Chinese pottery and porcelain; vol. 1. Pottery and early waresHobson, R. L. (Robert Lockhart)
History
Chinese pottery and porcelain; vol. 1. Pottery and early wares
Hobson, R. L. (Robert Lockhart)
Porcelain, Chinese; Pottery, Chinese
tints in the thick, uneven, bubbly glazes of the Sung and Yüan wares are
due to opalescence alone. This has been proved to demonstration by Mr.
Burton, who has produced from his kilns a porcelain glaze with passages of
pale lavender, and even flushes of warm red, by using nothing but a thick,
opalescent glaze entirely innocent of any colouring oxide.
Finally, a word of explanation is needed with regard to the frequent
references to thinly potted specimens among the principal Sung wares.
Almost all of the existing examples are of a thick and rather heavy type.
Not that we would have them thinner, for much of their charm is due to the
massive opulence of the thick opalescent glaze with its prismatic depths
and changing hues. But the Chinese writers constantly refer to a thinner
ware as well as the thick. Where are these thin and elegant pieces?
The suggestion that, being more fragile, they have by now all perished
has been coldly received as an obvious and easy answer to a difficult
question. But it is reasonable enough, after all, when one remembers that
upwards of a thousand years have passed since their manufacture. The
alternative that they existed only in the poetical imagination of later
Chinese writers is far less probable, though doubtless account must be
taken of the exaggerations indulged in by men who were describing the
ideal wares of a classic period. "Thin as paper," for instance, must
have been a poetic licence as applied to the Ch´ai ware. I shall not
cite the illustrations in the Album of Hsiang Yüan-p´ien[93] as proof of
the fineness and trim regularity of the best Sung specimens. Whatever
the value of this manuscript may originally have been, no reliance can
be placed on the illustrations as reproduced in _Porcelain of Different
Dynasties_.[94] The original was unfortunately destroyed by fire in 1888,
and what we have now is, at best, the reproduction of a copy, and probably
that of a copy of a copy. It is quite possible that the thinner Sung wares
are still represented in Chinese collections, rare though they must of
necessity be. But I believe that even our own collections are capable of
supplying proof that, making reasonable allowance for verbal exaggeration,
the Sung potters did make wares which could fairly be described as thin.
Many of the white Ting wares are thin enough to be translucent; no one
questions the correctness of the description as applied to them. It only
wants one specimen to prove the case for the celadon glazes, and that may
be seen in the beautiful bowl in Mr. Alexander's loan collection at the
Victoria and Albert Museum (Plate 16). As for the Ju and Kuan ware, it is
useless to consider their case until we are quite satisfied that we have
established their identity; and in the nature of things the opalescent
glazes and those described as "thick as massed lard" by the Chinese can
only have accompanied a relatively thin body. On the other hand, many
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account