Shizenna ashi, shizenna nihonto 自然な足。自然な日本刀

[cabowen]

There have been several contentious threads lately having to do with things such as utsuri and muneyaki, specifically, whether or not these things were created purposely or are perhaps byproducts of the smith's materials, forging, and yaki-ire process. The case of later work, when we know smiths were attempting to recreate koto work, is not part of the discussion as we know the intent in these cases. Also, at least with muneyaki, based on the physical evidence, we are confident in some, but not all, instances, of the intentional creation of this activity.

 

These discussions have danced around the issue of exactly what was within the smith's control, and what is a matter of providence. Having spent many hours with smiths in their forges, and having ordered many blades from them, I have had this discussion with many of them. When it comes to activities created by yaki-ire, there is much that is not under a smith's direct control. Additionally, there are things that while under their control, to a great extent, are purposely not controlled to the limit, but rather guided so that nature's hand plays a greater role in creating something natural, rather than contrived.

 

When we look at the early swords, what strikes many as one of their most attractive features is their organic, natural, completely uncontrived yaki-ba and associated activities. They have a serendipity not unlike many types of yakimono. Talking to both potters and smiths, one will frequently hear similar comments about the importance of the raw materials (steel/clay) to the appearance of the final product. You will also hear similar comments about the role the fire/heat plays- the potter positions the pot in a certain position in a certain location of the kiln in order to get the conditions (heat flow, air movement, atmosphere, etc.) which will potentially create that which they desire (ash patterns, natural glazing, etc.), much like smiths place the tsuchi in a pattern to guide the yaki-ba in the direction they wish it to flow. Both will tell you that there is only so much they can control, the rest is up to the kami. This is why no two pots are the same, nor two swords.

 

If you have ever performed yaki-ire, or watched a smith remove the clay after the quench, or helped a potter unload a fresh firing from his kiln, you know how exciting it is to see what nature has provided. There is always a bit of uncertainty as a great deal of the activities that form are not under the complete control of the smith. If the smith is skilled and everything goes as planned, the hamon will approximate the general shape he intended and the there will be an active ji-ba, with a consistent and defined nioi-guchi. Depending on the steel, cooling rate, and many other factors, there may also be very nice, attractive natural activities. Other times, perhaps activities that were not formed in a manner considered attractive.

 

When we look at old, masterpiece works, we see things like shizenna ashi (how many are familiar with this term?), yubashiri, yo, tobiyaki, etc., that result from this serendipitous interplay of steel, fire, water, and man. Later blades often lack this feeling of spontaneity, this almost visible connection between smith and nature. Many Japanese place great value on this naturalness and indeed, it plays a large role in Japanese art aesthetics. It goes a long way in explaining why many prefer older swords to new, and why some groups are not highly rated as art.

[Uechi]

All about the metallurgical components of the metal. The temperature of the metal during forming and quenching and of course most importantly the skill of the smith coupled with luck.

 

JDromm

[laowho]

Chris,

 

Your post reminds me of two things, maybe three. First is the distinction b/t serendipity and intention, circumstance and skill, and I would agree that this mutual arising of circumstance (accident) and manipulation (skillful intention/purpose) is a fine point dancing on a razor's edge. I'm new to all of this, but I find myself teetering one way and the other...how great was the original skill to adapt and optimize the available ores, and so how great also the skill and intention of those who could recreate this original meeting of accident and intention but now without the benefit of accident (which cannot be helped). In place of accident I see honoring and, what is common to both old and new, the requisite skill needed to reproduce the optimization of what's available and what was previously done so (artfully?) well.

 

My wife bought me Nakahara's Facts and Fundamentals of Japanese Swords, and when he writes of utsuri, for instance, he seems to prevaricate. "It is said that utsuri appears in the works of the schools that run along the Sanyodo road...However, this type of utsuri [as distinct from the modern contrivance of 'nie-utsuri'] originated in Bizen." The book is rather minimalist, aimed it seems at introducing the neophyte to only the most basic criteria for distinguishing good blades and basic school characteristics, and the only import of utsuri to which the author will commit is its usefulness as "the best way to decide if a blade is Koto or not." Moreover, he states from the start that the first mention of utsuri is in Matsutoki (1590s), but that its visibility is dependent upon the polish, and..."It is not possible to know what kind of polishing process took place before the start of the Edo period. However, it is fair enough to surmise that they did not have the exquisite level of polish that we have today." Is he suggesting that utsuri production was more of an accident than we're willing to believe/ascribe? Would this shift the balance of serendipitous accident to one of mere (unknowing) accident, and the value you ascribe to this in the overall equation?

 

I'm completely new to this and there are so many things to consider that nihonto is something of a Rorschach blot wherein I "see the world not as it is, but as we are." And I suppose that I appreciate this little book for its simplicity in keeping to a discussion of blade quality considerations vis a vis a few manageable criteria which transcend school differences, and in its refusal to ascribe importance to minor effects which may or may not be within the maker's control. And in this case, serendipity still reigns and allows for the incalculable interplay twixt man and his elements, old OR new. If there's less spontaneity due to knowing what we can't help but know, then honor and skill will do. I suppose I have to say this b/c I don't know anything about true nihonto, but I hope that if I had the benefit of a lifetime's learning "the end of all [my] exploring will be to arrive where started and know the place for the first time."

 

Your contributions here and knowledge are remarkable--I'd actually be surprised that I dare to reply to one of your posts were it not for my newly acquired beginning of an appreciation of all things nihonto, and my desire to know more.

[cabowen]

Many excellent comments and questions Doug.

 

Indeed there is much we do not know and much we will never know. I certainly don't have the answers.

 

When it comes to the intentions of early smiths, we may never know with certainty how much was serendipity and how much consciously produced. We do know what constitutes a well made sword. So did early smiths, and there can be no doubt that that was their prime objective. Much of what sword collectors appreciate, to use Nakahara's analogy, is the jewelery, and just accessory. We might keep in mind just who and what these early swords were made for.

 

Perhaps the reason Nakahara doesn't go into specifics regarding intentions is because they aren't known with certainty...He seems to be a very pragmatic person more concerned with what is, rather than why....

 

Smiths today generally can not reproduce all of what we see in the old works. When you ask modern smiths why, they usually will point to the difference in materials. With all the benefits and advantages that modern metallurgy and technology give the smiths of today, it is curious indeed why this is the case, but we see changes historically as smiths had less to do with their raw materials.

 

Love your signature quote...

 

Again, thanks for your thoughtful input.

[laowho]

I was discussing with my wife last night the continuing differences between even gendaito/shinsakuto and the best American smiths working in the Japanese tradition, many of whom will go to the trouble to secure Japanese tamahagane for some blades. I don't know how real are the differences, or how much I may be filtering, but to my limited eye there ARE differences in geometry and hamon. Maybe the difference is in the polish? Or the kissaki? I've heard some remark that there isn't an American polisher to whom they'd entrust a nihonto, regardless of the polisher's "years spent learning in Japan," etc. Maybe Japan is going to unknown or inaccessible controls to ensure the continuing uniqueness of its sword? I'm not sure the direction I'll go from here, but I need more books, and to get myself in front of nihonto. I read that there's a decent chapter of the NBTHK in Philadelphia. I do know that I now find even the best American smiths lacking in some intangible way that I can't express or even put a guessing finger on.

[cabowen]

I have brought Japanese smiths over to give workshops with American smiths and have talked at length with both sides.

 

The main difference between them is that the American smiths do not know for the most part the "rules" of proportion in sugata, the basics of what is a "good" hamon and what isn't, etc. There are many US smiths who have the forging and heat treating skills, they just aren't, in general, up to speed on the finer details that make a Japanese sword "right".

 

Outside of controlling sword production inside of Japan, the restriction on importing swords from abroad not made by a licensed smith, and the supply of tamahagane, there are no controls from the Japanese side...

 

Polishing is another story. There are those that believe a few trips to Japan qualifies/suffices as training.... Search this board....

 

By all means get in front of some good swords with guidance from an experienced mentor....Books won't hurt, but they will only take you so far...

[ROKUJURO]

Chris' message can only be underlined.

 

I think the key to many visual effects on a blade does not lie in the aesthetic approach and guesses about their origin but in a deep understanding of the qualities and reactions of steel. In the manufacture of a sword blade, a very large number of facts and fundamentals have to be looked at and experienced, and if you are not deeply familiar with every aspect of the forge, you might miss important points.

 

Looking at a blade without this knowledge is close to Platon's allegory of the cave: You can discuss endlessly without really getting to a result that is supported by reproducible evidence.

 

If I may just grab the term UTSURI from the discussion: We know where we can see it, we also know that it cannot be seen in a bad polish, and we have assumptions of how it might have been produced, but in the end we do not know for sure. It may have been influenced by a special material source, but if we look at the perfection of a really well made blade, we know that the KAWAGANE was sometimes very thin over a complex SHINGANE core, and so we have also to take carbon diffusion into account. I don't say that this is the solution, I only want to mention that lots of facts may be hidden under the surface and need more research before we can make statements.

 

This may be a bad example as I don't know if nowadays' swordsmiths can produce UTSURI and know the facts, but I wanted to stress that we need competence for a judgement.

 

A famous Chinese painter once said to his pupil: You will only be able to paint bamboo after you have become a bamboo.

[cabowen]

 

I think the key to many visual effects on a blade does not lie in the aesthetic approach and guesses about their origin but in a deep understanding of the qualities and reactions of steel. In the manufacture of a sword blade, a very large number of facts and fundamentals have to be looked at and experienced, and if you are not deeply familiar with every aspect of the forge, you might miss important points.

 

 

Couldn't agree more...It is rather senseless to argue about what is and what isn't if you have never performed yaki-ire yourself, nor spent time in a forge with smiths who are expert in all the details. Or are unfamiliar with the basics of ferrous metallurgy.

 

As I have said before, Japanese swords are more than just collectible art work or subjects for kantei. Religion, history, martial arts, culture, art, metallurgy, language, all converge in the Japanese sword. You don't have to be an expert in any of these fields to find beauty in nihon-to but serious research, study, and practical experience in these areas will only deepen one's understanding and appreciation.

[laowho]

This intimacy with the medium is tantamount, I'm sure, and all the more vital to the smith (and to our appreciation) especially in the absence of a more scientifically technological approach, as is 'available' nowadays. It's also no "accident" that Howard Clark was the leading innovator of L6 for katana given that his learning/familiarity was in making farming implements. And maybe that's what we're talking about...no 'separation' b/t subject and object, circumstance and skill, smith and his elements, resulting in an organic wholeness, something elemental. Almost a surrender? For myself, the result/art is in its apparent willingness to acknowledge and acquiesce to these greater forces (heat/fire/water/and iron, the most profound and stable element in the periodic table, the beginning of the end of every star's carbon cycle) in a fuller cooperation *on their* terms. If this means quenching at night, so much the better.

 

In all the ways of 'knowing' that we have, I much prefer apprehending to comprehending. I remember a similar story, too, where Americans were taking a painting class from their Japanese teacher and were told to feel like a flower. When they couldn't do this, he asked in exasperation, "Don't any of you know how to feel?!" Then there's the old Buddhist lesson of the master who told the student, "Today I feel like a duck." The student argued, "That's ridiculous--you've never been a duck." To which the master replied, "How can you say I've never been a duck if you've never been a master?"

 

DeBussy supposedly remarked that it's the notes that aren't played (or was it heard?) that matter most. Same with Taoist and Zen landscapes. Same for nihonto? Not to mention that the less I 'know' the more I'm required to fill in, hence my personal investment, the need to fill a new void, and room for learning and appreciation.

[Kronos]

the use of 200 year old nails to build a sword has got me intrigued, I don't expect anyone to know pricely but I'd be interested to know what is it about modern iron that is so different to that used centuries ago. Is it purely that the old sources have been depleted, the lack of knowledge to produce good tamahagane from what is available or a combination of both?

[laowho]

I think I remember having read that in Japan there are 3 steels used; electrolytic, sponge/oxygen, and tamahagane. The third I've read and watched about, but the first two I've never looked into. Not even sure I have them right. Maybe Chris will revisit to tell. I had occasion to ask a different question here at NMB and at reddit (only b/c one of my Google searches sent me there), and the fellow at reddit seemed to know all about Chris. What a resource to have.

[cabowen]

electrolytic is a high purity product that is used but is not considered "traditional". It makes for a very bright hamon, which is a goal, but is not an "approved" material for the sword contest (tamahagane is suppose to be used). Many have used it in varying degrees. It is looked as as "cheating" in a way...

 

Sponge iron is one of the products of the tatara process. Some smiths will work it to lower the carbon level and use it, together with other steels, for swords.

 

Some smiths, particularly those trying to recreate Soshu style blades, use something called "mazegane" which is a mix of steels. Some will use old nails and other old steel, together with newer tamahagane, etc., to give the hada a soft and hard matrix.

 

No one knows for sure why the steel used today seems to be different. Many say the older steel was more workable, less brittle, more elastic. Many smiths have tried making their own steel in an effort to recreate the older jigane. There has been varying degrees of success.

[laowho]

Last night my wife and I were discussing the difference b/t American custom blade emphasis upon the steel used vs. the apparent Japanese lack thereof. And considering that in Japan "live blades" (often "shinken" in the U.S. martial arts vernacular) are purchased for both iaido AND tameshigiri, and that they necessarily must purchase shinsakuto for this, how important ultimately is the forging part of the equation. Do you find that there are particular steels preferred for performance and others for art? Are the government rules for shinsakuto production sufficiently broad to allow for, say, nontraditional steel or even forging? Are there any through hardened monos being made strictly for iaido, perhaps? Sorry for the breadth of the question. I'll try a search here also.

 

Edit

In my search thus far I've come across these

 

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19727&p=177211&hilit=shinsakuto#p177211

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=19612&p=176524&hilit=shinsakuto#p176524

 

And in particular I'd like to thank you Chris for your thoughtful and nuanced response to someone who was casting with too wide a net and otherwise disparaging as "blanks" the modern Japanese blades:

 

"Shinsakuto are made for arts sake, not for commercial reasons.

 

Clearly the romance is a major part of the attraction for you. For many others, a fine blade is an end in itself.

 

As for killing, etc., most swords post the Sengoku period have probably never killed anyone, nor been tested, nor owned by anyone famous. But fantasy is free I suppose. To each his own."

 

I'm being a bit off topic maybe, but I'd like to point out that what a shinsakuto is for us is a continuation of the story, just as it seems to have been for many of the smiths who were admittedly producing copies of copies, albeit as faithfully as their skills would allow. My wife and I talk every night about the blade, the smith, and the entirety of the context and tradition in which he worked. Ours is a new window that opens on an old landscape full of marvelous things and I simply can't find anything in it to detract from its value...to the contrary. Inasmuch as the form has been required to be "repurposed," it's performing its new functions admirably.

 

Sorry for the digression, but maybe it's in keeping with your original post. As there's no way to recreate the conditions which produced the nihonto of old, they've managed to continue the tradition and, to my limited understanding, have managed it well, especially if we consider all the other attempts being made outside of Japan. Until now I've only been on the other side of that fence, i.e., with the western smiths, not knowing that "true nihonto" were within our grasp. I, for one, feel that I'm now a part of a living tradition, and that I didn't have to substitute anything else for that. If anything, "the romance continues." That's what it was for the maker and what it is for us.