|
|
Post by Elheru Aran on Mar 9, 2011 16:45:24 GMT
So, basically, the interest in katana is because they've gotten stuck in people's minds because of all the media exposure they've gotten compared to Euro swords.
And the cost is due to there being more work put into them overall?
It occurs to me that a 6-figure, Japanese-made shinken is probably somewhat equivalent to, say, Tinker getting together his own metal ore, smelting it down into steel, forging it into a bar, and from that into a sword... When you consider that Euro swords can be machined out of an already-made bar of steel, that does explain somewhat how the high-end ones are still cheaper than high-end katana-- there's not so much labor involved on the part of the craftsmen. Sort of makes more sense now, doesn't it...
|
|
|
|
Post by frankthebunny on Mar 9, 2011 18:24:37 GMT
the first swords I was drawn to when I was a child were magical swords. D&D was my portal. my character's first +1 sword made a huge difference to me and was the first time I really even cared what he was carrying and slaying goblins with. magical swords in this game not only had added strength and special properties but some even had egos and would clash with fellow campaigners and other weapons you might have been equipped with. I was enamored with the glowing "Sting" sword from the early animated Hobbit movie before I even read the books. "The Sword In The Stone" Disney movie....the blade cut deeply into a solid rock!!! (or what kind of looks like an anvil?) later on when I became interested in martial arts movies and Bruce Lee and the classic "Kung Fu Theater" I watched while cutting classes, I was really taken with swords with metal rings and spears with tassels, bo staffs, darts, etc. then came the ninja movies with a plethora of the coolest weapons I'd ever seen. very James Bond like, with push button triggers, hidden compartments, dual functions, stealthy, silent, deadly. ahhh the ninja-to, well we all know how cool these were. Rambo's combat knife with compass and water tight compartment holding everything a stranded soldier could need. oh yes, I had many of these knives. I'm not exactly sure where I first saw a Katana. maybe even in the "Oriental Adventures" D&D supplement guide book? IDK I wasn't cutting katana shaped swords out of plywood in my basement but long swords and scimitars. I wish I could find the original drawings and descriptions for many of the basic weapons listed in the "players handbook" or some of the listings of the magical weapons in the dungeon masters guide. later came the arms & equipment guide and the weapons of legacy supplements. Euro swords and weapons brought me into this sharp and pointy world but katana are sleek and mysterious without having to be enhanced by wizards. hmmm.....it might be less expensive to have Merlin put a spell on my emshs than to buy fittings for one katana from Fred Lohman.  |
|
Sean (Shadowhowler)
VIP Reviewer
Retired Moderator
No matter where you go, there you are.
Posts: 8,828
|
Post by Sean (Shadowhowler) on Mar 9, 2011 18:29:27 GMT
Heh...
I was, and to some degree still am, a huge D&D/RPG guy. Those old D&D books bugged me tho... because they got so many things wrong in regards to Arms & Armor. They call an Arming Sword a Long Sword... and their examples of Two handed swords are insane.
Still... that sort of thing was what got me into swords in the first place. D&D... Conan the Barbarian... TLotR and other books of adventure...
Good times.
|
|
|
|
Post by frankthebunny on Mar 9, 2011 18:40:05 GMT
yeah, looking back now I find some of the descriptions funny if not crazy, but at the time it's all I knew and seemed right on track.
I think it was as simple as: long sword, short sword, bastard sword, two handed sword, dagger. I'm talkin first published copies of these books. TSR not wizards of the coast, lol man I'm old!
|
|
|
|
Post by Pogo4321 on Mar 10, 2011 7:00:18 GMT
Wait...TSR doesn't publish D&D anymore?!?
|
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Mar 10, 2011 7:46:00 GMT
I think the excess work put into katana is most of it. Even though you could easily make a katana with a CNC machine and make high quality blades like Albion does, nobody would buy them because, well, they're just not traditional; just my opinion on that. I'm not attacking any JSA guys or katana lovers, but it seems the only thing they care about is that it's constructed in the exact same manner and method as they would have been 500 years ago. It must have this much niku, or that much sori, or this much of an edge, that manner of carving its saya and tsuka, must be folded in such and such a method, etc. It's no wonder Brenno doesn't want to get involved in them (at least, as of the last I spoke to him).
And because nobody would buy them, none are made that way (except I think Musashis, but I believe they're made through a press; I'd appreciate someone who knows to chime in on that), resulting in higher costs. Excluding the Hanwei Bamboo Mat, which has a quality disproportionate to its cost leading to exceptional value (or so the reviews say), almost all katana that people consider quality (Hanwei, Dynasty Forge, Kris Cutlery, Munetoshi a few others) are more expensive than Euros that people consider quality.
I could go on and on about the price differences, but those things are easy enough for a person just browsing Kult of Athena can find out, so I won't. Anyways, to wrap this up before I start to rant and ramble (and I can go on for quite a long time, believe me), it's my personal opinion that the high cost of katana, when they've flooded the market and should be relatively inexpensive, is a direct result of the katana lovers who are shamelessly unflinching in how things must be done, so more effort to get a quality blade is needed, whereas Euros can be made through a machine and still achieve the same quality; I haven't heard a Euro fan complain that it wasn't the way their ancestors made the blade. I know I'll probably take a lot of flak for this, but again, it's my personal opinion and is probably the main reason katana rarely interest me anymore.
I'll get even more flak for this next statement, but a sword is a sword; as long as it does its job (that is, to cut) and doesn't break or bend, who the hell cares how it's made? A machined blade will slay your enemy (or a hoard of those sneaky and menacing bottles) just as well as a perfectly folded, forged, polished, and mounted 10K nihonto straight from one of Japan's smiths. Hell, it'd probably do so better because you wouldn't be as afraid of scratching the polish. To me, it's like the guy who goes out and buys a Ferrari to park in his driveway, maybe drive on the weekend, and gets so paranoid at the thought of harming it that he never uses it to its full potential as opposed to the guy who buys, say, a BMW coupe; uses it as his daily commuting car, getting indignant if the paint gets scuffed or a bird semprinis on his windshield, but shrugging his shoulders, cleaning it up, and going on with life. Of the two, who got the better value for his money?
|
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Mar 10, 2011 8:27:18 GMT
Elheru Aran and Vincent,
I think you both are seriously over-stated the pickiness of katana collectors. Even if the katana blade is stock-removed (grinding or CNC) from readily available steel billet. It still require far more labor and times than the European counterparts after the blade is done. Let assume that the katana blade is through harden (no hamon) and is made the same way Gus and Tinker made their blades.
(1) Katana has more parts, more importantly small tiny parts. Fuchi, kashira, tsuba, seppa, menuki and habaki are all separate parts. Many of them are tiny and they all require closed tolerant fitting. Diverse material. Some of the parts are steel, some are copper which lead to more logistical cost.
(2) Putting them together is far more time consuming than European counterparts. The wrapping (tsukamaki) alone take 4-5 hours, not to mention the time consuming effort of apply the rayskin. The tsuka core is not exactly symmetry which requires a little more work than the European grip. The katana scabbard (saya) is lacquered which is more time consuming than simply applying leather over wood. The requirement for very tight fitting between the collar (habaki) and the saya mouth means far more work than the looser fitting of European swords.
(3) Certain parts are expensive organic material that cannot be mass produced, hence expensive. Rayskin, buffalo horn, and silk are expensive.
In fact, grinding is not unknown within the katana world. There are smiths who use stock-removal. I am having two custom katana blades being done right now. One is stock-removed, the other one is traditionally forged. The bare blades themselves actually cost a little less than a good finished Tinker or John Lundemo sword (by a few hundred dollars). But by the time the two blades are completely mounted, they will have tripled in price.
Time is money. More time, more money. Due the design of katana, regardless of method and technological use, it is impossible to do it in less time than a European sword. If you calculate in term of dollar per man-hour, a cost of a katana is comparable to a European sword, if not cheaper.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elheru Aran on Mar 10, 2011 13:22:59 GMT
It's impossible to do it in less time than an European sword? If you say so. If you're going to be very traditionalist about it. But, you could very easily machine out a katana, heat-treat and grind the edge, slap on a plain metal tsuba, and stick some simple grip slabs on it. Or if you're going to do an integral guard like Gus Trim does on his tac-katanas, don't even need the tsuba.
Don't get me wrong-- I do understand that a good part of a katana's appeal is the traditional construction. The whole, "It's made the same way swords were made in Japan for 500+ years!" factor. There is a certain cool-factor to that, just as there is with, say, using a knife given you by your grandfather, buying a hand-made rifle or watch, things like that.
This is my personal opinion: I just don't think that it honestly should cost *that* much to put together a katana. I'm not sure how much Frank the Bunny charges for his jobs, but I'd be surprised if they go much over a thousand dollars... probably a bit less. Granted, he's not a prestigious katana craftsman like Fred Lohman Co., he's more of a well-known hobbyist (Frank, please smack me if I'm totally misrepresenting you). Nevertheless, if he can do it for that price, it seems to me that what you're largely paying for with a katana is the prestige and the Cool Factor, if you're going to spend megabucks on them.
If that's what you want, though, it's your money. It's just not something that necessarily makes sense to me, personally.
To put the case in a different way: it would be quite possible to fit out an European sword with as much care, precision, and cost, as you are ascribing to quality katana. I'm positive there are smiths out there who could do exactly what many smiths do with katana. Taking as much time to forge and finish the sword, making sure the parts of the sword fit within very precise tolerances, carving the scabbard core so that it's an extremely close fit, intricately tooling the leather, finishing the fittings as well as the blade, etc. If someone wanted to pay for that much detail work to fit out a sword, then by all means let them; I'm sure some have.
The difference ultimately comes down to this, I think: people who buy Euro swords are willing to accept a degree less workmanship than goes into katana, because traditionally, less work goes into Euro swords. There have always been fancy Euro swords, and they're obtainable today if you're willing to pay for that degree of work. People who buy katana, on the other hand, tend to seem to want very good jobs done on their swords. To put it another way, there are more people who send their katana in for customizing than that send their Euro swords in...
I am not trying to come down on one side or another here, just stating my personal opinions and the way things are as I see it. As I mentioned in my OP, I'm trying to stay neutral and understand why this is the case in the sword world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bogus on Mar 10, 2011 23:41:02 GMT
This is kind of random but I believe part of the reason the ultra high end katana are so expensive is that they're regulated by the Japanese government in the same way European governments regulate wine--producers can only make a certain quantity per year. Of course a lot of Euro wineries sell "table wine" that's basically the same stuff with marginally less TLC involved, not sure if Japanese swordsmiths do anything similar.
edit: just looked it up, apparently the quota is 24 per year. If Gus was only allowed to make 24 "Gus swords" a year they'd probably be pretty expensive too...
|
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Mar 11, 2011 4:41:03 GMT
Elheru Aran,
I think I know where your misunderstanding come from. You are not considering the design of the sword within the context of the style of swordsmanship. The sword was designed to be used within a certain range of techniques. Radically changing the design making the practice of Japanese swordsmanship impossible.
For example, you think the very tight friction fit between the blade and scabbard is simply collectors being picky. NO! One cannot practice proper "Iai" without that feature. The shape of the handle has to be a certain length or certain shape is to facilitate particular cutting techniques. Everything about the katana has something to do with the fighting techniques. Changing the design would make those techniques less effective at best, and impossible to do at worst.
On the other hand, the context of Historical European Swordsmanship is different. One can practice German Longsword all day long without even needing a scabbard. There is absolute no need for the scabbard to be tightly fit to the sword. I would imagine that if it is as tight as the katana, it would consider to be a flaw, not at all a positive feature as one would associate with katana. Different fighting style, different need.
Your suggestion of a certain construction method, i.e. tactical swords, show a lack of understanding in swordsmanship. Even the Longsword folks would object to training with a tactical sword. Missing a pommel (or in the case of katana, fuchi and kashira), drastically shift the balance of the blade. The feel of the sword, which is absolutely necessary for proper learning of a certain school of swordsmanship is absolutely important. If you take a look at Gus tactical longsword, it grip/handle is longer in comparison to his other swords of similar blade length and profile. This is because it misses the guard and pommel. He has to lengthen the grip/handle to create proper balance. This completely change the dynamic of how one would use a sword. Sure, you can invent a new style base on the new sword design, but it would not be the same Longsword techniques written in historical fighting manuals.
The suggestion (or at least imply) that people who buy katana are simply "vain" and "superficial" is, for the lack of better world, prejudice. Sure there are those who buy them as art pieces, but they are a small wealthy minority. I buy katana because I practice Japanese swordsmanship. If I was practicing Longsword, I would want a correctly designed longsword as well. Take time to learn about the style of fighting; then one would understand better the sword's design. The sword is simply a tool, it was designed within a certain historical context and certain fighting techniques. Examine the swords and the swordsmanship instead of guessing people motive. This way one avoid making sweeping generalization that false and unhelpful.
PS: Think about American Football and Futball (Soccer). The former requires a whole lot of equipment. The later requires less equipment. The former cost more to play. The later cost less to play. Different sport, different need. It has absolutely nothing to do with people being picky or snobbish.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Mar 11, 2011 5:07:49 GMT
I don't want to sound like a semprini, Student, so forgive me if I do, but this sounds like you're saying that a skilled practitioner of their art is as a novice if the sword isn't designed to exacting specifications. To me, this would be an insult of the highest caliber; it would be like saying that the sword is everything and the swordsman nothing. There is quite a bit more I could say in regards to this, but I fear my words have been crass enough and I have no wish to start an argument where neither side will ever change their stance, so I will not post them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Mar 11, 2011 5:12:16 GMT
Vincent,
Can the best ping-pong player in the world play ping pong without a paddle? How's about practicing sword-and-buckler technique without the buckler? How's about a NASCAR champion racing in an golf cart?
This is more true of novices and students like myself. And in the sentence you quotes me, I was actually talking bout students not masters. Without proper equipment, I cannot learn proper techniques. Beginners and novices need proper equipment more than anyone else. And the vast majority of people practicing swordsmanship fall into this category.
Let's say a technique require me to use a guard (in German Longsword for example). As a student learning it, how can I possibly learn the technique if my sword does not even have a guard?
Furthermore, we are learning swordsmanship not for any practical purpose but to gleam a little into the past, an academic exercise. Without historically correct equipments, it makes the study of historical swordsmanship very difficult.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vincent Dolan on Mar 11, 2011 5:56:34 GMT
Fair enough, but the best ping pong player in the world could play with a dollar store paddle, a buckler could be substituted for a metal trash can lid, and that is just a gross misrepresentation as a golf cart rarely goes more than 10-15mph, whereas a NASCAR driver's car is expected to push something like 200. The specs are just too different that not even the best driver in the world could hope to win, whereas a master swordsman could perform splendidly with a sword not made to standards so exact that even the smallest of details is considered a flaw.
This is also pushing it. We were talking about details, not something so integral to the sword that it would be unfinished without it. Guard, grip, pommel, blade. Those things are all you need for a sword. You don't need ito, menuki, same; you probably don't even need a fuchi or kashira, though I'll admit they'd probably serve to help keep the tsuka together. You don't even need a polish except to clean up the blade and smooth it out, which can be done by a machine. I'll give you the habaki and the fit needed with the saya, though. That is rather important and not just for iai.
However, returning to the OP for a moment, this could, again, easily be done with machines and could achieve a better fit than most human hands, therefore saving time and money. The same machines could also apply the lacquer to the saya. A proper set of machines could make the entire sword, so that all an employee would have to do is grind the edges, heat treat it, then wrap and assemble the hilt. I know I'm probably forgetting a step or two, but that's the gist of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Mar 11, 2011 6:14:46 GMT
Vincent,
We are talking about the majority, who are still learning and still have yet to understand the whole system. Proper equipment is important to them. This is true for all forms of education, from science to basic cooking.
Good example my zinc alloy iaito, no collector sword there, purely for training. It is cast zinc-aluminum blade (make by machine). It has no same. The tsuka core is synthetic (probably make by machine as well). It still need good wrapping, especially true for beginners who have not yet fully control the sword. They need all the help they can get. Otherwise, we will have zinc-alloy iaito flying across the dojo. It still cost more than an equivalent practice longsword. The longsword need no scabbard for once and the longsword still have less parts than my zinc-alloy iaito.
If you can figure out a way of making zinc-alloy iaito cheaper, easier, simpler; by all mean, go ahead. You can end up very wealthy if you pull it off. The fact that the Japanese (who are famous for robotic assembly line) have not figure out how do it cheaply is a good indication of how difficult it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by f.m. on Mar 11, 2011 7:25:10 GMT
Interesting..my 2 cents (or two whacks to the dead horse  ) about gooder or expensiver swords: I definitely agree with the "mystique" and media hype theories. that is to say, katanas are always supposed to be 500 year old mythical razor sharp indestructible things that you can cut anyone or anything in half with, that all cruciform euros are these 10 pound barely sharpened clubs made of mild steel, and that you swordfight by slamming the swords' edges into each other repeatedly. Euros are looked at by most (especially younger) people as nerdy and obsolete at best, ancient and chinese patterns aren't given much thought at all. I agree katanas and asian martial arts in general have indeed seen a huge popularity increase, probably mostly due to word of mouth and media. I find it odd and funny in a sick way that when some mentally ill person goes nuts and attacks someone with a sword, it's always a wallhanger katana?! on price issues, i don't have either of the following examples in my collection to say for sure but I know a lot of you do, so help me out: I would venture to say that a handforged or stock removed chinese made 1060 sub $100 katana should by no means be expected to be a "bad" or "not authentic" sword, especially the forged ones..see (looks pretty "authentically handforged and assembled" to me, and i believe their 1045 blades run about $125 USD.) however, at this price point..yes, you'll probably have a cotton wrap and fake rayskin. However, it's notable that a $300+ katana (again, to my limited knowledge) does not really differ from the <$100 katana in construction methods so much as materials used..higher quality alloys in some or all of the metal parts, silk wrap and real rayskin(the obvious price increasers) but to a small extent, workmanship. there may be a few wiggly places on a eighty dollar katana, but then again that can and definitely has happened on much more expensive katanas. (source:sbg reviews) if you want more authentic fittings and maybe better steel and can spare the money, the $300 one is for you.. I'd say that euros are plagued by many of the same problems, but looking literally right now on kult of athena, I'm actually seeing the same price ranges vs. quality on euros vs. katanas. a $300 euro is more likely to be fitted together well, have a better polish and edge, and nicer furniture than a $100 or so euro..it comes with the increased price due to nicer materials and a little more attention to detail. but.. it's notable that the $100 katana AND euro, (barring defects) still functions quite well as a battle ready sword, and if you don't truly abuse it, you'll most definitely get your money's worth either way? if you want a production or semi/custom sword, regardless of style with a better hone, fitting, and furniture, and not cost so much you're afraid to touch it then again the magic $200-400 range is usually the place to find it. On the price cap issue, (not mentioning new custom or production pieces) the rarity of authentic Japanese made katanas and swordsmiths, combined with japan's import and export laws make truly authentic katana rare indeed. if it's really that important to someone to get an old world katana made in japan, the rarity is what drives up the cost and mystique of the blades. and if you're buying an antique, WWII or earlier katana, then of course it's really expensive, it's a genuine relic But, one can say the same for authentic antique euro swords in useable condition.. buying said authentic Japanese blades is the exact equivalent to buying a 400+ year old euro sword from a gallery or collection in really good condition..spendy..either way, you're buying a handmade weapon possibly hundreds of years old and if you want one in not only useable, but pristine maintained and restored condition, it'll be crazy expensive for either a euro or katana. phew, thanks for reading my novel lol. |
|
|
|
Post by D'artagnan on Mar 11, 2011 7:36:25 GMT
First off- whoever said the rapier is Spanish in origin, that is false. What we think of the classical rapier is Italian in origin, though the technical definition of a rapier covers weapons found as far back as classical Egypt.
ANWAY-
Student- Katana's aren't more expensive to manufacture that western swords. That is a large generalization and an incorrect one. I believe it is their hype that makes them more expensive. Giogio Armani is hyped, and has a name attached, and is advertized as such, it isn't harder to make one of their shirts than it is something at say, Wal-Mart. And saying a katana has more pieces-thus more expensive is false. Take a rapier, steel is more expensive than wood, katanas use more wood, thus the rapier would cost more as far as raw materials go. True this is a simplification, but more pieces does not make one thing more expensive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Student of Sword on Mar 11, 2011 9:23:31 GMT
Of course, I am generalizing and simplifying. So are you. There are only so much we can write on a forum post. Not only we are generalizing and simplifying. We are also speculating and theorizing. I just believe that my theory is more sound than your and vice versa.
My hypothesis is labor cost matter more than raw material cost. Steel are cheap. This is true in all (again generalizing) modern manufacturing, why is this any different in the sword production industry? More parts equal more time putting them together equal more cost.
Of course, there is one person who know with certainty and can settle this debate once for all. But he (or she) will never provide the answer, and for good reason. That person is the Hanwei accountant. He should be able to estimate the manufacturing cost in term of labor cost and material cost (minus overhead) and then we would know with certainty whether which one cost more to produce.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kilted Cossack on Mar 11, 2011 15:59:01 GMT
OK, I couldn't stay away, but I will try to put on my serious hat and formulate a proper response.
Elheru, I was a little confused as I seemed to sense two separate, and conflicting, strands in your original post. The first---to which I had jocularly responded with the "Katanas are just better" thing from tvtropes---was that the katana is more broadly represented in the reproduction market than European blades are. The second, which I did not address, jocularly or otherwise, was that katana are frickin' expensive.
Why are katana more popular in the reproduction market?
I speak as someone almost wholly ignorant of JSA, but to my eyes it seems that the katana remained within a fairly narrow range of development for most of its time frame. Without looking at any sort of source material, I'd throw out numbers like a 10-11" hilt and a 27" blade, with a weight somewhere well in excess of two pounds. (I just checked the stats at KOA for a Hanwei Bamboo Mat Katana and I'm not far off, hurray!)
Thus, if you ask someone, even someone fairly knowledgeable about swords, for their image of a "Japanese sword" I'll bet your answer would hew fairly closely to those specs. (OK, saying "hew" was an inside joke that doesn't really work, but then again "slice fairly closely to those specs" just doesn't have the same ring to it.
Contrariwise, if you ask someone, especially someone fairly knowledgeable about swords, for their image of a "European sword" you'll have to get much more specific. Which century? Which context? (I.e., a war sword, an arming sword, a riding sword, a sword for unarmored judicial duels, etc.) European swords were in an ongoing adaptive and evolutionary struggle for well-nigh 1000 years, adapting to the changing needs: from almost pure cutting, to cutting with some emphasis on the thrust, to thrusting with some emphasis on the cut, to almost pure thrusting, to a balance of cut and thrust (again!), all in reaction to the type of armor they were likely to face and the type of fighting likely to be involved.
If Hanwei had focussed, say, exclusively on producing XIIa swords for the last twenty or thirty years, I'll bet they'd have come up with a darn fine XIIa more recently
Stepping back from this argument, why are katanas so popular in, even, the American mind? I believe Tinker Pearce hit the nail on the head in one of his Sword Geek podcasts. Part of the fascination comes from exposure to a martial culture that still valued swordsmanship, both in China and Japan, to a much later age than the Western world did. Gunpowder and firearms rapidly reduced the importance of swords as a real fighting tool, and the development of self-contained cartridges sounded the death knell. As Tinker put it, morons with muskets ended Western swordsmanship. While Japan certainly had the "morons with muskets" problem, I think it was to a much lesser degree.
Given that, at the dawning of the second great era of mass communication (after movable type), in the middle 20th century, America occupied Japan following WWII,a nd was exposed to Japan's more recent and exotic feudalism, we just fell hard for the katana. I suppose that if we had occupied China instead of Japan, the roles could well have been reversed, and all our love would be for the super! awesome!! tier one!!! willow leaf dao---which could cut through tanks and level mountains.
Finally (at last, at last!), on to the point about the relatively high expense of katana vice, say, Albion. I would advance the argument that it's not really quite fair to compare Albion to the individual katana crafters. (Lohman?) Albion, albeit a high end manufacturer, is, in the end, a manufacturer. They have set product lines and take advantage of modern production methods. If I can get away with an analogy that some might find offensive, Albion is kind of a high end Hanwei. To me it seems that the more apt comparison is between someone like Fred Lohman and, say, Jake Powning, or Peter Johnsson.
I could, of course, be mistaken, misguided or just plain wrong about any of the foregoing, but that's pretty much how I view things right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elheru Aran on Mar 11, 2011 16:39:01 GMT
Okay, that's an excellent response. I see a certain sense to your conjecture that the greater variety of blade forms is what made a consistent value of Western swords difficult to achieve for some time, while the fairly constant form of katana simplifies manufacture and design. Historically, also, katana remained high-quality for a long time due to the strong traditional values of the Japanese-- when swords were being phased out of the battlefield somewhere in the mid-1800s due not only to obsolescence but also lacking in craftsmanship (nobody was making good blades for a while there), the Japanese were still making war-quality katana all the way up to the end of WWII. So there is that continuity as well, which as has been observed is another selling point. I take your point in comparing Albion to Hanwei; I was using them as, well, they make the most expensive swords You're right in that I should probablyhave used Jake Powning or Peter Johnsson to compare to makers like Howard Clark and Lohman, etc... their swords do probably come in at about the same price point (mid to high thousands). However, at that point what you're paying for is the amount of craftmanship they're putting into their swords, both Western and Japanese. It has to be noted that as for the Western makers, you're paying for the whole package-- blade, hilt, scabbard, fittings-- while with the Japanese, you're probably paying the same amount for just the blade. You might get a shirasaya if you're lucky. The reason for this, of course, is that they're putting much more work into the blade, though I wouldn't be surprised if a Jake Powning pattern-welded blade took just as long to make... Hmm, now I'm tempted to email Fred Lohman and Jake Powning both and ask how much they'd charge for a fine blade without fittings. |
|
|
|
Post by masahiro560 on Mar 11, 2011 16:48:14 GMT
In my view of why there are so much more katana in the market today than western swords is simply because
the katana has a certain mystery to it.
The mystery of why it seems unchanged in the past 300 years since Tokugawa Iemitsu closed the ports of japan
The question remains in every person's mind who has held a katana
Almost every sword fanatic knows have these questions
"Why did this particular sword remain unchanged?
Something about it must be different from all the others!
Why did the japanese strive to perfect this type of sword rather than develop a new type of sword?
If this sword has remained therefore it must be an effective weapon!"
Though machines can make a sword through CNC machinery
Most beginners do not buy katana for it's "Functionality"
but rather for it's "Mystique and Elegance" that it holds
And part of a katana's functionality is it's aesthetic appeal that actually stems from the complex geometry of the sword
In terms of manufacturing
Every part of the katana was in place on there for a reason
you cannot make a tsuka without a kashira
Though a pommel differs in function from a kashira
It is like making a hilt without a pommel
Though a tsuka do and can make a Functional weapon without an ito and samegawa and menuki
Any sane person will have the common sense to run out into a battlefield with all the integrity a sword can ever have
The Samegawa improves the strength of the overall tsuka
The tsuka itself which is not made from hardwood must be strengthened with samegawa
The reason why hardwood was not chosen for tsuka was because of it's shock absorbing abilities that can lengthen the life of a tsuka
Thus the reason for a soft wood (or moderately hard wood) and the need for samegawa
to improve grip there is the menuki they are not there just for ornaments but instead actually serve the purpose to improve grip (unless they are in the reverse position where when the sword is held the menuki actually shows, this is what I don't understand)
the ito itself serves for the very same purpose to improve the grip
any person with common sense will know they would not want a sword flying because it's grip is too slippery
Even a hilt of a western sword will have something there to improve the grip
Another thing is that people want "Uniqueness", since there's all this fuss that the soul of a samurai rests in his sword and other things that people are fanatic about, they want to feel one with their sword, therefore they want their sword to be uniquely "them".
Any sword can be made practically by stock removal, this is efficient in the case of Mass produced blades, In times of war
but let us all remember these times are just like the edo period
Some people who buy high end Japanese styled swords, do not buy swords for their functionality
Some people who buy high end Japanese styled swords, do not buy swords just so they can swing the heck out of it
They want the balance that will accord with them, The length that will accord with them
And such is the need for a custom smith, who does not create equally looking swords, The Japanese sword has a very complex Geometry that many people would want to have in their swords, Many "cheap low end swords" make cut backs
such as the ha-machi resting on the habaki, the sword not having niku, the sword not being properly tempered and so on and so forth, this is because there are too many requirements that a japanese sword must have in order to function correctly and become the "more than average sword"
Correct Geometry will indefinitely give the swordsman a feeling of
"Reliability"
But for their aesthetic appeal and that sense of pride that their swords can bring.
Aesthetics comes with a greater price than functionality, thus everyone seems to want beautifully executed fumbari and yokote and hamon, gold plated tsuba, menuki made from shakudo, habaki made in the two piece style and applied with gold leaf
And usually these demands cannot be met by a single person alone
And requires specialists in their own fields
And specialists usually have training of years, and years of training doesn't come cheap
pride can be easily tapped by a few simple words
"Be like a samurai and own a sword that a samurai would've brought into the battlefield"
Any proven Style of sword and methods of sword making will give the people who are about to buy swords a sense of "Reliability" let us remember that though we can CNC swords right now...
The question remains
"Have they seen real battle? Will they be able to stand up to the rigors of battle?"
Though these questions may seem a little out of place and a little childish, this is what people look for in a sword
And they will pay for reliability and aesthetics
And thus the end of my short novel o.o"
-My opinion and analysis of the whole thing
|
|
) about gooder or expensiver swords:
