Review: Shunga: Function, Context, Methodology

Author(s): Allen Hockley

Review by: Allen Hockley
Source: Monumenta Nipponica, Vol. 55, No. 2 (Summer, 2000), pp. 257-269
Published by: Sophia University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2668429
Accessed: 26-11-2015 00:43 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Sophia University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Monumenta Nipponica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 REVIEW ARTICLE

Shunga
Function,Context,Methodology

ALLEN HOCKLEY

Sex and the Floating World:Erotic Images in Japan, 1700-1820. By Timon

Screech. 319 pages. London: Reaktion Books, 1999. Paperback ?16.95;
Universityof Hawai'i Press, 1999. Hardback$48.00; paperback$22.95.

TN Sex and the Floating WorldTimon Screech aims to set Japaneseerotic

imageryin itspropercontext.This,he holds,means essentiallytwo things.
One, shunga JWmustbe reconnectedto broaderukiyo-eprintand painting
traditions that,whilenotovertlyerotic,werenonethelesspartof the"libidinous
economy."Second,anydiscussionofcontextmustaddressthequestionoffunc-
tion,which,inthecase ofshunga,was primarily as an aid tomasturbation.Given
thestateofexistingscholarshiponJapaneseerotica,bothpropositions arerefresh-
ing. Yet, apartfromthe firstchapter,much of what Screech introducesseems
only tangentially relatedto his declaredconcerns.While his observationsare
insightful and his argumentschallenging,thepresentation tendsto take on the
characterof a zatsuwa WMn: muchinteresting and usefulinformation but often
relatedonlylooselyto an overarching theme.Whenhe attemptsto reconnectto
his primarytheses,Screech's readingof boththe images and the evidence he
cites is at timesextendedto untenablelengths.The resultis a highlyprovoca-
tivebook-one thatchallengesthestatusquo foranyoneworkingin thefieldof
Edo visualculture-butone thatneedstobe navigatedina criticalframeofmind.
Screecharguesthatthedisproportionately largemale populationofEdo in the
eighteenth centuryand theexpenseofhiredsex meantthatmasturbation was the
mostreadilyavailable sexual experienceforall butthepowerfuland rich.The
cloisteringofwomen,a featureofBuddhistnunneriesand theupperechelonsof
theTokugawa social structure, suggeststhatthey,too, engagedin the"solitary
pleasures."The masturbation thesisis appealing,partlybecause it seems obvi-
ous thatshungawouldbe used as autoeroticstimuli,butalso because mostexist-
ing studiesare deplorablyinadequateon thematteroffunction.The notionsthat
shungawereusedforprophylaxis againstfire,protection forwarriors
on thebattle-

THE AUTHOR is assistantprofessorof arthistory,DartmouthCollege.

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
258 Monumenta Nipponica 55:2

field,sex educationforbrides,and communalviewingby couples forthepur-

pose ofarousalhave persistedin discussionsofJapaneseeroticaforfartoo long.
Screechexposes thefirstthreeforthemythsthattheyare,buthis critiqueof the
fourth, whileaccurateon a basic level,is nonethelessproblematic.His handling
of thispointraisesmanyquestionsconcerninghis use of visual evidence.I will
return tothisimportant issuebelow.First,however,itis necessarytohave a fuller
understanding of his agenda.
The relationshipbetweenshungaand thebroaderukiyo-etraditionseems as
obvious as themasturbation thesis.As Screechpointsout,notonlywere actors
and courtesansa standardukiyo-esubject,theperformative natureoftheiroccu-
pationsgeneratedmultifaceted imageryand could induce a varietyof viewing
behaviors.Since bothwere in thebusinessof sellingsex, an eroticreadingof
relatedimagesis plausible.The linkthebook seeks to forgebetweeneroticsen-
sibilitiesand more generalized floating-world imagery,however,is largely
synecdochicaland far less convincing.It hinges on the assumptionthatthe
viewerwas preparedto see theeroticin somethingpresentedstraightforwardly.
To supporthis assertions,Screech citespop-uppicturesand pornographicver-
sionsof standardthemes.On thesurfacetheseexamplesseemto verifyhis claim
of a relationship,yet it should be kept in mind thatthe eroticizedversions
dependedon theviewer'spriorexperiencewiththethemepresentedin a straight-
forwardmanner.Anylinkhereis sequential-therewereno straight derivatives
of eroticprecedents.Suppose Screech's argumentwere pursuedto its ultimate
conclusion.Would theexistenceof eroticizedversionsof Genji and Ise mono-
gatariindicatethatstandardversionsof theseHeian-eraclassics werealso part
ofthelibidinouseconomy?My pointis simplythis:straightforward imagescould
elicitmultiplereadings,one of whichmay well have been erotic,butit cannot
be assumedthatthiswas theonlyreading.In short,we cannottakethepartas
representative of thewhole. To claim,as Screech does, that"all floatingworld
artis libidinous"(p. 26) overstatesand oversimplifies thematterconsiderably.
The trueutilityof Sex and theFloating World,in thisreviewer'sopinion,lies
in themiddlechapterswhichpose a numberof important questionsconcerning
thevisual experienceofferedby shunga.In chapter3 Screech addressestopics
such as anatomicaltheory,nudity,theexaggeratedsize of thegenitals,and the
roleofclothinJapaneseerotica.He drawsinteresting comparisonswithWestern
erotica,a methodologicallyprecariousmove to be sure (non-Asianistswould
surelyaccuse himof overgeneralization), butan effectivemeans of helpingthe
reader"see" manyofthedistinctive featuresofshunga.A surveyin chapter4 of
ancillaryelementsoftendepictedin theseworkslinksmotifsof sex, gender,and
copulationto thebroaderculturein whichsuch representations circulatedand
suggestsways theymightnuancetheeroticreadingof theimagesin whichthey
appear. Chapter5, on themechanicsand politicsof thegaze, examineshierar-
chies createdbythethird-person voyeursfrequently portrayed in shunga.Draw-
ing on his extensive of
knowledge Rangaku and its relatedarts,Screech also
discussestheroleof mirrorsand lenticulardevices of varioussortsin construct-

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 HOCKLEY: Shunga 259

ing the gaze.1 He postulatesthatthe "pluralizedgazing" resultingfromthese

"scopic regimes"allows theviewerto witnesstheact ofcopulationfroma num-
berof vantagepoints,each capable of enhancinghis or herautoeroticfantasies.
Chapters3, 4, and 5 are easilythemostinformative sectionsof thebook, and
readersare sureto findthearguments stimulating,buttheysometimesdisappoint
whereScreech's primaryobjectivesare concerned.In chapter3, forexample,he
notesthattheplacementofclothin shungaoftensegmentsthebodies intogroup-
ingsof heads and genitals.He contendsthatthishead/genital splitcompensates
fortheunequal power relationshipinherentin bothEdo society(men control-
ling women) and in hiredsex (clientcontrollingtheindentured courtesan).Al-
thoughthe courtesansubmitsto penetration,he argues, she retainsequality
because "thehead is thepartof thebody wherepoweris determined by intelli-
gence and wit" (p. 127). This is a provocativeidea, as is the attemptto apply
recentlyfashionablemethodologies(genderconstruction and power differen-
tials) to thereadingofshunga.Unfortunately, Screechjettisonshis primarythe-
sis in theprocess.The readeris leftwonderinghow segmentation of thebody
plays out in theviewer's autoeroticfantasy.I mightsuggestthatmasturbation
withshungais itselfsegmentedintoa head and genitalexperience.The viewer
looks and fantasizeswhile stimulating the genitals.The restof thebody,be it
thatof the vieweror those depictedin the image,matterslittleonce the auto-
eroticnarrativeheatsup.
Screech's readingsof specificworksare sometimesmorethana littleforced.
In the sectionof chapter4 wherehe discusses the symbolicrole of animalsin
shunga,he cites as an example an image fromHarunobu's4i Fuiryui enshoku
ManeemonFR&L511r0 t A,series(he gives thetitleas Fuiryui koshokumane-
emon).The scene depictscatsrutting on thesecond-floor balconyof a residence
in whicha calligraphyinstructor is assaultinga youngfemalestudent.Screech
arguesthattheanimalsare reactingto thesexual tensionradiatingfromthecou-
ple. Details in theprintsuggestan alternative possibility.The flowering treenext
to thecats indicatesthatit is spring,thematingseason formanyanimals.The
inspirationto copulate,in otherwords,mighteasily runin the oppositedirec-
tion-even agingcalligraphyinstructors gettheurgewhennew springblossoms
appearand cats come intoseason. If Screechhad proceededno further withhis
interpretation, theissue would be simplya questionof differing opinions,butin
an attemptto bringthereaderback to the masturbation thesis,he overextends
his analysiswiththe followingstatement:"if the sightof sex is so irresistible
thatspontaneousnaturetakesthelead fromhumancopulation,thenthereader
need feelno qualmsabouttransferring thebook to one handand beginningauto-
amusement"(pp. 158-59).
The explorationof shunga's scopic regimesin chapter5 is likewise overly
complicatedat times.In one example (p. 200) Screechdiscusses an illustration
by OkumuraMasanobu At,fE- thatdepictsa couple copulatingin a room in
1 For his workin thisarea, see Screech 1996.

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
260 Monumenta Nipponica 55:2

whichthefusuma ik are decoratedwithimages of Ariwarano Narihira's sT

WF journeypast Mt. Fuji. He offersa complexreadingintendedto show that
Masanobu deliberatelyconstructed Narihira'sgaze, fromone fusumato a view
ofFuji on another,so as to crossoverthebodies ofthecouple. It,in otherwords,
providesthe viewerwithan alternativeaccess intothe scene. A closer look at
theprintreveals anotherinternally constructed gaze and a farsimplerreading.
As Screechpointsout,inshungaNarihiraoftenrepresents theconsummatelover.
The womanis clearlylookingat thepictureofNarihiraon thefusuma.Her fan-
tasy,and by extension,theviewer's (male or femalein thiscase), is thepointof
thisprint.
The approachtakenin Sex and theFloatingWorldraisesa numberofmethod-
ological issues. In recentyearsa splithas emergedin thedisciplineof arthistory
betweenthosewho definethemselvesas arthistoriansand thosewho favorthe
methodsofa developingfieldknownas visualculturestudies.In thatbothcamps
studyvisual as opposed to literaryculture,thenomenclatureis confusing,but
thereare substantialdifferences. Arthistorianssee the feministcritique,post-
colonialism, semiotics,poststructuralism, gender,and queer studies as late
twentieth-century extensionsof theirpractice.Visual culturespecialistsjettison
the workof earlier(pre-1970) arthistoriansand claim these more recentper-
spectivesas thehistoricalfoundationsof theirapproach.2Visual culturestudies
tendto conceptualizethe visual to a greaterextentthandoes arthistory.The
focusis less on theimage(and whateveritmayrepresent ormeanin and ofitself)
and moreon visualityin general.While in constructing the"ancient"historyof
thetwo approaches,Donald Preziozi,speakingforthefieldof arthistory,looks
to Kantforan aestheticperspective,3 Nicholas Mirzoeff,representing thevisual
studiesoutlook,counterswitha passage on opticsfromDescartes.4In visualcul-
turestudies,theviewerlikewisetakeson moresignificance thanhe or she would
in conventional(butnotnecessarilymorerecent)arthistoricalpractice.As Irit
Rogoffputsit,"In visual culturethehistorybecomes thatof thevieweror that
of theauthorizingdiscourseratherthanthatof theobject."5
Despitesuchdifferences, thereis also an overlapbetweenarthistoryandvisual
culturestudiesthatmakesitdifficult to situatea worklike Screech's definitively
in one camp or theother.6His approach,however,unquestionablyleans in the
directionof visual culturestudies.The masturbation thesiscould emergeonly
froma viewer-centered perspective.Some of his terminology (scopic regimes,
forexample) comes straightfromthe canon of visual cultureanalyticalprac-

2 For overviewsoftheorientations
ofarthistorians,see Minor1994 andPreziozi 1998; Walker
and Chaplin 1997 and Mirzoeff1998 offerintroductions to theconcernsof visual culturalspe-
cialists.
3 Preziozi 1998, pp. 70-96.
4 Mirzoeff1998, pp. 60-65.
5 Rogoff1998, p. 20.
6 It maybe noted,forinstance,thatseveralof thesame authorsappearin bothPreziozi 1998
and Mirzoeff1998.

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 HOCKLEY: Shunga 261

tices.7More importantly, he focuses attentionon methodologicaldifferences

when he deridesconventionalart historicalapproachesto shunga with such
statements as "Shungahave become 'art' and theircontexthas contracted to that
whichtheacademeallowsforartisticgenres,namelypositionintheoeuvre,biog-
raphyof themaker,developmentalpositionin thetype,etc." (p. 16). While tra-
ditionalarthistoricalhandlingof shunga has indeed leftmuch to be desired,
Screech throwsdown the methodologicalgauntletin a way thatdemands a
response,even if it meanstakingon, forthepurposeof thisreviewat least,the
role of a reactionary devil's advocate.
Let us firstreturnto thequestionof thenatureof thevisual evidenceScreech
cites in supportof his argumentthatshunga were intendedformasturbation
ratherthan communalviewing.Focusing on printsthatshow shunga within
shunga,thatis sexual activitycombinedwiththeuse ofshungaas a stimulus,he
assertsthatimages depictingcommunalviewing"are insufficiently commonto
takeas a primary viewingcontext,evenwithinthefictionalsystematics ofshunga
themselves"(p. 36). To illustratethispointhe providesone printrepresenting
communalviewingand threeshowingmasturbation. Two of the masturbation
printsportraymenusingcourtesanimages as stimuli,theothera Buddhistnun
usingan actorprint.To these,he adds a depictionof a male havinga wetdream
afterviewingshunga.The linkbetweenshunga and arousal in thislast case is
evidentbut one can hardlydescribeit as showingmasturbation while viewing
shunga.
How representative are theseimages? To answerthisquestion,I surveyeda
numberofthemorereadilyavailable publicationson shunga.My searchwas by
no means exhaustive-it amountedto less thanfourhoursof researchin two
libraries(DartmouthCollege and Yale University),neitherof whichis known
for its ukiyo-e holdings. Yet even this limited (conventionalart historical
reconstitute-the-genre) exerciseproducedtellingresults,which,forthereader's
convenience,I have summarizedin a table at theend of thisreview.Including
thosecitedin Sex and theFloatingWorld,I foundtwenty-two imagesthatdepict
shungabeing used as a means to arousal.Fifteenportraycouples in the act of
communalviewingorengagingin sexjustafterviewing,threeshowmenmastur-
batingwithshunga,and fourdepictwomendoingthesame. The visualevidence
Screechcitesfavorsmasturbation overcommunalviewingbya four-to-one ratio.
The evidence my limitedsearchturnedup suggeststhatimages of communal
viewingoutnumber masturbation scenes by morethantwo to one.
The real issue here,however,is morethana questionofnumbers.As Screech
states,it is unlikelythatimages of communalviewingrepresenta "primary"
viewingcontext,and in examiningthismaterialwe certainlyneed to keep in
mind"thefictionalsystematics ofshunga."Indeed,Screechseemsacutelyaware

7 MartinJaywas thefirst
to applytheterm"scopic regimes"to visual art.He borroweditfrom
ChristianMetz, who worksin thefieldof filmstudies.See Jay1998. For Metz's use of theterm,
see Metz 1982.

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
262 Monumenta Nipponica 55:2

oftheproblemsshungapresentinthisregard."All artconteststhereal,"he points

out,"but,witherotica,we are dealingwitha sortthatsets out,as its objective,
tomisrepresent" (p. 14). Givenassuranceslikethis,one cannothelpwonderwhy
images of masturbation are takenat face value and deployedas evidenceof the
functionof shungawhiledepictionsofcouples viewingeroticaare so easilydis-
missedas misrepresentations.
The identicalquestionapplies to argumentsin chapter2 about reactionsto
floating-world culture.Both arthistoriansand thosewho referto theirpractice
as visual culturestudiesoftenstep outsidethe visual traditionstheystudyin
searchof writtenevidencethatmay reflecton theway images shouldbe read.
Provideddocumentary evidenceis notdisproportionately privileged,muchis to
be gained by thispractice.8But when those whose primaryconcernis visual
materialsturnto written sourcesto shoreup theirclaims,one presumestheywill
bringto bear on such sourcesthe same degreeof criticalscrutinycalled forin
theuse of visual images. Screechis somewhatnegligenton thispoint.None of
theauthorshe quotesto gauge reactionsto shungacan be consideredneutralob-
servers.Manywerehighlycriticalofpopularculture.9 Mostimportantly, thecrit-
icismshe cites seldomextendedspecificallyto eroticimagery.Only one of the
passages he quotes mentionsshunga.10The fictionalsystematicsof shungaare
problematicenough,butScreechneedstobe equallyconcernedwiththefictional
systematicsof writtenevidence.
The resultsof my searchraised anotherimportantquestionconcerningthe
book's deploymentof visual evidence.As was trueof mostshunga,all butone
of theimages I located were issued in albums.Screechdismissesthispointall
too easilyin a caveat appearingneartheend oftheintroduction. "A senseofthe
fullcollectivityof a book is impossibleto conveyin theselectivereproductions
producedhere,"he states."It mighthave been desirableto offerone complete
book to show how narrativesunfoldedand germanelytoo, givenmy claim for
masturbation, wherebreaksoccurforthereaderto putthebook down.Yet even
whenshungaare boundtogether, theyare rarelystoriesand in mostinstancesa
page can reasonablystandalone" (p. 10). This statementseems irreconcilable
withtheprimaryintention of Sex and theFloating World.One would thinkthat
anyattemptto reconstruct viewingbehaviorwould takeintoaccounttheimme-
diate contextin whichshungawere received.When Screech distanceshimself
fromtheobject of his studyin thismanner,he throwsintosuspicionhis entire

8 Bryson1992 providesa thorough critiqueof themanyways arthistoriansmisusedocumen-

taryevidence.
9 Arai HakusekiV#m , MatsudairaSadanobu YF5t , and MoriyamaTakamoriA1*9,
forexample.It is also pertinentthatthemajorityofthefiguresScreechmentionswrotein thelate
eighteenthcentury,a timewhen the Tokugawa social structure and theirauthority(since most
were involvedin governanceof some sort)were underconsiderablestress.
10 Screechcreditsthequote to SugitaGenpakut,FEflA (p. 56), butthecorresponding note(p.
292, note31) statesthatit is froman anonymoustextof unknowndatetitledTenmeikibun,kan-
sei kibun.

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 HOCKLEY: Shunga 263

enterprise. His intention to recontextualizeshungais prefacedby whatis in fact

an act of decontextualization.
One wonderswhatpurposethis strategymightserve. Some of the compar-
isons Screech draws ignoredecades of shunga productionin between.Occa-
sionallyhe suspendschronologyaltogether. In a discussionof historicalfigures
oftendepictedas ancillaryelementsin shunga,he opens his argumentwithan
imageby Hokusai 11 datedto 1810. This is followedby discussionof a Masa-
nobu printdated 1738, a Jiheii6f*i designfrom1684, an Eishi 1 painting
dated 1800, MoronobuOrrnand Jiheiprintsdated 1684 and 1687 respectively,
and finallya Harunobudesignissuedin thelate 1760s (pp. 197-207). Removing
individualshungafromtheirprimaryviewingcontextallows Screech to sepa-
ratethemfromthevisual tradition to whichtheybelongedand to indulgein the
freewheeling conceptualismthatcharacterizesmanyofthearguments presented
in Sex and theFloating World.Playingfastand loose withtheevidencein this
manneris relativelycommoninthemorepoorlyconceivedofvisualculturestud-
ies. These seldomretainthesenseofchronologythatis generallytakenas a given
in the arthistoricaldiscipline.Arthistory,moreover,implicitlyacknowledges
thatthevisualtradition has a powerin and ofitselfthataffectsboththelook and
thereadingof an image as much,if not more,thanthe socioculturalmilieuin
whichit was produced.These considerationsare distinctlylackingin Sex and
theFloatingWorld.We arecompelled,therefore, to ask whattheresultswouldbe
if shungawere studiedin a rigorouslysystematicmannerwithchronologyand
thevisual tradition as centralparameters. Whatifwe returned individualimages
to theirprimaryviewingcontext-thealbumsin whichtheywereissued?Would
theresultbe different, or anyless instructive,or anyless conceptuallyincisive?
Screech's caveat is partlycorrect:tento twelveshungaboundtogetherin an
albumrarelyconstitutea storyin theconventionalsense. Most shungaalbums,
especiallyeighteenth-century examples,tendtoshowa selectionofcouplesrang-
ing acrossclasses, occupationalgroupings,ages, and occasionallygender.They
made itpossible,perhapseven desirable,to fantasizeoutsideofone's class, eco-
nomicmeans,and everydayexperience.To thisbody of standardizedpairings,
producersof albumsadded images thatimply,or perhapspropose,a narrative.
A musicorcalligraphylessonis interrupted (as in theFuiryut
enshokuManeemon
example discussed above), a lover appears as his or herpartneris reading,an
encounterin a publicbathleads to copulation.Masturbation scenesare common,
althoughnotones usingshungaas a stimulus.Amorouscouplesbehinda screen
or in thenextroomoftenarouse voyeurs(male and female,butmostlyfemale)
to thepointwheretheymasturbate.A singleimage may well have endedup as
theviewer's autoeroticfocusand encouragedtheconstruction of a narrativere-
volving around but
it, surelyperusal of thevarious pairingsand scenariosoffered
by thealbumservedas a preludeto thatlevel of engagementwithan individual
image.Shungaalbumshad a structure, bestdescribedas catalogue-like,thefunc-
tionof whichwas to facilitatethisfirstlevel of viewing.
The catalogue-likestructure had a pronouncedeffecton thedevelopmentof

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
264 Monumenta Nipponica 55:2

the genreas a whole. A repertoireof conventionalizedpairingsand scenarios

developedquicklyintheearlyeighteenth century.Laterartistssometimesaltered
theorderand thecombinationsof standardimages. Occasionallytheyadded a
new pairingor scenario,butby and largethebasic patternand repertoire were
reproducedconsistently throughout theeighteenth andnineteenth centuries.This
situationdoes notvalidateScreech's practiceof pullinga singleimage froman
albumand takingitas representative ofthetradition as a whole.If anything,con-
ventionalizedimages shouldraise entirelydifferent concerns.Tropes in every
sense oftheterm,theyneed to be consideredaccordingly.Anydevelopmentsin
thetradition,incremental orcataclysmic,oughtto be measuredagainsttheback-
groundof thesedeep structures.
This circumstanceraises a significantchallenge to much of what Screech
arguesin chapter6. He maintainsthatshungabeganto changesignificantly after
1820. He considersthechangesdramaticenough,in fact,to advocateabandon-
ing the termshunga altogether(p. 10). While, he claims, "eighteenth-century
shunga neverentertained the possibilitythata partnermightbe unwilling,no
one was forced,"in thenineteenth centurydepictionsof sex became moreadver-
sarial,withmorescenes of rape or forcedsex (p. 277). The suppressionof nan-
shoku E imagerylikewisebegan in theearlynineteenth century(p. 287), and
fearsofdepopulationbrought"changesto theacceptabilityofmasturbation" (p.
276), pushingit "intothedomainof thepubescentand theaged" (p. 277).
Thereis visual evidenceto counterall of theseclaims.Depictionsofrape and
forcedsex appearin theeighteenth centurywiththesame consistencyas theydo
in thenineteenth, thebest-knownexamplebeingin Uta makura ktt,an album
Screech oughtto know well consideringthatan image fromit appears on the
cover of Sex and theFloating World."1A depictionof two actorsengagingin
anal sex in Kuniyoshi's Hf1SEdo murasaki Yoshiwara Genji iI rWJfifi
(issued around1850) similarlyraises doubtsregardingthe suppressionof nan-
shokuimagery.12
Screech's characterizationofmasturbation as beingmarginalizedin thenine-
teenthcenturyalso has no groundingin the visual evidence. Six of the seven
masturbation-with-shunga scenes listed in the table below were nineteenth-
centuryproducts.Indeed,two of thethreeworksScreechcitesin supportof his
centralthesiswere producedin the 1830s. To theseone could add twenty-one
othermasturbation imagesfromthisperiodthatI came acrossin mysearch.Such
numberscannot,of course,be takenentirelyat face value. Survivalratesare
always an issue withJapaneseprints,and anyconclusionbased simplyon num-
bers is suspect.Viewed againstthe conventionsand tropesof the genre,how-
ever,theevidenceis telling.The publicationdatesoftheprintslistedin thetable
below indicatethatcommunal-viewing images,unlikethosedepictingmastur-
bation,wereissuedovertheentirecourseoftheeighteenth century withthesame

of therape scene, see Asano and Kobayashi 1995, vol. 1, p. 64.

For a reproduction
12
See Fukuda 1993, vol. 10, fig.96.

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 HOCKLEY: Shunga 265

degreeof regularity as otherconventionalizedrepresentations. Printsdepicting

couples viewingshunga forthe purposeof arousal evidentlyfitthe profileof
otherestablishedtropes.Conversely,eighteenth-century printsportraying mas-
turbationwithshungawerean anomaly.The increasedproductionofmasturba-
tionimages in thenineteenth centuryrepresentsa disjuncturein thegenre,one
thatrunsexactlycontrary to Screech's claim thatmasturbation was pushedinto
themarginsat thattime.
A moretraditional arthistoricalapproachto shungahas otherperspectivesto
offeron theissue of function.Screechcriticizesexistingscholarshipbecause of
its tendencyto privilegedeluxe editionsof full-colorshungaat theexpense of
cheaperbutmorecommonsumizuri-eMM+,la editions.In his words,arthistori-
ans "have been on a ceaseless quest for 'masterpieces'or forinnovationand
progress,to theocclusionofunderlying habits"(p. 46). It is truethattheshunga
arthistoriansmostoftenstudymaynotaccuratelyrepresent thebulkofwhatwas
consumed.Deluxe editionsnonethelesshave somethingto tellus aboutshunga
productionand reception.Theirlevel of artistry and highproductionvalue sug-
gestthatnotall shungawere made specificallyformasturbation. FrancisHall,
an Americanwho residedin Yokohama from1859 to 1866, offersevidence,cir-
cumstantialas it maybe, to thecontrary. In hisjournalhe relates,
I was abouttogo whentheold gentleman reachedtothetopofa case ofdrawers
andtookdowntenboxescarefully wrapped up.He undidthemandoutofeachbox
tookthreebooksfullof vile picturesexecutedin thebeststyleof Japaneseart,
accompanied withletterpress.We werealonein theroom,theman,wife,and
myself. He openedthebooksat thepictures,andthewifesatdownwithus and
beganto"tellme"whatbeautiful bookstheywere.13
Hall had a similarexperienceat theresidenceof anotherJapaneseacquaintance:
He thenwenttoa drawerandbrought whichhesaidwas veryvaluable,
something
andsuiting theactiontotheend,placedinmyhandsthreeorfourveryobscenepic-
tures.His wifestoodclosebyanditwas apparentfromthedemeanor ofboththat
therewas nota shadowofsuspicionintheirmindsoftheimmodesty oftheactor
ofthepictures themselves.Theyhadshownthemas something reallyverychoice
andworth lookingatandpreserved themwithgreatcare.14
We knownothingoftheshungaHall was shownbuttheway theywerestored
andpresented suggeststhathisJapaneseacquaintancesweremoreinclinedtowards
Kant thanDescartes. Screech's masturbation thesisdoes notfittheirdescribed
attitudetowardthepictures;moreover,theyviewedshungaas a couple. (I won-
derwhattranspired afterHall lefttheirresidence.)
We mustacknowledgethatHall describedratherspecial eventsthatoccurred
long aftertheperiodfromwhichScreech drawshis conclusions.The factthat
significantnumbersof deluxe editionshave survivedintactand in reasonable

13
Notehelfer1992, p. 81.
14
Notehelfer1992, p. 82.

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
266 Monumenta Nipponica 55:2

condition,however,indicatesthatthe attitudesHall recordshad earlierprece-

dents.How, then,do we deal withdeluxe shunga and the questionstheyraise
aboutfunction and viewingbehavior?Otherukiyo-eproductsoffera suggestion.
Ukiyo-eartistsoftenpaintedfloating-world themesforthehigh-endsegmentof
theirmarket.The subjectstheyexploredwereno different fromwhatappeared
in prints,butpaintingelicitedthedisplayof specificskillsthata printcould not
convey. Is it possible thatdeluxe shunga were specialized itemsof the same
order,ones in whichproducersexhibitedtheirabilitynotonlyto arousebutalso
to createa workof exquisitebeauty?
Statingone's argumentsin absolutes,as Screech oftendoes, is an effective
way to provokediscussion.In a fieldas staidas ukiyo-estudies,itis a welcome
development,but I am surehe knowstheconsequencesof thisstrategy.Inevi-
tablytherewill be evidence to the contrary.There will always be alternative
explanations.The possibilityofmultipleviewingbehaviorswill resistanyover-
archingperspectivewe mightattemptto bringto thestudyof shunga.
Many of theproblemsand issues forwhichI have takenScreechto taskstem
fromthegenreitself.Tens of thousandsof extantimages make workingin the
fieldof Japaneseprintculturea dauntingtask.Ukiyo-escholarsare inevitably
forcedto streamline,to focus, and to make a numberof difficultchoices.
Screech's all-too-easydismissalof arthistorians'efforts oeuvres
to reconstitute
andgenresis,inmyopinion,unfortunate. One pointofthisreviewwas to demon-
stratethe value of theirenterprise.There is stillmuch to be done in archival
reconstruction. The workmaybe tediousand theresultswill alwaysbe slow,but
it is a basic requirementof the field.Fortunately, thereare scholars (mostly
Japanese)willingto undertakethistask.Now thatcensorshiplaws in Japanhave
been substantially relaxed,thereare,as well, a numberof publishersclamoring
to illustratelavishlythevast corpusof Japaneseerotica.Scholars are certainly
nottheprimaryend-userthesepublishershave in mind,butwho are we to com-
plain?
Withtheever-increasing availabilityof good archivalscholarshipand acces-
sible illustratedpublications,we are,perhapsforthefirsttimein thehistoryof
ukiyo-estudies,in a positionto reallyunderstand shunga.Tim Screech's efforts
oughtto be recognizedas an importantstep in thatdirection.He oftenleaps
beforehe looks,butultimately Sex and theFloatingWorldforcesus to deal with
shunga much more than
critically we have in thepast.The natureofhis inquiries
affordsall of us workingin thefieldopportunities to engage shungaon a con-
ceptuallevel notpreviouslypossible. On thatissue, Screech's timingcould not
be better-Sex and theFloating Worldis preciselywhatthedisciplineneeds at
thispointin itsdevelopment.

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 HOCKLEY: Shunga 267

Shunga IncorporatingScenes ofShunga

Communalviewingfor thepurpose ofarousal

1. Kiyonobu MM>.Neya byobu rMJ (1711). Asano and Kobayashi 1995,
vol. 2, p. 122.
2. Masanobu.Neya no hinagatar_1g Wt (1738). Asano andKobayashi 1995,
vol. 1, p. 25.
3. Koryuisai MCA.Untitled(1774). Fagioli 1998, p. 59.
4. Shunsho4. Haikai yobukodoritTfJ,Z E 0 (1778). Asano and Koba-
yashi1995,vol. 2, p. 56.
5. Hokusai. Konsei reimuden + (1815). Hayashi 1988, p. 112.
6. Hokusai.Ama no ukihashii (n.d.). Fukuda 1993, vol. 6, fig.136.
7. Eisen XA. Keisei higo (1822-1825). Fagioli 1998, p. 125.
8. Hokuba JLt,%. Untitled(1820s). Grosbois 1964, p. 126.
9. Kunisada HA. Sentoshinwa7WAiM (1820s). Fukuda 1993, vol. 12, fig.
20.
10. Toyokuni ID. KaichuikagamirP (1823). Fukuda 1993,vol.7, fig.24.
11. Kunisada. Shikino nagame (A1M* (1827). Fagioli 1998, p. 134; Fukuda
1993, vol. 11, fig.84. Screech 1999, p. 37.
12. Toyokuni.Ehon otsumorisakazuki IMDt ?0Ji (1828). Fukuda 1993,
vol. 7, fig.36.
13. Kuniyoshi.Oeyama A1$O1jMJ (1831). Fukuda 1992, p. 112.
14. Kuniyoshi.Ensekizasshi Mt 4Mf,&(1833). Fukuda 1993,vol.10, fig.133.
15. Kunisada. Untitled(1840s). Fagioli 1998, p. 149.

Male onlyviewingfor thepurpose ofarousal

1. Anon. Untitled(1760s). Screech 1999, p. 20.
2. Toyokuni.Ehon otsumorisakazuki(1828). Fukuda 1993, vol. 7, fig.47.
3. Anon. Tekinwarai-e sho (1830). Screech 1999, p. 19.

Female onlyviewingfor thepurpose ofarousal

1. Toyokuni.Untitled(c. early1800s). Fagioli 1998, p. 114.
2. KunimaroMg. Ikurasemu.Screech 1999, p. 65.
3. Eisen. IrojimanEdo murasaki1PPI@CTPA4 (1841). Fukuda 1993, vol. 9,
fig.57-58.
4. Kunisada. Nise Murasaki onna Genji. lu7hU (1848-54). Fukuda
1993, vol. 11, fig.84.
N.B. Kanji have notbeen providedforworkscitedsolelyfromFagioli 1998 and Screech
1999, whichdo notgive anycharacters.

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
268 Monumenta Nipponica 55:2

REFERENCES

Asano and Kobayashi 1995

Asano ShuigoAMM'J and KobayashiTadashi 'i4tiA?.Ukiyo-esoroimono:Makura-e
r* t^t- : tt,t. 2 vols. Gakken,1995.
Bryson1992
NormanBryson."Artin Context."In StudiesinHistoricalChange,ed. Ralph Cohen.
UniversityPress of Virginia,1992.
Fagioli 1998
Marco Fagioli. Shunga: The EroticArtof Japan. New York: UniversePublishing,
1998.
Fukuda 1992
Fukuda Kazuhiko QFHM1i. Ukiyo-egiga i2atMi. Kawade Shobo Shinsha,1992.
Fukuda 1993
FukudaKazuhiko.Onishikihanga meihinsen i 12 vols. Kawade Shobo
Shinsha,1993.
Grosbois 1964
CharlesGrosbois.ShungaImages du Printemps.Geneva: Les EditionsNagel, 1964.
Hayashi 1988
Hayashi Yoshikazu 1I-. Edo makura-eno nazo i Kawade Bunko,
1988.
Jay1998
MartinJay. "Scopic Regimes of Modernity."In The Visual CultureReader, ed.
Nicholas Mirzoeff.London and New York: Routledge,1998.
Metz 1982
ChristianMetz. TheImaginarySignifier:Psychoanalysisand theCinema,trans.Celia
Brittonet al. IndianaUniversityPress, 1982.
Minor 1994
VernonHyde Minor.ArtHistory'sHistory.Englewood Cliffs,N.J.: PrenticeHall,
1994.
Mirzoeff1998
NicholasMirzoeff,ed. The VisualCultureReader.LondonandNew York:Routledge,
1998.
Notehelfer1992
F. G. Notehelfer,ed. Japan ThroughAmericanEyes: The Journalof Francis Hall,
Kanagawa and Yokohama1859-1866. PrincetonUniversityPress, 1992.
Preziosi 1998
Donald Preziosi,ed. TheArtofArtHistory:A CriticalAnthology.OxfordUniversity
Press, 1998.
Rogoff1998
IritRogoff."StudyingVisual Culture."In The Visual CultureReader, ed. Nicholas
Mirzoeff.London and New York: Routledge,1998.
Screech 1996
Timon Screech. The WesternScientificGaze and Popular Imageryin Later Edo
Japan: TheLens WithintheHeart. CambridgeUniversityPress, 1996.

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 HOCKLEY: Shunga 269
Screech 1999
Timon Screech. Sex and theFloating World:Erotic Images in Japan, 1700-1820.
London: ReaktionBooks and Honolulu:Universityof Hawai'i Press, 1999.
Walkerand Chaplin 1997
JohnA. Walker and Sarah Chaplin. Visual Culture:An Introduction.Manchester
UniversityPress,1997.

This content downloaded from 129.93.16.3 on Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:43:10 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions