Just Wondering About This Mei ?

[Bencld]

Hi all. As it says above, any ideas as to the meaning of this mei ? Claimed to be akatsuki ! Don’t know if it is a smith or something else.

[Guest Rayhan]

Looks like Aoi Art, any link?

[Alex A]

Thats one really scruffy mei, personally, id ignore it.

[Bencld]

Aoi

 

https://www.aoijapan.com/katana-akatsuki/

[Ray Singer]

I spoke with Tsuruta-san earlier in the week about that sword. This was his reply.

 

"the signature was made by someone engraved the title of the blade by himself. Akatsuki This is not the sword smith just only mark."

[Guest Rayhan]

Ah ok so not really collection material, as they say better for practice.

[Ted Tenold]

曉　"Dawn"  "Daybreak" .  

 

Likely just an owner romantically naming a sword.  

 

The work in the blade looks nice and gendai-like.  Reminds me of the style of work from the Enomoto family. 

[Gakusee]

While Facts & Fundamentals is somewhat controversial in certain places (and while it looks like a beginners’ book it is actually material for the more advanced student, who is aware of other opinions on some topics) , one thing that Nakahara belaboured was the consistency of the nioiguchi.

 

So please look at how the nioiguchi on this sword vacillates between fuzzy / not well defined and tighter in some places with mura-nie and so on. Not so good in my view.

[Guest Rayhan]

No nioguchi = not collectable

[Ted Tenold]

While Facts & Fundamentals is somewhat controversial in certain places (and while it looks like a beginners’ book it is actually material for the more advanced student, who is aware of other opinions on some topics) , one thing that Nakahara belaboured was the consistency of the nioiguchi.

 

So please look at how the nioiguchi on this sword vacillates between fuzzy / not well defined and tighter in some places with mura-nie and so on. Not so good in my view.

 

 

An advanced student will also realize that as Dr. Walter Compton wrote in his essay on nihonto, The Shapes of Things;  "... the variations are infinite and the generalizations are full of exception".

 

Establishing Nakahara's preference of a consistent nioiguchi as gospel inappropriately applies a (dare I say "personal") mandate that could mislead one to disregard *many* great smiths and works holding features and characteristics that could arguably be gathered under that description.  Mitsutada is the first that comes to mind, as well as many others in the Koto realm.  Shinto, I would think of Hankei.  These two sitting in juxtaposition between goals and their choices of compositions and techniques of kitae and yakiire, yet carrying elements of what Nakahara might judge as inconsistent nioiguchi, but more aptly described as reaching to organic in nature and working with nature, rather than something completely controlled like a brush and canvas.

 

If Nakahara's writings are to be interpreted in an orthodox manner, then students will maintain a pathway to collecting works by those such as Yokoyama Sukekane, Tairyusai Sokan, and others that more comfortably fit into that judgement.

 

The real lesson of Nakahara's book is, at an advanced level, it's okay to think for yourself, which is why it sits somewhat in opposition to much of the established nihonto scholarship.  That said, we also should therefore try to avoid overcorrecting so we can keep both ends of the spectum in view, and be careful about how many hairs we split, or how many times.