On these articles on such fundamental and massive topics, I feel the need to describe a bit what I think I've accomplished and covered, and what still needs doing.
This article was written primarily, almost solely, from Richard Lane's 1974 book. It covers most of the bases of the truly major print artists, but also represents a very traditional and somewhat outdated view of the genre. Painting is almost absent from the discussion, as is ukiyo-e from outside Edo. Also, while most of the prints do generally fall into the categories of bijinga and actor prints (and sumo and landscapes and a few others), this treatment fails to really capture the more general urban culture focus of the genre, the proliferation of works (particularly paintings) of genre scenes, that is, just general images of city life which do not focus specifically on courtesans or actors, but rather on townsmen (chonin) at work and at play.
I also fear that too much attention has been paid to individual artists who were particularly influential or famous, and that at times my writing has felt as though I was simply working to get as many names in as possible. If anyone has a better sense than I of the larger picture of the overall trends of the development of the genre, and can smooth out my punctuated equilibrium approach, that would be fantastic.
I've just finished a course on the subject with the wonderful Timon Screech, who turned my views about ukiyo-e right around and truly enlightened me as to an entirely different side of the genre. However, I don't have any of his books, or indeed any other books at all in front of me to work from to help really express that. I hope to get this across over time in my treatment of individual artists and schools, but for now I am afraid that this article is going to remain seriously flawed. If there is anyone out there with a serious interest and expertise in the subject who would like to help out, I implore them to do so.
Thanks! LordAmeth 14:08, 14 July 2007 (PDT)