CHAPTER 05

V. Art Appreciation

Have you heard the Taoist tale of the Taming of the Harp?

Once in the hoary ages in the Ravine of Lungmen stood a Kiri tree, a veritable king of the forest.

It reared its head to talk to the stars; its roots struck deep into the earth, mingling their bronzed coils with those of the silver dragon that slept beneath.

And it came to pass that a mighty wizard made of this tree a wondrous harp,

whose stubborn spirit should be tamed but by the greatest of musicians.

For long the instrument was treasured by the Emperor of China,

but all in vain were the efforts of those who in turn tried to draw melody from its strings.

In response to their utmost strivings there came from the harp but harsh notes of disdain,

ill-according with the songs they fain would sing. The harp refused to recognise a master.

At last came Peiwoh, the prince of harpists.

With tender hand he caressed the harp as one might seek to soothe an unruly horse,

and softly touched the chords.

He sang of nature and the seasons, of high mountains and flowing waters,

and all the memories of the tree awoke!

Once more the sweet breath of spring played amidst its branches.

The young cataracts, as they danced down the ravine, laughed to the budding flowers.

Anon were heard the dreamy voices of summer with its myriad insects,

the gentle pattering of rain, the wail of the cuckoo.

Hark! a tiger roars,--the valley answers again.

It is autumn; in the desert night,

sharp like a sword gleams the moon upon the frosted grass.

Now winter reigns, and through the snow-filled air swirl flocks of swans,

and rattling hailstones beat upon the boughs with fierce delight.

Then Peiwoh changed the key and sang of love.

The forest swayed like an ardent swain deep lost in thought.

On high, like a haughty maiden, swept a cloud bright and fair;

but passing, trailed long shadows on the ground, black like despair.

Again the mode was changed; Peiwoh sang of war, of clashing steel and trampling steeds.

And in the harp arose the tempest of Lungmen,

the dragon rode the lightning, the thundering avalanche crashed through the hills.

In ecstasy the Celestial monarch asked Peiwoh wherein lay the secret of his victory.

"Sire," he replied, "others have failed because they sang but of themselves.

I left the harp to choose its theme, and knew not truly whether the harp had been Peiwoh or Peiwoh were the harp."

This story well illustrates the mystery of art appreciation.

The masterpiece is a symphony played upon our finest feelings.

True art is Peiwoh, and we the harp of Lungmen.

At the magic touch of the beautiful the secret chords of our being are awakened,

we vibrate and thrill in response to its call.

Mind speaks to mind.

We listen to the unspoken, we gaze upon the unseen.

The master calls forth notes we know not of.

Memories long forgotten all come back to us with a new significance.

Hopes stifled by fear, yearnings that we dare not recognise, stand forth in new glory.

Our mind is the canvas on which the artists lay their colour;

their pigments are our emotions;

their chiaroscuro the light of joy, the shadow of sadness.

The masterpiece is of ourselves, as we are of the masterpiece.

The sympathetic communion of minds necessary for art appreciation must be based on mutual concession.

The spectator must cultivate the proper attitude for receiving the message, as the artist must know how to impart it.

The tea-master, Kobori-Enshiu, himself a daimyo, has left to us these memorable words:

"Approach a great painting as thou wouldst approach a great prince."

In order to understand a masterpiece, you must lay yourself low before it and await with bated breath its least utterance.

An eminent Sung critic once made a charming confession.

Said he: "In my young days I praised the master whose pictures I liked,

but as my judgement matured I praised myself for liking what the masters had chosen to have me like."

It is to be deplored that so few of us really take pains to study the moods of the masters.

In our stubborn ignorance we refuse to render them this simple courtesy,

and thus often miss the rich repast of beauty spread before our very eyes.

A master has always something to offer, while we go hungry solely because of our own lack of appreciation.

To the sympathetic a masterpiece becomes a living reality towards which we feel drawn in bonds of comradeship.

The masters are immortal,

for their loves and fears live in us over and over again.

It is rather the soul than the hand, the man than the technique, which appeals to us,

the more human the call the deeper is our response.

It is because of this secret understanding between the master and ourselves

that in poetry or romance we suffer and rejoice with the hero and heroine.

Chikamatsu, our Japanese Shakespeare, has laid down as one of the first principles of dramatic composition

the importance of taking the audience into the confidence of the author.

Several of his pupils submitted plays for his approval, but only one of the pieces appealed to him.

It was a play somewhat resembling the Comedy of Errors, in which twin brethren suffer through mistaken identity.

"This," said Chikamatsu, "has the proper spirit of the drama,

for it takes the audience into consideration. The public is permitted to know more than the actors.

It knows where the mistake lies, and pities the poor figures on the board who innocently rush to their fate."

The great masters both of the East and the West never forgot the value of suggestion

as a means for taking the spectator into their confidence.

Who can contemplate a masterpiece without being awed by the immense vista of thought presented to our consideration?

How familiar and sympathetic are they all;

how cold in contrast the modern commonplaces!

In the former we feel the warm outpouring of a man's heart;

in the latter only a formal salute.

Engrossed in his technique, the modern rarely rises above himself.

Like the musicians who vainly invoked the Lungmen harp, he sings only of himself.

His works may be nearer science, but are further from humanity.

We have an old saying in Japan that a woman cannot love a man who is truly vain,

for their is no crevice in his heart for love to enter and fill up.

In art vanity is equally fatal to sympathetic feeling, whether on the part of the artist or the public.

Nothing is more hallowing than the union of kindred spirits in art.

At the moment of meeting, the art lover transcends himself.

At once he is and is not.

He catches a glimpse of Infinity, but words cannot voice his delight, for the eye has no tongue.

Freed from the fetters of matter, his spirit moves in the rhythm of things.

It is thus that art becomes akin to religion and ennobles mankind.

It is this which makes a masterpiece something sacred.

In the old days the veneration in which the Japanese held the work of the great artist was intense.

The tea-masters guarded their treasures with religious secrecy,

and it was often necessary to open a whole series of boxes, one within another, before reaching the shrine itself--the silken wrapping within whose soft folds lay the holy of holies.

Rarely was the object exposed to view, and then only to the initiated.

At the time when Teaism was in the ascendency the Taiko's generals would be better satisfied with the present of a rare work of art

than a large grant of territory as a reward of victory.

Many of our favourite dramas are based on the loss and recovery of a noted masterpiece.

For instance, in one play

the palace of Lord Hosokawa, in which was preserved the celebrated painting of Dharuma by Sesson,

suddenly takes fire through the negligence of the samurai in charge.

Resolved at all hazards to rescue the precious painting, he rushes into the burning building and seizes the kakemono,

only to find all means of exit cut off by the flames.

Thinking only of the picture, he slashes open his body with his sword,

wraps his torn sleeve about the Sesson and plunges it into the gaping wound.

The fire is at last extinguished.

Among the smoking embers is found a half-consumed corps,

within which reposes the treasure uninjured by the fire.

Horrible as such tales are, they illustrate the great value that we set upon a masterpiece, as well as the devotion of a trusted samurai.

We must remember, however, that art is of value only to the extent that it speaks to us.

It might be a universal language if we ourselves were universal in our sympathies.

Our finite nature, the power of tradition and conventionality, as well as our hereditary instincts, restrict the scope of our capacity for artistic enjoyment.

Our very individuality establishes in one sense a limit to our understanding;

and our aesthetic personality seeks its own affinities in the creations of the past.

It is true that with cultivation our sense of art appreciation broadens, and we become able to enjoy many hitherto unrecognised expressions of beauty.

But, after all, we see only our own image in the universe,--our particular idiosyncracies dictate the mode of our perceptions.

The tea-masters collected only objects which fell strictly within the measure of their individual appreciation.

One is reminded in this connection of a story concerning Kobori-Enshiu.

Enshiu was complimented by his disciples on the admirable taste he had displayed in the choice of his collection.

Said they, "Each piece is such that no one could help admiring.

It shows that you had better taste than had Rikiu,

for his collection could only be appreciated by one beholder in a thousand."

Sorrowfully Enshiu replied: "This only proves how commonplace I am.

The great Rikiu dared to love only those objects which personally appealed to him,

whereas I unconsciously cater to the taste of the majority.

Verily, Rikiu was one in a thousand among tea-masters."

It is much to be regretted that so much of the apparent enthusiasm for art at the present day has no foundation in real feeling.

In this democratic age of ours men clamour for what is popularly considered the best, regardless of their feelings.

They want the costly, not the refined; the fashionable, not the beautiful.

To the masses, contemplation of illustrated periodicals, the worthy product of their own industrialism,

would give more digestible food for artistic enjoyment than the early Italians or the Ashikaga masters, whom they pretend to admire.

The name of the artist is more important to them than the quality of the work.

As a Chinese critic complained many centuries ago, "People criticise a picture by their ear."

It is this lack of genuine appreciation that is responsible for the pseudo-classic horrors that to-day greet us wherever we turn.

Another common mistake is that of confusing art with archaeology.

The veneration born of antiquity is one of the best traits in the human character, and fain would we have it cultivated to a greater extent.

The old masters are rightly to be honoured for opening the path to future enlightenment.

The mere fact that they have passed unscathed through centuries of criticism and come down to us still covered with glory commands our respect.

But we should be foolish indeed if we valued their achievement simply on the score of age.

Yet we allow our historical sympathy to override our aesthetic discrimination.

We offer flowers of approbation when the artist is safely laid in his grave.

The nineteenth century, pregnant with the theory of evolution, has moreover created in us the habit of losing sight of the individual in the species.

A collector is anxious to acquire specimens to illustrate a period or a school,

and forgets that a single masterpiece can teach us more than any number of the mediocre products of a given period or school.

We classify too much and enjoy too little.

The sacrifice of the aesthetic to the so-called scientific method of exhibition has been the bane of many museums.

The claims of contemporary art cannot be ignored in any vital scheme of life.

The art of to-day is that which really belongs to us: it is our own reflection.

In condemning it we but condemn ourselves.

We say that the present age possesses no art:--who is responsible for this?

It is indeed a shame that despite all our rhapsodies about the ancients we pay so little attention to our own possibilities.

Struggling artists, weary souls lingering in the shadow of cold disdain!

In our self-centered century, what inspiration do we offer them?

The past may well look with pity at the poverty of our civilisation;

the future will laugh at the barrenness of our art.

We are destroying the beautiful in life.

Would that some great wizard might from the stem of society shape a mighty harp whose strings would resound to the touch of genius.

前の章IV. The Tea-Room