The Japanese Society for Aesthetics

Aesthetics No.19 (2015): 51-64

British Colour Linocuts in the 1920s and 1930s
and Ukiyo-e Prints
ITABASHI Miya

Hosei University, Tokyo

Introduction
Ukiyo-e prints became enormously popular amid the vogue for Japonisme in the West in
the latter half of the nineteenth century, and a number of Western artists actively integrated thesubjects, compositional devices, and motifs of ukiyo-e prints into their own works in the earlyphase of Japonisme. The period after the 1890s saw the emergence of artists in Britain andAmerica who adopted not only the above-mentioned elements of ukiyo-e prints but also carving
and printing techniques, tools, and materials of ukiyo-e printmaking[1]. In Britain, it was colour
woodcut printmakers who were the first to adopt ukiyo-e printmaking methods[2], but in the
1920s and the 1930s, linocut printmakers also experimented with some Japanese techniques,
tools, and materials. At the centre of such experiments was Claude Flight, who taught linocut
printmaking at the Grosvenor School of Modern Art, London, and his former students. There
has been a body of research and exhibitions on the colour linocuts by these artists, who vividly
depicted the dynamism of modern society by introducing elements reminiscent of Futurism andCubism[3], but there has been little focus on Flight’s interest in ukiyo-e printmaking. This article
aims to re-examine British linocuts of the 1920s and the 1930s by analysing how Flight and his
followers adopted elements of ukiyo-e printmaking to promote linocut as a medium forexpressing ‘modernity’.
In considering this issue, this article compares these linocut printmakers with the woodcut
printmakers who earlier adopted the techniques, tools and materials of ukiyo-e printmaking.
Previous studies on British linocuts of this period emphasized Flight’s severe criticism that the
woodcut printmakers imitated Japanese printmaking techniques, thereby taking little accountof the fact that Flight also incorporated some aspects of Japanese printmaking. In fact, close
examination of his discourse on printmaking reveals that he did not entirely oppose
incorporating some aspects of ukiyo-e printmaking. It was the way the woodcut printmakers
imitated Japanese methods that he criticised. Moreover, there were some common features
shared by the linocut and woodcut printmakers, who seem to have had a rivalry. With this inmind, this article analyses the similarities and differences between these groups of artists, andwhy and how Flight criticised the woodcut printmakers, in order to clarify the characteristics ofthe linocut printmakers’ adoption of some ukiyo-e printmaking elements. To this end, the firstsection of this article overviews the way the woodcut printmakers incorporated ukiyo-e
printmaking techniques. It then goes on to focus on the protagonists of this article, the linocut
printmakers, in the following three sections. The second section looks at the ‘modernity’
expressed in their works, relying mainly on previous studies. The third section turns its attention

52

ITABASHI Miyato similarities between the adoption of ukiyo-e printmaking methods by the woodcut
printmakers and by the linocut printmakers. The fourth section focuses on the differences
between these groups of artists, and describes the characteristics of Flight’s interest in ukiyo-e
printmaking, and how it was geared to the expression of ‘modernity’ in his works and those of
his followers.
In these analyses, this article focuses on Flight’s discourse rather than on the visual elementsof the linocuts. In fact, it is difficult to detect the influence of ukiyo-e prints merely by analysing
the formal qualities of the linocuts. As will be shown, Flight himself did not try to imitate theappearance of ukiyo-e prints but to find modes of expression that could only be attained with the
newly invented medium of linocut. Also, he was interested in non-visual aspects of ukiyo-e prints,
that is, the social context in which ukiyo-e prints had existed as ‘art for the people’. These aspectsof Flight’s interest in ukiyo-e printmaking cannot reveal themselves only through visual analyses.
By analysing hitherto overlooked discourse on the linocut, this article attempts to shed new lighton the unprecedented flowering of colour linocuts in Britain during this period.

1. The adoption of ukiyo-e printmaking techniques by woodcut printmakers
In 1889, at the request of the Smithsonian
Institution in the United States, the Bureau ofEngraving and Printing of the Japanese
Ministry of Finance compiled a report in English
about the techniques of ukiyo-e printmaking,which was published by the Smithsonian in
1893[4]. The report, which was described as ‘thefirst authoritative statement on this subject
made by a native of Japan thoroughly qualified
for the task’[5], was featured in The Studio in
Britain only a year after it was published[6]. The
pioneering figures in introducing Japanese
printmaking techniques to Britain were twoartists, John Dickson Batten and Frank Morley
Fletcher (Fig. 1), both of whom were members of

Fig. 1: Frank Morley Fletcher, Floodgates(1899), Photograph © 2015 Museum ofFine Arts, Boston

the Art Workers Guild and exhibited at the Arts and Crafts Exhibition Society. It is possible thatthey gained knowledge about Japanese printmaking techniques from sources such as this one.
Laurence Binyon and Edward F. Strange, who were the leading scholars of ukiyo-e prints in
Britain in this period, regarded the way ukiyo-e prints had been produced by craftsmen andenjoyed by common people for reasonable prices in Edo Japan as realising the ideals of the Arts
and Crafts Movement, such as ‘truth to materials’, ‘artist-craftsmanship’ and ‘art for thepeople’[7]. Batten and Fletcher embraced similar views on ukiyo-e prints, and adopted thetechniques of ukiyo-e printmaking. The Japanese method of woodcut printmaking, introducedby these two artists, spread to various parts of Britain by being taught at major art schools
including the Central School of Arts and Crafts, the Reading School of Art, and the Glasgow

British Colour Linocuts in the 1920s and 1930s and Ukiyo-e Prints

53

School of Art as the embodiment of Arts
and Crafts ideals from the 1890s to the
1930s. The ukiyo-e printmaking method,which requires only simple tools andmaterials and enables artists to bring out
the beauty of materials to their utmost
effect by exercising their own ingenuity
through designing and hand-printing, wasconsidered suitable for teaching art students how to design, to get an overall graspof the actual processes of production, andto understand the properties of materials.
Fig. 2: A set of printmaking tools that were usedat the Reading School of Art and are preserved
Through such teaching at art schools, thein the Department of Typography and Graphic
number of artists who produced woodcuts
Communication, the University of Readingin the Japanese manner increased gradual(photo by the author)
ly, and they began to organize societies ofprintmakers that held exhibitions at home and abroad[8].
From the articles and books on the printmaking techniques written by Fletcher, Allen W.
Seaby, and John Edgar Platt[9], all of whom used ukiyo-e printmaking techniques, and from theset of printmaking tools and woodblocks (Fig. 2) that were used by Seaby and are still preservedin the University of Reading, where he taught printmaking, it is clear that these artists followed
the Japanese method of printmaking quite faithfully. However, the way these British artists
produced prints had one aspect fundamentally alien to traditional ukiyo-e printmaking: while
the production of traditional ukiyo-e prints was divided into designing, carving, and printing,each process being undertaken by different artists and craftsmen, the whole process was doneby the same artist in Britain[10]. It must have been extremely labour-intensive for an artist to do
the carving and the printing in the Japanese manner, both of which require a considerable
amount of skill, alertness, and discipline.
Whereas printing was customarily done in oil ink with a press in the traditional Westernmethod of printmaking, here pigment mixed with water was brushed onto woodblocks, andprinting was done by hand, which made it possible to produce watercolour-like limpidity,
gradation of colours, and traces of brushes in prints made with the Japanese method adopted by
the British woodcut printmakers. However, the woodcut prints’ resemblance to watercolour
paintings caused some critics to wonder what was the point of taking great pains to produce inprints the same visual effects as those in watercolour paintings, using such a labour-intensive
printmaking method. For example, commenting on prints produced in the Japanese manner andexhibited by the Colour Woodcut Society, a reporter in The Times stated: ‘it often leaves one
wondering why – except for purposes of multiplication – the artist went to the trouble of cutting
blocks when he might have got what he appears to be aiming at in a water-colour painting.’ Aswill be mentioned later, the same criticism was repeated by Flight, for whom linocut was theprimary medium of expression.

54

ITABASHI Miya

2. Linocut and ‘modernity’
Linoleum, which is made from solidified linseed oil and cork dust with canvas backing, wasinvented as floor covering in the mid-nineteenth century, and, by the 1910s, various artists
including German Expressionists and the Russian avant-garde came to experiment with thismaterial for printing blocks. However, while these pre-war linocut prints were produced
predominantly in black and white, inter-war Britain saw remarkable developments of the linocut
in colour. At the centre of this flowering of colour linocuts were Claude Flight and his students
at the Grosvenor School of Modern Art in London.
Claude Flight, after working at various jobs, enrolled at the Heatherley’s School of Art at theage of thirty-one in 1912, the year the Italian Futurist artists had their first London exhibition.
Flight is believed to have been introduced to the Italian Futurists through C. R. W. Nevinson, themost ardent advocate of Futurism in England, who occasionally attended Heatherley’s
School[11]. After military service in France during the First World War, Flight spent ‘a year in
French art schools’, which suggests the possibility of his contact with Continental developments
in art[12]. It is not certain when Flight first realised the potential of linocuts, but he began towrite about them in 1926.
In 1926, Flight was invited to teach colour linocut printmaking at the Grosvenor School ofModern Art, which had just been established in London a year earlier. Various subjects were
taught at the school, but Flight’s class was by far the most popular and attracted students evenfrom abroad. Exhibitions of linocuts by Flight and his followers were held almost annually from
1929 to 1937 at the Redfern Gallery and the Ward Gallery and sometimes toured abroad, to theUnited States, China, and Australia[13]. Moreover, Frank Rutter, an art critic who published adefence of the first Post-Impressionist Exhibition in London in 1910, which was to beremembered as a landmark of the introduction of modernist aesthetic ideas to Britain, continued
to write favourable reviews on their linocuts in his columns in The Sunday Times[14]. Flight’s
1934 book was illustrated with reproductions of many linocuts by him and his students, in which
he wrote of ‘“modern art” – and by “modern art” we speak of such prints as are exhibited in thisbook, prints which express some experience of to-day in the technique of to-day’[15].
By ‘experience of to-day’, he meant public transport and bustling crowds in the cities,
popular entertainment and sports, enthusiasm for speed, and so on (Figs. 3 and 4). He paid
attention to the ‘speeding up of life in general’ as ‘one of the interesting and psychologicallyimportant features of to-day’[16]. ‘Rhythm’ and ‘movement’ were also key themes that often
appeared in Flight’s writings and were depicted in many of the Grosvenor School linocuts.
The subjects which I have taken are such things as buses coming down a street, waves
breaking on the shore or carrying a ship on the sea, dancing, or the movement in a crowd,
swings, or the eddies of the wind and rain: all these have their particular significant rhythm
which I have been trying to grasp and place in my colour prints, textiles, sculpture andpaintings so as to give the feeling of the universal rhythm in each individual movement[17].
These qualities, which embodied the dynamism of modern society, corresponded to those theBritish Colour Linocuts in the 1920s and 1930s and Ukiyo-e Prints

Fig. 3 Claude Flight, Speed (1923) Image
copyright © The Metropolitan Museum ofArt

55

Fig. 4 Sybil Andrews, Concert Hall (1929)
Image copyright © The Metropolitan
Museum of Art

Italian Futurists sought to express through their art. Not surprisingly, contemporary critics often
described Flight as representing the tenets of Futurism. For example, James Laver, an art
historian and critic, wrote, ‘Mr. Flight, in his lino-work at least, is a futurist in the strict sense,that is, he is chiefly concerned with expressing the motion of objects, as opposed to those who
merely depict objects in motion’[18]. S. C. Kaines Smith went so far as to call him ‘the only true
futurist that this country has produced’ in his book published in 1934, Painters of England[19].
Also, the elements seen in the prints of Flight and his followers, such as geometric compositions,the intersection of lines and planes, and the decorative treatment of bold colours, suggest affinity
to Cubism and Art Deco.
Flight himself, however, refused to be categorised in any of these schools of modernism,saying:I am a lone figure, belonging to no school…I have been trying to delve below the surface ofthings and to express the collective spirit of the times in terms of simplicity, unity andharmony…The Cubists missed, partly from lack of humanism, and the Futurists from a lackof order[20].
As has been pointed out in previous studies on Flight and his followers, it was a peculiar
combination of modernism and traditional craftsmanship that characterised their linocuts, andtheir interpretation of ‘modernity’ was personal and individual, rather than being attachedrigidly to any particular school[21].

3. Flight’s interest in ukiyo-e prints
What kind of printmaking method, then, was employed to express the qualities of‘modernity’ as interpreted by Flight and his followers? P. G. Konody, an art critic, stated that
‘this new method is nothing more than a labour-saving device to get the same results that were

56

ITABASHI Miyaobtained with greater pain and less quickly by cutting
in wood’[22]. It could even be said that Flight’s method was a simplified version of traditional Japanese
printmaking, or of the woodcut printmaking employed by Fletcher and his followers. Instead of wood,they employed linoleum, which is softer and easier tocut. Also, instead of water-based pigment, they used
oil colours or printing inks, which were more familiar
to Western artists. Flight explained, ‘Many printers,
following the custom of the Japanese, who are masters of their medium, use powdered colour and rice
paste for printing, but this method is unnecessarily
complicated and the results in English hands arenever as satisfactory as the oil or ink method’[23].

Fig. 5: An illustration of the printmaking
tools Flight recommended in Claude
Flight, ‘Linoleum-cut Colour Printing,
Paper No. 2’, The Arts and Crafts
Quarterly, vol. 1, no. 7, 1926, p. 16

Colours are applied to blocks with rollers and printed
on dry paper in linocut printmaking, while in ukiyo-e
printmaking, water-soluble pigment is brushed onto awoodblock and printed on damp paper. Flight also recommended the use of the baren, a
traditional Japanese tool for printing. He modified the Japanese prototype, so that it was easier
to make and to handle (Fig. 5). He wrote about this tool as follows:This tool (baren or home-made rubber) is used for rubbing the back of the paper whenprinting and is adapted from a Japanese model. Unlike the Japanese “baren,” which is madeof rolled string backed with cardboard in a casing of bamboo leaf, this “baren” is made fromtwo rounds of millboard, one slightly smaller than the other, strongly glued together andcovered with the bamboo leaf which has been soaked in water for twenty-four hours…Inplace of the above the beginner can make shift with a small round box or tin covered tightly
with rough linen, or he can work with two rounds of millboard glued together, covered withlinen or canvas, the ends being bound with string in the same way as with the bamboo
leaf[24].
The technique of cutting register marks at one side and one corner of each block, which was
obviously derived from the Japanese technique called ‘kento’, made it possible to print frommultiple blocks in various colours (Fig. 6). The visual effects resulting from the similarity ofmethods between linocut and Japanese printmaking led P. G. Konody to comment, ‘The same
method is, of course, used by the Japanese in printing their woodblocks, and by a few Western

Fig. 6: An illustration explaining how to cut out registermarks on the block in Claude Flight, ‘Linoleum-cut
Colour Printing, Paper No. 3’, Arts and Crafts
Quarterly, vol. 1, no. 8, 1926, p. 29

British Colour Linocuts in the 1920s and 1930s and Ukiyo-e Prints

57

artists who have adopted the Japanese method. It is thus not surprising that in generalappearance the lino-cut is more closely akin to the colour print of the Far East than to theEuropean woodcut’[25].
As is clear from the following statement, Flight himself admitted the connection between
his method of linocut and Japanese printmaking, based on his understanding of the techniquesand contexts of ukiyo-e printmaking:
Unlike the modern wood-cutter the linoleum-cutter, though sharing grandparents had adifferent father. This father was a little slit-eyed Asiatic, a man of the people who cut out his
own cherry-wood blocks, as many as eight different blocks being used, each printed in adifferent colour to complete a single picture. These pictures were at first portraits of popular
actors and were printed in hundreds and sold for ridiculously small sums among the people.
Later the wood-cutters turned to landscapes and subjects of country and town life[26].
Flight’s adaptation and simplification of Japanese tools and techniques made linocut, which had
been printed predominantly in monochrome, easier to produce in multiple colours. Flightinsisted that colour linocuts produced through this method would lead toward the ‘Art of Colour’,
the art form that Flight believed to be the ideal modern art.
If, as W. H. Wright predicts, the whole movement towards colour from Constable andTurner up to the Modern Art of to-day is towards an ‘Art of Colour,’ then surely our simple
colour prints in every home will prepare us for what he feels will be the outcome of all the
century-long strivings between the different schools of thought. And when some “colourinstrument” has been invented and the modern artist’s creative conceptions are properly
impressed, then ‘With the completion of this new medium the art of colour will have entirely
dissociated itself from the art of painting, not only in impulse and conception, but in theworld’s attitude to it.’ Whatever our ideas may be as to the future of art the appeal of colour
is ever present and can be satisfied so easily by the Modern Colour Print[27].
By using multiple colours, Flight tried to promote linocut as ‘Modern Art’. In this respect, it
is notable that, though in a simplified way, Flight and his followers adopted some ukiyo-e
printmaking techniques and tools as the woodcut printmakers did. The Arts and Crafts tradition,
carried on in linocut printmaking by Flight and his followers, could also be seen as a common
feature shared with the woodcut printmakers. Echoing the laments expressed by John Ruskin
and William Morris about the current state of the majority of people, whose surroundings weredeprived of beautiful things, Flight deplored the status quo, saying, ‘Living in ugly homes,
adorned with ugly furniture and hangings, the average man has grown up without training in thearts, and he does not realize that the greatest and most satisfactory of all the pleasures is denied
to him’[28]. He saw great potential in colour prints to overcome this situation, and paid
particular attention to the possibility that colour prints would be produced cheaply so that they
could become available to people with small incomes.

58

ITABASHI Miya

People live in smaller rooms, and the pictures they buy must necessarily be smaller, the pricealso they are willing to pay for a picture is much less than they were willing to give formerly.
Woodcuts and colour-prints can meet this demand, for, in case of woodcuts, one hundred
copies are usually printed from each block, and in colour-prints generally fifty. This meansthat one can afford to sell colour-prints and woodcuts for from one to three guineas, andperhaps when the demand grows greater, at something approaching the prices once current
in old Japan, whereas water-colours cost from £5 to £20, and oil paintings fabulous sums
which no one can afford to pay[29].
He also wrote, ‘the art of colour printing in Japan was only appreciated and the prints onlybought by the people; the artists themselves being of the humblest origin’[30]. These statements
show his eagerness to establish prints as ‘art for the people’, the art that had been envisaged by
the proponents of the Arts and Crafts Movement. In this respect, he apparently had in mind theoriginal context in which ukiyo-e prints were produced and appreciated by common people inJapan. In Edo Japan, the systems for production and retail of ukiyo-e prints developed to aremarkable extent, enabling a wide range of people to enjoy prints cheaply. Flight believed that
his ideal of ‘art for the people’ could be achieved by creating a society similar to Edo Japan inwhich sufficient demand for and supply of prints existed.
With respect to the educational value of colour printing, Flight expressed opinions recallingthose held by the woodcut printmakers who used ukiyo-e printmaking techniques. Flightinsisted that a simple medium like linocut gave students valuable lessons in the essentials ofdesign:Here all possibility of niggle and detailed copying of nature is impossible and the student iscompelled to express himself in terms of the simple medium, in terms of flat masses ofcolour superimposed; nothing could be better than experiments in Linoleum-cut Colour
Printing to counteract the almost universal confusion in the teaching of the Art Schools of
England to-day; this return to simplicity and a search for the essentials of the subject inhand will be found an invaluable aid to design[31].
Moreover, like the woodcut printmakers, Flight also paid attention to the potential of simple
tools and materials, which gave artists much discretion for controlled and personal expression.
In this respect, he pointed out the advantage of hand-printing with the baren. He stated, ‘it isabsolutely essential that they are printed by hand without the use of a press, the results of press
printing – we have unfortunately certain printers who advocated this method – being deplorablymechanical and works of art of a very low order’[32]. By rubbing with baren using variouspressures, artists could regulate the density and quality of colour and the texture produced by
the linoleum, giving the image an especially personal character.

4. Linocut vs. woodcut
As described in the previous section, Flight’s views on colour printmaking were similar toBritish Colour Linocuts in the 1920s and 1930s and Ukiyo-e Prints

59

those of the woodcut printmakers in certain respects. However, while many of the woodcut
printmakers produced works that showed an affinity to watercolour paintings, Flight tried todissociate colour prints from paintings. He insisted that colour printmakers should not try toimitate other media, but create visual qualities that could be obtained only through the processof printmaking:[C]olour prints which are reprinted from either wood or linoleum blocks should be treated
not as either water-colours or oils, but as pictures that are the result of the special labourthat is expended on their creation. The special labour in this case being cutting and printing,they should have the quality of something that is (1) cut out, and (2) printed in different
layers of colour.[33]Instead of the gradations of colour that many of the woodcut printmakers created in their prints,
with visual effects similar to those in watercolour paintings, Flight and his followers often used
the technique of superimposing colours so that their prints revealed the quality of being printed
plane by plane.
These statements by Flight show his detachment from and criticism of the woodcut
printmakers, who produced colour prints imitating the effects of watercolour painting. It is
possible to presume that his antagonism against them became stronger after Frank Morley
Fletcher criticised colour linocuts in his article in The Original Colour Print Magazine:
To condemn linoleum printing in itself would be foolish in view of the remarkable work thathas been done by its means, especially by the children in Professor Cizek’s class in Vienna,
or by some of Professor Orlik’s pupils, or by the Printing School (Kunstgewerbeschule) in
Leipzig, but the best of the work has been in black and white and of a primitive and simple
kind. The material is not suited for printing a beautiful surface of colour nor for giving thefiner qualities of line, and when it is used for colour the result is poor. Linoleum work
illustrates very clearly the rule that when the tools and materials of an Art are made easy,
the tendency is for design to deteriorate, and for the Art to become base[34].
Citing the above statement by Fletcher, Flight wrote in his book, Lino-cuts, ‘The object of thisbook is to endeavour to disprove this statement and to show that greater fluency of expression ispossible both in form and colour in linoleum-cut colour printing if that printing is developed ina European way, the technique being the means to an end instead of almost an end in itself’[35].
Flight emphasised the difference between his method of printmaking and that employed by
Fletcher and his followers by calling the former ‘European’ and the latter ‘Anglo-Japanese’. He
wrote,The Anglo-Japanese wood-cut colour printers in England are a case at point, these printers
having been influenced very strongly by the Japanese, so strongly that the colour prints
which they create with such cleverness of technique are lacking in any vital motives of
expression in keeping with the age they are living in. So much of the work of to-day is based

60

ITABASHI Miyaon that minute attention to detail of the “Pre-Raphaelites” of the last century, detail whichis unnecessary and has no significance and the artist becomes so bound up technically in the
difficult processes of the Japanese, those processes which are absolutely suitable to an
Eastern people, among whom individual artists are readily giving up their lives to thecreation, for example, of a single complicated ivory carving, and the vital experience islacking[36].
As Stephen Coppel remarks, one should consider the contemporary hierarchy of printmaking asa context of such rivalry between Flight and Fletcher. Woodcut printmakers, whose medium had
just recently been revived, had to enhance their position in order to emulate etchers, who wereat the top of the hierarchy, and tried not to be associated with linocut, which was generally
considered a childish form of art due to the fact that linocut was taught to children at someschools[37]. About the situation of British printmaking in this period, Frances Carey andAnthony Griffiths pointed out that ‘Each technique was contained in its own world, with its own
artists, its specialist societies, and, more often than not, its specialist publishers’[38]. The rivalry
between the linocut printmakers and the woodcut printmakers could be seen as one of theconflicts triggered by this situation, in which each group of printmakers tried to differentiatethemselves from others.
It should also be remarked that Flight did not criticise the Japanese method of printmaking
itself, but the way the woodcut printmakers imitated Japanese techniques even in their minutedetails without much adaptation. He wrote about the woodcut printmakers as follows:
Inspired by the work of such masters as Hokusai 1760-1849, Utamaro, 1754-1806 andHiroshige, 1796-1858, they attempted to get a Japanese feeling as well as a Japanesetechnique, the result being that their efforts were lacking both in reason and technique, andboth the public and the artists themselves not realising the possibilities of this new medium
if put to its right uses, the art of the colour print has not yet developed to anything like theextent one would have expected[39].
Instead of just imitating Japanese printmaking, he believed, contemporary printmakers had toput the medium ‘to its right uses’, adopting only what is useful to express something relevant totheir own time. He also cited the following statement from the book by Stewart Dick, The Arts
and Crafts of Old Japan:
As S. Dick says in ‘The Arts and Crafts of Old Japan’, the English man ‘demands of the
sculptor, painter, engraver, wood-cutter, just that unintelligent, pseudo-realism which thedecadence of the Renaissance invented to please his forefathers…demanding light andshade modelling or minutiae of form from a craft only capable of strong line and flat massof colour’[40].
‘Strong line and flat mass of colour’ were actually key features of linocuts by Flight and his
followers. It is possible that in order to achieve ‘vital motives of expression in keeping with the

British Colour Linocuts in the 1920s and 1930s and Ukiyo-e Prints

61

age they are living in’[41] through such lines and masses of colour, Flight made use of sometechniques from Japanese printmaking, but, in doing so, he much simplified the Japanesetechniques so that the vitality of expression would not be hampered by technical difficulties.
With this hybrid method of printmaking, Flight and his followers vividly depicted the ‘modernity’of the contemporary society.

Conclusion
In this way, Flight accused the woodcut printmakers of ‘imitating’ ukiyo-e printmaking
techniques. However, the woodcut printmakers themselves insisted that they did not ‘imitate’
Japanese techniques. Moreover, in insisting so, they presented the theory that a colour woodcut
printmaking method had already existed in the form of chiaroscuro[42] in Europe, and that it
was rather the Japanese who ‘imitated’ the method. W. R. Lethaby, one of the leading figures in
the Arts and Crafts Movement and the first Principal of the Central School of Arts and Crafts,
tried to disseminate craftsmanship embodying the tenets of the Movement by publishing The
Artistic Crafts Series of Technical Handbooks. As part of this series, a book on the method ofcolour woodcut printmaking, Wood-block Printing, was written by Fletcher. In the preface tothis book, Lethaby insisted on the theory that colour woodcut printmaking techniques wereoriginally invented in Europe, quoting Edward F. Strange’s words:
The following account of colour printing from wood-blocks is based on a study of themethods which were lately only practised in Japan, but which at an earlier time were tosome degree in use in Europe also. The main principles of the art, indeed, were well known
in the West long before colour prints were produced in Japan, and there is some reason to
suppose that the Japanese may have founded their methods in imitating the prints takenfrom Europe by missionaries. Major Strange says: ‘The European art of chiaroscuroengraving is in all essentials identical with that of Japanese colour printing…It seems,
therefore, not vain to point out that the accidental sight of one of the Italian colour-prints
may have suggested the process to the Japanese’[43].
It is also clear from the following statement that Lethaby saw the introduction of the Japanesemethod of printmaking as a way to revive lost European techniques: ‘Sufficient has been said toshow that in studying Japanese colour-prints, and working more or less after the same method,
we are not trying to adopt anything exotic, but rather readapting an art which belongs as muchto the West as to the East’[44].
It is possible to see their encouragement of woodcut printmaking as one of the attempts of
the Arts and Crafts Movement to re-create old techniques – ‘a profound, creative relationshipwith the past’ as Alan Crawford calls it – a prominent feature of the Movement[45]. The mission
to revive lost crafts in a modern society was carried out in various classes at the Central School,such as a class in writing and illumination by Edward Johnston, which was based on his study of
medieval manuscripts, and Alexander Fisher’s revitalising of the art of enamelling[46].
According to the curriculum of the School, ‘Printing of Colour Prints from Wood Blocks by a

62

ITABASHI Miyamethod based on the Japanese practice’ was taught from 1897 to 1910[47], which can be seen as
yet another example of this mission.
As we have seen, Flight and his followers, on the other hand, promoted linocut, which wasa newly invented medium, and tried to dissociate themselves from ‘the past’. Flight stated, ‘here
in England at the present day is the chance, I think, of creating an art which will appeal to thepeople, because in colour printing we must create – not copy the past’[48]. Both the woodcut
printmakers and the linocut printmakers adopted ukiyo-e printmaking techniques. However,while the former tried to re-create ‘the past’, the latter adapted and absorbed the ukiyo-e method
in order to create a new medium of expression for ‘today.’
Notes
[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

In France, several artists including Henri Rivière, Jules Chadel, and Prosper-Alphonse Isaac
temporarily used the techniques of ukiyo-e printmaking. Furansu no Ukiyoeshi: Anri Rivieru Ten[Henri Rivière : Maître Français de l'Ukiyo-e], ed. by Hagi Uragami Museum (Tokyo: NHK Service
Center, 2009), Hélène Goarzan, ‘Urushibara to Isakku to Shaderu: Yoroppa ni okeru Japonisumu
to Shikisai Mokuhanga’ [Urushibara, Isaac and Chadel: Japonisme and Colour Woodcuts in
Europe], Gareria Tsushin [Nouvelles de l’Estampe], 30 (1996), 7-15. In the German speaking region,
Emil Orlik experimented with ukiyo-e printmaking techniques. Emiru Oruriku, Nihon Dayori [AusJapan by Emil Orlik], ed. by Setsuko Kuwabara and Eberhard Friese (Tokyo: Yushodo, 1996).
However, the number of printmakers who adopted the ukiyo-e printmaking method was by far thelargest in Britain and America. For the Amercan printmakers, see Andrew Stevens, ‘The Spread of
Style: Americans and the Color Woodcut of the Early Twentieth Century’, in Color Woodcut
International: Japan, Britain, and America in the Early 20th Century, ed. by Christine Javid(Madison, Wis.: Chazen Museum of Art, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2006), pp. 44-53, Julia
Meech, ‘Reinventing the Exotic Orient’, in Japonisme Comes to America: The Japanese Impact on
the Graphic Arts 1876-1925, ed. by Julia Meech (New York: H.N. Abrams, 1990), pp. 101-222.
For British woodcut printmakers who adopted ukiyo-e printmaking techniques, see Miya Itabashi,‘The Reception of Japanese Prints and Printmaking in the Artistic Revival of Woodblock
Printmaking and the Arts and Crafts Movement in Britain’, Design History, 8 (2010), 59-82, Nancy
Green, ‘Temptation of the East: The Influence of Japanese Colour Woodcuts on British
Printmaking’, in Color Woodcut International, ed. by Javid, pp. 30-43.
Rhythms of Modern Life: British Prints 1914-1939, ed. by Clifford S. Ackley (Boston: MFA
Publications, 2008), Gordon Samuel and Nicola Penny, The Cutting Edge of Modernity: Linocutsof the Grosvenor School (Aldershot, Hampshire: Lund Humphries, 2002), Caroline Taylor, ‘Flight
Power’, Antique Collecting, (May/June, 1996), 54-59, Stephen Coppel, Linocuts of the Machine
Age: Claude Flight and the Grosvenor School (Aldershot: Scolar Press, 1995), Stephen Coppel,
Claude Flight and His Followers: The Colour Linocut Movement between the Wars (Canberra,
A.C.T.: Australian National Gallery, 1992), Lora S. Urbanelli, The Grosvenor School: British
Linocuts between the Wars (Providence: Museum of Art, Rhode Island School of Design, 1988),
Michael Parkin, ‘Claude Flight and the Linocut’, Journal of Decorative and Propaganda Arts, 6(Fall 1987), 26-33, British Colour Linocuts of the 1920s & 1930s (London: Redfern Gallery, 1985),
Claude Flight and His Pupils (Colchester: Minories, 1973).
‘Japanese Wood-cutting and Wood-cut Printing by Mr. T. Tokuno (Edited by S. R. Koehler, Curator,
Section of Graphic Arts)’, in Report of the United States National Museum of 1892 (Washington:
Government Printing Office, 1893), pp. 221-244.
‘Japanese Wood-cutting and Wood-cut Printing by Mr. T. Tokuno’, p. 221.

British Colour Linocuts in the 1920s and 1930s and Ukiyo-e Prints

[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]

[10]

[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]

[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]

63

‘Woodcut Printing in Water-colours: After the Japanese Manner’, The Studio, vol.3, 1894, pp. 110116.
Miya Itabashi, ‘The Reception of Japanese Prints and Printmaking in Britain, 1890s-1930s’, Ph.D.
thesis, Royal College of Art, 2008, pp. 118-123.
Among such societies of printmakers were the Society of Graver-Printers in Colour, the Colour
Woodcut Society, and the Central Club of Colour Woodblock Engravers.
Frank Morley Fletcher, Wood-block Printing: A Description of the Craft of Woodcutting & Colour
Printing Based on the Japanese Practice (London: John Hogg, 1916), Allen W. Seaby, ‘Colourprinting from Wood-blocks’, The Studio, vol. 75, 1919, pp. 149-158, Hand Printing in Colour(Leicester: Dryad Handicrafts, c1921), John Edgar Platt, Colour Woodcuts: A Book of
Reproductions and a Handbook of Method (London: Sir I. Pitman & Sons, Ltd., 1938).
In the United States, on the other hand, many artists including Helen Hyde and Bertha Lum had
Japanese craftsmen cut and print their designs. Two British artists – Elizabeth Keith, who lived inJapan for many years, and Charles William Bartlett, who stayed in Japan for a while and moved to
Hawaii – produced prints in collaboration with professional carvers and printers at Watanabe
Shozaburo’s workshop in Tokyo. They were, however, exceptional among British artists. For an
anecdote in which Keith realised that her method was not in accord with that adopted by othercontemporary British printmakers when she returned to Britain in 1924, see Malcolm Charles
Salaman, Elizabeth Keith, Masters of the Colour Print, IX, (London; New York: The Studio, 1933),
p. 3.
Coppel, Linocuts of the Machine Age, p. 17.
Letter from Adrian Hill to Michael Parkin, quoted in Parkin, p. 26.
British Linocuts, the Redfern Gallery [exhibition catalogue], 1929-1931, Linocuts, the Ward
Gallery, [exhibition catalogue], 1933-1937.
Frank Rutter, ‘British Linocuts: A New Colour Art for the People’, Sunday Times, 14 July, 1929, p.
7, ‘Modern Colour Prints: A Democratic Art’, Sunday Times, 7 August, 1932, p. 5, ‘Modern Colour
Prints’, Sunday Times, 29 July, 1934, p. 7.
Flight, The Art and Craft of Lino Cutting and Printing, p. 63.
Claude Flight, ‘Dynamism and the Colour Print’, Original Colour Print Magazine, no. 2, June 1925,
p. 56.
Claude Flight, ‘Mr. Flight Explains Himself’, Arts and Crafts, vol. 1, no.4, July 1928, p. 184.
James Laver, ‘Recent Etching and Engraving’, Artwork, vol. 3, no. 11, September - November 1927,
p. 151.
Quoted in Claude Flight and His Pupils, n.p.
The interview with Flight that appeared in ‘Golder’s Green Artist’s Life as “Caveman”’, Golders
Green Gazette, 3 June, 1927, p. 1, quoted in Coppel, Linocuts of the Machine Age, p. 17.
Coppel, Linocuts of the Machine Age, p. 22, Urbanelli, pp. 18-19.
P. G. Konody, ‘Linocuts’, The Observer, 27 July, 1930, p. 12.
Flight, The Art and Craft of Lino Cutting and Printing, p. 48.
Flight, Lino-cuts, pp. 29-30.
P. G. Konody, ‘British Lino-cuts’, The Observer, 28 May, 1933, p. 14.
Flight, Lino-cuts, pp. 8-9.
Claude Flight, ‘The Modern Colour-Print’, Arts and Crafts Quarterly, vol.1, no.2, April, 1925, p.7.
Flight, Lino-cuts, pp. 1-2.
Flight, ‘The Modern Colour-Print’, p.7.
Flight, Lino-cuts, p. 9.
Flight, Lino-cuts, p. 43.
Flight, Lino-cuts, p. 50.
Flight, ‘The Modern Colour-Print’, p. 6.

64

[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
[39]
[40]
[41]
[42]

[43]
[44]
[45]

[46]

[47]
[48]

ITABASHI Miya

Frank Morley Fletcher, ‘The Woodblock Colour-Print, a Democratic Art’, Original Colour Print
Magazine, no. 1, June 1924, p.4.
Flight, Lino-cuts, p. 17.
Flight, Lino-cuts, pp. 15-16.
Coppel, Linocuts of the Machine Age, pp. 14-15.
Frances Carey and Anthony Griffiths, Avant-Garde British Printmaking: 1914-1960 (London:
British Museum Publications, 1990), pp.9-10.
Flight, Lino-cuts, pp. 9-10.
Flight, Lino-cuts, p. 17.
Flight, Lino-cuts, p. 15.
Chiaroscuro was a kind of woodcut colour print that developed mainly in Italy and Germany fromthe late fifteenth century onward. In chiaroscuro, multiple woodblocks in related colours were used
to produce shading.
Lethaby, ‘Editor’s Preface’ in Fletcher, Wood-block Printing, pp. viii-ix.
Lethaby, p. xiii.
Alan Crawford, ‘United Kingdom: Origins and First Flowering’, in The Arts & Crafts Movement inEurope & America: Design for the Modern World, ed. by Wendy Kaplan (London: Thames &Hudson, 2004), p. 61.
Theresa Gronberg, ‘William Richard Lethaby and the Central School of Arts and Crafts’, in W. R.
Lethaby 1857-1931: Architecture, Design and Education, ed. by Sylvia Backemeyer and Theresa
Gronberg (London: Lund Humphries, 1984), p. 22.
The London County Council, Technical Education Board, Prospectus and Timetable: The Central
School of Arts and Crafts, 1897-1910.
Flight, Lino-cuts, p. 12.

*This is the English version of my paper in Studies in Japonisme, no. 30, 2010, pp. 45-57, published by theSociety for the Study of Japonisme.