Sunday, March 18, 2018

Authenticity in China.. and money

This Aeon article claims that Chinese ideas about original and copy differ substantially from Western notions--that if something is made in the spirit of the first creation, and I gather (perhaps wrongly) with the same materials and tools, it effectively is a new original. It sounds nice and plausible, and it looks like there is a history of this attitude. I don't have the scholarship to confirm or deny, but I think I can claim that the rule Byung-Chul Han proposes isn't universal. (In the process I got sidetracked.)

It certainly didn't apply to paper money -at least not from the point of view of the Emperor, who prescribed execution for copying it (although in eras when the money was badly depreciated and deprecated, the penalty might only be a fine). And if the provenance is culturally important--this belonged to Duke Zhou--I'm not persuaded that a buyer would be as satisfied if the piece were more recent. (The artifact would no doubt still be valuable, if Han is right.)

Read the Aeon article--and the one about paper money is interesting too:

A most original solution to the counterfeiting problem occurred in Sung times after a large shipment of counterfeit money had been seized. During the discussion as to what should be done with the counterfeiters, one court official stated that the current policy of beheading the criminals and destroying their money was a mistake. He proposed instead the following: “If you put the official imperial stamp on the counterfeited paper, it will be just as good as genuine paper. If you punish these men only by tattooing them, and circulate these notes, it is exactly as if you saved each day 300,000 copper cash together with fifty lives.” It is said that the proposition was adopted.

and

I have concluded, therefore, that the representation of only nine coins, or 90 cash per string was deliberate. But how can 900 cash be the same as 1000 cash? The explanation, I believe, lies in the fact that during the Hung-wu reign 900 cash passed for 1000; just as 770 cash represented a string in Sung dynasty times and 800 during the Chin dynasty. In other words the government’s financial arm, the Board of Revenue, must have set the relation of cash coin to the value of a string by decree. Thus the official value of cash in the marketplace would vary from time to time.

why?

When emperor Shin Tsung of the Posterior Chou ascended the throne in 915AD, he was in great need of funds. He seized over 3350 monasteries and then gave orders to melt all Buddhist bronze images found there so that they could be turned into cash. The emperor declared that Buddha himself would raise no objection, having in his lifetime given up so much for mankind. The shortage of money also caused the emperor to send a fleet of junks to Korea to trade silk for copper with which to mint cash coins.

2 comments:

Assistant Village Idiot said...

It has the flavor of one of those "No, this isn't really wrong, it's just that you don't understand their culture as well as you should. Like me."

james said...

Yes. I wonder if they'd be as happy to have imitation rhino horn...