Illustration: Owen Jones. Examples of Chinese Ornament, 1867.
In 1867, Owen Jones published Examples of Chinese Ornament. It was focused, as the title suggests, on only one regional area of human decoration, as opposed to his earlier title The Grammar of Ornament that was broadly multi-cultural in format.
In some respects, Examples of Chinese Ornament was in the form of an apology for his earlier comments in the The Grammer of Ornament published in 1856. In the earlier title, he was quite specific in his criticism of Chinese decoration and ornament, which was both scathing and culturally motivated. From the simple and relatively bland statement of:
'...they do not appear to have made much advance in the Fine Arts.'
he moves on to the much more damaging:
'In their decoration, both painted and woven, the Chinese exhibit only just so much art as would belong to a primitive people.'
He ends his chapter on Chinese Ornament with the most extraordinary statement of all:
'On the whole, Chinese ornament is a very faithful expression of the nature of this peculiar people; its characteristic feature is oddness, - we cannot call it capricious, for caprice is the playful wandering of a lively imagination; but the Chinese are totally unimaginative, and all their works are accordingly wanting in the highest grace of art, - the ideal.'
Illustration: Owen Jones. Examples of Chinese Ornament, 1867.
It is hoped that we have come a long way in the intervening one hundred and fifty six years since Owen Jones statement on Chinese decoration and ornament, and that we see China as one of the major players in the development of human culture, whether it be in science or the arts. Jones, to his merit, realised that he had made a number of rash statements about a culture that he knew little if anything of substance about. Therefore, we have Examples of Chinese Ornament published eleven years after The Grammar of Ornament.
Within the introductory chapter of his later book, Jones was to say that:
'...in the chapter in the Grammar of Ornament on Chinese Ornament I was led, from any then knowledge, to express the opinion that the Chinese had not the power of dealing with conventional ornamental form...'
This was obviously putting it lightly. However, he was willing to itemise a number of examples where Chinese culture excelled within the fields of decoration and ornament and though he could still be ambiguous, on the whole the book does portray a genuinely positive aspect towards Chinese decoration and ornament. Particularly when seen in the context of an era in which China itself was seen by many Europeans as little more than an intriguing new area of the world for both exploitation and acquisition. Demoting the cultural achievements of a particular region of the world was always part of the European empire machine, lesser cultures being ruled by the benevolence and obvious superiority of Europe.
Illustration: Owen Jones. Examples of Chinese Ornament, 1867.
Jones, on the other hand, was willing to own up to his bigoted cultural mistakes, and in consequence to raise the status of China:
'...it now appears that there has been a period in which a School of Art existed in China of a very different kind.'
He placed Chinese decoration and ornament in one his highest categories, that of the non-use of realism:
'...in none of our examples, by light or shade, [have they] endeavoured to express relief, though in many of the examples it is suggested both by colour and form.'
Jones was always convinced, as were an increasing number of Victorian practitioners and critics, that the European near obsession with realism in decoration, one that had dominated European cultural life since the renaissance, was not naturally a high point in the history of human expression, but actually a low point. More controversial still was the designation by many critics, Jones included, of non-European cultures as being infinitely more skilful and accomplished than the European, particularly within the fields of line, shape and colour.
Illustration: Owen Jones. Examples of Chinese Ornament, 1867.
Jones came to the conclusion, as far as the Chinese culture was concerned, that they had reached the extreme limits as regards the representation of the natural world. China has made the representation of the natural world a near poetic art form. The affinity with the spirit of nature seems just as important, if not more so, than the physical portrayal. In decoration, flora and fauna dominate in all its variety, and certainly in all its colourful representations. Jones was indeed particularly impressed by the entirely distinctive use of colour in China, something that was particular and peculiar to the culture.
'The scheme of colouring of the Chinese is peculiarly their own. They deal principally with broken colours: pale blue, pale green, and pale pink for the masses; dark pink, dark green, purple, and yellow and white, in much smaller quantities.'
To close, Jones made it clear to all concerned that he was entirely mistaken, through his own ignorance, of the ability of Chinese decorative culture, and that his present book Examples of Chinese Ornament was to show that:
'There is nothing crude or harsh in any of their compositions; the eye is perfectly satisfied with the balance and arrangement of both form and colour.'
Illustration: Owen Jones. Examples of Chinese Ornament, 1867.
That the degradation even dismissal of the accomplishments of Chinese culture, particularly by empire building Europeans, was to long outlast Owen Jones 1867 book, many in China would probably say that the remnants of European imperialist thoughts still continue, does not change the fact that this was an important book within the more popular field of decoration. It was not meant as a detailed critique of Chinese cultural history, but as a form of reappraisal by a harsh, though misinformed critic, of the accomplishments of the decorative arts in China, and in that respect, it succeeded.
Further reading links:
