so far, and that is not far enough. In truth, you need both.

 

Mike, you note that the shinsa team is "always ready to prove their reasoning." Really? Why is it, then, that so many seem to feel that shinsa results are not explained, not transparent?

 

Maybe because so many don't take the time to go to Japan and do what is necessary to educate themselves, cultivate relationships, study, attend kantei kai, learn the language, etc. MIke spends time in Japan and has done much of this. He has access to the experts. Don't confuse a kantei-sho with a legal opinion, to use your metaphor. If you want to peek behind the curtain, follow the yellow brick road....

[John A Stuart]

Yes, everyone is not able to do so, just economically not feasible or due to commitments impossible. Those that can need introductions to the right crowd otherwise they are a leaf blown about by the wind. If they even know where to go it is very hard to just present one's self and say I'm here feed me (Knowledge). Refering back to Henry's cup; not a problem for me, they keep pouring into my cup and it never fills, bloody thing leaks like a sieve. More and more so lately. John

[Pete Klein]

bloody thing leaks like a sieve

 

You too? LOL! Better than the other leaks I suppose...

[cabowen]

Yes, everyone is not able to do so, just economically not feasible or due to commitments impossible. Those that can need introductions to the right crowd otherwise they are a leaf blown about by the wind. If they even know where to go it is very hard to just present one's self and say I'm here feed me (Knowledge). Refering back to Henry's cup; not a problem for me, they keep pouring into my cup and it never fills, bloody thing leaks like a sieve. More and more so lately. John

 

No one ever said the path was easy...But for those who truly wish to learn, they will find a way....

[raiden]

So what do you make, then, of pieces that are submitted to NBTHK shinsa more than once over the course of some months or years (as has happened, probably multiple times), with the outcome that different results (a different attribution) were obtained on each occasion? Which kanteisho would you accept, the first one, attributing the piece to X, the second one, attributing the piece to Y? Perhaps a third submission would hit the jackpot? Does one accept the result that one "likes," while ignoring the other? Or maybe, as you say in your post here, you'd look to see who was on those respective shinsa panels and go with the result that would have come from an (even more) educated team? What if the panel members were the same each time? How could the same "incomparably knowledgeable" shinsa team issue contradictory results for a given submitted piece?

 

I would say in the case of multiple submissions, it really depends upon the exact situation. Do you have a particular piece that you are talking about? Just saying item "x","y" or "z" is not enough. What was the piece, signed, unsigned, was it horyu? What was the quality and condition level? Many times if the item is in bad shape, it is difficult to kantei properly. The judges are not magicians. I would like to see anyone kantei a rusty blade that has few visible traits, or a tsuba with severe fire damage or rust....Give me an exact situation with proof - show me a pic from 2 papers and the time difference - also was the item in question submitted with any type of supporting material, or just "hope"

As far as who was on the judging staff at the time, I know at times there are visiting judges from other museums used to fill in if there is a absence due to illness or some emergency, therefore allowing for a variation in judging results (this is just a possiblity).

[raiden]

The fact of the matter is that the whole contention that a deeply knowledgeable, experienced, trained, seasoned team of experts in their field will be far more likely to arrive at sound judgments than mere novices will is so obvious that it needn't even be stated. But this does not mean that this seasoned team will not arrive at incorrect/poor judgments from time to time.

 

There is not an incorrect or poor judgment, this is not a court. When someone submits an item to any shinsa, the submitter is freely asking them for their opinion on the piece. Most people submit an item to either verify it is what they think or hope, or fopr educational reasons trying to get an opinion from a set of people that are educated in this subject. I know many dealers in Japan that have an excellent "eye" that would have made excellent judges for a shinsa. In fact at the Dai Token Ichi they have such a service for a verbal opinion by the dealers from the zentosho with the best eye. I have learned that to be a top level dealer, one has to really know the information very very well, that is the difference in Japan between the top dealers and the lower ones. It never ceases to amaze me the amount of information that the high level sensei or dealers know about a certain artist. That is why even if i do not agree with their opinion at times, I still listen, and they are also willing to listen to mine as well. That is how I learn, all pride put aside.

[raiden]

Mike, you note that the shinsa team is "always ready to prove their reasoning." Really? Why is it, then, that so many seem to feel that shinsa results are not explained, not transparent?

 

Since you have not given an exact situation, I cannot answer, I can only feel like the people that you are talking about i guess - confused?

I have found that from the older days, many collectors were very educated in both blades and fittings. Many old high quality collections had many items with no certification other than sayagaki or hakogaki. I have told the NBTHK that they give people too much credit these days when they assume that the submitter understands the attribution that is sometimes given on a piece, but as far as I know when asked, they always are willing to explain the reason for the result.

as the case here, a Fuchi Kashira unsigned attributred to Hikozo (Mumei Hikozo). Well usually the submitter will ask well which generation is it?

According to the NBTHK style of Kiwame in Mumei pieces, this means that it is most likely the Shodai, possibly the Nidai. If they thought it was the Nidai exactly, they would put Mumei Hikozo Nidai in the kiwame area. But unless someone explains this, most beginners do not understand. that is why if I am at a show, and someone has a simple question about a paper from the NBTHK, I try to answer it for them, if it is complicated a bit (their question) then they can always contact the NBTHK directly.

[raiden]

Finally, you conclude your post by observing that "Like everyone knows, when [a piece] passes with flying colors, there's no sound of a complaint." Likely true, but as I have stressed many times now, if a collector at that point just sits back satisfied that "the mystery is solved," rather than using that result to pursue/deepen his own investigation, that is one helluva poor approach to take to the entire process.

 

What the collector decides to do after his/her happy result is up to them. Myself personally , I take a harder look at the piece and remember it as a good example of what is is. But I do find it true, when a person gets a happy result, they do not complain at all, just some want more information.

[raiden]

Of course a "glowing resume" is not all that is necessary but without the experience and knowledge it indicates, critical thinking and "reason" only gets you so far, and that is not far enough. In truth, you need both.

 

AGREED!!!!

[raiden]

one last item, what we do for clients of ours is go through their items that they are considering for submission, and pre screen them. If an item is a signed Bushu Masa someone, and the tsuba is of fair quality, I usually do not recommend it for submission, especially if the signature is an easy one to verify. But if the person has a very excellent tsuba like this one (no papers yet), then I say put it in the shinsa, as the quality speaks for itself therefore in my opinion a piece worthy of submission.