Posted by Pat Collins on May 18, 2002 at 01:02:53:
In Reply to: Re: album-backing and trimming posted by John Fiorillo on May 13, 2002 at 18:29:24:
Hi John, I was simply talking about your last paragraph, which repeated my original idea. Your refinement of my wording is accepted, though somewhat accessory to the point. The point is that these early hashira-e were not originally intended to be this way, but were the publishers making the best of what they had, in a way roughly parallel (though certainly not the same) to a dealer trimming away damage today. From this I wanted to call attention to some of the arbitrariness of seeing "cut down" prints as damaged, while also asserting that there is a standard for judgment, which is historical.
: There seems to be a miscommunication between us, as I did not think we were saying the same thing. You referred to "cracking in the warped blocks of kakemono-e ... publishers ... made the damage 'disappear' by having the block cut down to a narrow size and making a pillar print." As you used the singular for "block" plus the term kakemono-e, I took that to mean you were disagreeing with me and saying a single kakemono-e block was used and then cut down. Otherwise, I donít understand why you directed me to the Pins book. My follow-up answer was intended to show that two blocks were used for the wide pillar print, not one, and that neither block alone could serve for the kakemono format. In any case, we are in agreement now.
Post a Followup