Fig. 116.—Tea-Caddy.
We cannot do better than to quote from Jacquemart:
“A radical difference separates the two countries as regards drawing. At Niphon the figures, though affected, and too much resembling each other not to be the produce of ‘pouncing,’ have a simple grace and softness, the evident reflex of Oriental manners. Certainly, it is not an imitation of Nature; it is not art, such as we understand it, with its complex qualities; but it is a dreamy act, a first manifestation of thought under form. A scene of frequent occurrence represents two women standing, one upon a rose, the other upon a leaf, and thus floating upon the waves in an aureole of clouds: the first, elegantly attired, holds a sceptre; the second is her attendant, and carries a basket of flowers passed through a kind of lance or instrument for ploughing. According to the indications of the Japanese Pantheon, it is the goddess of the seas or patroness of fishermen. It matters little which it may be; but, by the modest grace of the attitude, the easy elegance of the draperies, this painting approaches the graceful vellums of our artists of the middle ages. The birds and plants partake of these merits, and are truthfully drawn, the details most delicately rendered. Nothing is more beautiful than these venerated silver pheasants, the proud-looking cocks perched upon the rocks or lost among the flowers; nothing more charming than certain crested blackbirds with rose-colored breasts, and other passerine birds of beautiful plumage.”
While it is true that the Japanese flower-painting approaches nearer to Nature than the Chinese, it does not seem correct to say that it approaches to, or is, a copy of Nature. It is difficult to see anything which is not treated freely and strongly rather than naturally.
Some of the decorations peculiar to Japan may be mentioned as follows:
The kiri, or flower of the paulownia.
The imperial three-clawed dragon.