Wikipedia:Peer review/Ukiyo-e/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ukiyo-e[edit]

Previous peer review
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I intend to make this my next Featured Article nomination, and would greatly appreciate feedback to make sure the article is of the highest quality.

Thanks, Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:39, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Crisco comments[edit]
  • Ah, a 40k article on a subject I know nothing about! Well, I guess I'll learn something. I will focus mostly on grammar and what is difficult to understand for me, a lay reader. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for taking the time! Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • "ukiyo-e" - what's with the quotes?
      • Signifier vs signified—it's meant to indicate that the term is the subject rather than the artform itself. That's not so clear in the first instance, so I've dropped it, but I've retained the second instance. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • "brocade prints" led to colour as a standard, - why use the English translation and not the original Japanese? Also, is "led to colour as a standard" logically sound here? I'm thinking it led to the use of colour becoming standard.
      • When there's an English term with widespread use I've chosen to prefer that. Part of that is a reaction on my part to Japanese articles that cram themselves with Japanese terms even when equivalent English terms are more common (I mean, seriously, "mangaka"? Why can't we call a cartoonist a cartoonist? The distinction doesn't exist in Japanese). Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • "led to colour as a standard"—changed to "the success of Harunobu's "brocade prints" led to full-colour production becoming standard," Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Great Wave off Kanagawa - I'm very surprised this is not in the lede as an image
      • I've been mulling redoing the lead images, but I'm reluctant to include The Wave:
        1. It's the one image I can think of that made a splash (har har) all on its own; other artists became known gradually for their bodies of work, rather than for a particular "hit" image that had an immediate impact. For that reason, I think it's appropriate to have that "hit" image in the chronology where it's specifically referred to, so readers don't have to scroll back to see it when they read about it (very few individual images are actually named in the body).
        2. It's atypical of ukiyo-e in general, and even of ukiyo-e of Hokusai's generation. Hokusai influenced an awful lot of artists to take up doing lanscapes, but they tended to do it in a style more like Hiroshige's than Hokusai's highly abstract and individualistic style. As the article is about the genre of ukiyo-e, I think the lead images should represent general trends, and avoid something so atypical.
        3. The Wave (and Red Fuji) tend to dominate attention, drawing attention away from what's around them. The article is about a 200-year period in art, not "HOKUSAI ... and all those other guys" which seems almost inevitably the impression people get of ukiyo-e. Hokusai still gets plenty of attention—he gets foreshadowed, then an entire paragraph to himself, scattered mentions throughout, and then gets three out of 55 images (or 5½%) out of the thousands upon thousands of readily available images by hundreds of artists.
      • Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Considering you discuss erotica as a genre a little, I'm surprised we aren't using something like The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife to represent said genre. The only nude here is considerably more tasteful than the later erotica.
      • Again, the same issues: (1) Hokusai overkill; and (2) the work is hardly typical of shunga. If there's a desire to include explicit erotica, I'd rather go with something by Utamaro, who was a prolific master of this stuff, and whose porn was far more typical in form and content (you can see lots at commons:CategoryKitagawa Utamaro‎ and commons:Shunga by Kitagawa Utamaro‎, and there's plenty more out there).
      • Oh, and plenty of the early shunga was an awful lot more explicit that the Sukenobu in the article; check out commons:Category:Shunga by Hishikawa Moronobu—that stuff goes right back to the very beginning. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • That's why I said like the image. Something explicit and representative of the genre would work. I think Utamaro's Amorous Couple is fairly common in reproduction. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:47, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • Can you link to the one you mean? There are a couple under that name, and I can't find the Japanese names for them—the images I've found though all have some kind of damage to them (wormholes or whatever). Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 12:45, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why the perfect tense in the Pre-history section? What does "had" add?
      • I suppose I meant "had, by the time ukiyo-e emerged". I 've dropped it, because it doesn't make a difference. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why the focus on wood block books in Pre-history?
      • Because the earliest ukiyo-e prints grew out of the woodblock books—Moronobu started in wooblock books, and then turned around and sold the individual pages: voila! ukiyo-e prints. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • the new capital of Edo and following... would this work better after you explain the context?
      • I've reversed the two paragraphs—can you check to make sure they work logically? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • shikomi-e - the type you are using here looks considerably different than the rest of the article
    • Moronobu was ... Moronobu was - ick
    • The paintings of Miyagawa Chōshun (1683–1752) portrayed early 18th-century life in delicate colours. Chōshun made no prints. - why not combine the two sentences, or rework this so that we don't have a really short sentence?
    • Would be nice if you standardised whether or not you italicize genre names.
      • It's hard to tell—we're supposed to italicize unfamiliar words and not italicize words that have become common English. I'm not sure exactly where the line is. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Consider linking New Year to Japanese New Year, or at least make it clear that you're referring to the lunar new year.
      • Hmmm ... I'm afraid that might come off as "eggy" as the context doesn't make it clear the link's not just to any old New Year, and Japanese New Year focuses on the post-1873 version. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Simply writing "lunar new year" might work. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:49, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • I put it in a footnote, since the fact that it was a lunar new year isn't immediately relevant. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:26, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Consider linking fine to Fine paper?
      • Fine paper seems to talk about a particular grade of paper, whereas this article just means "a higher grade"—in other words, just nicer than what was standard. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • amongst - Wikipedia is very much against "amongst", as it is considered old-fashioned.
      • I have no idea why Wikipedia would think that. I ran into this a while ago, and started asking around. Plenty of people continue to use "amongst" daily (including many Americans), and so far few of those I've brought it up with realized it was even a "thing". Canadian news sources continue to use it, even in titles for "high-falutin'" articles on ice hockey. I strongly suspect the prejudice against "amongst" is limited to writers who have been taught to hold a prejudice against it, totally out of step with the living language. (trivia: the "old-fashioned" amongst is actually newer to the language than among). Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • I believe it's mostly because a) among and amongst have the same meaning, essentially, meaning that b) the "st" is considered unnecessary. Don't seem to be able to find it in the MOS right now though. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:56, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • If it were a matter of length, we Commonwealthers would be spelling "colour" without a "u" all along (such spelling has a long pre-Revolution history). Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:15, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
            • Considering how you feel about this, I've left the remainder alone and may restore the earlier ones if you haven't beaten me to it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:20, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Eishōsai Chōki - I understand if we don't know his life span, but at least use (fl. 1786–1808)
    • though ukiyo-e had a long history preceding these late-era masters. - we've just read through that history; is this sentence really necessary?
      • Well, the point is that Westerners tend to ignore that earlier history, and many have come to associate ukiyo-e with landscapes. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • the latter an area rarely explored in the dictatorial atmosphere of the Edo era, a sign of the weakening of the Shogunate in mid-century. - could be read as the dictatorial nature was a sign of weakening
      • Reworded to "the latter an area rarely explored in the dictatorial atmosphere of the Edo era; that Kuniyoshia could dare tackle such subjects was a sign of the weakening of the Shogunate at the time". Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:52, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Will be back tomorrow. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:44, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hokusai was the star of his inaugural exhibition as first curator of Japanese art Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, and in Tokyo in 1898 he curated the first ukiyo-e exhibition in Japan - Sounds as if Hokusai was curator.
  • that Japanese critics have accused him of siphoning Japan of its national treasure. - later Japanese critics, I would assume, if the contemporary Japanese didn't care much per your earlier statement
  • "At the time of their introduction to the West, woodblock printing was the most common mass medium in Japan, and the Japanese considered it of little lasting value." ... "The drain first went unnoticed in Japan, as Japanese artists were immersing themselves in the classical painting techniques of the West." - Might be worth combining the two?
  • Whistler focused his attention on ephemeral elements of nature as in ukiyo-e landscapes. - Whistler did a lot more than that, as The Princess from the Land of Porcelain can bear witness to (check out the sakura flowers he later removed, the silk screen, and the kimono); worth mentioning? Not the painting, necessarily, but that it was not just nature which inspired Whistler.
    • Well, I was hoping not to get into an exhaustive list—there's the Japonism article for that. I was hoping to give an overview of different elements that made their way into Western art: focusing on "ephemeral elements of nature" was a new concept to Western art; including exotic images in the background was not. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Degas - you mentioned Degas earlier but didn't link him then.
  • Amy Lowell - Why do you give a full name here when almost every other artist has had just a family name?
  • Combing the hair - Why the miniscule h?
  • kindai hanga - You may have questions why you don't even mention this term in text
    • It's in a hidden comment in the text—"kindai hanga" is not set term for a movement or period in prints—it simply means "contemporary prints". If the term catches on in the literature it'll make sense to use the term, but so far all I see is Fiorello's web page—and even on that page, Fiorillo only uses it in the title, adn prefers "'Modern' and 'contemporary' Japanese prints" (with scarequotes) in the body. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Earlier or early? (#Style)
  • Any of these look interesting?
    • Yes, and some of them (the face made of bodies) are quite famous, but I think they're out of scope. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:20, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unrestricted by the technical restraints of printing, - restricted and restraints in the same sentence feels clunky
  • Not quite sure what the value of #Painting is
    • Sorry? Painting was a major part of ukiyo-e. They're "pictures of the floating world", not "prints of the floating world"—several masters never produced a print. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • It looks like you are focusing on Japanese painting in general there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:20, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • The techniques described are those of the ukiyo-e painters; of course there's some overlap with Japanese painting in general, but things such as "delineat[ing] contours with sumi ink" are specific to the ukiyo-e world. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:20, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • by rubbing with agate to brighten colours; - rubbing what?
  • were only in black ink. - what about "used only black ink"?
  • Arashi Ryuzo - I'm very surprised that there's no article here, and no link to a Japanese article. I'd have thought the sale would have drawn considerable attention to Ryuzo.
    • There is no page for him, just a page that mentions him in the lineage of actors who at some point took the name "Arashi Shichigorou". Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ukiyo-e often went through multiple editions, sometimes with changes made to the blocks in later editions. Editions made from recut woodblocks also circulate, such as legitimate later reproductions, - I'd migrate this north, as it seems to work better near the discussion of the values of reprints
  • The first exhibition in Japan of ukiyo-e prints was likely one presented by Kōjirō Matsukata in 1925, - Didn't you mention exhibition by that American earlier, which predates Matsukata's exhibition?
    • Hmmm ... the book definitely says "Some of the prints were put on show. This was believed to be the first ever exhibition of Ukiyo-e prints held in Japan." I've totally screwed up the Fenollosa citation—it is not in the Meech-Pakarik book. I'm going to have to hunt through the references before I can fix this. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Aargh! The citation was right, I clicked through to Meech-Pakarik 1986 instead of Meech-Pakarik 1982 when checking it. Meech-Pakarik 1982 says that Fenollosa "collaborated for several years with the Tokyo dealer Kobayashi Bunshichi ...Kobayashi and Fenollosa staged an ukiyo-e print exhibition in Tokyo in 1898 that is thought to be the first ever held in Japan." It cites the 1898 catalogue for the show. I've dropped the 1925 claim. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 22:29, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Anything on the MET and the LOC? Both have fairly extensive ukiyo-e holdings, from what I can tell. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:50, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've downloaded a shitpile from both of them, especially Sharaku stuff. Downloading, reuploading, and properly tagging all that stuff takes a lot of time though ... Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sharaku's portrait of Arashi Ryūzō ... you mean this? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:20, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Prosperosity comments[edit]
  • Do you think Takashina Shūji (高階秀爾)'s 日本美術を見る眼　東と西の出会い (1991) should be mentioned? I read an excerpt from Suwa Haruo's book on perspective (lemme see that it's called...諏訪春雄 - 日本人と遠近法 ちくま新書, 1998), and Suwa pointed out that even though Takashina's book was in 1991, it was the first to ever link the lack of perspective with a distinctiveness in Japanese art. Suwa also talked about interactions with the west's ideas of perspective showing up a lot in ukiyo-e, pointing out Suzuki Harunobu's お仙と団扇売り, since you can see the torii in the background getting smaller with distance, but the woman is still contorted as if the frame of reference was taken from multiple angles. I see perspective gets mentioned a couple times in passing, but one of the times ("...was generally thought inferior to Western works which emphasized mastery of naturalistic perspective and anatomy.") implies that perspective and anatomy in ukiyo-e is significantly different to Western art, but the article doesn't really explain why. The book also talks a lot about the stance of bijin (how they're 蛇体姿勢 and not straight up and down, even when they're up and down they're looking behind, etc). Even though these were aspects of Japanese art in general, greater emphasis might be needed on perspective/anatomy, especially since it was apparently these that influenced a lot of Western artists. --Prosperosity (talk) 06:27, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Both books are in local libraries, so I'll check them out tomorrow. Question: when you say "should be mentioned", do you mean cited, or mentioned with someone like Suwa as a citation? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 07:21, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • I assume this is the Harunobu you're talking about. I'm having trouble coming up with stuff online that says anything about 蛇体姿勢—everything I'm coming across talks about 怪談話 about women literally turning into snakes. I'm sure there's some other vocabulry that refers to this kind of thing, but I'm not familiar with it. Any other sources you could point out would be helpful. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 09:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's the one that was in there! You can see how osen's head and legs are painfully contorted, if you actually give sitting like that a go. I meant Takashina being mentioned in the text, since apparently he was the first one who linked Japanese perspective with the idea that it was a positive, genre-based thing and not just Japanese painters being less superior to Western ones, even though it was 150 years later. These are Suwa's opinions, not mine, so since you've got a chance to look you can evaluate his arguments yourself! I've had a quick search of 立美人図+姿勢 and nothing special was coming up. He'd listed the term as 「蛇体姿勢」 when writing, so apparently it's not his own, perhaps Takashina's. --Prosperosity (talk) 02:28, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't come across the term 「蛇体姿勢」 yet, but there are two whole chapters on perspective in ukiyo-e in the book. I'm going to see if I can boil the whole two chapters down to a paragraph. It's a bit disappointing the book has no index ... and it's a dinky little book with even dinkier little b&w reproductions of the artwork. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 03:59, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Try page 103! Ooh, I see, it was a term Wakakuwa Midori used (I'd somehow thought 104 was the first time it had come up). The artwork is really awful, you'd expect a book dealing with art to at least reproduce it nicely! --Prosperosity (talk) 08:52, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Ukiyo-e/archive2&oldid=613369898"