Page 33 - BSAM 2016 Q3

stones in his 1967 book, How to Collect and Enjoy Suiseki. He was opposed to modifying stones just to add value and to deceive others. Instead, he advocated that enhancing the beauty of stones should be accepted to a certain degree. Saruta illustrated how to suspend a stone in an acid bath to modify the surface of the stone. is is another indication that some suiseki were being produced by working the stone to varying degrees.
Further evidence that stones were being worked extensively, and not just on the bottom, is obtained from Tanaka Kouki’s book, Small Stones for Hobby: from Searching to Appreciation, published in 1967. Tanaka believed that polishing and processing stones enhances and deepens the beauty that suiseki holds. He included a chapter in his book to illustrate the tools and materials used in modifying stones, as well as a series of simple line drawings showing how to alter a stone by removing portions to make it look more like a natural mountain stone. Tanaka shows how to make a lake in a mountain stone. Other line drawings show how to make other types of suiseki.
The concept of removing parts of a stone to improve its appearance was not limited to Tanaka’s largely obscure book, but it was discussed by suiseki leader Murata Keiji in his book, Encyclopedia of Suiseki Hobby (1969). Murata wrote about the limits of “worked out” stones by saying, “yes to removing stone, but no to adding to the stone.” is was, in e ect, setting the limits to the level of working stones. Further evidence to support this concept is found in an essay in Matsuura and Yoshimura’s well known classic work, An Overview of Japanese Suiseki Masterpieces (1988). In describing suiseki, the authors wrote “As a principle, no works are allowed. However, it has been said that removing is acceptable, but no adding.”
Articles describing the different methods used in stone enhancement were being replaced with photographic essays of attractive stones. Published works in the last two decades are largely silent on the matter of enhancements except to brie y state that it was acceptable to alter the bottom of a stone. Matsuura’s 2010 English language book, An Introduction to Suiseki, supported limited basal alterations. Matsuura emphasized and promoted Japanese suiseki as natural stones in his lectures in North America and Europe. Kasahara Manabu, former chairman of the Nippon Suiseki Association, also stated in his book, Notes on Suiseki, published in 2013, that altering the bottom of stones was acceptable.
Even though the emphasis today in the West is on natural stones, some worked stones are regularly displayed in major exhibitions in Japan. A carefully examination of the stones in each of the major displays will reveal several stones with bottom cuts. One example is a large Kamo River Mountain shaped stone which was included in the 1987 Taikan-ten and a photograph of it published in their display catalog for that year. Another example is the nearly perfect suiseki, a two-peaked Saji River stone, exhibited in the 3rd Japan Suiseki Exhibition in Tokyo in 2016.
e evidence that Japanese suiseki were enhanced by altering stones, especially stones from the Ibi, Abe, Sajigawa and other rivers, is overwhelming. Despite the fact that some Japanese suiseki enthusiasts did not support the modi cation of stones, numerous articles were published in books and newsletters showing how stones can be modi ed to appear more natural. e demand for attractive landscape stones was great during the 1960s and 1970s, the peak of the boom among hobbyists in stone appreciation in Japan. Many of these pieces were so well-made that serious collectors and even dealers could not tell the altered from the unaltered. e fact that no records were kept of each of the worked stones as they passed from stone carver to dealer to collector helped to obscure the origin of each stone. us, it is time to dispense with the myth that Japanese suiseki are all natural and recognize that a signi cant number of stones held in collections and shown in exhibitions have been worked to some degree. Our ndings blur the distinction between rocks displayed as found objects and a sculpted rock that is treated as an art object. e lines between the collector and the artist evaporate in regards to Japanese suiseki.
Top; The authenticity of this nearly perfect mountain shaped stone from the Kamo River was seriously questioned a year after it was purchased. It was sold as a natural stone with only slight work on the bottom; however, leading Japanese suiseki specialists said it was de nitely “worked out.”This is a very atypical shape for a natural stone from a fast owing river.
Bottom; This Kamo River stone was displayed in the 1987 Taikan-ten in Kyoto and later published in the catalog for that exhibition. It is a beautiful island or mountain stone that was made by a single basal cut from a larger rock. This large stone was recognized as the best mountain suiseki in the World Bonsai Convention in Washington, D.C. in 2005.
July/August/September 2016 | BCI | 31