AESTHETICS No.13 (2009)

The Japanese Society for Aesthetics / 249

Koga Harue’s Sea (1929) and “Soluble Fish”:
Proletarian Art, Max Ernst, Bauhaus and the Volte-Face ofMachine Aesthetics
NAGATA Ken’ichi
Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo

Koga Harue’s oil painting, Sea (1929, pl.
1), is not only representative of Koga’s own
period of ‘Sur-realism’ (chō-genjitsushugi),
but it is also one among some very significant
works of his lifetime, of Japan’s Surrealism
and of prewar Japanese art. Research workon Koga Harue and focusing on Sea hasentered a new stage, since 1991. Harue Koga:
The Creative Process: A Show Built Around theMuseum Collection exhibition held at The
National Museum of Modern Art, Tokyo,
December 1991 － March 1992 and Tanaka
pl. 1: KOGA Harue Sea (1929) Tokyo National
Atsushi’s paper [1] printed in the exhibition
Museum of Modern Art
catalog called the reader’s attention to theprocess that underwent in the creation of Sea and some of his other works, as well as to the
motifs used therein. Thereafter, research work by Hayami Yutaka [2], Ōtani Shōgo [3],Sugimoto Hideko [4] and a few others uncovered the extrinsic sources to the various images
employed in Koga’s post-1929 works. As a result of their efforts, although it is true that light
was shed on the collage of various image sources that the then media could have provided
Koga with, but it cannot be denied that they served to befog the mystery surrounding themeaning and comprehension of the works, even further. Subsequently, Gotō Kōji attempted todeepen the level of research on Koga by moving away from a mere reading of individual
image motifs and their extrinsic sources to exploring the working principles that underwent in
the production of his works [5]. However, the fact remains that a few other significant images
which hold the key to the overall comprehension of the works continue to remain unexplained,
as a consequence of which even Gotō’s argument does not prove to be convincing enough.
This paper aims to shed light on Koga’s art by way of elucidating certain significant
images found both in his Sea and outside of it, those which hold the clue to a deeper
interpretation and understanding of the said work. By doing so, this paper further aims todemonstrate that Koga Harue held a position right at the juncture connecting proletarian art,
Dada, Surrealism and Bauhaus.

250

NAGATA Ken’ichi

1. Wissen und Fortschritt and the Blast Furnace
Koga’s painting Sea was a riddle in many ways. In the middle of the painting is a kind of
picture book portrayal of a sea-view that includes a submarine, fish, a galley and an airship.
On the right is portrayed a lady in swimsuit holding her right hand straight and up high,whom Koga positions in concert with an industrial plant composed of a tower, factorychimney, etc. on the top left hand side of the painting. Despite the picturization of imposing
compound objects like the submarine and industrial plant, their overbearing presence
diminishes giving way to the towering figure of the lady in swimsuit, whose impressive,
upright posture, in turn, dominates the whole painting. If seen in isolation, the individual
motifs, in themselves, are plain and simple. But, when they are seen in juxtaposition to eachother, like sheets overlapping to form an unrealistic spatial structure, as is in the painting, it
becomes difficult to grasp their meaning-in-context. Despite such a difficulty in comprehension, the composition of the painting, Sea, captures the viewer with an overwhelmingcohesive force and a sense of tension. Sea is contradiction in itself.
This research paper concerning Sea finds its point of departure in a vital comment
provided by Gotō Kōji. Gotō turned the attention of the viewer to the constellation of
analogical relationships positioned within the painting. It may be noted that there is a distinct
figurative semblance [6] between the lady in swimsuit on the right and the industrial plant
painted on the left. Quite visibly, an anthropomorphic image has been rendered to theindustrial plant. Such a figurative semblance between the two icons, in turn, supports theargument for a contrastive, transitional, comparative, or metaphorical kind of meaning-context
that both the icons might be said to bear. Namely, that “the industrial plant is a woman,” or,that “woman stands against industrialism.” Similarly, it has also been argued that the airship,
the submarine and fish too bear a meaning-context based upon their respective figurative
semblance. As Gotō has pointed out, there is no doubt that the key to understanding Koga’s
painting lies in seeking analogy between the various image motifs and the meaning-context
borne out of the constellation of those significatory relationships. But, as has been mentioned
in the beginning, his argument to attribute meaning-context to an allegorical relationshipbetween “mind and matter” is not convincing, though.
The extrinsic sources of many of the image motifs portrayed in Sea, beginning with thelady in swimsuit, have hitherto been identified by research studies that have been mentioned
earlier. Furthermore, it is also widely held that the industrial plant possesses a characteristically anthropomorphic configuration and, that its correlation vis-à-vis the icon of the lady inswimsuit holds a pivotal significance with regards both the overall composition of the painting
and its interpretation. The anthropomorphic icon of the industrial plant had been consideredas the most significant clue that would help throw light on and interpret the mysteryshrouding the painting. But, despite being so considered, not only is its image source a matterof undisclosed identity, but it in itself is a subject that has not been thoroughly scrutinized inpast research.
There exists a source that resembles the industrial plant portrayed in the painting. It is
the photograph (pl. 2) of a blast furnace that appeared in Peter Bünge’s article, “At a Blast

Koga Harue’s Sea (1929) and “Soluble Fish”

251

pl. 3-1: “Wissen und Fortschritt”
1927.10
pl. 2: Furnace in : “Wissen und Fortschritt” 1927.10

Furnace,” published in the October issue of a popular,
German science magazine, Wissen und Fortschritt (Knowledge
and Progress) [7] in year 1927. There is a very obvious figurative resemblance between the two (pl. 3-1/3-2). At the
instruction of Hayami, it is found that there exists yet
another illustrative photograph of a blast furnace (pl. 3-3)
that closely resembles the one in Koga’s Sea and that it
appeared in the December 1927 issue of popular sciencemagazine Kagaku no Chishiki (Scientific Knowledge) of Japan.
The possibility for Koga to have seen this too is high. Never-pl. 3-2: KOGA Harue Sea(detail)theless, as a result of the author’s deliberation on this issue(cf. “Koga Harue’s Sea (1929) Reexamined－The Motif of theIndustrial Plant and Image Transfiguration,” ΚΑΛΛΙΣΤΑ,
No.14, 2007), it has been noted that the said image in Sea
possesses certain aspects which cannot be explained with asole reference to the illustration pointed out to in Scientific
Knowledge. There is seen in the painting a mesh covering the
top of the tower jutting out the furnace, as also a slanting
pl. 3-3: Illustration in “Kagaku
conveyor arm on the right of the blast furnace resembling
no Chishiki” 1972.12 (offered
by HAYAMI Yutaka)
the neck of a giraffe. These are portions that can be substantiated only if one is to accept that Koga did have a lookat an illustration [8] carried in the German magazine Knowledge and Progress.
In fact, embellishing the front cover of the magazine’s November 1927 issue is an
imposing photograph of Zeppelin afloat, while the same issue carries an article entitled“Camera ‘That Went Wild’,” in which appears a photographic montage of a lady dancer atop
Eiffel Tower‐images that bear an undeniable resemblance to the motifs painted in Sea and
Makeup Out-of-Doors (1930) [9]. The editorial article of the same issue written by Günter Buggs

and entitled “How does Technology Reflect Living Organisms?” is also of grave importance to252

NAGATA Ken’ichi

the argument here. The editorial
features photographs (pl. 4) ofdinosaurs/cranes, a caterpillar/Catterpillar machine, a giraffe/dock cranes, fish/an airship,
etc. showing the analogous relationship between living crea-pl. 4: “Wissen und Fortschritt”
1927.10 ｢How the Techniquereflects creatures｣pl. 5: “Wissen und Fortschritt”
1827/5 covertures and machines, similar to
those by which Sea is seen to
be composed of [10]. The cover
page of the May issue too is
worth taking note of (pl. 5).
On it is portrayed an island on
which is built a giant electric-

ity generator plant, including agroup of modern-style buildings. The island, moreover,is illustrated in such a way so as to show the crosssectional view of its structure lying below the sea level－an illustration with a close semblance to that in Koga’s
Sea. Even the placid and transparent, oceanic sense of
space, devoid of any air, that the cover page projects, ishighly reminiscent of Koga’s painting [11]. Taking a
glance at the sketch (pl. 6) that went into the making ofpl. 6: KOGA Harue sketch for Umi(Sea) 1909 in Sketch-book 1927-33
Tokyo National Museum ofModern Art

Sea, one may note that a group of buildings is drawn inthe same place in which the blast furnace appears on thepainting. This, all the more, increases the possibility ofan analogical relationship to the cover page of this issue.

Therefore, it may be convincingly argued that, on the basis of all these evidences produced
herein, there is a very high possibility for Koga Harue to have seen the photograph of the blast
furnace in question in none other than the magazine Knowledge and Progress referred to herein.
Yet, even if that is ascertained to be so, it does not mean that all the evidences provided for in
the magazine would serve to explain the whole of the production principle which governed
the making of Sea. It is necessary to shift the point of focus and continue the investigation.

2. Yanase Masamu’s CAPITALISMUS and Sea
There is an interesting fact about Yanase Masamu’s CAPITALISMUS (pl. 7) that has notbeen pointed out in past research. It is that the work has been conceived in such a way that it
can be viewed from all the four corners, thus incorporating a principle of rotation. Of
pertinent significance is the fact that the word “CAPITALISMUS” can be read when the work isturned 180 degrees [12]. And, surprisingly, similar to this inversion is found an anthropomorphic depiction of a blast furnace, very much akin to that in Koga’s Sea. However, theKoga Harue’s Sea (1929) and “Soluble Fish”

253

affinity between Sea and CAPITALISMUS is not limited tojust such an allusion to human form found in the depictionof blast furnace. Rather, it is the “transparency of reality/
exposure of reality and inversion/volte-face of the world,”
which may be said to the central theme punctuating both thecomposition and content of either of the works. As may beeasily found, there is an allusion to the satirical sketches
made by George Grosz in Yanase’s CAPITALISMUS, which
may be derived from the fact that the latter employs anumber of human figures from the latter. For example,
when held upside-down, the two bald faces seen portrayedat the lower end are the same ones who are depicted asoffering a prayer for good health, “Das Gesundbeter,” inGrosz’s Got mit uns (1920). And the one holding a bloodstained sword up high is the very same Noske who waspl. 7: YANASE Masamu
CAPITALISMUS (1924c.)in headstand, Musashino
Art University Art-librarycheered, “Cheers for Noske! The Proletariat has been
Disarmed!” (“Prost Noske! Der Proletariat ist entwaffnet!”), in Pleite (1919). The import of thispainting by Yanase is very clear, namely, the exposure/upsetting of capitalism. The blast
furnace, painted big in a position that occupies a significant place in the composition of thepainting, epitomizes a fulcrum that overturns capitalism, the motive force for the constructionof a socialistic order, in its place－an icon of machinery and heavy industry visualized by the
Marxists.
Coming back to Sea, the basement atop which sits the blast furnace, the submarine and the
body of sea water have been painted in such a way that an otherwise invisible interior has
been rendered visible. Indeed, at first sight, one might be given to believe that, such a
depiction of individual motifs by Koga are only copy of the cutaway illustrations stylized in
the German science magazine discussed earlier, and that such a portrayal is of a completely
different order from that of an exposure of the reality of capitalism alluded by Grosz andYanase in their works. But Koga himself states elsewhere: “It would be a fallacy to interpretthe objects portrayed in the painting as representing, in themselves, the thoughts, the emotionsor the ideas of the painter [13].” This is indicative of the fact that the clue to the problem ofinterpreting Koga’s painting lies in asking, “What is it that the painting, as a whole, achieves in
expressing with a montage of individual motifs depicted in it?”
It is a well-known fact that Koga wrote explanatory poems to his works and printed themalongside reproductions of his paintings in the self-compiled Collected Paintings of Koga Harue(Dai-ichi Shobō, 1931-32), published during his lifetime. Following is the poem he composed
for his painting Sea with the same title [14]:Clear and striking watery blue, indigo blue and purple,
Reality that is seen through, land is under the sea
Sliding objects; sea water; a submarine; a galley
50°north latitude

254

NAGATA Ken’ichi

Lady in a sea-bathing suit, who connects all things to the family of fish in the sea
Seaweeds, with a new odor, burst forth
Inside the steel-mill for an up-to-date German submarine
The commander must have loved a bird that looked like a pigeon
A direct sound pulse hits the sonar
The motor rotates, and rotates
The face of the crane in the wind
The fishes seek their course－probably, they would fill the distance of emptiness
Grab and set your binoculars!
The Earth will turn around and you will see through the whole scene
What strikes the reader is the use of the phrase, “see/n through,” in the second and lastline of the poem, as well as that it appears in connection with an image of “rotation.” So muchso that, the theme of “overturning,” “rotation” of the whole reality－ ”The motor rotates, androtates”－ runs across this poem Sea. Thus, it might be argued that the poem, as well as thepainting, is not to be interpreted on the basis of what is obvious. On the contrary, what is
important is that, while the concrete feeling of rotation or seeing through remains, the poem
evokes an experience of “seeing through things” and “rotation,” by going beyond that
concreteness rising to a level of imagery that seems to dominate the entire poem. And, as it isan explanatory poem to the painting Sea, it would not be unreasonable to assert that an
analogy to the compositional principle of the painting is hidden within the poem. Thus, byreferring to the explanatory poem written by Koga, one may affirmatively locate a theme of“transparency and rotation,” right at the heart of his Sea, which is closely identical to that of“exposure and upsetting/inversion” found in Yanase Masamu’s CAPITALISMUS.
The poem Sea includes yet another clue that would aid interpretation of the painting Sea.
The last line of the first stanza goes: “50°north latitude.” Fifty degrees north latitude wascertainly not just another numerical to the Japanese around the year 1929. It coincides with thenorthern limit to the southern half of Sakhalin (Karafuto) that Japanese won from the Russians
at the time of Russo-Japanese War. Being the one and only overland borderline Japan pos-sessed with a foreign country, the borderline cutting across Sakhalin (Karafuto) separated theterritories of Japan and erstwhile Soviet Union. While, for the leftists of the time, it was theplace of connexion with what was called, “the native country of revolution”－in fact, it is thesame borderline crossing which the “Red Love-Escapade” was actually staged by western-styletheatre (shingeki) actress, Okada Yoshiko, and producer, Sugimoto Ryōkichi, who fled to Soviet
Union in the year 1938.

For the leftists of that day, the phrase “50°north latitude” connotes yet another meaning.
It is to be found in connection with Kobayashi Takiji’s representative literary work, CrabCanning Boat. It was completed on March 30, 1929 and was serialized in the magazine Senki,
during May-June the same year. And, in July, the following month, the serialized novel was
dramatized by the drama troupe, Shin-Tsukiji Gekidan, led by Hijikata Yoshi and staged as
Further North of 50°North Latitude at the Tsukiji Small Theater (Tsukiji Shō-Gekijō) that wasKoga Harue’s Sea (1929) and “Soluble Fish”

255

located in the Tsukiji district of Central Tokyo. It would not have been possible for Koga tohave been ignorant of all these echoes emanating from the phrase, “50°north latitude.”
Past research has made note of an interesting observation about Koga by referring to abiographical sketch of him published in Koga Harue (Shunchōkai, Sep 1934), stating that Koga,
beginning year 1928, “took interest in new trends of thought and extensively read articles onfrontier research, as also books on sociology. His subscription of newly published magazines
ran to over thirty titles [15].” Past research conducted on Koga also alludes to his close association with theoretician, Takenaka Kyūshichi, who attempted to unify Marxism and Surrealism
and professed something like a “scientific Surrealism.” But, with the exception of a major
investigation conducted by Nakamura Giichi [16], there was almost no rigorous attempt toprove the relationship between Koga Harue and Marxism or, between him and the proletarianart movement, on the basis of concrete reference to evidence found in his artworks.
This paper makes do for that long hiatus by proving that the painting Sea is itself the fruitof an effort on Koga’s part to pursue the artist’s task of what he himself has called, “the role tocompensate for the incompleteness of reality and to help direct reality towards a future that iscomplete [17].” The foregoing argument presented in this paper demonstrates his proximity toproletarian art that was represented by Yanase Masamu. Yet, in spite of Koga’s proximity toproletarian art, it must not be concluded that he bought wholesale the stance and principles
of proletarian art. Although “the transparency and volte-face of reality” is the primal principle by which Koga’s Sea is composed, it certainly does not depict a class war as Yanase’s
CAPITALISMUS does so very starkly. The various individual motifs painted in Sea holdmultiple connotations and do not directly imply social conflict. Neither does the painting,seen as a whole, inheres a singular meaning like, the inversion of capitalism. Thus, it becomes clear that Koga and Yanase, despite sharing a principle of transparency/exposure andvolte-face/inversion, decidedly differ from each other vis-à-vis the presence or absence of asingular and socio-realistic meaning in their respective works. Thus, it should be stressed that
Koga’s Sea is made on the basis of a production principle which is different from that of
Yanase’s work [18].
This point will be discussed further in the following section. But before that, the mutual
influence that respective works had upon each other is an issue that needs to be taken up in
more detail. The blast furnaces painted by both Koga and Yanase, although visibly resemblingeach other, differ from each other with respect to a minute detail. If one compares both these
depictions with the photograph that appeared in the aforementioned magazine Knowledge andProgress, it may be noted that both Yanase and Koga have taken the same specimen, but
depicted it in respectively characteristic ways－for it very much seems that Yanase has
minutely reproduced one part of the blast furnace, while Koga has given minute attention toanother part. As for the smokestack jutting out of the blast furnace (not to be mistaken for yet
another smoke chimney, but a cylindrically-shaped construction to suck out the gas emissions
from the furnace, Gichtgasabsaugung, in German), it might be noted that the smokestackdepicted in Koga’s Sea is made up of two stories with different diameters, while that inYanase’s work is a single-storied smokestack with horizontal stripes running across its lower
portion.

256

NAGATA Ken’ichi

In the case of Koga’s painting, there isno contradiction in inferring that he abbreviated the construction made of iron covering
the lower portion of the smokestack, as seenin the photograph printed in Knowledge andProgress, to depict a two-storied smokestackwith different diameters. Whereas, how could
one account for its depiction in case of Yanase.

pl. 8: Unknown Hochofen 1 des Hochofenwerkes
Lübeck (Industriemuseum Geschichtswerkstatt Herrenwyk,Lübeck)Well, it is necessary to refer to a different
photograph at this juncture. It is a 1909 dry
photograph of an ironworks factory in thecity of Lübeck. The photographer’s name is
not printed but it carries the title, “No.1 Blast
Furnace of Herrenwyk”(pl. 8). In this photograph, the portion that was seen as hidden by theiron made structure in the one printed in Knowledge and Progress has been clearly photographed. And, surprisingly, the smoke stack towering above can be seen in full, identical tothe one portrayed by Yanase in CAPITALISMUS. Moreover, this same photograph distinctively shows the two dots that Yanase depicted as resembling the two eyes of a human form,on the observation platform on the upper end of the blast furnace. Whereas, the two dots inthe photograph appear to be emphasized by way of some play of light reflected from within
the glass window. On a clarification made by Dr. Wolfgang Muth of the concerned museum,
this photograph is known to have been printed in Volume 17 of the magazine Stahl und Eisen(Steel and Iron) in the year 1909 and that it is possible for it to have been reproduced in the formof a picture post-card, but the whereabouts of its specimen copies are not known as of yet.
Nevertheless, the concerned museum does house picture post-cards reproducing exactly thesame image of blast furnace that is printed in the magazine Steel and Iron. It is plausible thatYanase might have come across picture post-cards or other illustrations of that furnace andused the image printed in Steel and Iron as a sample for portraying the blast furnace.
In this way, it may be said that the mode of expressions in the case of both Koga andYanase, who arguably used two different specimen photographs of the same blast furnace at
Lübeck in the depiction of differing, but anthropomorphic images of blast furnaces, took place
in a context of rotation and inversion, and that it also contributed to the proximity and similarity of their expressions. At this stage, it cannot be verified as to whether Yanase influenced
Koga [19], or whether both of them arrived at expressive techniques independent of each other.
In either case, what can be definitely ascertained is that Koga’s painting Sea holds a position
that is at a very close distance to that of Yanase’s work depicting an inversion of capitalism,with respect to both an image of volte-face, as well as to the motif of an anthropomorphic blast
furnace. Yet, with respect to the production principle, Koga’s Sea displays a distinction awayfrom that of Yanase’s CAPITALISMUS. The following section is a more detailed discussion of
Koga’s production principle.

Koga Harue’s Sea (1929) and “Soluble Fish”

257

3. Max Ernst and “Soluble Fish”
Max Ernst’s collage hier ist noch alles in der schwebe… (Here Everything is Still Floating…,
1920, pl. 9) [20] is an artwork that needs attention in
the context of a discussion on the production principle that went into the making of Koga’s Sea. Made
towards the end of Ernst’s Zurich days, this work is
one among the collaborative productions that heundertook with Hans (Jean) Arp who contributed bypenning the explanatory poems that go with theworks. This particular work was exhibited at acollage exhibition of his (a 6-page catalogue had been
made for the occasion) held at the Dada art gallery Au
Sans Pareil in Paris, year 1921. It was Au Sans Pareilthat had provided the impetus and inspiration to theSurrealist movement of the times.

pl. 9: Max Ernst “hier ist noch alles inder schwebe…”(1920) Museum ofModern Art, N.Y.

Firstly, it might be noted that the union or match between artwork and the accompanying verse, as seen in relation to the works of Ernst, is found in the self-compiled Collected
Paintings, carrying the poems written by Koga Harue himself. Moreover, the portrayal of a“see-through vessel = fish” by Ernst is also commensurate to that of the portrayal of a “seethrough submarine” by Koga. Moreover, one may also confer to the verses contributed by
Arp: “…Here is where the armada first received a definitive blow (hier wird die armada zum
1.mal definitiv geschlagen)…the vessel showing its bowels and the fish showing its skeleton decided upon a second departure (der darndampfer und der skelettfisch entsclossen sich 2. aufbruch).”These verses are conclusive proof that the images of “a see-through vessel” and “fish” are one
and the same.
Furukawa Tomotsugu did make a note [21] of the adoption of Ernst by Koga, with reference to “Gyofu (Fisherman)” (1929), but he stops short of just that comment and there has been
no further examination on the connection by others too. But, Koga Harue, despite showing anaffinity with proletarian art draws a clear line of demarcation with it, made possible because of
his “Sur-realism.” And, it is Koga’s adoption of this very collage work [22] by Ernst which is of
crucial significance in appreciating the “Sur-realism” of Koga.
Makeup Out-of-Doors (pl. 10) is another entry that Koga sent along with the painting Sea, at
the 1930 Nika Art Exhibition. The explanatory poem to it carries a phrase－“fish that dissolves
into the air/becomes air”－and the painting itself portrays a smoke-belching steamboat (pl. 11),in the distant background that corresponds to that phrase. Needless to mention, “Soluble Fish”(Poisson soluble) is the title of an “automatically” written book published by André Breton in thesame year (1924) after the publication of the Manifesto of Surrealism. And, there can be no
mistake that one hears the echo of Breton in Koga’s poem. But, nonetheless, what formed the
crucial link to the image of “soluble fish = smoke-belching steamboat” in Koga’s painting wasErnst’s collage. In Koga’s painting, the motif that looks like the larva Zoea, with a body that istransparent, is a submarine as well as a steamboat belching smoke. It also resembles a fish

258

NAGATA Ken’ichi

pl.11: KOGA Harue
Makeup Out-of-Doors(Detail)pl.12: KOGA Harue
A Woman’s Surroundings (1930)

pl.10: KOGA Harue
Makeup Out-of-Doors (1930)
The Museum of Modern Art
Kamakura, Hayama

pl.13: KOGA Harue
Simple, Sad Story (1930)
Ishibashi Museum of Art

whose anterior part of the skeletal structure is transparent.
In other words, the images of Zoea = submarine = steamboat= fish…form a chain that is in a perpetual state of meta-

pl.14: KOGA Harue
Sketch for the Cover of “Shishin(Art Goddes)” (1929) Tokyo National Museum of Modern Art

morphosis. Furthermore, not only are all the individual motifs actually seen as, what is put
literally as, floating in the air/water, but that they seem to be floating, that is to say, to befloating in the sea of meaning. A look at the face of the painting would convince the viewer of
how the single phrase, “soluble fish,” is emblematic of the whole chain of those images. Thus,
there is a very acute possibility for the “fish that dissolves into the air/becomes air” in Koga’s
painting to be the “soluble fish” as depicted in the 1920 collage of Ernst.
Substantiating that argument is the repetitive occurrence of a number of images in thelater works (1929-1930) of Koga, with an unmistakable semblance to the icon of “soluble fish”
depicted by Ernst. Firstly, it might be noted that the “soluble fish,” metaphorically related to
the respective icons of “fish belching out air” and to its metamorphosed form of the “smokebelching ship,” in Ernst’s collage form a family of images with the submarine in Sea and thesteamship in the distant background of Makeup Out-of-Doors. Those icons subsequently appear
as another steamship in the distant background (pl. 11) in the picture Onna no mawari (AWoman’s Surroundings, 1930), as a fish belching out air (pl. 12) in Tanjun na hiwa (Simple, Sad
Story, 1930) (pl.13), as in the imagery of an airship connected to a fish from which air seems to
be gushing out (the cover design of the journal Shishin (Goddess Muse, pl. 14). Of interest is
the cover design of this journal Shishin. The motif of a cut flower and the lower torso of afemale, and that of a fish and airship are depicted antithetically to each other. The lower torso
of a female and the flower share an identity as they represent reproductive regions, as against

Koga Harue’s Sea (1929) and “Soluble Fish”

pl.15: On the Physiology
of Sentiment (1931)(lost)

pl.16: KOGA Harue
Severe Tradition (1931)
Ishibashi Museum of Art

the identity drawn between the vaporizing fish and airship.
Would it be unreasonable to argue that the relationship posited
between the two is suggested in the title of the magazine itself,
namely “Muse,” that is to discover identity in heterogeneity?
For Koga, the icon of “soluble fish” was suggestive of theprinciple of his”Sur-realism,” namely “Muse.”
Thus, as has been argued in the foregoing passages, if one
is to accept a common bond, owing to the common link of“soluble fish,” between Koga and Ernst deeper than what hashitherto been imagined, then it ensues that there seems to be amuch wider theme underpinning their relationship. For

259

pl.17: Max Ernst
Jeanne Hachette et Charle
Le Téméraire! 1929
(in > La Révolition
Surréaliste <, Nr.12, 1929)

example, the upside-down figure of a female in Koga’s Kanshō
pl.18: KOGA Harue
no seiri ni tsuite (On the Physiology of Sentiments, pl. 15) andEndless Flight (1930)
Kibishiki dentō (Rigorous Tradition, pl. 16), both of year 1931,
Ishibashi Museum of Art
echoes the collage work Jeanne Hachette et Charle Le Téméraire(pl. 17) published in the second issue of La Révolution Surréaliste (The Surrealist Revolution)(Dec, 1929). If it is true that it was Ernst who introduced the paintings done by the mentallychallenged in the repository of Prinzhorn to the Surrealist group at Paris, then Hateshinaki tōhi(Endless Flight, 1930, pl. 18) of Koga’s, and which is considered to have been inspired by one
amongst that collection, too would be a work of Koga’s that shows the influence of Ernst. It isconsidered that it was mainly the work of Ernst until year 1921, the initial phase of his
Cologne-Paris years.

4. Bauhaus Representation as the axis of Rotation of “Machine Aesthetics”―From Sea to
Makeup Out-of-Doors
The art of Koga, although it did inherit the aforesaid principle, underwent a slight, butvery significant change from Sea of 1929 to Makeup Out-of-Doors of the following year. In thelatter, heavy, gloomy motifs of submarine and factory complex disappear and, in their place, aparched brightness fills the whole painting.
Yet, even Makeup Out-of-Doors, like the painting Sea, has continued to be caught in amystery. Despite the fact that Hayami Yutaka found the source to the painted image of a girldancing on the top of a building in the magazine Asahigurafu (The Asahigraph) and provided a

260

NAGATA Ken’ichi

vital clue to help interpret the artwork, unrevealing the originof this image, on the other hand, only deepened the mysterysurrounding the work. In the foregoing section, this research
paper traced the smoke-belching ship painted in the distantbackground of this painting to “Ernst’s soluble fish” andpointed out to the significant meaning it holds vis-à-vis thatgenealogical position. But, there is a significant motif posing acounter to the dancer atop the building and forming thepl.19: KOGA Harue Makeup
Out-of-Doors (Detail)skeletal framework of the whole painting, whose meaningelusive representation is a subject that has hitherto remained
thoroughly unexamined. It is about the faceless person, seen
inside the see-through building and atop which is straddled asteel tower and, whose palm, with a white circle in the
background (pl. 19), is held high up in concert with the righthand of the dancer, atop the building on the opposite corner.
There is found a photograph (pl. 20) of the metal workshop printed in the April 1928 edition of the bulletin of
Bauhaus bauhaus that features a special article introducing
students. In the photograph is seen a smiling girl student
holding her palm high up, at the back of which is seen acurved disc that seems like a metallic light appliance. A single
look at this photograph would convince the viewer that itserved as a source to the image of the faceless person on thepl.20: metallwerkstatt(“Bauhaus” 1928-4)
foto : w,zimmermann (1929)

left-bottom of Makeup Out-of-Doors. But, this photograph itself
can be traced to a source even further. The special feature
covering stage performances in the 1927 edition introduces Oskar

Schlemmer’s Lichtspiel mit Projektion und Transparenz (APerformance of Light by Projection and Transparency), in which appears a photograph of his palm
as projected onto a large, circular disc of light. Unmistakably, the students at the metal workshop posed for the said photograph emulating this particular scene. If one traces the image
source this further, the hand in Makeup Out-of-Doors may identified with that of Schlemmer’s.
It is very plausible that Koga browsed through bauhaus, himself. In January 1930, thesame year Makeup Out-of-Doors was made, the very first Bauhausler of Japanese origin,
Mizutani Takehiko, returned home carrying with him a huge collection of resource material
related to Bauhaus. On his return to Japan, Mizutani enthusiastically spread word about the
Bauhaus, and it may be presumed that Koga took a look at that bulletin that Mizutani returned
with. Nonetheless, numerous possibilities for coming across information on Bauhaus werecreated by publications of Japanese origin themselves during the increased awareness on
Bauhaus that began before and continued after the return of Mizutani back to Japan. Repre-

sentative among them is a magazine titled Kenchikukigen (An Era of Architecture), and on the
35th page of its second issue, published in autumn 1929 featuring a special on Bauhaus, isfound the said photograph taken at the metal workshop.

Koga Harue’s Sea (1929) and “Soluble Fish”

261

As yet another clear example of Koga’s adoptionof Bauhaus imagery, is Yūbi-naru enkei (GracefulLandscape, pl. 21) of year 1930 following Makeup
Out-of-Doors: The white building in the painting(corresponding to the Bauhaus campus building in
the photograph printed in the special issue of
Kenchikukigen; the silhouette of a human figure on aline painted as if in midair on the left side of thepainting (see pl. 22 reproducing a work by a Bauhaus
student emulating Schlemmer, printed in the same
special issue of the magazine, p. 3); the circle below
the Bauhaus building (resembling the curved discin the aforesaid photograph taken at the metal
workshop); the picture of a twisted column rising
upwards from the building (photograph of somepl.21: KOGA Harue Graceful Landscape1930 Tokyo Museum of Modern Art

educational materials used at Bauhaus, pl. 23); andmore so that, in Graceful Landscape, all the motifs in
the distant view, in fact, have Bauhaus as theirsource. Furthermore, the human figure standing
beside the limbs those jut out upwards in the
aforementioned Hateshi-naki tōhi (Endless Flight) pl.22: A work of a student in O.Schlemmer’sclass（『Kenchikukigen』No.2)
clearly show an influence of a relief [23] made by
Schlemmer. The print-like picturization of movie
scenes, the picturization of refracting beams of light,
Kandinsky-like painting on the wall, individual
motifs like the building that can be viewed in the
distant background, as well as the kind of 3-D
imaging of the indoor environment, all of it is“Bauhaus-like.” Thus, it can be seen that the worksof Koga, after 1930, are often laden with Bauhauslike imagery.
Koga’s love for Bauhaus is in itself a fact thathas been pointed out by research studies conductedin the past, from a variety of standpoint [24]. But, it
is interesting to note that such clear Bauhaus-like
imagery does not appear [25] in the works of year
1929. Even in Sea, which might be said to be themost representative of all the 1929-works that are

pl.23: Joost Schmidt: Elements ofSpacesculpture (1928) (in: moholy
nagy “von material zu architektur”)

laden with ‘modern’ imagery, one does not find any motif that might relate to Bauhaus. But,
that does not imply that Koga was not aware of Bauhaus at that time. Bauhaus had been introduced into Japan by that time, so much so that a photograph of a Bauhaus work by designer
Alma Buscher－boat made out of wood blocks (pl. 24)－dots the cover of the inaugural issue262

NAGATA Ken’ichi

of Rian (Untitled) (March 1929), edited Takenaka Kyūshichi.
In fact, this photograph is printed in New Products of
Bauhaus, one among the Bauhaus serial publications
brought out by Gropius, et al. The binding style of thesaid Rian issue also carries a distinct Bauhaus mark as seen
in its publication series. It is very plausible that Koga,
who, at the stage of the year 1929, was already in close
communication with Takenaka, should have come toknow of Bauhaus by way of that acquaintance. Despitethat fact, Koga does not reflect Bauhaus in Sea. It can besaid that this fact demonstrates the intensity of a tensive
relation-ship with proletarian art that gripped Koga at thatpl.24: Rian No.1 (March 1929)(cover)time. Or, on the contrary, can’t it be thought of that the
coming of Bauhaus onto the foreground [26] was an
expression of Koga adopting a decisive stance to distanceaway from something like, proletarian art. Therefore, it
can be said that, amidst what, at first sight, might otherwise look like an uninterrupted
continuity between the representative work of Koga’s “Sur-realism,” Sea, and Makeup Out-ofDoors, there had undergone a significant change that is demonstrated by the fact of a presenceor an absence of Bauhaus imagery in the two paintings.
The presence of Itagaki Takao, who was highly influential upon Koga, cannot be ignoredin this context. His book Kikai to geijutsu no kōryū (Exchange Between Machinery and Art) [27],which is a compilation of articles published in the journal Shisō (Thought: revised after spring
1929), is significant from the point of view, namely, that the sketches found in Koga’s sketch
book are considered to be copies of illustrations printed in it [28]. Moreover, the argument
about the transition ‘from a romanticism of the machine to a realism of the machine’ that
Itagaki presents in the opening essay of this book, entitled “Machine Civilization andContemporary Art,” is particularly suggestive in the context of the argument discussed herein.
Itagaki posts a gravure picture of the film Metropolis in the book to show how the machine-likesociety depicted in the film was representative of an outmoded ‘romanticism of the machine.’
And in the essay too, he inserts a photograph of Tatlin’s monument tower to the Third
International as epitomizing a ‘romanticism of the machine’ in Russia after the Revolution [29].
Itagaki paraphrases the new direction, emergent ‘in European countries,’ of what he saw as ‘anew, historical task that ought to the discovered’ in place of this romanticism of the machine,with the expression: ‘realism of the machine’ or ‘contemporary intellectualism.’ And, he sees
Le Corbusier’s slogan of “a house is machine to live in”[30] as representing this newly
emerging direction. If one is to see this argument of Itagaki as matching with that of Koga
Harue’s, then the transformation of Koga from Sea to Makeup Out-of-Doors is nothing else but avolte-face from a ‘romanticism of the machine’ to a ‘realism of the machine.’ The submarine or
blast furnace portrayed in Sea was very much symbolic of Koga’s romanticism of the machine.
Although Koga distanced away from proletarian art, on the hint he acquired from Ernst’s
collage, but as regards the motifs he employed, he incorporated a host of images from within

Koga Harue’s Sea (1929) and “Soluble Fish”

263

the bounds of the ‘romanticism of the machine’ that circumscribed even proletarian art.
Makeup Out-of-Doors, on the other hand, is composed of motifs that transcend the boundaries
of a ‘romanticism of the machine.’ In what is thought of as a study to Makeup Out-of-Doorsdrawn in his sketch book, one may note that it prominently includes motifs of the kind of‘romanticism of the machine’ found in Sea. However, in the final work of Makeup Out-of-Doors,such an element is completely wiped out off the face of the whole painting. Even in the case of
the motif on the bottom-left, a bright, serene building structure housing a machine complex
takes the place of a dark, heavy machinistic world enveloped in noise, similar to that symbolized by the steel manufacturing plant. Moreover, the antenna tower atop the building reminds
one of the world’s latest telecommunication technology of the day [31]. Thus, Koga made avolte-face vis-à-vis the ‘aesthetics of machine’ in the very midst of the production process of
Makeup Out-of-Doors, throwing open the window to a world of ‘realism of the machine.’ Hesings a hymn to this new world in the explanatory poem for Makeup Out-of-Doors:
Beating the fog engulfing the past
The spirit, free from all dust, springs into action
The calculator raises its hand, beckoning
The fish dissolves into the air/becomes air
A new myth begins, sewing together the world spirit [32]
It is the very same image projected by Bauhaus and discussed in the foregoing passages that issymbolized by this “new myth” which has been alluded to in the poem above.

5. Concluding Remarks
The investigation of the various themes identified in this research paper tentatively
concludes here [33]. In such a way, it was possible to revise the understanding of Koga
Harue’s representative work, Sea, to being a proclamatory painting of “Sur-realism” that hecarved out from within the thick of a tensive relationship between and betwixt the contemporaneous trends of art and design, namely, proletarian art, Dada/Surrealism and Bauhaus. It
was not a mere cut-and-paste job of some modern image motifs acquired from different
magazines and publications of that age. On the contrary, it was a result of a search that
happened to go, via a detour to Ernst, right into the heart of, but which touched upon a core
principle that lie at a much deeper level of Surrealism than that which has been hitherto
thought of, namely, the principle of a transmutation in meaning by way of contrapositioning
heterogeneous images, as is to be found in Ernst’s “soluble fish.” At the same time, the painting occupied a position that brought about a volte-face of ‘machine aesthetics’ in the process ofa movement away from proletarian art to an incorporation of Bauhaus imagery－certainly amonumental work that situates itself right at the intersection connecting the various trends ofthe age. In the light of the argument presented here above, could it not be said that it is but
now that this work Sea stands gallantly under the blue sky of Japanese modern art of 1929-30,
with its right arm held straight up high, and gathering all the vectors of the age in the name ofa ‘modern’ wind? Let us, for once again, hear the voice of Sea beckoning us:

264

NAGATA Ken’ichi

Grab and set your binoculars!
The Earth will turn around and you will see through the whole scene(This paper is an appended version of an oral presentation delivered at the Open Research
Meeting held in December 2004 and research for a part of this paper was accomplished under

the research fund（B）(1) allocated for year 2003-2004 for the research project “War andRepresentation in the 20th Century/Art― Exhibition・ Image・ Print・Products― ” Representative
Researcher: Nagata Ken’ichi)

Notes
[1]
[2]
[3]

[4]
[5]
[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

“Introduction: Harue Koga: The Secret Behind Transformation” trans. Egashira Kikuko, exhibition catalog Harue Koga, 1991, pp. 127-134“Surrealistic Paintings of Koga Harue and Images of the Same Period,” Journal of Art History, Vol.
137-44, No. 1, Mar 1995
“The Modern Girl of Koga Harue’s Sea,” Gendai no me: Newsletter of the National Museum of Modern
Art, Tokyo, Vol. 524, Oct-Nov 2000; “The Modern Girl of Koga Harue’s Sea, Revised” Gendai no
me: Newsletter of the National Museum of Modern Art, Tokyo, Vol. 533, Apr-May 2002
“On Koga Harue of 1929,” Annual Bulletin of Kajima Art Research: Supplementary Volume, No. 15,
The Kajima Foundation for the Arts, Nov 1998
“Koga Harue Research: The Surreal As an Allegory,” Oral presentation at the 57th National
Convention of The Japan Art History Society, Keio University, Tokyo, May 23, 2004
In fact, it was Kuraya Mika, researcher at the National Museum of Modern Art, Tokyo, whopointed out this figurative semblance to the author way back in 1994. And, the concerned
research is a fruit of the discussions carried out between the author and Kuraya Mika.
Wissen und Fortschritt: Populäre Monatschrift für Technik und Wissenschaft, Industriebericht G.m.b.H.
Berlin, SW18 (started April 1927). In fact, it was the catalog a very important exhibition covering
the multi-dimensional relationship between technology and art in the 1920s, held in 1980, that provided the opportunity for the author to focus upon this magazine (Kunst und Technik in der 20er
Jahren－Neue Sachlichkeit und Gegenständlicher Konstruktivismus, Hrsg,: Helmut Friedel, Lenbachhaus,
München, 1980). This catalog features a research article, entitled “Die neuesachliche Photographie”
and written by Ingeborg Güssow, that dealt with matter-of-fact, neo-realistic kind of photographs
which demonstrated the tendency of technology to affiliate with and symbolize nature. It carries
a number of photographs from Knowledge and Progress and also introduces the page shown inplate no. 3, about which the author discusses in the subsequent passage.
Strictly speaking, it might be a modified photograph with a phrase printed on it or with its
border altered. As would be argued in the following passages, there survives in Germany anumber of photographs of this particular blast furnace taken from almost the same angle. And,
as would be mentioned later on, the blast furnace in that photograph corresponds to the No. 1
blast furnace at a factory called, Herrenwyk Steel Factory (1908-1981) in the city of Lübeck.
Moreover, it is also found that the same issue also features cutaway illustrations of submarines.
As for the image source of the submarine in Koga’s Sea, Hayami cites a Japanese magazine, whileŌtani has referred to a French science magazine. But, the sketch of a submarine, made in what is
considered to be a study for making Sea, has a bow that is curved in shape, in distinction from theimage sources cited by both. This demonstrates that Koga, even at the preliminary stage of study,
sourced the image for his cutaway illustration of the submarine, painted in Sea, from a context

Koga Harue’s Sea (1929) and “Soluble Fish”

[10]

[11]

[12]
[13]
[14]

[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]

265

different from those cited by Hayami or Ōtani. On the other hand, the connection to Knowledge
and Progress and to Max Ernst, which would be discussed subsequently, may be considered toprovide the necessary clues.
Veering away from the subject of a comparison between living creatures and machines, it isworthy to note that during the summertime of 1929, when Sea was painted, Japanese newspapers
carried images of various objects that compared with the airship Zeppelin for many days on. The
August 12th edition of daily Tokyo Asahi Shimbun printed a photograph comparing it to The
Empire State Building. On the 20th of the same month, it carried photographs comparing it with asea plane and luxury liner. Although it might be said that comparison of the huge size of objects
in real-life was a matter of deliberate intention, it is also true that just a juxtaposition of photographs in itself brings forth an affinity between the respective images, generating a metaphorical,
but quite inadvertent, mediation between an airship, a seaplane and a luxury liner. It shows how,even before the advent of Koga, such a collage of images delivered at the hands of ordinary
readers evoked a surrealistic experience, irrespective of their correspondence with real-life objects.
The same issue also features large-size cutaway illustrations of coke storehouses, increasing thepossibility of these magazine issues to have served Koga the clues for his cutaway illustrations of
the insides of machines that characterize the painting, Sea.
Incidentally, such an alterity in viewpoints also owes its affinity to that employed in the male andfemale profiles painted by Giuseppe Arcimboldo.
“Musings on Surrealism,” Atorie (Atelier), Vol. 7 No. 1, Jan 1930
The year of its completion is not specified, however. Noda Utarō (“The Poems of Koga Harue,”
Collected Paintings of Koga Harue: To Stoke a Cow, Azuma Shuppan, 1974) suggests that one may
take the year of publication of Dai-ichi Shobō’s first print edition, 1931-32, as the year of composition of poems to which the year is not specified. If one accepts that hypothesis, then the
poem, Sea, should have been written after what is argued later on in this paper as a “volte-face ofmachine aesthetics” that Koga accomplished in undertaking. But, even in that case, it does not
explain the other issues related to the painting Sea before such a volte-face.
p. 185“A Different Surrealism－The Debate on Surrealism,” Nakamura Giichi A Historical Compendiumof Debates on Modern Japanese Art,” Kyūryūdō, 1982
“Musings on Surrealism” op. cit
The reader may take note of first line of the third stanza in the poem, Sea: “Inside the steel-mill fora state-of-the-art German submarine.” There is found an interesting novel that relates to “an upto-date German submarine.” It is U-713 ou les gentilshommes d’infortune (U-713, Or, the Unfortunate
Gentlemen) written by Pierre Mac Orlan in year 1917. There was no Japanese translation of thisnovel by the year 1929. It was translated into Japanese only in year 2000 under the title, Koi suru
sensuikan (Submarine in Love) (trans. Ōno Takashi, Kokushokankōkai). According to the commentary given in the translated edition, Mac Orlan was a well-known writer in France at thattime and the said work was significant in terms of “bridging King Ubu and Dadaism.”
The novel revolves around the state-of-the-art German submarine, U-713, which is portrayedas having been constructed as a “blend of an obedient body and steel possessing consciousness,”thus infusing in it an innate mimetic ability. But, it so turns out to be that owing to its possessionof a free will, it defies the commander and falls in love with the daughter of a human being.
Eventually, the submarine drives out the commander and all other personnel, and also engages
in intercourse with the fish around, leaving behind a new generation of fish made out steel. In
other words, “it is a story of a submarine that falls in love with a songstress and, in defiance of theorders of the commander, returns back to being a fish (p. 392)”.
It is improbable for Koga to have read the novel himself. But, as the opening line of thesecond stanza in the poem Sea－Lady in a sea-bathing suit, who connects all things to the family

266

[19]

[20]
[21]
[22]

[23]
[24]
[25]

[26]

NAGATA Ken’ichi

of fish in the sea－suggests, ‘all things’ portrayed in the painting, including the submarine,
connect to and mingle with the fish in the sea at the gesture of the ‘lady in a sea-bathing suit’holding her right hand straight up, high in the air. It is evident how the plot of the novel is
identical to the scheme of things portrayed in the painting and the related poem. There isevidence based on which one may infer that Koga was fully aware of Mac Orlan around the year
1929. Mac Orlan is featured in the June 1930 issue (Vol. 8) of the poetry quarterly Shi to shiron that
was at the forefront of Japanese Surrealism. The quarterly was edited by Haruyama Yukio,
whose philosophical stance ran counter to that of the aforesaid friend of Koga Harue, Takenaka
Ryūshichi. Yet, in spite of their mutual opposition, the same issue also features an article byTakenaka entitled, “Chō-genjitsu-shugi to puroretaria bungaku no kankei” (The Relation of
Surrealism to Proletarian Literature). All this evidence makes it highly probable of Mac Orlan,
whose novel U-713 ou les gentilshommes d’infortune must have been read in the close circles of
Koga, was a literary figure in the knowledge of Koga Harue.
According to Kai Shigeto, a characteristic feature in common with that of Yanase’s CAPITALISMUS
is to be sought in the illustrative cover painting for Eroshenko’s Jinrui no tame ni (For Humanity).
It has been considered up till now that 1924 was the year CAPITALISMUS was produced.
Although there has not been any conclusive evidence to determine that fact, one may confirm its
year of production as 1924 owing to the fact that For Humanity was published in the same year.
Therefore, it is improbable for Koga to have influenced Yanase with regards the image of theblast furnace.
Cut-and-pasted printed paper and pencil on printed paper on cardstock, (16.5 x 21 cm), MoMA,
New York
Furukawa Tomotsugu Kindai no bijutsu 36 Koga Harue, Shibundō, 1976, p. 65
That Koga saw this work of Ernst’s by his naked eye is a possibility that cannot substantiated. On
the other hand, as of the present, the author has not stumbled upon any publication or any sort ofother media printed until the year 1929 that carries reproduction of the said work. Despite that
fact, the presence of a number of images of “soluble fish,” beginning with the submarine, in Sea
seems to ‘demand’ a possibility of Koga to have come to know of this collage, somehow or theother. For, it is only when one assumes that Ernst’s collage was the definitive source for Koga’s
painting, then that one can comprehend the presence of those characteristic images. The possibility for people like the artist Tōgō Seiji to have brought back to Japan a printed illustration ofit and, for it to have made its way into the hands of Koga cannot be totally ruled out.
As the collage itself, it is a work dating to Ernst’s Dadaist times. But it is the one that set into
motion Surrealism. And, if one believes that Ernst was known as a Surrealist by the time Koga
adopted him and his work, then it would be evidence enough to prove that the “Sur-realism” of
Koga had its origins at a much deeper level than what has been hitherto thought of.
Photograph of a stone engraving studio printed in the 2nd issue of Kenchiku kigen, 1929, p. 13
Notable among them is Ōtani Shōgo “Koga Harue and Bauhaus－From a Design Point of View,”
Gendai no me: Newsletter of the National Museum of Modern Art, Tokyo, Vol. 519 (1999/2000 12-1)
Strictly speaking, Paul Klee was a faculty at Bauhaus and so it cannot be stated that the “Kleelike” works of Koga were unrelated to Bauhaus. Yet, as far as this research paper is concerned,
what is meant by the term “Bauhaus-like” indicates the modern sense of “plasticity” in what has
been called, “The Utopia of Glass.”
However, it must be noted that the representation of Bauhaus as a “new myth” took place at atime when Bauhaus, during the directorial tenure of Hannes Meyer, was decolorized. It was insummer 1930 that Meyer was relieved of his post on the charge of leading a “Red” Bauhaus,
which was what perplexed Mizutani Takehiko who had returned after studying during his
tenure. Indeed, it was Bauhaus that really experienced a volte-face, similar to the one from Sea to
Makeup Out-of-Doors.

Koga Harue’s Sea (1929) and “Soluble Fish”

[27]
[28]

[29]
[30]
[31]

[32]
[33]

267

Iwanami shoten
The June 1932 special issue of Wakakusa (Fresh Grass) featuring “new research on mechanism”
carries the article “Machine and Art,” written by Koga, as well as another article entitled “Boat”
written by Itagaki. Incidentally, the same issue also mentions the name of Mizutani Takehiko.
Kikai to geijutsu no kōryū, December 1929, Iwanami shoten, p.43
ibid. p. 44; In fact the Japanese translation to Le Corbusier’s Vers une architecture appeared in 1929.
In the following year, Maekawa Kunio’s translation of L’art decoratif d’aujord’hui too was published.
For example, the April 14th edition of daily Tokyo Asahi Shimbun year 1929 carries an article entitled“An Hour to Europe; Nagoya Wireless Telecommunication Center Completed; A New Era in
Wireless Japan” along with a number a photographs. And ten days before August 29th when thesame year’s Nika Exhibition Jury was held, that is on August 19th, airship Zeppelin had landed at
Kasumigaura after a 101hr 50min travel via Tokyo and Yokohama. Wireless telecom helped relay
news, one after another, chasing its flight. For people of that day, the experience of Zeppelin was,at the same time, an experience of wireless telecommunications.
Many lines have been abbreviated in this abridged version.
It might be said that the perspectives obtained by way of this study also secures the newconditions to aid a reexamination of the artistic views of Koga Harue, Takenaka Kyūshichi and
Abe Kongō, as well as the trends in art of that period. The author hopes to discuss anew thoseissues in a future research paper.

List of Corrections
p.250, l.7: “on the top- left hand side of” → “on the top left hand side of” [June 30, 2012]