Asianart.com | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries

Hello to all! I am pleased to know someone can help identify the artist of this wonderful little woodblock. It measures 5 1/4" x 3 3/4" and features a group of Japanese women caught in the rain with parasols. 2 of them appear to be Geishas. I'd love to know who the third figure is and perhaps the title? Especially the age and artist. It's a lovely piece! I did my best to make the image small enough to fit here. I do hope it can be viewed. Arigato! :-)

You have a woodblock print copy of two pages from an ehon (Two Geisha and Porter in Wind and Rain at Night, from Vol. 2 of the book Ehon shiki no hana (Flowers of the Four Seasons). The artist is Kitagawa Utamaro. The original was printed in 1801. When yours was printed is unknown.

The Boston MFA has the pages referenced. Cut and paste this link in your browser:

http://www.mfa.org/collections/object/two-geisha-and-porter-in-wind-and-rain-at-night-from-vol-2-of-the-book-ehon-shiki-no-hana-flowers-of-the-four-seasons-252185

Cheers,
Stan

Stan, I am thrilled and grateful for your expertise! And especially to know who the artist was! I will study more about him:) So this was cut from a book, if I understand you? I did notice there was no stamp, I think it's called, on the print. Is this important? Forgive me for more questions! I do have a curious mind! Regardless, I am so appreciative of your help!
Warm regards, Susana

Susana,

I may not have been clear enough in what I said. The original print(s) were two facing pages in a book. See below for an example. Copy and paste the URL to see a picture of them at the Boston MFA.

I doubt your print was cut from a book. Your print, because it is so small, may have been part of a larger print that was cut up. My guess is that it is a later reproduction using the original Utamaro book as source material. It does have Utamaro's signature on it. I don't know what you mean by stamp. Japanese woodblock prints don't have stamps like Chinese paintings.

I suspect it was done long after Utamaro was dead. If I had to guess, based on the color palette, I would guess in the later 1800s - say 1860+. I believe those reds and blues weren't available until the mid 1800s and after the Meiji restoration. However, that is a real guess and I wouldn't lend it much credence.

Cheers,
Stan

Stan, you are such a help! I so appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions! BUT, is this considered an "Original" print from the Original Woodblock? Done at a later date. I did look at the image on BMFA. Lovely! But this little print does seems to be a complete image, and not "cut"? I forgot to mention someone printed in pencil the name "PRELL" and A-910 in the lower margin. Any guesses who this might have been? Sorry to sound so confused and ask more questions! I promise these will be my last!
And I guess I did get the red stamp confused with Chinese prints. Sorry! :-) Arigato so much!
Susana

Susana,

I think your print might part of a harimaze zu page (cut out pictures). I couldn't remember the term last night when I needed it.

Copy and paste this link in your browser for an example:

http://www.mfa.org/collections/object/no-2-hodogaya-totsuka-fujisawa-hiratsuka-iso-from-the-series-cutouts-for-the-fifty-three-stations-goj-san-tsugi-harimaze-also-called-cutout-pictures-of-the-t-kaid-road-t-kaid-harimaze-zue-328142

Cheers,
Stan

"is this considered an "Original" print from the Original Woodblock?"

It is a reproduction.

Hello Jim! I just hate to "Bore" everyone with my questions on such a TINY print! :-) But here goes: When you say "Reproduction", what do you mean? Are you saying it ISN'T a Woodblock print?
I thought it was Printed using the original woodblock, due to the back of the paper? Poor Stan has tried to explain it to me, but I seem just too confused! I promise not to bother you after this last question! :-) I just love to learn! Thank you!!
Susana

Let's define terms:

1) "original" - Printed using the woodblocks that were created from the artist's work (sketch or painting). Sometimes prints are printed from the original blocks posthumously. These are tough to identify and it might turn on the paper used or some other detail (wear on the blocks or ink used). Note that the artist's original work is cut up to produce the original blocks and, therefore, can't be used to create another set of blocks.

2) "reproduction" - everything else. The reproduction method can be via woodblocks (your case), Xerox machine, FAX, offset printing, etc.

The "original" blocks in this case were used to create two book pages. Thus, there were two sets (one block for the black lines (key block) and a block for each color) of several blocks (1 set for each page) used to create the images in the book. Your print was made from a single set of blocks and, thus, can not possibly be from the original blocks.

As I said, my best guess is that your print was made no earlier than several decades after the artist's death. It could have been made 50 years ago depending on the life of the print and its exposure to elements (light, heat, etc.) that would cause premature aging.

Cheers,
Stan

For more detail, read the following:
http://viewingjapaneseprints.net/texts/topictexts/faq/faq_original.html

Cheers,
Stan

URL Title :Original Woodblock Prints

Oh Dear! More information for my poor brain! :-)
I'll do my best to study the link. And again, I can't thank you enough for your patience with me!
My problem is to describe it correctly to list on ebay, as that is what I do for a living, and don't want to mis-lead any potential buyers! :-)
Cheers Stan!!
S

Just to show how copies proliferate, here is a big version of that print on the Goodwill auction site. We don't know how the Goodwill reproduction was made.

Cheers,
Stan

URL Title :Goodwill Print

Asianart.com | Associations | Articles | Exhibitions | Galleries |