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
that Bushell in the other passage was influenced by the statement in
the _T’ung ya_ that it was a furnace transmutation piece, a statement
probably based on the superstition that it was a miraculous likeness
of the goddess, who herself descended into the kiln and moulded its
features. As to the other temple tradition, that it was made in the
thirteenth century, it is not necessary to take that any more seriously
than the myth concerning its miraculous origin, which derives from the
same source.
It is hardly necessary to state that all the existing specimens of this
class (and they are fairly numerous) do not belong to the Hsüan Tê
period. Indeed, it is unlikely that more than a very small percentage
of them were made in this short reign. Whether the style survived the
Ming dynasty is an open question; but it is safe to assume that it was
largely used in the sixteenth century.
The discussion of this group of polychrome porcelain leads naturally
to the vexed question of the introduction of enamel painting over the
glaze. By the latter I mean the painting of designs on the finished
white glaze in vitrifiable enamels, which were subsequently fixed in
the gentle heat of the muffle kiln (_lu_)--_couleurs de petit feu_, as
the French have named them. No help can be got from the phraseology of
the Chinese, for they use _wu ts’ai_ or _wu sê_ (lit. five colours)
indifferently for all kinds of polychrome decoration, regardless of
the number of colours involved or the mode of application. There is,
however, no room for doubt that the delicate enamel painting, for which
the reign of Ch’êng Hua (1465–1487) was celebrated, was executed with
the brush over the fired glaze. It is inconceivable that the small,
eggshell wine cups with peony flowers and a hen and chicken “instinct
with life and movement” could have been limned by any other method.
If this is the case, then what could the Chinese writers mean when
they contrasted the _wu ts’ai_ ornament of the Hsüan Tê and Ch’êng
Hua periods, but that the same process of painting was in use in both
reigns? The Ch’êng Hua colours were more artistic because they were
thin and delicately graded, while the Hsüan Tê _wu ts’ai_ were too
thickly applied.[45] For this reason, if for no other, we may rightly
infer that painting in on-glaze enamels was practised in the Hsüan Tê
period, if, indeed, it had not been long in use.[46]
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account