The Tectonics of Japanese Style Architect and Carpenter in the Late Meiji Period Cherie Wendelken U tntil recently, the wooden architecture of the mod- to the modernization and integration of the building indus- ern period and the role of the carpenter in the tries. That contact temporarily blurred the boundaries development of modern Japanese architecture between architect, engineer, and master builder and had 28 have not been carefully studied.' The literature on late lasting consequences for the definition of Japanese nation- nineteenth- and early twentieth-century architecture has al identity in architecture. tended to emphasize two important concerns: first, the gen- Collaboration between building professionals also esis of a newly imported Western architectural profession raised questions of professional identity. In Europe and the and its developmental progress on Japanese soil; and sec- United States, as in Japan, debates about styles, their asso- ond, the transformative effects of this new profession that ciated meanings, and their relative quality were part of the involved the mastery of Western building technology and discourse of nineteenth-century historicism, but in Japan what has been called "the problem of style."2 However, in the self-conscious questioning of stylistic and formal con- the broader built environment of Meiji Japan, there was no vention was accompanied by discussion of the nature of abrupt break with the building practices of premodern architecture as distinct from mere building. The somewhat Japan. Meiji-era construction was overwhelmingly execut- naive-sounding debates in the late Meiji period over the ed by carpenters using methods and materials not unlike role of the architect-was he engineer or artist?-can also those used in the late Edo period (1600-1868). In both be understood as early modern Japanese architects' public and private sectors during the first half of the Meiji attempts at self-definition vis-a-vis past building tradi- period, the master carpenter and the architect were paral- tions.3 The new profession saw its expertise and its role as lel and even rival professionals working in similar capaci- distinct not only from that of the engineer but also from the ties but in different materials. Traditionally trained master tradition-bound world of the master carpenter. Within carpenters acted not only as craftsmen, but as design pro- Japan, the differences in working methods and technical fessionals and the equivalent of structural engineers. They expertise between architect and carpenter were as signifi- continued to have an important role even in the construc- cant as the differences between Japan and the West. tion of national monuments as long as the Meiji govern- Today the architectural symbol of the cultural climate ment's K6bush6, or Department of Construction, sponsored of the late Meiji era is the Shrine and Temple style, or sha- traditional wood construction. jiyo, which appeared in the 1890s. It is conventionally In this context changes in education, building tech- understood as the reflection of a heightened awareness of nology, and the political climate during late Meiji period, national identity. However, buildings like the Nihon Kangyo from the 1890s into the twentieth century, constitute an Bank (fig. 1) were not new in the landscape in the 1890s, important transitional period when architects acquired but were new as products of the architectural profession. some of the traditional builders' technical expertise in the They were different because they were understood not sim- use of wood. Thus they were the first who had not only the ply as Japanese buildings but as a self-consciously Japan- desire but the skill to manipulate the traditional building ese style of architecture in an increasingly eclectic age. vocabulary to create a new Japanese architecture that was During the early years of the Meiji Restoration, for- both national and modern. The wide range of activities eign institutional programs, construction technologies, and engaged in by academy-trained architects beginning in the architectural styles had been imported together as part of 1890s marks an important time of contact between the tra- the nation-building program of the new regime. Since ditional master builder and the academy that was critical many of the newly created public and commercial institu- FALL 1996 This content downloaded from 160.39.4.185 on Tue, 05 Jul 2016 15:05:29 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 29 FIG. 1 Tsumaki Yorinaka, Nihon Kangy6 Bank, Tokyo, 1899. No longer extant. tions had been based on European models, it is not sur- style. Although later moved to Chiba prefecture, the Nihon prising that many of the buildings that housed these insti- Kangy6 Bank was originally built across from the tutions-post offices, palaces, ministries, and schools- Rokumeikan, the European-style reception hall designed were modeled on European designs.4 European engineers by Josiah Conder (1852-1920) in 1883 (see Toshio Watan- and architects had been invited to practice the modern abe's article on the Rokumeikan in this issue of Art Jour- building professions and to help establish them in Japan. nal ).7 It was therefore not only an architectural rebuttal to By the early 1880s Japanese architects trained by foreign the westernizing sentiment of the Rokumeikan era, but a teachers were being retained by the Meiji government to very literal and deliberate upstaging of the Rokumeikan's design versions of the eclectic revival styles popular in urban presence and its prominence as a cultural symbol for Europe. These, employing stone or brick masonry technol- modern Japan. The Japanese appearance of these and other ogy, represented a fundamental departure from the timber- shajiyo buildings, such as hotels and prefectural offices, is based building practices of pre-Meiji Japan.5 usually understood to reflect the more nationalistic climate In the late 1880s a newly reorganized central govern- of late Meiji, and the questioning of the earlier uncritical ment called for an ideological return to Japanese antiquity adoption of European styles by Japanese architects (as opposed to modeling the West) as a guide to remaking enthused by the architectural culture of Europe. By the late Japan's institutions and strengthening its national identity. 1880s the Japanese architectural community had gotten During this same period from the end of the 1880s to the beyond a monolithic understanding of European style to an turn of the century, a new, self-consciously Japanese style increasingly sophisticated and detailed discourse on style of architecture appeared. The Shrine and Temple style in architecture, some of which centered on the appropriate (shajiyo) was the creation of a new generation of architects, use of revival styles then popular in Europe, such as Queen the first to be trained in Japan by Japanese teachers.6 As Anne, Neoclassical, or Gothic.8 The few extant Shrine and the name suggests, these buildings took their formal inspi- Temple-style buildings remain important as early examples ration from premodern shrines and temples. The upturned of the quest for national identity in modern architecture, a eaves, cusped gables, and tiled roofs that characterized the central issue in critical debate and in architectural design Shrine and Temple style were intended to resemble those for generations to come.9 of ancient religious monuments. The ancient shrines and temples of the Nara and The Nara Prefectural Office, designed by Nagano Kyoto area had become increasingly important in late This content downloaded from 160.39.4.185 on Tue, 05 Jul 2016 15:05:29 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms struction methods and of the dimensioning system called kiwariho.11 Significantly, they involved the collaboration of both master carpenters and academy-trained architects. The contact of young architects with master builders in the Imperial University began as part of a curriculum change in the late 1880s. Until that time, architectural education had focused on courses in modern construction technology and Western-style design. Ito Chiita (1867- 1954), Sekino Tadashi (1869-1938), Oe Shintar6 (1879- 1935), and Takeda Goichi (1872-1938) are among those architects now associated with the Shrine and Temple style. Not coincidentally they were also students of Kigo Kiyoyoshi (d. 1915), an influential master carpenter employed by the Imperial Household, who taught the first FIG. 2 Meiji Palace, Tokyo, site plan showing Josiah Conder's proposal for courses in Japanese architecture at the Imperial Universi- the reception hall to the right, 1886. Imperial Household Agency; from Onogi, Meiji Yofu Kyutei. ty beginning in 1889. The scope of Kigo's activities as builder, educator, and scholar is remarkable, and his name is associated with a long list of important projects. His pre- tion and the restored monarch.l0 In the West as in Japan, sent obscurity is perhaps due to his status as master 30 much nineteenth-century architecture was historicist in builder rather than architect.12 spirit; the Shrine and Temple style was an alternative to Kigo was no ordinary carpenter: his family had long imported European revival styles, one of distinctly Japan- served as master builders for the Imperial Household, act- ese character. Since European-style buildings in masonry ing as designers and general contractors for the palace. In continued to be built throughout the Meiji period, building true Meiji antiquarian fashion, the Kigo family claimed in the manner of temples and shrines was no longer mere association with the Imperial Household as far back as the construction but a symbolic act: the deliberate creation Heian period (794-1185). During the Edo period, the Kigo of a native revival style based on ancient monuments. family seems to have taken a subsidiary role to the ruling Regional politics played a role in what later became a Tokugawa clan's own carpenters, the Nakai family based in national style in architecture.