Ornament - The transformation of life into patterns in early China.

ORNAMENT the transformation of life into patterns in early China.

by Klaudio Muรงa

Introduction Artistic objects represented human values and social relationships since the most ancient and remote times, both in the eastern and in the western world. From early China to Greece, craftsmen were considered doing something similar in a way to the act of the creation. It is well-known that, differently from God, these artefacts were produced and shaped to serve the wealthy part of the society, being that a prince, a noble or even a king.

Therefore, their appearance is fundamental to understand how important concepts as for example authority, power, social ranking, control, closure... were shaped and translated into patterns, forms and ornament. Ornament seems to be a here a tool or maybe a way to influence people’s unconsciousness. It remains only to find out who has used this huge instrument and against whom?

One might think as a simple example of this principle the concept of radiality. From European city planning to medieval Japan, hierarchy and privilege is often represented using concentric circles. It is simple and persuasive, easy to understand and for this reason it was transformed into one of the most used ornaments of all time: mandalas (Figure 1).

Hierarchy comes naturally with human vision, so in this case the most important objects or people will stand on the centre of the field vision. The less important objects will occupy the periphery. Hypothetically this is actually the representation of a society, with the prince in the centre and then the court and finally the people.

This essay tries to make a comparison between different ornamental objects and styles throughout thousands of years of early Chinese history, from the Shang dynasty (1600 BC – 1046 BC), going thru Zhou dynasty (1046 BC – 256 BC) until the late Han dynasty (206 BC – 220 AD).

The essay is subdivided into three main chapters: Modularity, Co-Dependency and Mutation.

Figure 1

Modularity Ornament started to evolve in China since the beginning of the Bronze Age (2000 BC) (Powers, 2006). The first examples we can find are dated to the Shang and Zhou dynasties.

It is important to consider that both Shang and Zhou societies were very closed and rigid. Fixed and inherited work were at the base of everyday life. Moreover, ceremony was the main tool of politics and ruling families.

Zhou dynasty Kings legitimized their rule by invoking the “Mandate of Heaven”, (Tianzi) a simple notion that the King (the “Son of Heaven”) governed by divine right. Therefore, natural disasters and calamities as well as successful rebellions would thus demonstrate that the ruling family had lost this Mandate.

Let’s consider for example the Dui ritual bronze vessel in Figure 2, belonging to the Shang dynasty (1600 BC - 1040 BC).

It is divided into four registers and the base. Each of the sections is made of simple modular components and this are themselves subdivided into minor units. This way of organizing the artefacts into separate compartments lasted for so 2000 years apparently for a specific reason. The main aspect of this lasting effect is for sure their ceremonial function. The bronze vessels of the Shang dynasty show us how they were used by nobles or lords in the same way as clothing and weapons, to specify power, honour, charisma and so on by the number of their compartments and the patterns on them. In a society ruled by ceremonies and rituals, ornament was a fundamental part of gaining reputation and respect from the people.

Modularity seems here the perfect way to go with the production of artefacts and their ornaments. Certainly craftsmen of that time were not able to distinguish between design and execution since all the artistic ability was passed from one to another almost automatically. They learned both design and technique simultaneously.

It is possible to point out some basic rules that guide ornament in such a context: Closure, Consistency, Rectitude and Alternation (Powers, 2006).

During the Spring and Autumn period, closure was the main preference in ornament. All lines in the artefacts of this period are often joined against another. From that comes a linear articulation of the compartments in different scales of the design.

Consistency was then achieved by fixing the thickness of the carving lines.It was basically as working considering only one dimension.

It comes almost automatically since the dimension of the carving knifes was fixed. Although this rule might limit creativity and innovation, it was important to better subdivide the working path into different and less experienced craft workers.

Rectitude means the use of an underlying grid in the design of ornament and in particular using vertical and horizontal lines instead of diagonal ones. This is a very crucial step in order to achieve standardization.

In addition to the first three rules, we might consider alternation. It refers to the changing direction of lines and bands. It seems like this rule brings to another style but eventually it helps to create denser or less dense areas in the modular design of ornament.

Each of the rules deeply influenced what we call style due to their limits and boundaries to the design of graphic patterns.

Figure 2

Co-Dependency Warring States period goes from 475 BC to 221 BC. It follows Spring and Autumn period and led to the Qin’s state.

It was an era of intensive battles, leading to bureaucratic and military reforms and consolidation; The constant chaos and need for innovation, social and political models brought to the development of many philosophical doctrines. It was in this moment when Kings started to consider people and recognise their rights. Society started to become more free and thoughtful. From the third century B.C., a man could find himself in the best position for his talent.

This brings to the fact that, an individual might occupy different roles even from the ones of his ancestors. Transformation and changing social roles was now possible, therefore clouds and dragons started to be used in the daily life ornamentation.

It is during this time also that the separation between nature and culture occurs in china. The medium of ceremony is no more required in the social and political order. The rapid advancement of technology and knowledge made Chinese people more conscious and the power of the myths and spirits diminished significantly. As a result, ornament now has changed his ideological function and a new logic was now required in order to make it still an important part of society.

Asymmetry, fluidity, curve lines, movement took now the place of symmetry, rigidity and straight lines. The use of inlay is now preferred in order to achieve greater connections and refuse sections and compartments. In order to enhance this effect and to achieve same height and shine, all the surface (inlay and base), were treated with a whetstone.

All the rules of modular ornament are here broken and substituted by new ones as for example inclination. Now ornament follows a diagonal path rather than a grid of vertical and horizontal lines. This means the definitive abandonment of the additive element in the decoration.

Consistency is now turned upside down making the design more complex and multiplying the number of decision to be made by the craftsmen. It is now possible to change lines and band width drastically within very short distances.

The rule of closure was here substituted by the one of intersection. In this way, compartments are finally forgotten and all parts of the geometric pattern interact smoothly with one another. A feeling of coherent beauty is

now present in the entire artworks.

Therefore, the variation of the width and the shape of the lines can take place simultaneously in the figure. By breaking this two simple rules (consistency and closure), Warring States craftsmen created the co-dependence of figure and ground (Figure 3).

A radical change has occurred now between physical energy and mental energy. Of course, creating at the same time both figure and ground, the physical labour needed to produce the same number of patterns is now halved. On the other hand, visual complexity of this designs require a bigger amount of mental energy in order for the brain to conceive and perceive them.

Figure 3

Mutation There was something undifferentiated and yet complete, which existed before Heaven and Earth. Soundless and formless, it depends on nothing and does not change. It operates everywhere and is free from danger. It may be considered the mother of the universe. I do not know its name; I call it Tao. - Lao Tzu From the third century B.C., clouds and dragons changed from being used as patterns to a new set of operations halfway between representation and ornament. “At close inspection this vivacious configuration proves to be the body of a single dragon with organically indefinable extensions and flourishes... The extraordinary thing is that this creature is partly organism and partly ornament, yet in all its ambiguity possesses a semblance of vitality... the dragon is essentially an ornament that has mysteriously acquired life� (Loehr, 1967).

It is possible then to speak about a sort of animated ornament.

Looking at the bronze mirror of the (Figure 4), differently from the ornament of the fourth century B.C., the dragon pattern is now raised and covered with a texture making him look like floating above the surface.

Moreover, its width is almost always uniform and it is possible to recognise some of its physical characteristics. Nevertheless, there is still something enigmatic about this pattern, and it derives precisely from the simple fact that the dragon shares some fundamental features like contour, delineation, direction and structure with its environment. The change of distance of observation make the image look differently. The dragon’s identity shifts continuously from that of a pattern into that of environment. The mirror can sometimes look like a regular cloud design, but when the distance is reduced it can show its incredible details of a dragon.

We can speak about a constant mutation or metamorphosis of the ornament of this period. Four rules are applied to this new way of producing artefacts.

Inclination, alternation, single unit, and permutation. The first two we already faced before, while a single unit rule means the absolute use of only one design unit that is an increasing volute coming to a head in a bunch of cusps. Permutation is basically a high level of variations and irregularities

on the production of the basic unit. In this way it is possible to obtain more realistic forms. Geometry now seems to be no more precise and organized but as Oleg Grabar calls it, a “loose geometry”.

The image of the dragon is fundamental to understand better its use in ornament and its role in society. From representing men engaged in politics going thru talented men that can adapt themselves to all circumstances of life, dragons became a model into which people could see what they were dreaming of for so long: freedom.

We can easily see this in one of the Chinese classical texts, Tian yun, where Confucius speaks about Laozi as the ever-mutable dragon. “Today I have seen a dragon: Gathering together, he assumes form; dispersing, he completes his designs. He rides on the clouds and nourished by the Yin and Yang. I stood there with my mouth open and was unable to shut it. How should I have ventured to correct him?”

Figure 4

In other representations, we can observe that the artists of the late Warring States period knew better than anyone else how to represent a condition between being and nonbeing, a state of becoming, of indeterminacy, of mutation (Figure 5). All formal aspects of this style are somehow without a fixed hierarchy as well as society. Definitively, the dragon was an ideal image for rethinking people’s nature and agency during the Warring States period.

One aspect of this style that distinguishes it from the previous ones is the representation of clouds and the concept of water or turbulent flow. Differently from before, for the first time artisans and craftsmen of metamorphic style started to look at nature with a sensitive and scientific eye. They observed fluids and studied the way material responds to stress producing ornaments and designs that reminds us of something discovered by Benoit Mandelbrot in 1979: fractals. What better than the observation of nature could bring them into the best representation of the society of that time.

Randomness, however, is the translation of what philosopher of Warring States were professing to people, that is being constantly inconstant, like water or clouds.

Figure 5

Conclusion Chinese craftsmen starting from Shang dynasty until the end of Han dynasty, evolved their style of working with matter and thus producing ornament. From a rigid and fixed compartmentally style they arrived into modelling viscous fluid with the head of their brush defining solid and fluid form in a natural way. Han dynasty artisans expressed quick motion by moving their brush rapidly. They created more compact and solid structures by stopping the brush, whirling it gently, allowing in this way to the viscous lacquer to expand in more considerable areas.

It is thanks to new ways of observing nature and society that patterns and ornament managed to always evolve and transform into something really important for people in early China. They passed from being used by a King, Prince or even nobility as the main object of ceremonies and rituals in order to express power and respect into being associated with what for the philosophy of the Han Dynasty was the law of nature: the tao.

All things being liquid, shapeless, formless like water. With great sensibility, patience and attention, early Chinese artist studied nature and observed reality from different perspectives and points of view. From a general overview to really detailed and particular ones. Their artefacts, ornaments and patterns which have survived since in our times, are a great testimony of values and very profound principles, without which, the development of civilization would probably not have been possible.

Artisans used interpretation to invent and create spatial organizations expressing naturally self-generating forms. Meanders, clouds, dragons, water and spirits were placed together in the composition without hierarchy even from figure and ground, yet employing that randomness and pattern associated with co-dependant shapes and providing a simple template for the way of mutation.

Maybe we should not ask ourselves if the Han craftsman understood the philosopher of his time, but rather, what might the philosophers have learned from the craftsman?

Figure 6

Figure 7

Bibliography Powers, M. J. (2006). Pattern and Person: Ornament, Society, and Self in Classical China. Cambridge: Harvard University Asia Center.

Lewis, M.E. (2006). The Flood Myths of Early China.

New York: State University of New York Press.

Lewis, M.E. (2006). The Construction of Space in Early China.

New York: State University of New York Press.

Li, F. (2013). Early China: A Social and Cultural History.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Shelach-Lav, G. (2015). The Archaeology of Early China: From Prehistory to the Han Dynasty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Chase, W.T. (1991). Ancient Chinese Bronze Art: Casting the Precious Sacral Vessel.

New York: China Institute in America Ardelia Ripley Hall (1948). Review of Ludwig Bachhofer ‘A short history of Chinese art’ The Journal of Asian Studies, 7, pp 332-333.

Cover page, figure 1-7: http://www.galeriegolconda.com/en/category/imperial-china-archaic-china-art-archeology-beryl-cavallini-galerie-golconda