The Japanese Society for Aesthetics

Aesthetics No.21 (2018): 55-68

Rethinking David Hockney’s “reverse perspective”:
The acceptance of Japanese art in the 1970s and 1980s
TANAKA Maho

Waseda University, Tokyo

1. Introduction
David Hockney, the contemporary British artist (b. 1937), has visited Japan at least six
times to date [1] and has often spoken of the connection between his art and his time spent inJapan [2]. However, relevant previous studies have involved only partial interpretations ofHockney’s comments, and there have been no detailed investigations of individual artworks or
considerations of the significance of the artist’s involvement with Japan. This study analyses indetail, for the first time, the features that Hockney discovered in Japanese art; suggests novel
origins for these features; and points to their importance. Thus, the connection with Japan isclarified, a connection that, although frequently mentioned, has not yet been interpreted in
depth. The circumstances of Hockney’s trips to Japan in 1971 and 1983, which can be regarded,even by the artist himself, as particularly influential, are discussed, and there is a novel study of
the Japanese art that inspired his visual expression and his spatial compositions.

2. Trip to Japan in 1971
Hockney first travelled to Japan in November 1971. In 1972, having returned to the UK, heproduced the acrylic paintings Japanese Rain on Canvas (Figure 1) and Mt. Fuji and Flowers(Figure 2) and, in Los Angeles during the following year, he produced the lithograph and screen
print series Weather Series (Figures 9-12) [3]. In his autobiography, the artist confesses thatduring this visit to Japan he was disappointed with the rather industrial scenery, but enthralledby the traditional art [4]. As a result, the aforementioned works have been interpreted asallusions of mainly Japanese art or stereotypical photos and images of Japan rather than actual
scenery [5]. The only artwork that Hockney actually names as having seen on this trip is Osakain the Rain, which was on display in the Kyoto Municipal Museum of Art. Based on the annual
reports of the Kyoto Municipal Museum of Art, Hiroya Sugimura has identified this artwork as
Osaka in the Rain by Yoson Ikeda (Figure 3), which was part of an exhibition entitled ‘Nine
excellent Japanese-style painters in Kyoto’, which showcased Kyoto’s best nihon-ga (Japanesestyle paintings) [6]. Hockney reminisced about the painting as follows:‘The misty clouds over the river and street were suggested only by the thin bars of the rain,
and the little cars and people walking about all had just the slightest suggestion of reflection
under them, making the whole thing look extremely wet’ [7].

56

TANAKA Maho

Enthralled by the diversity of traditional techniques in these nihon-ga, particularly thediversity of techniques with which the Japanese drew the rain, Hockney decided to paintJapanese Rain on Canvas, experimenting with dribbling heavily diluted acrylic paint over thebase [8].
There is no doubt that the motifs in this painting (the rain depicted by straight lines; theovals for stones, which are repeated at an angle amid puddles; and the concentric ripples in those
puddles) work together to impart a watery texture, an effect that is facilitated thanks to thepooling and bleeding of the paint. The beginning of the 1970s, when this painting was produced,
has been considered a frustrating period for Hockney as an artist, as he was still attempting topaint using a strict one-point perspective [9].
Previous studies interpret his Japan-related artworks as an attempt to transcend the deadend of such naturalistic painting [10]. However, the composition of Ikeda’s Osaka in the Rain is
in fact not far from the conventional western linear perspective, and Hockney could also havebeen influenced by other Japanese works.
In this study, the catalogue of the ‘Nine excellent Japanese-style painters in Kyoto’
exhibition that Hockney attended is also examined, and this investigation extends to the worksof other artists. The list of exhibits in the catalogue includes works by eight Japanese artists otherthan Ikeda. Quite a few of the listed works have a rain or water theme but, in my opinion, thepieces worth noting in this context are by Heihachiro Fukuda and Shinsen Tokuoka [11].
According to Mr. Kenji Nishimura, head of the Nishimura Gallery, who was among the first to
introduce Hockney to Japan, Hockney was very interested in Fukuda’s work and, inapproximately the 1990s, he apparently spoke of wanting to hold a Heihachiro Fukuda solo
exhibition at the Tate Gallery. Mr. Nishimura also suggests a relationship between still-life
pictures by Fukuda and some of Hockney’s works [12].
When looking anew at the works in the ‘Nine excellent Japanese-style painters in Kyoto’
exhibition, it can be seen that Fukuda’s Ripple (Figure 4) and Fresh Snow (Figure 5) arecomposed of motifs close up, and are repeated as flat patterns at an angle. In Tokuoka’s Rain
(Figure 7), there are also concentric ripples formed by the rain around oval stones in water. This
diagram-like expression resembles Hockney’s Japanese Rain on Canvas. Parallels can also be
drawn between Tokuoka’s Pond (Figure 8) and Hockney’s Mt. Fuji and Flowers. In Mt. Fuji and
Flowers, Mt. Fuji is in the top half of a vista visible through a window, with a reflection of themountain in a lake in the bottom half, while a bunch of narcissi in a single-flower vase is locatedon a windowsill in the foreground. It has been suggested that this work is an imaginary
composition based on a photograph from a flower arrangement manual and a postcard of Mt.
Fuji [13]. Nevertheless, the background is formed of tones of blue created by the blurring ofheavily diluted paint, and differing textures are used for the blue sky, for Mt. Fuji, and for thereflection of Mt. Fuji in the surface of the water. Meanwhile, Tokuoka’s Pond is also composedof two sections (the space above the water, and the surface of the water); it has a limited ochre
and green palette, and the bleeding of those two colours is utilised to effectively portray the lotus
leaves and their reflections in the surface of the water.
If we further develop this line of thought (concerning repeating patterns, the depiction ofRethinking David Hockney’s “reverse perspective”

57

water by straight lines and by ripples and the technique of bleeding paint), it is possible tosuggest a sensibility particular to traditional nihon-ga. First, in works constructed with a pattern,
unlike the perspective depth that has become traditional in Western art since the Renaissance,
the same motif is repeated on one plane, giving rise to rhythmical movement. As the eye follows
these rhythmic repetitions, the viewer can surely feel the very passage of time. In Fukuda’s Rain
(Figure 6), which was also on show at the aforementioned exhibition, a rain shower that is
beginning to fall onto a roof is depicted [14]. The slight early spots of rain on the roofing tiles
presage the later development of a full-fledged shower. It is not unreasonable to suggest that, inthe same way, Hockney’s Japanese Rain on Canvas employs the use of stylized rather thanrepresentational expression, in which the rain is shown by lines and ripples on puddles, andallows the artist to not just depict a single moment, but also to imply in the same picture the time
before and after that moment. Additionally, from the viewpoint of technique, the texture of thedribbled paint and the bleeding effect emphasize the process by which the paint soaks into thebase as the artist works, prolonging time.
In addition, the fact that the six works in the lithograph and screen print series Weather
Series have various types of weather as their theme [Rain (Figure 9), Sun (Figure 10), Lightning(Figure 11), Wind (Figure 12), and Snow and Mist] suggests a relationship with the Japanese
portrayal of weather, most notably in ukiyo-e [15]. Indeed, upon concrete analysis, in Rain andSun steady streams of rain and sunlight are expressed with lines, conveying their continuousness.
Also, in Lightning, the moment when thunder is heard is retained as a symbol of lightning; Wind
shows paper being blown by a gust of wind, as if time has stood still, with motion lines added toemphasise the trajectory of the movement. Each work conveys its own delicate sense of moment
and of the duration of time. In addition, as various types of weather are shown in variations of
the same format, as a series, the works could be seen as an expression of the continual passageof days and of seasonal change [16]. Looking again at Ikeda’s Osaka in the Rain, besides the rain
shown using lines and reflections on wet ground, he also depicts papers being blown upwards by
the wind and floating in the air; hence, this work also includes various expressions of time.
All of the above-mentioned works demonstrate that, in his Japan-related works from the1970s, Hockney used expression of time with nihon-ga compositions and techniques, and thishas been overlooked in the past. This receptiveness to Japanese art was developed further on his
second trip to Japan, approximately ten years later.

3. 1983 – Second trip to Japan and the stimulus for ‘reverse perspective’
3-1. Outline of ‘reverse perspective’ and controversial points
In the 1980s, a series of photographic collages created by Hockney attracted worldwide
attention as revolutionary visual expressions of their era [17] (Figures 13 and 14). A single
photograph, like a one-point perspective painting, usually has just one focus point and captures
one static moment. In contrast to this, Hockney attempted to express human movement and thepassage of time by combining multiple photographs [18]. While theorising this new type of visualexpression and seeking an expression that differed from the one-point perspective, he uniquely
proposed the existence of a visual sense that he called ‘reverse perspective’ and he began to use

58

TANAKA Maho

this method in his work [19].
According to Hockney, in traditional western painting since the Renaissance the picture
space converges on one vanishing point, and the boundaries of the picture are fixed. This isbecause of the use of the one-point perspective method. Therefore, the position of the viewer isrestricted to a set position outside the picture, and the result is that only one moment is shown
and, as if frozen, the motifs and the viewer lack motion. Meanwhile, the polar opposite visualexpression, ‘reverse perspective’, can be seen in Oriental art (i.e. art from outside the western
European world), particularly in Chinese art. As an example, he points out that in illustrated
handscrolls from the Yuan and Qing periods pictures have multiple focus points (Figures 16, 18
and 19). In other words, viewers are able to unroll the scroll from any point and take their timelooking at it, freely changing their viewpoint between motifs. Also, the sky and the ground at the
top and the bottom of the scroll do not set clear boundaries to the picture, and so, the viewer isable to appreciate the picture almost as if taking a stroll inside it [20]. Hockney frequently spoke
about this visual sense, particularly from the latter half of the 1980s, amplifying its implications
beyond just a matter of viewing position towards an expression of time and space, and then also
towards a world view [21].
As a matter of fact, the greater part of Hockney’s understanding of ‘reverse perspective’
follows the principle of ‘moving focus’ mentioned by art historian George Rowley in his bookPrinciples of Chinese Painting. In his speeches and interviews after 1983, as he obtained thisbook at the end of this year, Hockney often cited the following passage, which contrasts the visual
sense of China with that of the West [22].
“A scroll painting must be experienced in the time like music or literature. Our attention iscarried along laterally from right to left, being restricted at any one moment to a shortpassage which can be conveniently perused. (…)In the European tradition, the interest inmeasurable space destroyed the “continuous method” of temporal sequence used in the
Middle Ages and led to the fifteenth-century invention of the fixed space of scientificperspective. When the Chinese(…)suggested a space through which implied more spacebeyond the picture frame” [23].
In regard to the significance of Hockney’s kind of ‘reverse perspective’ art, previous studies
have tended to only discuss the kind of concepts revealed in his quoted excerpt from Rowley, and‘reverse perspective’ has been suggested as an Eastern (in other words non-European) visual
sense [24]. However, it seems to me that if the discussion is limited to Chinese handscrolls, withJapanese art not distinguished within the broad framework of Eastern art, and if there is only anon-specific comparison of Western and Eastern, then some significant aspects of the issue arebeing excluded. More than six months before becoming acquainted with Rowley’s book, in Japanthe artist received an important stimulus to his actual work.
3-2. The Zen Garden at the Ryoanji Temple
In February 1983, having been invited to attend the International Conference of Papers in
Kyoto, Hockney spent some more time in Japan, visiting the Ryoanji Temple in late February

Rethinking David Hockney’s “reverse perspective”

59[25]. According to Hockney’s autobiography, creating a photographic collage of that temple’s
Zen garden was an opportunity to discover the significance of ‘reverse perspective’. Having firsttaken a photograph for the collage entitled Sitting in the Zen Garden at the Ryoanji Temple(Figure 13), the artist felt that there was too strong an emphasis on the V-shaped composition
that appeared to converge on one point at the back of the picture, which had the effect ofamplifying the sense of perspective. As a result, next, aiming to leave the garden undistorted byperspective, he took pictures while walking slowly along the curve of stones. This was in order toexpress the garden as rectangular, exactly as seen from above. After returning to Los Angeles, inthe very act of using those photographs to compose the collage Walking in the Zen Garden at
the Ryoanji Temple (Figure 14), he noticed the significance of ‘reverse perspective’ [26]. Up tothat point, his photographic collages had a photograph of his feet stuck in one place in the lower
part of the work, and his feet stay in that one spot (Figure 13). Thus, only movement that was in
the artist’s line of sight was shown rather than a movement of his entire body. However, fromthat point on, with the feet of the artist walking from left to right being expressed in the lower
part of Walking in the Zen Garden at the Ryoanji Temple, the passage of the artist and the
movement of his body are emphasised and there is an increase in works that are expanded
spatially. The overall picture has a form that broadens out towards the back, suggesting an
intention to reverse the composition of perspective, which narrows as it extends back.
In previous studies, excluding the above episode about which the artist has spoken, there isno indication of the impact of the Zen garden, so here I intend to comment on the traditional
methods of appreciation and landscaping of Japan’s Ryoanji Temple Zen Garden and show thatthey fit with Hockney’s ‘reverse perspective’.
First, the Zen gardens have traditionally been intended to be viewed while sitting. In otherwords, they are gardens associated with appreciation through viewing while sitting in one
particular place inside the temple (Figure 15) [27]. Similar to this manner of viewing the garden,
Hockney initially takes photographs while sitting in just one spot on the veranda. Next, thedistribution of stones in the Zen garden has various meanings resulting from an ancient
relationship with Zen philosophy, with the concept of the ‘hidden stone’ being particularly wellknown. In the garden, 15 stones are positioned within a confined space, making it impossible tosee all 15 stones from any one spot; one stone is always hidden [28]. Indeed, if a photograph istaken while sitting on the veranda, the view is extremely constricted, and only some of the stones
can be seen. Meanwhile, with Walking in the Zen Garden at the Ryoanji Temple, Hockney’s
intention was to thoroughly show a walk through the three-dimensional space that cannot be
fully perceived when viewed while sitting in one spot. Thus, it is surely possible that hearing
about the concept of the ‘hidden stone’ gave him the idea for the composition.
Delving deeper into the garden’s construction, it appears at first glance to be a perfect
rectangle. However, when viewed head on, the ground gets lower as it goes back and to the left,
and the right wall opposite also lowers as it goes back. This is said to have the effect ofchoreographing perspective [29]. Hockney claims to have discovered ‘reverse perspective’,
whereby the image opens out the further towards the background the viewer looks, in his desire
to express the Zen garden as a rectangle undistorted by conventional perspective. The direction
is different, but there is an obvious resemblance in the subtle consciousness of both ideas to the

60

TANAKA Maho

illusion of perspective. It is worth noting that in his autobiography Hockney recalls his 1971 visit
to temples and gardens in Kyoto; besides producing drawings of the Zen Garden at the time, hevisited again in April 1993, taking photographs; thus, it is possible to consider that the temple
had a special significance for him [30].
In this way, an affinity can be found between Hockney’s ‘reverse perspective’ idea and theZen garden. So, with regard to a link with Japanese art, having arrived at an understanding oftraditional painting in particular, when a comparison is made with Chinese handscrolls (themain topic of former studies), a number of differences are surely obvious.
3-3. Chinese and Japanese handscrolls
In previous relevant studies, the influence of China on the paintings in which Hockney
practiced ‘reverse perspective’ has been emphasised, and the artist himself often explained thetheory with reference to Chinese handscrolls [31]. Certainly, Hockney travelled to various partsof China in 1981, reflecting the scenery in photographs and paintings and showing an interest in
the culture, and it is possible to dub this involvement significant [32]. However, in practice, when
the Chinese handscrolls referenced by Hockney are specifically examined, it is possible to seethat Hockney’s ‘reverse perspective’ also has characteristics of typical Japanese handscrolls.
First, the Chinese handscroll most frequently mentioned by Hockney is the Qing era, theseventh Kangxi Emperor's Southern Inspection Tour, by Wang Hui and others (Figure 16), andhe explains the Chinese ‘reverse perspective’ as seen in that work by comparing it to the onepoint perspective of Western paintings and photographs [33]. Certainly, features that Hockney
considers important can be seen in that scroll, including the zig-zag movement of focus that canbe appreciated over time, the spatial layout that does not converge on one focus point, and thelively portrayal of individual characters. However, other scrolls that he references do notnecessarily fit with his explanation of ‘reverse perspective’.
For example, there is a scroll box on the top shelf of the trolley in the photographic collage
Paint Trolley (Figure 17). The writing on the box identifies the scroll as the Chinese Yuan period,
Autumn Colors on the Ch’iao and Hua Mountains by Zhao Meng-fu, (Figure 18). However, upon
actually viewing a replica of that scroll, the length of the scenery section can be seen to be shorter
than one metre, which is clearly not long enough for viewing by unwinding the scroll section bysection with a moving focus [34]. In addition, the trolley in the photographic collage widens out
in an extreme manner, in a trapezoidal shape, towards the back, and the composition is almost
like a diagram to illustrate the ‘reverse perspective’ theory [35]. As a result, it is possible to see
the inclusion of the photograph of the scroll box in the collage as nothing other than a symbol of
the concept of the ‘Chinese handscroll’, with the important thing being the external view of thebox rather than the depiction of scenery on the actual scroll. The Yuan period Chinese handscroll
Dwelling in the Fu-ch'un Mountains by Huang Gong-wang (Figure 19) also features inHockney’s comments regarding ‘reverse perspective’. However, in this work, although the pointof sight does slowly change from a long-distance view to a close-up view as the scroll moves along(for example, after a wide view over a distant lake the focus gradually moves to a close-up of
rocky mountains), there is little up or down movement of the point of sight, with only a flatcomposition of continuing scenery [36]. Replicas of both of the Chinese scrolls mentioned wereRethinking David Hockney’s “reverse perspective”

61

published by Nigensha Publishing Co., Ltd. of Japan in 1981, accompanied by detailed
explanations in English [37]. In an interview in 1987, Hockney said that his replicas of theChinese handscrolls were made in Japan, and so it is very likely that he obtained them in Japanand that someone there informed his knowledge of the method of appreciation [38].
In fact, it is possible that much of Hockney’s knowledge of scrolls in the 1980s came fromJapanese illustrated handscrolls, which he utilised in his work. In the long, large-scale oilpainting A Visit with Christopher & Don, Santa Monica Canyon, 1984 (Figure 20), a distantbuilding visible through the window is represented a number of times within the one work, andthe repetition of that single motif resembles the Iji-Douzu ho’ method of depicting more than
one moment within one picture, which was developed in Japan. For example, in the late Heianperiod scroll Shigisan-engi (Legend of Mt. Shigi), a volume concerning Buddhist nun, a nun who
is the older sister of the main character, the monk Myoren, is depicted travelling in his direction
and visiting the temple in Nara. Notably, before and after the Hall of the Great Buddha scene(Figure 21), the nun visits a temple alone, spends a night praying to Buddha, receives a message
in her dreams and then embarks on a journey to Mt. Shigi. The nun appears several times in one
scroll, and a sequence of episodes is depicted one after the other [39].
Although the method of depicting more than one moment within one work was perfected in
Chinese handscrolls, it apparently did not become as popular in China as it did in Japan [40]. In
the Kangxi Emperor's Southern Inspection Tour, the main character, the Kangxi Emperor, isonly shown once on each scroll. In addition, the other two Chinese scrolls mentioned above arelandscapes, and so there is no repetition of the same motif. Moreover, Hockney emphasized thata Chinese handscroll should not be opened up completely, but appreciated while moving one’s
own body along and unrolling it a section at a time. In a 1988 film in which he demonstrates andexplains Chinese handscrolls and ‘reverse perspective’, Hockney suggests appreciating a scroll
by opening up three or four feet at a time at most [41]. When that feature is noted and the methodof actually appreciating Chinese handscrolls and Japanese illustrated handscrolls is compared,a significant difference becomes clear.
In previous studies relating to Japanese illustrated handscrolls, it is observed that the main
method of appreciation for Chinese narrative scrolls was in fact opening the whole scroll up toview the entire scene while, on the other hand, the main method of appreciation of Japanese
illustrated scrolls was traditionally to unroll approximately 50-60cm at a time [42]. The
assumption is that differences arose between the two because, with Japanese illustrated
handscrolls, it is assumed that there is a temporal act of appreciation on the part of the viewer,
and the composition aims to build a mutual relationship with the unfolding of the story within
the artwork. In addition, the focus of the depicted characters and the viewer overlap, and theunfolding of the scenery in line with that can also be mentioned as a feature of Japanese
illustrated handscrolls [43]. Therefore, the method of appreciation of Japanese illustrated
handscrolls, in which they are viewed one section at a time, is closely related to the expression oftime and the movement of the viewer’s body [44], and it could be considered to be extremely
close to Hockney’s ‘reverse perspective’, as mentioned in section 3.
Based on this fact, when appreciating the large-scale oil painting A Walk Around the Hotel
Courtyard, Acatlan, 1985 (Figure 22), which Hockney painted after he had experimented with62

TANAKA Maho

photographic collages, it is clear that the rhythmical repetition arising from the series of columns
and the spaces between them produces the physical sensation of walking at a leisurely pacearound the corridors, and it is certainly possible to see here an affinity with Japanese illustrated
handscrolls.

4. Conclusion
This study clarifies Hockney’s ‘reverse perspective’ as a visual sense created from his uniqueinterpretation of a variety of sources, including not just Rowley’s book, as noted earlier, but also
his experiences during his visits to Japan. His sensibility towards the expression of time, which
has its roots in a response in the 1970s to the repetition of pattern and the bleeding technique innihon-ga, developed in the 1980s to include physically felt spatial expressions.
To this day, ‘reverse perspective’ remains a basic concept in Hockney’s discourse [45], andin recent years he has experimented with artworks in which multi-viewpoint moving images shotfrom multiple angles are reconstructed and projected onto a horizontal grid-style composite
display. For example, in Seven Yorkshire Landscape Videos, created in 2011 [46], moving-shot
images taken using up to 18 cameras of the woods of Yorkshire, where Hockney grew up, areprojected in a composite manner onto a seven-metre-plus screen. Standing in front of this, theviewer has the sensation of strolling amid the images of scenery, and just when a blossom seems
to be flowering or green woods appearing, the scene shifts to a tranquil silver forest. Along with
the inclusion of the artist’s memories of his birthplace, it seems to me that this demonstrates autilisation of a Japanese-like sensibility (love of the seasons that change with the passage of time)[47]. In this regard, I believe that this study underlines an important aspect for inclusion in any
discussion of Hockney’s artistic career.

NoteThis study is a Japanese translation, with some additions, based on a speech given at the 19th congress of
the International Association for Aesthetics (25th September, 2013, Jagiellonian University, Krakow,
Poland). In my investigation, I received valuable information from Mr. Kenji Nishimura, head of the
Nishimura Gallery, who extended exceptional kindness, including allowing me to examine artworks andconsult primary sources. The staff of the Museum of Contemporary Art, Tokyo, extended greatcooperation in allowing me to examine the Weather Series. I would like to finish by sincerely thanking
everyone for their help.
[1][2]

As far as I can ascertain, Hockney visited Japan on the following occasions: November 1971,
February 1983, summer 1986, 25th October 1989, April-May 1993, and 25th October 1996.
Nikos Stangos ed., David Hockney, David Hockney by David Hockney: My Early Years, London,
1976, pp. 150, 247; Paul Joyce, Hockney on Photography: Conversations with Paul Joyce,
London, 1988, pp. 22-23, pp. 30-52; Nikos Stangos ed., David Hockney, That’s the Way I See It,
San Francisco, 1993, pp. 29-31, 100; Yusuke Nakahara ed., David Hockney, Shinchosha, 1990, pp.
60-64.

Rethinking David Hockney’s “reverse perspective”

[3]

[4]
[5]
[6]

[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]

[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]

[18]
[19]

[20]

63

Peter Webb, Portrait of David Hockney, New York, 1988, pp. 123, 128. Besides discussion of theconnection of these works with Japan, there is also discussion suggesting similarity with
contemporary abstract art. Henry Geldzahler, ‘Introduction,’ in Hockney (1976), p. 20; Alan
Woods, ‘Photo-collage,’ in Paul Melia ed., David Hockney, Manchester, 1995, p. 112. Hockney also
produced a painting called Island, which was based on postcards featuring an island in the Inland
Sea in Japan, but it has not been considered in this study because Hockney began work on it before
his trip. Marco Livingstone, David Hockney, London, 1996 (1981), pp. 149-54. Also, this study
does not generally deal with drawings made during the trip to Japan.
Hockney (1976), p. 242.
In Island and Weather Series, Marco Livingstone discovered a connection with paintings byimpressionists such as Claude Monet. Livingstone, op. cit., pp. 152-53.
Hiroya Sugimura, ‘What the Twelve Travels Bring About’ in Twelve travels: British art insensibility and experience, Executive committee of the Twelve travels: British Art in Sensibility
and Experience Exhibition, 2008, pp. 14-15, 19, 177-78, 180. (in Japanese and English). Mr.
Sugimura also mentions that works by Heihachiro Fukuda were on show in the same exhibition.
Hockney (1976), p. 242.
Ibid., p. 247.
Ibid., p. 249; Hockney (1993), pp. 16-17.
Livingstone, op. cit.; Paul Melia and Ulrich Luckhardt, David Hockney, Munich, Berlin, London
and New York, 2007 (2000), pp. 121, 130.
Nine excellent Japanese-style painters in Kyoto, Kyoto Municipal Museum of Art, 1971, pp. 15154 (in Japanese).
26th February and 14th June 2013, at the Nishimura Gallery, in interviews with the author of thisstudy. Further, according to Mr. Nishimura, Hockney was attended by Mr. Arata Isozaki during
his stay in 1971. Incidentally, Mr. Isozaki identified a relationship between Hockney’s JapaneseRain on Canvas and the depiction of stepping stones by Fukuda.
Arata Isozaki, ‘posuto modanizumu no fuukei 3, David Hockney’s Photo Collages, Cubist
Photography’ Kikan Herumesu (Quarterly periodical Hermes), Volume 3, June 1985, title page(in Japanese).
Livingstone, op. cit., p. 153; Geldzahler, op. cit., p. 20.
Heihachiro Fukuda Exhibition, The Kyoto Shimbun Co., Ltd., 2007, p. 160.
Livingstone, op. cit., p. 153.
As noted earlier, in regard to this characteristic, Livingstone mentioned a relationship with theimpressionists, as well as with ukiyo-e, Livingstone, op. cit., p. 153.
Arguably the largest-scale travelling solo exhibition of the 1980s, Hockney’s photographic works
were shown in 41 places in 10 countries, including Europe, the US, Australia, and Japan. The
naming of the pieces followed Lawrence Weschler’s classification, with those featuring Polaroid
pictures called ‘Polaroid collages’, and those featuring ordinary 35mm photos called‘photocollages’. However, in the main text of this study, I have used the general term ‘photographic
collages’ for both. Lawrence Weschler, Cameraworks: David Hockney, London, 1984, p. 21.
David Hockney, On Photography: a Lecture at the Victoria & Albert Museum, November 1983,
New York and Zurich, 1983, p. 12.
Hockney (1993), p. 112. See the following article by the author of this study for details of Hockney’s
photographic collages: ‘Hockney's photographic collages: from 'reverse perspective' to theaccumulation of memory’ The Study of the History of Art, Volume 47, The Society of History of
Art Waseda University, pp. 87-108, 2009.
Hockney (1983), pp. 24-26; Hockney (1993), p. 100; Lawrence Weschler, ‘A Visit with Hockney
and Stanley Hollywood Hills 1987,’ in David Hockney: A Retrospective, Los Angeles County
Museum of Art, 1988, pp. 92-93; Joyce, op. cit., p. 140.

64

[21]
[22]
[23]

[24]
[25]

[26]
[27]
[28]

[29]

[30]
[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]
[35]

[36]

TANAKA Maho

David Hockney, ‘Vogue par David Hockney,’ Vogue Française ed., Décembre 1985-Janvier 1986,
p.232; Weschler (1988), p. 95.
George Rowley, Principles of Chinese Painting, Princeton University Press, 1972 (1959), p. 61;
Hockney (1983), pp. 24-26; Weschler (1988), pp. 92-93.
Rowley, op. cit., p. 61; Hockney (1983), pp. 24-26. However, in some places in this book by Rowley,
the characteristics of Chinese and Japanese art are sometimes defined separately. Rowley, op. cit.,
p. 60.
Weschler (1984), pp. 20, 30; Anne Hoy, ‘Hockney’s Photocollages,’ in David Hockney: A
Retrospective, op. cit., p. 64.
The International Conference of Papers in Kyoto ’83, a report by the executive committee of theInternational Conference of Papers in Kyoto, Kyoto Chamber of Commerce and Industry, 1983, pp.
58-59 (in Japanese and English). The title on the mount of Walking in the Zen Garden at the
Ryoanji Temple refers to the 21st February, but according to Mr. Nishimura it is in fact likely thatto have been the 22nd.
Hockney (1993), p. 100.
Tadakazu Saitoh, How to Look at Japanese Gardens, Shogakukan, 2002 (in Japanese).
Kimiko Mochida, ‘Looking at Gardens or Gardens that Produce’, Tadashi Yokoyama ed., Library
Zen and Japanese Culture Volume 5, Zen and Architecture and Garden Design, Perikansha
Publishing Inc., 2002, pp. 274-75 (in Japanese); Tadakazu Saitoh, Illustrated guide to Japanese
Gardens, A History of Japanese Gardens through Stone Layout, Tokyodo Shuppan, 1999, p. 217(in Japanese).
There are various explanations of the construction of Zen gardens; here, I referred to the
Ryoanji Temple website. http://www.ryoanji.jp/smph/garden/perspective.html#j_point (accessed on 5/12/14)
Hockney (1976), p. 242; Kyoto, 1971. Crayon, 35.6 x 43.2cm. Collection of Kasmin, London; Kyoto,
April 24th 1993, #38. Color laser print, 61.0 x 183.5cm. Nishimura Gallery.
Joyce, op. cit., pp. 22-23, 30-52; Weschler (1988), pp. 91-92; Hockney (1993), p. 128; David
Hockney, Secret knowledge: Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters, London, 2006
(2001), pp. 204-05, 230-31.
Hockney’s interest was sparked by travelling to China in 1981 with the writer Stephen Spender andtaking responsibility for illustrating a travel diary and taking photographs. Stephen Spender, China
Diary, London and New York, 1981.
According to the testimony of Mr. Nishimura, Hockney himself claimed that the composition of
the exhibition catalogue for these photographs, David Hockney Photographic Exhibition: China(Nishimura Gallery, 1989), was a great inspiration for sets he designed for the opera Turandot.
With regard to films of Hockney explaining ‘reverse perspective’, I referred to the Nishimura
Gallery’s video archives and transcripts in Japanese. Philip Haas, Day on the Grand Canal with
the Emperor of China: or Surface is Illusion but so is Depth (1987, Film).
Joyce, op. cit., p. 35; Haas, op. cit. Moreover, in the film, comparison is made between the same
work and the Chinese handscroll Qianlong Emperor’s Tour of the South, which was influenced byWestern one-point perspective, and the same work is evaluated.
National Palace Museum ed., Zhao Mengfu, Autumn Colors on the Ch’iao and Hua Mountains,
Nigensha, 1981.
Hockney, in general terms, evaluates reverse perspective in Western European Medieval art and in
Persian art, but the lynchpin of his theory always remains a comparison of (Greco-Romaninfluenced) Western art and Eastern art (i.e. that which is not western art). Hockney (2006), pp.
204-05, 230-31.
National Palace Museum ed., Huang Gong-wang, Dwelling in the Fu-ch'un Mountains, Ningensha,
1981.

Rethinking David Hockney’s “reverse perspective”

[37]

[38]
[39]

[40]

[41]
[42]
[43]

[44]

[45]
[46]

[47]

65

Please see Note 34 and Note 36. When producing his film about Chinese handscrolls, Hockneyreceived the cooperation of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. He also had access toChinese handscrolls at the Sydney L. Moss Ltd. Gallery in London. Joyce, op. cit., p. 23.
Weschler (1988), pp. 91-92.
Encyclopedia of Japanese Handscrolls, Volume 4, Legend of Mt. Shigi, Chuokoronsha, 1977, pp.
99-113 (in Japanese); Natsuko Haraguchi, ‘Spatial Composition of Illustrated Handscrolls:
Legend of Ishiyama Temple Picture Scrolls 1, 2, 3, and 5 as Indicators’, Studies in aesthetics andart history, Volume 8, Kyoto University, 1987, pp. 97-99 (in Japanese).
Hironobu Kohara, ‘Narrative Scrolls in China’, Nara Daigaku Kiyou, Volume 14, Nara University,
1985, p. 96 (in Japanese).
With regard to the building shown multiple times in A Visit with Christopher & Don, I have alsosuggested a relationship with the ‘clochers de Martinville’ mentioned by Marcel Proust. ‘David
Hockney and the "Temporal" Perspective : From a Connection with Marcel Proust's A la recherche
du temps perdu’, Journal of the Japan Art History Society, Volume 171, The Japan Art History
Society, 2012, pp. 289-301.
Weschler (1988), pp. 91-92; Haas, op. cit.
Kohara, op. cit., p. 96.
Nobuo Tsuji, Midori Sano, ‘Conversation – Illustrated Handscrolls as recreation and how they wereenjoyed’; Touru Takahashi, ‘Literature and Illustrated Handscrolls – Similarities and differencesin expression method’; Junji Wakasugi ed., Basic Knowledge on Appreciation of Illustrated
Handscrolls, Shibundou, 1995, pp.138-41, 149 (in Japanese).
Please note that in the summary currently on the Metropolitan Museum of Art website by curator
Dawn Delbanco, there is mention, as a feature of Chinese handscrolls, that the scroll was unrolled
shoulder-width section by section to reveal a narrative or journey developing in time and space.
http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/chhs/hd_chhs.htm (accessed on 5/12/2014).
However, in his 2010 discussion, curator Maxwell Hearn, who explained Chinese handscrolls to
Hockney in the 1980s, says that the handscroll format is very intimate in that only one or two
people can view it at any one time, but makes no mention of the unrolling of the paper by theviewer’s own hand or the length of paper in each section. Hockney (1993), p. 128; Maxwell K.
Hearn, ‘Painting and Calligraphy under the Mongols,’ in The World of Khubilai Khan: Chinese Art
in the Yuan Dynasty, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 2010, p. 181.
Hockney (2006), pp. 204-05, 230-31.
Seven Yorkshire Landscape Videos, 2011. Eighteen digital videos synchronized and presented on
18 x 55 inch NEC screens to comprise a single artwork, 205.7 x 729.0cm, overall. Duration: 12
mins 9 sec.
On other occasions I have considered the issue of memory in regard to Hockney’s 1970-80s works.
Please see Note 19 and Note 40.

* This article is based on “Rethinking David Hockney’s "reverse perspective": The acceptance of Japanese
art in the 1970s and 1980s,” in Bigaku (Aesthetics), Vol. 66, No. 1, 2015, pp. 137-48 (in Japanese),published by the Japanese Society for Aesthetics.

List of Figures
Because of copyright protection, this article does not include images of David Hockney’s works. Please
use the following source information to refer to the images in question:

66

TANAKA Maho

Figs. 1, 2, 13, 14, 20, 22 can found in David Hockney: A Retrospective, Los Angeles County Museum ofArt, 1988.
Figs. 9-12 (The Weather Series) can be found in David Hockney Prints, Tokyo Shimbun, 2016-2017 (inJapanese).
Fig. 17 can be found in Paul Melia and Ulrich Luckhardt, David Hockney, Munich, Berlin, London and
New York, 2007 (2000).

Works by David HockneyFig. 1: David Hockney, Japanese Rain on Canvas 1972. Acrylic on canvas, 121.9x121.9cm. Private
Collection.
Fig. 2: David Hockney, Mt. Fuji and Flowers 1972. Acrylic on canvas, 152.4x121.9cm. Collection
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
Fig. 9: David Hockney, Rain from The Weather Series 1973. Lithograph and screenprint, 99.0x77.4cm.
Fig. 10: David Hockney Sun from The Weather Series 1973. Lithograph and screenprint. 95.2x78.0cm.
Fig. 11: David Hockney, Lightning from The Weather Series 1973. Lithograph and screenprint. 99.6x
80.3cm.
Fig. 12: David Hockney, Wind from The Weather Series 1973. Lithograph and screenprint. 101.6x78.7cm.
Fig. 13: David Hockney, Sitting in the Zen Garden at the Ryoanji Temple, Kyoto, Feb. 19, 1983 Photographic collage, 149.9x108.6cm. Collection of the Artist.
Fig. 14: David Hockney, Walking in the Zen Garden at the Ryoanji Temple, Kyoto, Feb. 1983 Photographic collage, 101.6x152.4cm. Collection of the Artist.
Fig. 17: David Hockney, Paint Trolley, L.A. 1985 Photographic collage, 101.6x152.4cm. Collection of theArtist.
Fig. 20: David Hockney, A Visit with Christopher & Don, Santa Monica Canyon 1984. Oil on two canvases, 182.9x609.6cm. Collection Museum Ludwig, Cologne.
Fig 22: David Hockney A Walk Around the Hotel Courtyard, Acatlan 1985. Oil on two canvases,
183x609.6cm. Collection of Benesse Art Site, Naoshima, Kagawa, Japan.

Works by Other Artists

Yoson Ikeda, Osaka in the Rain 1935. Ink on silk,
size unknown. Kyoto Municipal Museum of Art. (Thiswork was can be found in Nine excellent Japanesestyle painters in Kyoto, Kyoto Municipal Museum ofArt, 1971 (in Japanese)).

Fig. 3

Heihachiro Fukuda, Ripple 1932. Ink on silk,
two panels, 157x184cm. Osaka City Museum ofModern Art (This work can be found in Heihachiro
Fukuda Exhibition: Works and Sketches, Oita
Prefectural Art Center, 1991.)

Fig. 4

Rethinking David Hockney’s “reverse perspective”

Fig. 5 Heihachiro Fukuda, Fresh Snow 1948.
Ink on silk, 112.0x82.0cm.
Whereabouts unknown.

67

Fig. 6 Heihachiro Fukuda, Rain 1958.
Ink on paper, 108.7x86.5cm. National
Museum of Modern Art, Tokyo* Figs. 5 and 6 can be found in Fukuda Heihachiro, The Kyoto Shimbun Co., Ltd., 2007 (in Japanese).

Fig. 7 Shinsen Tokuoka, Rain 1964.
Ink on silk, 110.7x143.7cm.
Shizuoka Prefectural Museum of Art

Fig. 8 Shinsen Tokuoka, Pond 1952.
Ink on silk, 129.9x174.8cm.
National Museum of Modern Art, Kyoto.

* Figs. 7 and 8 can be found in Shinsen Tokuoka: The Man and His Art, The Yamatane Museum and
The Asahi Shimbun, 1989 (in Japanese).

Fig. 15 Ryoanji Temple Zen Garden.
Approximate point from whichphotographs for Sitting in the Zen
Garden were taken.
(Fig. 15 is taken from Zen art: Zen
Architecture and Gardens, Gakusyukenkyusha, 1979 (in Japanese).
The arrow was added by the authorof this article.）

Fig. 16 Wang Hui and others, Wu-his to Suchou, theseventh Kangxi Emperor's Southern Inspection
Tour, 17th century. Handscroll, Ink on paper.
Metropolitan Museum of Art (detail).
(Fig. 16 can be found in Paul Joyce, Hockney on
Photography: Conversations with Paul Joyce,
London, 1988).

68

TANAKA Maho

Zhao Meng-fu, Autumn Colors on
the Ch’iao and Hua Mountains c.1295.
Handscroll, Ink on paper, 28.4x90.2cm.
National Palace Museum (detail).

Fig. 18

Fig. 19 Huang Gong-wang, Dwelling in the
Fu-ch'un Mountains 1350. Handscroll,Ink on paper, 33x636.9cm.
National Palace Museum (detail).
* Figs. 18 and 19 can be found in New History of World Art: Eastern, Volume 7, Yuan period,
Shogakukan, 1999 (in Japanese).

Fig. 21 Unknown Artist, Shigisan-engi (Legendof Mt. Shigi) 12th Century. Handscroll, avolume concerning a Buddhist nun, Folio 15,
31.7x58.5cm. Collection of Chogosonshi-ji
Temple (detail).
(Fig. 21 can be found in Encyclopedia ofJapanese Handscrolls, Volume 4, Legend of
Mt. Shigi, Chuokoronsha, 1977 (in Japanese).)