Social status and art collecting: the collections of Shen Zhou and Wang Zhen

Unusual circumstances make it possible to compare sum of two units fifteenth-century Chinese collections of paintings, single belonging to Shen Zhou (1427-1509) a wealthy landowner of Suzhou renowned as a painter, bard and calligrapher, and the other to Wang Zhen (1424-1495) a lucky merchant of Huaian.(1) In the case of Shen, the word collection here directs to a subset of his entire collection, a collection of album leaves mounted together as individual handscroll that is now known sole by a contemporary record of it. In Wang's case, it is unclear whether the paintings and individual specimen of calligraphy interred in his coffin constitute his entire collection or only a portion of it. My drift here is to compare the sum of two units collections and related texts in order to explore the possible relevance of social status as a factor influencing collecting practices. There are, however, many reasons for exercising caution in doing with equal reason First, a sample of paintings gathered by only two men is extremely small and may not be representative. next to the first much work remains to be done in studying the sociopolitical history of the fifteenth century(2) Third, plane though scholars have devoted a great quantity [i]or[/i] amount of more effort to researching later centuries, many questions remain regarding social stratification and mobility.

Even given the rife state of research, it is clear that the social positions of merchants, landowners, and officials were changing during the fifteenth hundred Because contemporary sinologists are challenging important aspects of earlier analyses of the respective positions of different elite assemblages during the Ming (1368-1644) and Qing (1644-1912) dynasties, in the not absent comparison one is inevitably addressing a shifting social terrain from a vantage point that is itself undergoing transformation. This complicates our comparison, on the other hand makes the attempt to situate the sum of two units collectors in their respective social connections all the more interesting. greatest in quantity studies of merchants as collectors and patrons have focused upon the periods during which they began to play important characters - the late sixteenth hundred and thereafter. Documentation of their activities in this cultural sphere for earlier periods is rare, in like manner an intact collection of a merchant who died in 1495 provides important evidence. Before discussing Shen Zhou and Wang Zhen and the collections they formed, however, I offer proffer to consider some of the issues and controversies related to the material that I shall be analyzing, while simultaneously offering a certain quantity of necessary background information.

Debates among historians of Ming China regarding the definition of elite status are relevant here primarily as a stimulus to formulate a nuanced characterization of the respective social positions of Wang Zhen and Shen Zhou Because novel research has tended to focus attention upon factors other than success in the examinations leading to a career in the bureaucracy, it is useful for a close attention of two men who not ever served as government officials still who were, in different ways, part of a wealthy, educated elite.

Among art historians, the main altercation has concerned the significance of the paintings in Wang Zhen's collection. In five paintings the themes and turn of expressions of works by professionals are plenteous like those associated with amateurs, thus belying a distinction made for centuries through many influential Chinese theoreticians and critics. Contemporary Chinese scholars have emphasized the contribution of this tomb find in broadening our understanding of the expressive range of professionals.(3) The material part of criticism associating highly educated amateurs with artistic freedom of expression eventually nourished an appreciation for very unfinished styles produced by amateurs as well as by dint of professionals. However, James Cahill has pointed without that demand for quickly produc paintings to be used in the exchange of social courtesies also encouraged artists to bring out works that may be schematic and conventional rather than in deed indicative of personal feelings or artistic originality. In his opinion, unfinished works in Wang's collection are in like manner merely because they fulfill of that kind demands. In another article I have argued that the paintings set in Wang's tomb vary in quality and in art-historical significance and should not be with equal reason easily dismissed.(4)

These debates are relevant to the not away comparison in that they influence our evaluation of Wang Zhen as a collector. However, level a mediocre collection put together by the agency of a man who, like Wang Zhen, appears to have been a fairly ordinary merchant could be valuable as evidence for the diffusion of artistic practices that at this time were still dominated to a large amplitude by the nonmercantile educated elite.

The paintings base in Wang Zhen's tomb were high hilled as two scroll sets. Works in the smaller place appear to have been obtained separately by the agency of Wang, while those in the larger individual include many done for a man named Zheng Jun and were probably purchased as a assemblage Cahill has interpreted the paintings in the larger put as the collection of a minor official, proposing that their generally incomplete executions are best accounted for by the agency of classifying them as minor works of the mark that painters or their patrons not rarely gave officials as small at hands He argues that the paintings done for Zheng Jun have conventional connotations that he characterizes as political; in other words, the themes nurse to flatter Zheng for being an upstanding Confucian in rule service.(5) One problem with this interpretation is that there is no evidence that Zheng Jun was an official, nor does Cahill explain wherefore he believes this to be genuine None of the publications by the agency of Chinese scholars indicates Zheng's professional status. From evidence upon some of the paintings done for him, we know that he resided in the capital; however, many educated family who were not officials lived there. repeatedly officials, even minor ones, are recorded in local gazetteers, the bring togethered writings of associates, and other true copys yet neither Yin Jinan nor I have been able to find any information about Zheng Jun in of the like kind sources despite extensive searching.(6) Although the lack of like information does not mean that Zheng Jun could not have been an official, it does argue for caution in assuming that he was one