Re: LOC vs Other Museums and sources

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Ukiyo-e Q & A ]

Posted by Guy Pepermans ( on January 24, 2015 at 21:10:30:

In Reply to: LOC vs Other Museums and sources posted by Hokusai's pupil on January 23, 2015 at 06:10:31:


I'm afraid that the LOC has it right. There are notable differencies with the distinctive blocks that you mention (copies dealer Woodblock Print World, MMA ref JP1081, Freer & Sackler and of course LOC) - and acknowledged originals.

Compare these distinctive prints closley with the blocks from prints used in the original editions. Copies are present in the collections of the BM, MFA Boston, Honolulu, FASF, Harvard, TNM and again MMA but another print with ref JP2924.

Prints from original editions are commented and fully illustrated in:
- Hokusai, Prestel, 1991, Cat 39 (Forrer)
- The Bauer Collection, Vol I, 1994, Cat G201 (Forrer)
- Hokusai and Hirosgige, San Francisco and Honolulu, 1998, Cat. 52 (Woodson).

Richard Kruml also mentions a clever set of copies, of this particular series, fully discussed by Roger Keyes in Oriental Art, Summer 1972, Vol. XVII, No 2, pp 141-147 (article not in my possession). You could contact Mr Kruml and ask him for a copy of Keyes' article.


Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Subject: Re: LOC vs Other Museums and sources


Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Ukiyo-e Q & A ]