Chinese pottery and porcelain; vol. 2. Ming and Ch'ing PorcelainHobson, R. L. (Robert Lockhart)
History
Chinese pottery and porcelain; vol. 2. Ming and Ch'ing Porcelain
Hobson, R. L. (Robert Lockhart)
Porcelain, Chinese; Pottery, Chinese
Probably these observations are in the main correct, but experience
shows that relative opacity and glazed bases are by no means confined
to modern wares. Still, if the collector aims at acquiring pieces of
good colour, whether cream or milk white, with translucent body, pure
glaze and sharp modelling, he is not likely to go far astray.
The description quoted above of the painting of modern Fukien ware
is interesting in view of the common assertion that the Tê-hua white
porcelain was never painted. This assertion is probably based on a
passage in the first letter of Père d’Entrecolles: “Celle (i.e. la
porcelaine) de Fou-kien est d’un blanc de neige qui n’a nul éclat et
qui n’est point mélangé de couleurs.” On the other hand, a distinct
reference is made to the painting in colours in a modern Chinese
work.[257] Unfortunately, the question has been complicated by the
existence of many pieces of Fukien white which have been enamelled
in Europe. In the first half of the eighteenth century in Holland,
Germany, and elsewhere, there were decorators busy enamelling white
porcelain of whatever kind they could get, and the _blanc de
chine_ offered a ready subject for this treatment. The decoration
thus added was usually in Oriental taste, and might be confused with
indifferent Chinese work. Many of these pieces are in the British
Museum. On the other hand, there are in the same collection two
cups with roughly painted floral designs in green and red which
are obviously Chinese, though they might well have been painted in
the mechanical method described by Mr. Dukes, which was probably
traditional. Mr. Eumorfopoulos possesses several good examples of this
painted Fukien ware, one of which may be described to show the style
of painting affected. It is executed in leaf green, lustrous red, and
the turquoise green which we associate with the Wan Li period, and
the form--a double-bottomed bowl--is likewise reminiscent of the Ming
dynasty.
The Japanese, whose traditions have often proved most misleading,
have frequently classed the Fukien white as Corean porcelain
(_haku-gorai_ or white Corean), probably because specimens reached
them from the Corean ports. In the British Museum, for instance, there
is a beautiful white incense vase, formerly in the collection of Mr.
Ninagawa of Tokio, and labelled by him as “Corean porcelain, 500 years
old.” It has all the characteristics of the finest cream white Fukien
ware of late Ming or K’ang Hsi period, and if this piece is Corean,
then I do not believe that even the subtle perception of the Japanese
could find any difference between Corean and Fukien white. It is only
right to add that other Japanese experts have pronounced it Chinese.
Incidentally, I may mention that the base of this vase is glazed.
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