This article is reproduced from the 2004 Conference of the International
Comparative Literature association. The original (www.ln.edu.hk/eng/staff/eoyang/icla/SUZUKI%20Sadahiro.doc)
is a Microsoft Word document.
The 17th Triennial Congress of the International Comparative
Literature Association
8th-15th August 2004, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Monday, August 9, 2:00pm-3:30pm, Special Topics 1, “Writers
Who Were Considered to Have ‘Gone Native’” (MC1)
“The Marriage of East and West”: Bernard Leach as
a Cultural Pilgrim
SUZUKI Sadahiro (Ochanomizu University)
Bernard Leach (1887-1979) was an artist-potter who played a key
role in the history of the twentieth century British crafts. Born
in Hong Kong, he received his education in England, but he determined
the course of his life in East Asia, encountering pottery by chance
in Tokyo in 1911 and choosing it as his lifelong profession in
Peking in 1916. Returning to England in 1920, the Englishman began
his professional career, eventually making his name as the “Father
of Studio Pottery”.
Leach’s life and art is notable due to his positive idea
of cultural amalgamation. He concludes his autobiography, Beyond
East and West (1978) with the following passage: I have seen
a vision of the Marriage of East and West, and far off down the
Halls of Time I heard the echo of a childlike voice. How long?
How long?
The phrase “the Marriage of East and West” encapsulates
one of the major themes Leach explored during his lifetime. In
the twentieth century, the development of transport and communication
systems made the world relatively small in scale, and artistic
traditions in the world necessarily changed as a result. Leach
wrote in his autobiography that “[m]odern art is inevitably
eclectic. Abruptly in the unfolding tale of humanity, we have
become the inheritors of all history and geography”. This
statement reveals his recognition of the way that globalization
enabled artists of the twentieth century to source their inspiration
in different regions and historical periods.
Bernard Leach was an artist who embraced this trend in art. As
the word “marriage” suggests, he approved of mixing
arts and cultures from various places and times. The Englishman
explored innovative possibilities of expressing the new age in
the field of crafts, and considered the establishment of new standards
to assess the results. He expressed his views in his pottery as
well as in writings and occasional lectures. In this respect Leach's
life and art is significant not only to art history but also to
comparative cultural studies.
Although the citation with which I opened this paper is worth
careful examination simply by virtue of its being the artist’s
summation of his own career, there is another interesting fact
to consider: exactly the same passage can be found in an essay
he wrote in Tokyo in 1920. The fact that a sentence written in
1920 is found, without any alteration, at the very end of an autobiography
published in 1978, suggests that the future direction the artist
would pursue had already been defined in 1920, by his experiences
in East Asia.
Therefore, to evaluate the whole of Leach's life and art, it is
essential to consider the meaning of his expression, “the
Marriage of East and West”. In the first part of this paper,
I will trace the process by which this idea was formed in East
Asia in the 1910s and consider what Leach intended by the phrase.
In the second part, I will offer a reading of one of his works
as an embodied expression of “the Marriage of East and West”.
It will be seen that his career as a potter was a continuous endeavor
towards the understanding of “East”, which for Leach
usually meant Japan, China, and Korea, and “West”
meaning Western Europe, and towards the exploring the possibility
of a new mode of expression.
“The Marriage of East and West”
Before starting the discussion, it seems appropriate to take a
brief look at the artist’s early life. Bernard Leach was
born in Hong Kong in 1887, as the first and only child of a colonial
judge. As his mother died soon after she gave birth to him, he
was taken in by his mother's parents who were then living in Japan.
He returned to Hong Kong in 1890 when his father remarried, and
going on to live in several parts of South East Asia afterwards.
He first set foot in England in 1897, when his father decided
to send his son to the Beaumont Jesuit College in Windsor . In
this Roman Catholic school, Bernard found an interest in art,
and in 1903 went on to the Slade School of Art, continuing on,
in 1907, to the London School of Art. In these schools Leach learned
the skill of drawing and etching, but never studied pottery in
England. Around 1907 or 1908, he became increasingly interested
in Japanese art. According to his autobiography, the paintings
of J. A. Mc. Whistler (1834-1903) and the books of Lafcadio Hearn
(1850-1904) fascinated him.
In April 1909, Bernard Leach arrived in Japan and remained there
until 1920, with several excursions to China and Korea. Leach
studied Japanese arts in Tokyo while he furthered his acquaintance
with Japanese intellectuals and artists. With help from these
friends, the Englishman studied not only Japanese arts but also
those of China, Korea, the Ainu and Taiwan, including both painting
and crafts. In February 1911, he encountered “raku-yaki”,
a form of pottery. He was fascinated with it, and began to study
in earnest. Although his study was abandoned from 1914 to 1916,
during which period he was in Peking, he finally decided to choose
pottery as his profession in September 1916. He returned from
China to Japan and devoted himself once more to the study of pottery.
Trying to emulate the Asian traditions of pottery, he gradually
felt the need to study European pottery as a next step. He returned
to England in June 1920, and set up his new kiln in St. Ives,
Cornwall.
Let us, with Leach’s early life in mind, return to a close
examination of his vision of “the Marriage of East and West”.
Although the text is too vague for us to interpret with total
clarity, the meaning becomes more apparent when it is considered
in conjunction with other essays that Leach wrote in the 1910s.
I would like to quote three passages from his writings to assist
in an examination of the phrase.
The first quotation is from the essay “East and West”
(1920), which contains the relevant phrase, “the Marriage
of East and West”. This article includes a list as below:
West |
East |
Male |
Female |
Body |
Soul |
Reason |
Intuition |
Action |
Rest |
Outer |
Inner |
Violence |
Restraint |
Personal Religion |
Impersonal religion[sic] |
Objective Art |
Subjective Art |
Individualism |
Communism |
For Leach, exposed to various cultures in his infancy, the two
words “East” and “West” always represented
the diversity of cultures on the earth, and were constant subjects
of his speculation. This table clearly shows that the artist regarded
the “East” as feminine, intuitive, spiritual, and
passive while the “West” was masculine, rational,
material and active. Through this dualistic thinking, whereby
two seemingly incompatible principles are set against one another,
Leach proposed an explanation of the phenomena of the world: dualism
is a keynote concept conditioning Leach’s views, out of
which his art, and views on art, naturally developed.
It took Leach considerable time before he succeeded in formulating
his understanding of “East” and “West”
into this table, and found a word, “marriage”. Originally
he accepted the Western values and supported openly the modernization
of the “East”, like all other European people did
. However, his attitude changed in the middle of the 1910s. Please
look at the next quotation:
In claiming that the meeting of East and West is the meeting of
the two extremes of human evolution, the spiritual and the practical:
that the decadence of the East is due to the exaggeration of spiritual
life, of imagination and dreamy idealism unsupported by reason
and exact practical knowledge of things; that the perversion of
the West is due to the exaggeration of practical life, of reason
and the exact knowledge of things, not governed by spirit, by
intuition by instinct, by imagination, naturally I not only make
an aesthetic claim, but one, which if it is accepted, is of widespread
importance . It means that the East has more to offer us than
we have to offer to the East. It means, to anyone who is not a
sheer materialist, that the failure of the East is not so great
as that of the West, and that consequently our traditional attitude
of superiority towards the Yellow and the Brown races is indefensible
.
This is from a lecture entitled “The Meeting of East and
West in Pottery”, a paper he read at a meeting in Tokyo
in 1915, soon after his second trip to China. In this lecture
he criticized the “West” for not making a sufficient
effort to understand the “East”, while the “East”
did much to understand the “West.” For him the relationship
between “East” and “West” should be equal,
and he insisted that the East and the West should “meet”
and collaborate so as to reciprocally offer their strong points
and compensate for the other's weak points. This text shows that
not only the experience in Japan but also that in China were necessary
for the artist to gain the culturally relative viewpoint necessary
to reflect on his own background. His experiences in these countries
convinced him that “East” and “West” share
a common history of communication and cultural values. Apparently
Leach uses the word “meeting” in the sense of compromise,
mutual understanding and mutual support. For him, “East”
and “West” should try to overcome the distance between
them, and support each other without losing their own characteristics.
When Leach writes of “the Marriage of East and West”,
he seems, in the first place, to insist on cultural relativism
against a Euro-centric view of the world. However, at this early
stage it was the word “meeting”, not “marriage”,
that he used to discuss the paring of “East” and “West”.
It was in 1917 that Leach found the word “marriage”
to regulate the relationship of “East” and “West”.
He had a sudden inspiration on the morning of March 16th, 1917.
Leach wrote as below:
Before getting out of bed this morning I was thinking about the
real meaning of the word “ai no ko” which is always
used in a scornful sense.
This seems to me senseless, both if we examine the literal meaning
of the word,i.e. “Child of mutuality”, or if we ponder
over the popular meaning of the word, i.e. “Foreign plus
Japanese mixture”, or any mixture of extremes.
It became clear to me to-day for the first time that the real
blending, or mixing, of extremes, whether in life or in art, is
the highest aim we can strive after, and that the scorn which
is contained in the manner or tone of every Japanese when he uses
the word “ai-no-ko” is at bottom a just scorn of that
miserable half-mixture, not only in marriage, but also in all
other directions, which is the inevitable result of the meeting
of East and West. Till this morning I had always believed that
the marriage of, say Japanese and Americans or English, was an
utter wrong to the children, even if it was not a mistake for
the parents, this morning I grasped that uniting of two extremes
into a new whole increases in difficulty and also value according
to the difference between the two.
In this passage Leach discussed the mixing of two extremely different
things. He put such mixtures into two categories according to
the degree to which the mixing was successful: “the miserable
half-mixture” and “a new whole”. He was critical
of the former, exemplified by new architecture in Tokyo and Japanese
export wares produced in contemporary Yokohama. On the other hand,
he thought highly of the latter. In the beauty of “ai no
ko” he found the features of parents coexisting and achieving
harmony. Certainly he acknowledged that the more difference the
two “extremes” had, the more difficulty there was
in their marriage, yet he claimed that the significance of the
marriage would increase all the more for such complication.
Importantly, the word “marriage” appears in the quotation
above, while the phrase “the meeting of East and West”
is still retained. It is true that Leach discusses here an international
marriage between foreigners or “extremes” and he does
not yet fully extend the analogy to art or pottery. However, the
word “marriage”, significantly, appears here for the
first time in his consideration of the problems of eclecticism
in art, in terms of a child of mixed parentage.
The expression of “ai no ko” i. e. “child of
mutuality” shows that when Leach refers to “the Marriage
of East and West” later, he is imagining a child in his
mind rather than matrimony itself, and that his “marriage”
lays stress on the act of “blending, or mixing”. This
approach to finding a positive meaning in cultural amalgamation
in art was formulated into a phrase “the Marriage of East
and West”, in 1920.
Regarding the way Leach attempted to “blend” or “mix”
the different cultural traditions, there is an interesting report
of an interview with Leach written by a Japanese art critic. In
the report Leach refered to a letter written to a Japanese politician
by Herbert Spencer (1820-1903), a philosopher known for his theory
of social evolution . In this letter Spencer mentioned an international
marriage and approved it only on condition that it is between
parents from what he would term as “close” races.
We have already seen that Leach, who had originally been sympathetic
to this view, changed his opinion on March 16th, 1917. After mentioning
Spencer's letter as a starting point, Leach, in the interview,
discussed the condition of art in terms of an international marriage.
He insisted that an artist, the “parents” of an artwork,
should be responsible for the works and the effect they may cause.
According to Leach, if the artist understands the strong points
of both the native culture and the foreign culture, he can perceive
“a good harmony of beauty” and avoid “the miserable
half-mixture”. The context of social evolution explains
what Leach intended in the production of such a work. For him,
to produce a work with a “beauty of good harmony”
and propagate it in the rapidly changing society of the modern
age, was a strategy to reduce the ugliness of daily life. It should
be noted here that what concerned Leach were events in the present
and the future, not the past. In this sense we should say that
Leach applied Social Evolutionism, rather than Darwinism, to art.
Leach seems to hold a basic belief that his present existence
is regulated by the notion of a better future, and that he is
responsible for enabling this future to be realized. Adapting
this to the interpretation of the text quoted at the beginning
of this paper, we can theorize that “the echo of a childlike
voice” heard “far off down the Halls of Time”
is coming from the future toward “I” in the present,
and that “I”, who heard the voice asking “How
long? How long?”, realizes his responsibility for the child
to be born in the future. And it seems Leach’s later activity
after his return to England in 1920 is conditioned by this vision
of a child destined to be born.
Practice of “the Marriage of East and West”
I would like now to consider Leach's works in terms of his idea
of “the Marriage of East and West”. As we have already
seen, this idea took sharper form in the latter half of the 1910s,
the period in which Leach developed his skill as a professional
potter. For the artist, the process of learning pottery meant
an exploration of East Asian cultures on the one hand, and the
rediscovery of European cultures on the other. Pottery not only
offered Leach a useful foothold to deepen his understanding of
the various art traditions of the world, but in addition, led
him to a field beyond the difference of cultures, where he conceived
his vision of cultural concoction.
The work we shall analyze is <Tile Panel, Consisting of Nine
Tiles with Tree of Life Painted Decoration> owned by the National
Museum of Modern Art, Kyoto, Japan. Tiles were Leach's favorite
and specialty. As he originally trained as a painter at art school,
the surface of a tile was a good space for him to satisfy his
desire for painting. The “Tree of Life” is one of
the most important motifs employed by Leach in his works.
The motif, “Tree of Life” has dense symbolism in terms
of history, culture, and religion. It is a symbol of life in the
universe. Its roots, trunk, and branches connect the three worlds:
the Underworld, Earth, and Heaven. It signifies endless rebirth
and victory over death. In Christianity, it is first a tree in
Eden in Genesis, but its religious significance can be extended
to the cross in the New Testament. In the system of symbolism,
the roots, trunk, and branches of the tree have associations with
animals: serpent and dragon for the roots; lion, unicorn, hart,
ox, and ram for the trunk; and peacock, dove and eagle for the
branches. The three parts also have their own significant colours:
black for the roots, white for the trunk, and red for the branches
.
Leach's version of the “Tree of Life” does not seem
to follow the symbolism described above. There are birds among
the branches and at the edge of the tile; under the branches,
there is a man and a horse on the right side and a woman on the
left; above the tree, there is a zodiac sign, the Plough; and
beneath the tree, there are three fish swimming in a stream. Although
Leach's choice and distribution of the animal imagery does not
correspond directly to the received symbolism, the intentionally
symmetrical composition of these creatures suggests that he was
conscious of his motifs. However, it is still difficult for us
to understand with complete clarity the meaning that the motifs
were intended to convey.
There is an interesting source concerning the interpretation of
the tree: in an article from a newspaper Leach contributed to
in 1955, he wrote about his friend, Ryusei Kishida (1891-1929),
one of the most important painters in the modern Japanese art.
Leach regarded Kishida as his comrade in seeking a balance between
“the East” and “the West”. In praising
the Japanese artist, Leach wrote as follows:
Kishida had an ability to perform the tense work of weaving a
new cloth out of the Eastern warp he originally possessed and
the West European weft…In order to bridge East and West,
the two big branches of the human culture, I think it an urgent
necessity for an artist to have deep comprehension of both of
their cultures. This task is not only a problem of an artist's
mind, but also of his heart.
When Leach mentions “the two big branches of the human culture”,
he is probably thinking of a genealogy which shows the process
of biological evolution. In other words, he understands that historically
and geographically, human culture has been developing in two directions:
Eastward and Westward. Apparently, he regards it as a task of
the modern artist to bridge the gap between “East”
and “West”.
Here we find an interesting overlap between the image of a cultural
genealogy conceived by Leach, and the motif of the “Tree
of Life” depicted in his works. One of the characteristics
of his tree is its branches, which cross and weave repeatedly.
Since a man is on the right side and a woman on the left, we can
ascertain that the right branch means “the West” and
the left, “the East”. The overlapping branches seem
to imply the contact of “East“ and “West”,
which Leach thought was taking place with more frequency in the
modern age. Leach expresses his sense of the vivacity of creatures
by composing the animals, the zodiac, and a stream, implying the
endless flow of time and the cycle of life. It may be possible
for us to conjecture that the birds among the branches represent
an idealised image of artists, who can move between “East”
and “West” and bridge the two. In this way, the artist
generates a new symbolism by incorporating traditional motifs
into his own vocabulary.
Conclusion
In this paper we have considered the formation and meaning of
Leach's idea, “the Marriage of East and West” and
its application in his pottery. Discussion has revealed that the
artist groped for cultural eclecticism in art, and hoped the various
elements from the world art traditions would coexist in his works.
A dualistic way of thinking was an effective tool and standpoint
for the artist to explore and digest the arts of “East”
and “West”. He explained his ideal in terms of international
marriage. It was important for him that each of the elements in
his works should combine to achieve harmony without losing their
original features, just as a child of mixed parentage inherits
the features of his parents whilst retaining uniqueness as an
independent person. He thought the result of this eclecticism
should be judged by making reference to “the highest standards
of the past constantly checked by the present”. In his later
years, he began to employ a motif of a pilgrim. It seems this
motif not only succeeds the birds bridging “East”
and “West” in the “Tree of Life” motif,
but also his self-portrait. Leach did not stop shuttling between
Britain and Japan until he became blind and retired in 1973. Leach’s
activity is characterized by his aspiring to universal values
through the continuous exploration of cultural diversity, and
in this sense his life and art is a remarkable case of dynamic
cultural exchange in the twentieth century.
|