Talk:East Asian calligraphy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject China, a project to improve all China-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other China-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (see comments)
More information about this article... Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project’s quality scale.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project’s importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the East Asian calligraphy article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

WikiProject Echo has identified East Asian calligraphy as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the French language Wikipedia.

Contents 1 Seiseki Abe 2 suggestions for consensus on main translation of script names 3 Origins of seal and clerical script updated 4 origins of standard, or regular, script updated 5 Every script was originally brush written 6 New image 7 Rename 8 Image for Brush Holding

[edit] Seiseki Abe

I would like to suggest an article on one of the gratest caligraphers in modern Japan, the master Seiseki Abe. Besides being one best shodo teachers in the world today, he's also an Aikido master, holder of 10th degree. A direct disciple of the founder of Aikido (Ueshiba), and at the same time Ueshiba's caligraphy teacher. His work is simply breathtaking. I recomend urgency on this matter due to fact that Abe sensei is very old.

[edit] suggestions for consensus on main translation of script names

I strongly feel that Wiki should be using, as the main translations and page titles, the terms used by influential educators and scholars. I am proposing to use the following as the primary terms-- oracle bone script (not oracle script); Zhou bronze script (specifying Zhou if that is the period, since bronze is a medium for inscriptions from the mid Shang to Han and onward); clerical (not official or scribal) script; cursive (not grass or draft) script; semi-cursive (with running hand secondary) script; and as for kaishu, I cannot identify a standard term -- reputable scholars seem to use all three forms (standard, regular, & "kaishu"). For each script, the primary term should be used on each page mentioning it, while all the secondary terms can be mentioned once in a box on the main page for each script style.Dragonbones 09:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

• support. if you have the proper references that verify the most common english name, you should just go ahead and change it. Appleby 17:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that there's no published survey asking professors which term is most common; the best we can do is have a look at textbooks and scholarly articles to get a feel for whether there's any consensus. The above is my read on that consensus; certainly the terms official, scribal, grass and draft are not dominant standards, although each can be found. I cite Qiu Xigui in translation by Norman and Mattos for the preferred usages. Dragonbones 08:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Reference:

裘錫圭 Qiú Xīguī (2000). Chinese Writing. Translation of his 文字學概論 (1988 PRC ed. in simpl. Chin.; 1993 Taiwan ed. in reg. Chin.) by the late Gilbert L. Mattos (Chairman, Dept. of Asian Studies, Seton Hall University) and Jerry Norman (Professor Emeritus, Asian Languages & Literature Dept., Univ. of Washington). Early China Special Monograph Series No. 4. Berkeley: The Society for the Study of Early China and the Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley. ISBN 1-55729-071-7. Note: this is a fundamental, systematic, comprehensive and authoritative work on the nature, origin and history of the Chinese writing system. It has been recommended by scholars of the highest caliber.Dragonbones 08:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

If you're going to change the English names, you should move the articles as well!!! Right now you've basically broken our links to the Running script and Grass script!! -- ran (talk) 18:48, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry! (oops). Stupid newbee mistake. Dragonbones 07:42, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Origins of seal and clerical script updated

The brief references to the origin of seal and clerical script were misleading or unclear. Note (briefly) that seal evolved organically out of the Zhou bronze script, and contrary to popular conceptions, the style of small seal was already established before Qin Shihuang or Li Si were even born. Similarly, clerical script arose not from the official Qin script (seal) but from its vulgar counterpart. Furthermore, this evolution began during the Warring States period; thus clerical script was not born in the Han dynasty. Rather, it matured partway through the Han. I will be updating the seal, clerical and Chinese writing pages to reflect a more modern scholarly understanding, and will expound upon this, with references, in the relevant discussion pages in the near future.Dragonbones 10:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] origins of standard, or regular, script updated

After "The Regular Script (often called standard script or simply kǎishū) is one of the last major calligraphic styles to develop, emerging..." I've added "between the Hán and Wèi Dynasties, gaining dominance in the Southern and Northern Dynasties, and maturing in the Táng Dynasty. It emerged from a neatly written, early period semi-cursive form of clerical script." The reference is the authoritative Qiu Xigui (pp142-9) which I've added to the references section. I'll incorportate similar but more detailed information on the main page for that script soon.Dragonbones 07:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Is there a reason the regular script sample shows 'shu' in simplified characters? It would be more accurate to show the running style with this allowable simplification, and this seems to conflate completely different issues (styles of writing and forms of characters) which those who aren't fluent in Chinese might easily misinterpret.

[edit] Every script was originally brush written

This is to correct a common misconception about ancient scripts. None of them, not even the Shang script, was fundamentally a carved form as opposed to brush-written. The brush has existed since Neolithic times, as evidenced by brush-marks in the pigment on painted potteries of the time. In the Shang script, characters for brush and book are present, and some of the oracle bones still have vermillion ink graphs on them (uncarved). The misconception arises because the vast majority of early writing has survived in carved form, which is of course because perishable wood, bamboo, and later silk and paper media didn't survive as well as harder ones. See Qiu Xigui (ref. on main page) for evidence. Dragonbones 01:34, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New image

There is a new image available Image:Japanese calligraphy.jpg if anyone wants to use it, I don't know anything about the subject, so I might put it in the wrong place. - cohesion 05:26, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

The top icon is not good. It is ugly and it is not in regular script as it claims to be.Hillgentleman 10:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rename

I believe this page should be renamed to Chinese calligraphy. Either that, or Chinese calligraphy should be a separate page. "East Asian" calligraphy is Chinese calligraphy. The only exception is Hangul calligraphy, which is (as far as I know from glossing over Hangul entries in international calligraphy competitions) written with Kaishu-style strokes. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 22:19, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The term "East Asian" calligraphy is inaccurate and it is basically Chinese calligraphy using Chinese characters. We should move this page to Chinese calligraphy.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]).

We have East Asian calligraphy for the same reason that we have Islamic calligraphy instead of, say, Arabic calligraphy. Although Islamic calligraphy is done in the Arabic alphabet, it is done not only by Arabs but also by Muslims of many other ethnicities, and is done in not just the Arabic language but also many other languages spoken by Muslims. Similarly, calligraphy is used by Japanese and Koreans to write in the Japanese and Korean languages. -- ran (talk) 02:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be better to have a separate article on Chinese, Japanese, and Korean calligraphy?

... I merged Chinese calligraphy and Japanese calligraphy together in the first place because I found that 90%+ of each article applied to the other one as well. -- ran (talk) 11:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Ran, I think you're envisioning "this-and-that calligraphy" as "national" identities... What I'm saying is, all forms of "East Asian calligraphy" are derived from Chinese characters, and as such should be called Chinese calligraphy. Another problem with "East Asian calligraphy" is that it assumes this form of calligraphy to be practiced by all East Asian peoples... and that isn't really true. -- Миборовский 02:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Similar wiki articles is not a justification for renaming two separate things in my opinion. The articles should be separate or there should be a paragraph explaining the similarities.

--Sunawave 08:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

• Chinese calligraphy is very different from Japanese calligraphy. Firstly the brush-holds are different. Then the aesthetics are different. Hillgentleman 10:23, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
• On the other hand, I would like to see a seperate page of Chinese calligraphy (and also pages of Korea and Japanese calligraphies also) since it is a deep subject.Hillgentleman 10:23, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image for Brush Holding

The image of brush holding does not look right to me. It seems too laxed. I don't know about other people, but my habit is to use the first segment of my index finger to control the brush. And the little finger should be on the nameless finger, not on the brush itself.Hillgentleman 10:09, 3 September 2006 (UTC)