Scholarlink

<p>This article examines the transmission of porcelain production techniques through an eighth-century fiscal regulation document by Tang Ying (1682–1756 CE), Chief Supervisor-Designer of the Imperial Porcelain Manufactory, ‘Regulations and Precedents on the Cost of Making Round and Molded Porcelain Wares’ (1747 CE). Tang Ying’s text translates craft processes into fiscal tables and explanations for imperial bookkeeping. The document showcases how labor was calculated, products categorized, and technical knowledge made public. I argue that Tang Ying’s text transforms embodied experiences—such as handling difficult materials and managing kiln unpredictability—into structured knowledge that reflects a political agenda. The document’s aesthetic form shapes how porcelain production was represented, merging technical details with rhetorical strategies. Unlike the term <i>technology</i>, which implies a systematic examination of technical factors, the term <i>technique</i> is more fitting for this context because it helps address the aesthetic approach to representing production processes, the political rhetoric, and the often-overlooked multisensory experiences involved in porcelain manufacturing.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Techniques and aesthetics in an inventory for porcelain manufacture in early modern China

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月1日

查看全文
  • Kai jun Chen

摘要

This article examines the transmission of porcelain production techniques through an eighth-century fiscal regulation document by Tang Ying (1682–1756 CE), Chief Supervisor-Designer of the Imperial Porcelain Manufactory, ‘Regulations and Precedents on the Cost of Making Round and Molded Porcelain Wares’ (1747 CE). Tang Ying’s text translates craft processes into fiscal tables and explanations for imperial bookkeeping. The document showcases how labor was calculated, products categorized, and technical knowledge made public. I argue that Tang Ying’s text transforms embodied experiences—such as handling difficult materials and managing kiln unpredictability—into structured knowledge that reflects a political agenda. The document’s aesthetic form shapes how porcelain production was represented, merging technical details with rhetorical strategies. Unlike the term technology, which implies a systematic examination of technical factors, the term technique is more fitting for this context because it helps address the aesthetic approach to representing production processes, the political rhetoric, and the often-overlooked multisensory experiences involved in porcelain manufacturing.