Introduction to the new column
Jin Gongzi Pro "Jiucheng Palace Monument"
From the time I first came into contact with calligraphy when I was 10 years old, I have been writing for almost 30 years today. In those 30 years, I wrote the most in letters.
In the Famous Books of the Tang Dynasty such as Yan, Liu, Chu, and Ou that I have studied, the one that has worked the most is the Ouyang Inquiry Book. I wrote this "Jiucheng Palace Stele" for a total of 7 years before and after. Creating this column is an important combing and summary of my past study of Ouyang Inquiry.
I hope to take this opportunity to re-implement the little experience and experience accumulated over the years into the post of the "Jiucheng Palace Monument".
Through the generalization and explanation of the "Jiucheng Palace Monument" in this column, I would like to share a little bitter talk about writing this Tang Monument to my friends who like Ou Kai.
- Prince jin
One, nine
To study the calligraphy, especially the classic works of the Tang Dynasty, we must first understand the following basic artistic principles:
Among the five common calligraphy styles, namely seal, li, kai, xing, and cao, the two types of seal and lishu are grouped in the form of pen splitting.
In other words, the writing seal and the two bodies, because the previous stroke and the last stroke do not have the characteristics of continuous stroke writing, but the pen is broken and then rises, we only need to focus on the isolated treatment of a single stroke line, without considering the transition between the front and back strokes.
But when it comes to lettering, this way of writing will never work. Because it is written in letters, like writing and cursive writing, it is not written in separate strokes, but in order to transfer the group of words.
To turn, in layman's terms, is to make strokes. It requires us to take into account the transition and care between this stroke and the next when writing the previous stroke.
Taking the word "nine" as an example, its line writing is as follows:
Through the drawing of the strokes, we can clearly observe that the transition from the first "skimming" to the second "horizontal", the brush draws a large circle of clockwise rotation on the paper. "Skimming" and "horizontal" establish an echoing relationship by moving the pen in circles, and ancient calligraphers called this "making turns".
Sun Guoting's "Book Genealogy" said: "True uses dot painting as the form to transform into a erotic nature; grass uses dot painting as a erotic nature, so that it turns into a form." "Essentially, italics, calligraphy, and cursive writing are all grouped according to the order.
The difference is that the transfer of calligraphy and cursive is implemented as ink on the paper, which is what we commonly call the ribbon, while the transfer of the letter is done in the way that the tip of the pen lifts away from the empty book on the paper (the ancients called it "fit").
Still taking the first word of the Jiucheng Palace Stele, the word "nine", as an example, it should be written like this:
(The trajectory of the "nine" character in the script is exactly the same as that of the book, the only difference is that the book of the book falls to the paper and becomes a thread, while the letter does not)
What is the difference between understanding or not understanding this principle of turning, which is manifested in the writing of this "nine"? Let's look at the following diagram:
If we don't know how to make a turn, we can only deal with the first apostrophe of the "nine" word in the way of pen splitting. An independent stroke, its pen should be rushing straight in the direction of 7 o'clock. And always keep the idea of turning to move the pen, the first stroke of the front will involuntarily rise (that is, turn to the direction of 9 o'clock).
Because only by upturning can we establish a connection with the second stroke, can we make the strokes of this word echo between the strokes, and can we avoid writing this word as a rigid building block and make it a flesh-and-blood organism.
Second, into
Why is it that some calligraphy enthusiasts still feel difficult to enter the study of calligraphy after practicing calligraphy for a long time?
In the final analysis, this has a great relationship with the fact that when I first studied the script, I did not understand the principle of making the words that make the transfer, and I did not establish the writing consciousness of the transfer.
Take the word "cheng" as an example. Let's see how to write this word in today's most popular Ou Kai teaching template:
Copying like this has attracted a lot of criticism, and many people have criticized it for being written like a print. But why it is like a printed body, but it is not clear.
Personally, I think that the fundamental reason why this word is like a printed form and not like a post writing is that it is written in parts, rather than in a group of words.
It is not difficult to illustrate this question, and it is enough to cite just one of these words:
Looking at this cross-fold hook alone, the direction of its forward is no problem. However, in the overall structure of the word "cheng", it is not coordinated, compare the "cheng" character written by Zhao Mengfu:
The biggest difference between the two "Cheng" characters is that Zhao Mengfu writes the horizontal folding hook of the "Cheng" character, and the front is to try his best to pick out the direction of 10 o'clock. Because he knew that only by picking it upwards could the pen intention be smoothly continued to the beginning of the "Ge" hook.
The horizontal folding hook of ou kailin's "cheng" character is horizontally forwarded in the direction of 9 o'clock. Written like this, the pen can not be connected to the next stroke of the "go" hook in any case. So I had to write another stroke when writing the "Ge" hook, which was equivalent to breaking up the transfer and becoming a sub-pen book.
In the book, the messenger is the god who rules over each single stroke, and it is also the note of the qi rhyme of a word. Cancel the rotation, these strokes will sing their own tune, equivalent to the separation of families, where can it be condensed into a flesh-and-blood glyph?
So as to turn the group of words, how should the "Cheng" character of the "Jiucheng Palace Stele" be written?
Let's restore the trajectory of this word on paper. Step 1:
Step 2:
Step 3:
Step 4:
Iii. Palace
Fourth, the spring
Yan, Liu, Ou, Chu, these famous Tang Dynasty calligraphers, each of whose calligraphy heritage has formed a large number of successors in later generations.
But today, it seems that only the people who study Ouyang Shushu have such a "strange appearance": some people learn and figure out oushu's brushwork, and always like to focus on the "hook" pen. Or to show off the master's inheritance with a kneeling pen flick, or to self-esteem with a stroke of the hook, wasted a lot of energy in vain, but made little contribution to the discussion of the basic brushwork of Ou Shu.
The reason for this result is, first of all, that in such discussions, the concepts of the two disciplines of philology and calligraphy are often confused. Let's take the "亅" hook of the word "泉" as an example to briefly illustrate this problem.
From a philological point of view, "亅" is a stroke, yes. But we should note that philology discusses the static display of glyphs and the cultural meaning behind this static display.
But this is not what calligraphy is discussing. Calligraphy is about the dynamic writing principle of glyphs. Because the objects discussed are different, the laws for calculating strokes are also different.
According to the laws of philology, as long as it is a complete stroke line, it can only be counted as a stroke. But according to the law of calligraphy, this line needs to be written several times, and it has to be counted as a few strokes.
Take the word "wind" in the seal book as an example:
The strokes marked in the picture above are calculated according to the laws of philology. However, according to the laws of calligraphy, there are at least four points of connection in this curved and winding line, which is written in five strokes. The calculation law of the Zhaozi Seal Book is still the same when it is transmitted to the Book.
The character "Yong" can only be counted as five strokes according to the popular modern Chinese dictionary, but calligraphy has had the Yongzi "eight" method since ancient times. If you insist that "亅" can only be counted as one stroke, then the word "yong" has no "eight laws", only "seven laws".
However, anyone with a little knowledge of calligraphy should know that "亅" is calculated in the "Eight Laws of Yongzi" by dismantling it into two strokes: "Nu" (i.e., "Vertical") and "趯" (let's call it "Hook").
What makes me even more ridiculous is that those who are complacent about a stroke of the hook always protect their tails and ignore their heads, only confusing "Nu" and "Zhao", but not combining "Le" (that is, "horizontal") and "Nu" into one stroke.
You know, according to the strict rules of philology, the three strokes of the "Yong" character "Le", "Nu" and "Zhao" can only be counted as one stroke, which is a "horizontal folding hook"!
Having clarified this, we can proceed to the second problem: in the Jiucheng Palace Stele, "hook" and "趯" are actually two different strokes. What is a "hook"? For example, the following two words:
The two strokes circled in the image above are the "hooks". It is characterized by a stroke in a circular transition, with no pick-up point in the middle. This stroke itself is inherited from the Lishu.
Compare the "nine" characters and the "hu" characters in the Lishu:
From the writing method of these "hook" paintings, we can appreciate the residual "affiliation" of Ouyang's "Jiucheng Palace Stele". But these "hooks" in the "Jiucheng Palace Stele", we can also replace it with another way of writing:
The writing method of the left two characters in the above figure is the "hook" that is transformed from the Lishu, while the writing of the two words on the right is unique to the letter, that is, the "Zhao" method in the "Yongzi Eight Laws".
Both "趯" and "hook" are attached strokes (that is, they cannot appear alone in glyphs, and are always used with the main pen such as horizontal and vertical), and the difference between them is:
There is a circular transition between the "hook" and the main pen to which it is attached, and there is no need to do the action of returning to the positive pen at the end of the main pen before writing the "hook", so the horizontal hook and the vertical hook are all written in one stroke.
However, there is a square fold transition between "Zhao" and its main pen, and if you do not straighten the refill at the end of the main pen and collect it as a sharp edge, the next "Zhao" cannot be picked out.
Therefore, where "趯" and the main pen are connected, there must be a pick-up point, which is why the "Yongzi Eight Laws" count "Nu" and "趯" as two strokes.
Some friends may worry that the lines that could have been written with one stroke now have to add a pick-up point to split and make two strokes, so will it affect the fluency of writing? In fact, this kind of unfounded idea does not have to have:
The four characters in the picture above are the handwriting of four calligraphers, Wang Xizhi, Zhiyong, Huang Tingjian and Mi Fu. The strokes circled in the picture are what we commonly call the "crab claw hook", and their essence is the "Zhao" method of the "Yongzi Eight Methods". I would like to ask, does this writing style affect the fluency of their writing?
Finally, I attach the word "spring" that I wrote:
— THE END —
The text | Prince of Jin
Typography | cream belly
The picture | Zhang Qianbei & Jin Gongzi original