Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: 1869's marbling description

Expand Messages
  • Jake Benson
    Feridun, you are quite right in pointing this out. The story given in the = article is one of the most hilarious stories I ve encountered! Then again it is,
    Message 1 of 10 , Apr 5, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Feridun, you are quite right in pointing this out. The story given in the =
      article is one
      of the most hilarious stories I've encountered! Then again it is, neverthe=
      less, a pretty
      good description of the techniques at that time. Yet this myth about how m=
      arbling
      was invented seems a familiar model. Wasn't washing bluing (çamasir çivi=
      di- a
      commercial preparation of ultramarine blue solds in small balls or pellets =
      added when
      washing white clothing) used for marbling in Turkey?

      A story currently on the web describes a mysterious, unknown, Central Asian=
      Turkish
      artist who noticed that color floated on water while cleaning his brushes. =
      I am quite
      intrigued that despite a compelling lack of evidence to support this story,=
      that the
      author is not only certain of it, but that they have also determined the my=
      sterious
      figure who was the orignator of all marbling to have been ethnically Turkis=
      h! yet the
      story bears a certian similarity to the one in Manufacturer and Builder.

      Many stories and suggestion suggest that someone in particular "invented" m=
      arbling.
      Most of these have an enthocentric emphasis that must be veiwed with greate=
      r
      objectivity than the original author possesed. One Indian manuscript entit=
      led the
      Ma'asir -i Rahimi (dated 1615 CE) mentions that Mohamed Amin from Mashhad
      "invented abri". But sometimes I think they may mistake or mis-translate t=
      he word
      "invented" for "innovated". This has not stopped a number of Indian schola=
      rs and
      authors from repeating this attribution.

      I just came across yet another recent book published by an excellent schola=
      r on
      Mughal painting that repeats this same information ad verbatim.

      Seyller, John, Artist and Patron in Mughal India. Artibus Asiae, Zurich. 1=
      999.

      An otherwise excellent book that unfortunately contains one problematic sen=
      tence
      regarding marbling.

      Yves Porter mentions in his book

      Painters paintings and Books. Manohar Publishers New Delhi, 1995
      ( French version: Arts et Peinture du Livre)

      that the Iranian scholar Suhayli Khvansari makes an interesting reference i=
      n the
      introduction to his critical Persian edition of the manuscript

      Golestan-i Honer (Rosegarden of Art) by Qadi Ahmad.

      Khvansari says that a Mir Mohamed Tahir "invented" marbling in India, thoug=
      h he
      doesn't reveal his source. Porter also systematically reviews the many cit=
      ations
      mentioned by another Persian scholar named Mohamed Taqi Danesh-Pazhuh. Thi=
      s
      man claimed the Emperor Babur, among others, mentioned marbled paper, which=

      Porter has shown to be false.

      So, in the end, I am not so sure if these 16th and 17th century references=
      may be
      fully accurate either. One of the most famous 16th century references that=
      circulates
      in Turkey is the attribution of marbling in a copy of the Hadiqat us Sueda =
      of Fuzuli to
      Shebek Mehmed Effendi. This was derived from a much later inscription foun=
      d inside
      the cover stating "with the papers of Shebek Mehmed Effendi". While the da=
      te of the
      manuscript's production seems to fit with what we know about Shebek Effendi=
      , the
      inscription in no way proves that this manuscript contains his work. Still=
      , this piece is
      widely cited as the "authentic work" of Shebek Mehmed Effendi.

      In fact some of the alba amicora shown by Nedim Sönmez at Arrowmont are pr=
      obably
      better sources for understand 16th century Ottoman marbling than some of th=
      e
      Ottoman manuscripts that we know about, simply becuase of the problems with=

      dating them. The alba amicora on the other hand are filled with many wonde=
      rful
      references that better help to determine specific provenance. and there ar=
      e so many
      kinds of papers in these manuscripts too- as you saw, there were even decor=
      ative
      stencils, calligraphic stencils, various pattern styles. Nedim described a=
      much
      broader range of styles than was previously known.

      Then turning to Japan, there's the wonderful story of Jiyemon Hiroba, who i=
      n the 8th
      century was inspired to make suminagashi after special devotions at the Kat=
      suga
      shrine. This family maintains that this was the very beginning of their ma=
      rbling
      tradition for over 90 generations. There may be some merit to this, in tha=
      t Jiyemon
      Hiroba may have been an "innovator' rather than an "originator". Einen Miu=
      ra has
      found that suminagashi is mentioned in waka poems that pre-date the time of=

      Jiyemon's supposed discovery.

      Did Necmeddin Okyay invent floral marbling, or did he come up with innovati=
      ons in
      floral marbling? The latter of course, as there is a lot of evidence for f=
      loral marbling
      from the 18th century. Yet the style of Necmeddin, now deemed "traditional=
      " has
      entirely displaced the earlier styles.

      Did Hatip Mehmed Effendi actually invent motifs? The answer is no, he did=
      not. We
      have evidence showing that motifs are much older. Was he responsible for c=
      reating
      innovative motifs? Yes, he certainly was. The motifs that we can associat=
      e with him
      are beautifully rendered and executed. Does Hatib's work make the earlier =
      motifs
      somehow "obsolete"? Have the contemporary methods outlined for creating "h=
      atib"
      motifs (generally said that to consist of 3 strokes) served to only further=
      obscure our
      understanding of older motif forms? I think so.

      All of this serves to illustrate how "tradition" is not necessarily the sam=
      e thing as
      "history". "Tradition" as such is a process of transmission of knowledge f=
      rom one
      person to the next. Many innovations and variations can develop and be ado=
      pted, in
      a a "tradition" even displacing earlier methods. Hence the innovations ar=
      e then seen
      as completely original inventions. Josef Halfer favored carragheenan, and =
      look at
      what happened...

      Investigating older articles and evidence always yields important clues, bu=
      t one is
      likely to stumble over problems of one sort or another. Each writer is onl=
      y able to
      describe what they know and nothing more. The impact of these older articl=
      es is
      quite harmless, as so few actually bother to read them. We could certainly=
      chastise
      Rosamond Loring, Mehmed Ali Kagitci, Olga Hirsch, and Albert Haemmerle for =
      their
      scholarly oversights, but without their fledgling efforts, where would we b=
      e today?

      Jake Benson


      --- In Marbling@yahoogroups.com, "Feridun Ozgoren" <feridun.ozgoren@v...>
      wrote:
      > Dear all,
      > Those three pages in the March 1869 issue of MANUFACTURER AND BUILDER has=

      some information about the methods and materials used at that time but info=
      rmation
      given about the "first marbled paper" is unfortunately wrong and has NO val=
      ue.
      > Cute stories may make people feel good but eventually fall short of makin=
      g history.
      There are a lot of reliable resources for accurate information about early =
      16th century
      ebru works.
      > Best wishes,
      > Feridun Ozgoren
      >
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: renatocrepaldi808
      > To: marbling
      > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 8:51 AM
      > Subject: [Marbling] 1869's marbling description
      >
      >
      > Hello all,
      >
      > I was google around the web searching for old marbling books and texts =
      and I
      found an article about marbling edited in march 1869....tree pages of great=
      value.
      > For those interested to read it go to:
      >
      > http://memory.loc.gov
      >
      > go to search, scroll page down until: NINETEENTH-CENTURY PERIODICALS
      >
      > search and browse INDIVIDUAL PERIODICALS
      >
      > click on MANUFACTURER AND BUILDER (1869~1894)
      >
      > browse VOLUME FOR THIS PERIODICALS
      >
      > click on VOLUME 1 ISSUE 3 MARCH 1869
      >
      > PAGE 71, 72, 73....
      >
      > Best wishes to all,
      >
      > Renato
      > Brazil.
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >
      >
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      ------
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Marbling/
      >
      > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > Marbling-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Servi=
      ce.
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • irisnevins
      Great Jake! Tradition to my thoughts is sort of like playing Telephone ....the message keeps changing and changing.....and it is always evolving or morphing
      Message 2 of 10 , Apr 6, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Great Jake! Tradition to my thoughts is sort of like playing
        "Telephone"....the message keeps changing and changing.....and it is always
        evolving or morphing into something else with each new transmission. And
        thankfully so, new innovations come in, but we should try and remember what
        has gone before. I admire your knowledge and interest in the history, you
        are one of the few who remind us of the ....pardon the pun....colorful
        history of marbling. Jake, you are a treasure! I don't think I have told
        you that for at least a decade, but think it often!

        Marbling these days, I see especially when I teach, is more a matter of
        being asked which color goes with what, or does bouquet look better in pink
        than in orange.....yes, it is art and these are truly appropriate
        questions, but .....wow....I sometimes just stand back in awe at the long
        and amazing history, and the scientific points of this "art" also. Marbling
        is truly a fascinating subject to study in real depth......it is sometimes
        a romantic history, sometimes a very ugly one, as seen in the Dickensian
        use of little children in Victorian England, hidden behind partitions, each
        only allowed to know a part of the secret process, and worked until they
        were ready to drop.

        Thanks for all the information you share with us.....keep reminding us of
        the history!
        BTW.....does ANYONE use Bluing anymore???? I remember it......that dates
        me, LOL! WOnder how Laundry starch would work as size, .....just
        kidding....does anyone else remember the sprinkle bottles for ironing???
        Bet they'd be good for making stone patterns!

        Iris Nevins


        Message text written by INTERNET:Marbling@yahoogroups.com
        >
        Feridun, you are quite right in pointing this out. The story given in the
        =
        article is one
        of the most hilarious stories I've encountered! Then again it is,
        neverthe=
        less, a pretty
        good description of the techniques at that time. Yet this myth about how
        m=
        arbling
        was invented seems a familiar model. Wasn't washing bluing (çamasir
        çivi=
        di- a
        commercial preparation of ultramarine blue solds in small balls or pellets
        =
        added when
        washing white clothing) used for marbling in Turkey?

        A story currently on the web describes a mysterious, unknown, Central
        Asian=
        Turkish
        artist who noticed that color floated on water while cleaning his brushes.
        =
        I am quite
        intrigued that despite a compelling lack of evidence to support this
        story,=
        that the
        author is not only certain of it, but that they have also determined the
        my=
        sterious
        figure who was the orignator of all marbling to have been ethnically
        Turkis=
        h! yet the
        story bears a certian similarity to the one in Manufacturer and Builder.

        Many stories and suggestion suggest that someone in particular "invented"
        m=
        arbling.
        Most of these have an enthocentric emphasis that must be veiwed with
        greate=
        r
        objectivity than the original author possesed. One Indian manuscript
        entit=
        led the
        Ma'asir -i Rahimi (dated 1615 CE) mentions that Mohamed Amin from Mashhad
        "invented abri". But sometimes I think they may mistake or mis-translate
        t=
        he word
        "invented" for "innovated". This has not stopped a number of Indian
        schola=
        rs and
        authors from repeating this attribution.

        I just came across yet another recent book published by an excellent
        schola=
        r on
        Mughal painting that repeats this same information ad verbatim.

        Seyller, John, Artist and Patron in Mughal India. Artibus Asiae, Zurich.
        1=
        999.

        An otherwise excellent book that unfortunately contains one problematic
        sen=
        tence
        regarding marbling.

        Yves Porter mentions in his book

        Painters paintings and Books. Manohar Publishers New Delhi, 1995
        ( French version: Arts et Peinture du Livre)

        that the Iranian scholar Suhayli Khvansari makes an interesting reference
        i=
        n the
        introduction to his critical Persian edition of the manuscript

        Golestan-i Honer (Rosegarden of Art) by Qadi Ahmad.

        Khvansari says that a Mir Mohamed Tahir "invented" marbling in India,
        thoug=
        h he
        doesn't reveal his source. Porter also systematically reviews the many
        cit=
        ations
        mentioned by another Persian scholar named Mohamed Taqi Danesh-Pazhuh.
        Thi=
        s
        man claimed the Emperor Babur, among others, mentioned marbled paper,
        which=

        Porter has shown to be false.

        So, in the end, I am not so sure if these 16th and 17th century
        references=
        may be
        fully accurate either. One of the most famous 16th century references
        that=
        circulates
        in Turkey is the attribution of marbling in a copy of the Hadiqat us Sueda
        =
        of Fuzuli to
        Shebek Mehmed Effendi. This was derived from a much later inscription
        foun=
        d inside
        the cover stating "with the papers of Shebek Mehmed Effendi". While the
        da=
        te of the
        manuscript's production seems to fit with what we know about Shebek
        Effendi=
        , the
        inscription in no way proves that this manuscript contains his work.
        Still=
        , this piece is
        widely cited as the "authentic work" of Shebek Mehmed Effendi.

        In fact some of the alba amicora shown by Nedim Sönmez at Arrowmont are
        pr=
        obably
        better sources for understand 16th century Ottoman marbling than some of
        th=
        e
        Ottoman manuscripts that we know about, simply becuase of the problems
        with=

        dating them. The alba amicora on the other hand are filled with many
        wonde=
        rful
        references that better help to determine specific provenance. and there
        ar=
        e so many
        kinds of papers in these manuscripts too- as you saw, there were even
        decor=
        ative
        stencils, calligraphic stencils, various pattern styles. Nedim described
        a=
        much
        broader range of styles than was previously known.

        Then turning to Japan, there's the wonderful story of Jiyemon Hiroba, who
        i=
        n the 8th
        century was inspired to make suminagashi after special devotions at the
        Kat=
        suga
        shrine. This family maintains that this was the very beginning of their
        ma=
        rbling
        tradition for over 90 generations. There may be some merit to this, in
        tha=
        t Jiyemon
        Hiroba may have been an "innovator' rather than an "originator". Einen
        Miu=
        ra has
        found that suminagashi is mentioned in waka poems that pre-date the time
        of=

        Jiyemon's supposed discovery.

        Did Necmeddin Okyay invent floral marbling, or did he come up with
        innovati=
        ons in
        floral marbling? The latter of course, as there is a lot of evidence for
        f=
        loral marbling
        from the 18th century. Yet the style of Necmeddin, now deemed
        "traditional=
        " has
        entirely displaced the earlier styles.

        Did Hatip Mehmed Effendi actually invent motifs? The answer is no, he
        did=
        not. We
        have evidence showing that motifs are much older. Was he responsible for
        c=
        reating
        innovative motifs? Yes, he certainly was. The motifs that we can
        associat=
        e with him
        are beautifully rendered and executed. Does Hatib's work make the earlier
        =
        motifs
        somehow "obsolete"? Have the contemporary methods outlined for creating
        "h=
        atib"
        motifs (generally said that to consist of 3 strokes) served to only
        further=
        obscure our
        understanding of older motif forms? I think so.

        All of this serves to illustrate how "tradition" is not necessarily the
        sam=
        e thing as
        "history". "Tradition" as such is a process of transmission of knowledge
        f=
        rom one
        person to the next. Many innovations and variations can develop and be
        ado=
        pted, in
        a a "tradition" even displacing earlier methods. Hence the innovations
        ar=
        e then seen
        as completely original inventions. Josef Halfer favored carragheenan, and
        =
        look at
        what happened...

        Investigating older articles and evidence always yields important clues,
        bu=
        t one is
        likely to stumble over problems of one sort or another. Each writer is
        onl=
        y able to
        describe what they know and nothing more. The impact of these older
        articl=
        es is
        quite harmless, as so few actually bother to read them. We could
        certainly=
        chastise
        Rosamond Loring, Mehmed Ali Kagitci, Olga Hirsch, and Albert Haemmerle for
        =
        their
        scholarly oversights, but without their fledgling efforts, where would we
        b=
        e today?

        Jake Benson
      • irisnevins
        Yes....cute stories abound......I wonder if the one about how Spanish Marbling came to be has any truth in it.......! I like that one being of Spanish descent,
        Message 3 of 10 , Apr 6, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Yes....cute stories abound......I wonder if the one about how Spanish
          Marbling came to be has any truth in it.......! I like that one being of
          Spanish descent, and liking a little drink here and there...LOL!
          Iris Nevins


          Message text written by INTERNET:Marbling@yahoogroups.com
          >
          Dear all,
          Those three pages in the March 1869 issue of MANUFACTURER AND BUILDER has
          some information about the methods and materials used at that time but
          information given about the "first marbled paper" is unfortunately wrong
          and has NO value.
          Cute stories may make people feel good but eventually fall short of making
          history. There are a lot of reliable resources for accurate information
          about early 16th century ebru works.
          Best wishes,
          Feridun Ozgoren <
        • Dave Allen
          You can still buy those sprinkle ends for pop bottles from Regal. Actually all that was in the bottle was water used to dampen the clothes before ironiong
          Message 4 of 10 , Apr 13, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            You can still buy those sprinkle ends for pop bottles from Regal. Actually all that was in the bottle was water used to dampen the clothes before ironiong before the days of steam irons. Putting them in a plastic bag after sprinkling them with water merely allowed the water to spread around a bit before ironing.My Grandmother used this system even after the steam iron came on the scene. Sometimes she would simply dip her hand in a bowl of water and flick it over the clothes as she put them in the plastic bag.
            Dave

            At 09:23 PM 4/13/04 -0700, you wrote:
            >Hi, I remember seeing my mother use the sprinkle bottle for ironing, but had never thought about it being starch. I believe the bottle was like a coke bottle or maybe, it was a coke bottle. I guess this was more than 30 years ago. It seems like she put the shirts in a plastic bag, as part of this process.

            David Allen
            Beddall Bookbinding Conservation & Restoration
            840 Snowdrop Avenue
            Victoria, British Columbia
            CANADA V8Z 2N4
            (250) 888-9380
            http://www.webvictoria.com/beddall

            In a culture whose fundamental premise is that Paradise is
            permanently lost, the most subversive, dangerous, and
            revolutionary of all principles lies in the simple statement,
            'I have everything I need.'
            - Don Berry
          • Steve Bryant
            Hi, I remember seeing my mother use the sprinkle bottle for ironing, but had never thought about it being starch. I believe the bottle was like a coke
            Message 5 of 10 , Apr 13, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi, I remember seeing my mother use the sprinkle bottle for ironing, but had never thought about it being starch. I believe the bottle was like a coke bottle or maybe, it was a coke bottle. I guess this was more than 30 years ago. It seems like she put the shirts in a plastic bag, as part of this process.

              I really did try liquid starch for size. It worked fairly well. I read about the process in a marbling book and on websites. So, I thought I'd try it. It's not as good as other techniques, but it was fun to try.

              A comment on how things get misrecorded/miswritten in history. My husband's family's genealogy has been recorded for many, many years. One of the relatives joined the DAR (Daughters of the American Revolution) which is an honor and I considered a membership for my children. As history goes in this case, it turns out that one letter in the last name was misprinted, by hand, when some DAR records were transferred, years ago. The person in the family is actually a different name. The good news is another relative is a Revolutionary War soldier.

              Cynthia


              ----- Original Message -----
              From: irisnevins
              To: INTERNET:Marbling@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 2:47 AM
              Subject: [Marbling] Re: 1869's marbling description


              Great Jake! Tradition to my thoughts is sort of like playing
              "Telephone"....the message keeps changing and changing.....and it is always
              evolving or morphing into something else with each new transmission. And
              thankfully so, new innovations come in, but we should try and remember what
              has gone before. I admire your knowledge and interest in the history, you
              are one of the few who remind us of the ....pardon the pun....colorful
              history of marbling. Jake, you are a treasure! I don't think I have told
              you that for at least a decade, but think it often!

              Marbling these days, I see especially when I teach, is more a matter of
              being asked which color goes with what, or does bouquet look better in pink
              than in orange.....yes, it is art and these are truly appropriate
              questions, but .....wow....I sometimes just stand back in awe at the long
              and amazing history, and the scientific points of this "art" also. Marbling
              is truly a fascinating subject to study in real depth......it is sometimes
              a romantic history, sometimes a very ugly one, as seen in the Dickensian
              use of little children in Victorian England, hidden behind partitions, each
              only allowed to know a part of the secret process, and worked until they
              were ready to drop.

              Thanks for all the information you share with us.....keep reminding us of
              the history!
              BTW.....does ANYONE use Bluing anymore???? I remember it......that dates
              me, LOL! WOnder how Laundry starch would work as size, .....just
              kidding....does anyone else remember the sprinkle bottles for ironing???
              Bet they'd be good for making stone patterns!

              Iris Nevins


              Message text written by INTERNET:Marbling@yahoogroups.com
              >
              Feridun, you are quite right in pointing this out. The story given in the
              =
              article is one
              of the most hilarious stories I've encountered! Then again it is,
              neverthe=
              less, a pretty
              good description of the techniques at that time. Yet this myth about how
              m=
              arbling
              was invented seems a familiar model. Wasn't washing bluing (çamasir
              çivi=
              di- a
              commercial preparation of ultramarine blue solds in small balls or pellets
              =
              added when
              washing white clothing) used for marbling in Turkey?

              A story currently on the web describes a mysterious, unknown, Central
              Asian=
              Turkish
              artist who noticed that color floated on water while cleaning his brushes.
              =
              I am quite
              intrigued that despite a compelling lack of evidence to support this
              story,=
              that the
              author is not only certain of it, but that they have also determined the
              my=
              sterious
              figure who was the orignator of all marbling to have been ethnically
              Turkis=
              h! yet the
              story bears a certian similarity to the one in Manufacturer and Builder.

              Many stories and suggestion suggest that someone in particular "invented"
              m=
              arbling.
              Most of these have an enthocentric emphasis that must be veiwed with
              greate=
              r
              objectivity than the original author possesed. One Indian manuscript
              entit=
              led the
              Ma'asir -i Rahimi (dated 1615 CE) mentions that Mohamed Amin from Mashhad
              "invented abri". But sometimes I think they may mistake or mis-translate
              t=
              he word
              "invented" for "innovated". This has not stopped a number of Indian
              schola=
              rs and
              authors from repeating this attribution.

              I just came across yet another recent book published by an excellent
              schola=
              r on
              Mughal painting that repeats this same information ad verbatim.

              Seyller, John, Artist and Patron in Mughal India. Artibus Asiae, Zurich.
              1=
              999.

              An otherwise excellent book that unfortunately contains one problematic
              sen=
              tence
              regarding marbling.

              Yves Porter mentions in his book

              Painters paintings and Books. Manohar Publishers New Delhi, 1995
              ( French version: Arts et Peinture du Livre)

              that the Iranian scholar Suhayli Khvansari makes an interesting reference
              i=
              n the
              introduction to his critical Persian edition of the manuscript

              Golestan-i Honer (Rosegarden of Art) by Qadi Ahmad.

              Khvansari says that a Mir Mohamed Tahir "invented" marbling in India,
              thoug=
              h he
              doesn't reveal his source. Porter also systematically reviews the many
              cit=
              ations
              mentioned by another Persian scholar named Mohamed Taqi Danesh-Pazhuh.
              Thi=
              s
              man claimed the Emperor Babur, among others, mentioned marbled paper,
              which=

              Porter has shown to be false.

              So, in the end, I am not so sure if these 16th and 17th century
              references=
              may be
              fully accurate either. One of the most famous 16th century references
              that=
              circulates
              in Turkey is the attribution of marbling in a copy of the Hadiqat us Sueda
              =
              of Fuzuli to
              Shebek Mehmed Effendi. This was derived from a much later inscription
              foun=
              d inside
              the cover stating "with the papers of Shebek Mehmed Effendi". While the
              da=
              te of the
              manuscript's production seems to fit with what we know about Shebek
              Effendi=
              , the
              inscription in no way proves that this manuscript contains his work.
              Still=
              , this piece is
              widely cited as the "authentic work" of Shebek Mehmed Effendi.

              In fact some of the alba amicora shown by Nedim Sönmez at Arrowmont are
              pr=
              obably
              better sources for understand 16th century Ottoman marbling than some of
              th=
              e
              Ottoman manuscripts that we know about, simply becuase of the problems
              with=

              dating them. The alba amicora on the other hand are filled with many
              wonde=
              rful
              references that better help to determine specific provenance. and there
              ar=
              e so many
              kinds of papers in these manuscripts too- as you saw, there were even
              decor=
              ative
              stencils, calligraphic stencils, various pattern styles. Nedim described
              a=
              much
              broader range of styles than was previously known.

              Then turning to Japan, there's the wonderful story of Jiyemon Hiroba, who
              i=
              n the 8th
              century was inspired to make suminagashi after special devotions at the
              Kat=
              suga
              shrine. This family maintains that this was the very beginning of their
              ma=
              rbling
              tradition for over 90 generations. There may be some merit to this, in
              tha=
              t Jiyemon
              Hiroba may have been an "innovator' rather than an "originator". Einen
              Miu=
              ra has
              found that suminagashi is mentioned in waka poems that pre-date the time
              of=

              Jiyemon's supposed discovery.

              Did Necmeddin Okyay invent floral marbling, or did he come up with
              innovati=
              ons in
              floral marbling? The latter of course, as there is a lot of evidence for
              f=
              loral marbling
              from the 18th century. Yet the style of Necmeddin, now deemed
              "traditional=
              " has
              entirely displaced the earlier styles.

              Did Hatip Mehmed Effendi actually invent motifs? The answer is no, he
              did=
              not. We
              have evidence showing that motifs are much older. Was he responsible for
              c=
              reating
              innovative motifs? Yes, he certainly was. The motifs that we can
              associat=
              e with him
              are beautifully rendered and executed. Does Hatib's work make the earlier
              =
              motifs
              somehow "obsolete"? Have the contemporary methods outlined for creating
              "h=
              atib"
              motifs (generally said that to consist of 3 strokes) served to only
              further=
              obscure our
              understanding of older motif forms? I think so.

              All of this serves to illustrate how "tradition" is not necessarily the
              sam=
              e thing as
              "history". "Tradition" as such is a process of transmission of knowledge
              f=
              rom one
              person to the next. Many innovations and variations can develop and be
              ado=
              pted, in
              a a "tradition" even displacing earlier methods. Hence the innovations
              ar=
              e then seen
              as completely original inventions. Josef Halfer favored carragheenan, and
              =
              look at
              what happened...

              Investigating older articles and evidence always yields important clues,
              bu=
              t one is
              likely to stumble over problems of one sort or another. Each writer is
              onl=
              y able to
              describe what they know and nothing more. The impact of these older
              articl=
              es is
              quite harmless, as so few actually bother to read them. We could
              certainly=
              chastise
              Rosamond Loring, Mehmed Ali Kagitci, Olga Hirsch, and Albert Haemmerle for
              =
              their
              scholarly oversights, but without their fledgling efforts, where would we
              b=
              e today?

              Jake Benson

              Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              ADVERTISEMENT





              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Yahoo! Groups Links

              a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Marbling/

              b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              Marbling-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • irisnevins
              This dates us, eh?LOL! Iris Nevins Message text written by INTERNET:Marbling@yahoogroups.com ... You can still buy those sprinkle ends for pop bottles from
              Message 6 of 10 , Apr 14, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                This dates us, eh?LOL!
                Iris Nevins

                Message text written by INTERNET:Marbling@yahoogroups.com
                >
                You can still buy those sprinkle ends for pop bottles from Regal. Actually
                all that was in the bottle was water used to dampen the clothes before
                ironiong before the days of steam irons. Putting them in a plastic bag
                after sprinkling them with water merely allowed the water to spread around
                a bit before ironing.My Grandmother used this system even after the steam
                iron came on the scene. Sometimes she would simply dip her hand in a bowl
                of water and flick it over the clothes as she put them in the plastic bag.
                Dave<
              • hamburgerbuntpapier_de
                ... and everyone who detests ironing as much as yours truly is invited to compare ironing with a bulky steam iron to ironing with a nice light-weight normal
                Message 7 of 10 , Apr 14, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  ... and everyone who detests ironing as much as yours truly is invited to compare ironing
                  with a bulky steam iron to ironing with a nice light-weight normal iron when sprinkled
                  clothes have been sitting in a damp package for an hour or so... better antique and
                  comfortable than modern and uncomfortable... and even better: skip ironing and make
                  some more sheets instead..

                  Susanne Krause

                  --- In Marbling@yahoogroups.com, irisnevins <irisnevins@c...> wrote:
                  > This dates us, eh?LOL!
                  > Iris Nevins
                  >
                  > Message text written by INTERNET:Marbling@yahoogroups.com
                  > >
                  > You can still buy those sprinkle ends for pop bottles from Regal. Actually
                  > all that was in the bottle was water used to dampen the clothes before
                  > ironiong before the days of steam irons. Putting them in a plastic bag
                  > after sprinkling them with water merely allowed the water to spread around
                  > a bit before ironing.My Grandmother used this system even after the steam
                  > iron came on the scene. Sometimes she would simply dip her hand in a bowl
                  > of water and flick it over the clothes as she put them in the plastic bag.
                  > Dave<
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.