We have already had occasion to note, as a general criticism, that in Japanese pictures—not excepting those that delight us by their fleeting impression of life and movement, by the appearance of reality and character they convey—a discord is often created by the intrusion of accentuated outlines among natural surroundings. This defect is least observable in the paintings and chromo-xylographs of the Popular School because their motives are usually human figures and drapery, subjects which not only permit but require some recognition of outline; and if, occasionally, we are disposed to quarrel even with Kyonaga, Harunobu, Utamaro, Toyokuni or Yeishi for their emphasis of outlines, we forgive them readily for the sake of the charm of manner, the exquisite grace of gesture and the superb rhythm of movement that their figure subjects display.
Passing, further, to the question of composition, we may say that in this greater feature the ukiyo-ye paintings stand on a very high level. More unstinted praise has indeed been bestowed on them, but when we speak here of “composition,” we understand the perfect arrangement to which all the factors of pictorial art must contribute their share—not merely flow and force of line, harmony of colour and due relation of tones, but also linear perspective and chiaroscuro. Some of the artists of the Popular School understood linear perspective sufficiently not to offend by obvious disregard of its rules, but they neglected chiaroscuro, and that defect disqualified their composition to be called a faultless achievement, which epithet would otherwise be often applicable to their admirable grouping of pictorial elements.
We may close this brief analysis by referring to one fault conspicuous in all their work: they did not understand the light-suggestions without which textures and surfaces can not be rendered. They relied upon line and colour to produce effects which are due in nature to the uneven distribution, absorption, or reflection of light. Hence while they show us with admirable accuracy the folds of drapery and the patterns winding and flowing through all its plies, they fail to tell us whether the surface represented is that of velvet, or of silk, or of cotton. It has been well said that in judging pictures we must consider what the painter succeeds in doing and not be forever critical about what he fails to do. The ukiyo-ye artists achieved so much that much may be forgiven to them, but since genre pictures are certainly the proper field for the display of texture painting, the absence of this quality in the work we are considering can not be left unnoticed.
The naturalistic tendency of which the pictures of the Popular School are the most characteristic outcome, found very refined and beautiful expression in the works of Maruyama Okio (born 1733, died 1795), a Kyoto artist, who must be regarded as one of the greatest painters Japan ever produced. Okio is generally spoken of as the founder of the Sho-jo School, and his contemporary Kishi Doshi (known artistically as “Ganku”) is placed at the head of a separate school, the Ganku Riu. But though the individuality of each master impressed itself on his style sufficiently, perhaps, to justify this independent classi-
