Research identifies how kasen-e printed books reflect Edo Period's desire for Heian court refinement, suggesting cultural continuity.
People of the Edo Period (1603–1868) longed for the refinement of the Heian court and had it deeply rooted on their minds. This study will research this longing in the publications of printed books with kasen-e. Moreover, by examining the transition and characteristics of these works, various aspects of the inheritance of tradition and innovation will be added to the history of early modern publishing culture. First, a chronological table of printed books with kasen-e published in the Edo period will be presented, in order to get an overall view (it is geared to the woodblockprinted books, and as a general rule, this excludes the variants of hyakunin isshu and the variants of sanjūrokkasen, and ōraimono). The chronological table lists a total of 88 titles, starting with sagabon Sanjūrokkasen (published around Keichō era, tokuōhon, 1 volume), and ending with Teika sen kin’yōshō (published in Ansei 3/1856, ōhon, 1volume). And then, each of the following categories will be examined: A: book size, B: publisher, C: book cover, D: artist, and E: multi-colored print to grasp the overall characteristics and trends. In particular, the following six artists will be focused on: (D-1) HISHIKAWA Moronobu, (D-2) NISHIKAWA Sukenobu, (D-3) HASEGAWA Mitsunobu, (D-4) KATSUKAWA Shunshō, (D-5) TOSA Mitsusada, and (D-6) KITA Busei. The characteristics of each representative work will be analyzed. Based on those results, the entire situation in the Edo period will be surveyed and various aspects of the tradition and innovation of kasen-e illustrated in printed books will come into light. *This study is a translated version of KANSAKU Ken’ichi’s “Edo no ōchōbi: Kasen-e iri kanpon no tenkai.” In Kinsei wakashi no kenkyū (Tokyo: Kadokawa Gakugei Shuppan, 2013).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ken’ichi KANSAKU (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: