When in 1868 the School of Arts of the Imperial College of Engineering was established, marking a genuine beginning for modèin art education, three instructors were invited to teach painting, sculpture, and architecture. All three of these ins~uctors were Italian. I would like to consider their ways of thinking and artworks from the point of view of their reIationship to the Japanese art tradition.

At the School of Arts, copying was emphasized at the beginning of the program, whether it be a preparatory course or a more specialized one. This reminds one of the copying practices (funponshugi) in the training of painters of Japan's Kano school. The copying of model paintings in both the Imperial School of Arts and the Kano school both originate from academism. Needless to say, the Italian instructors of the Imperial School of Arts were all graduates themselves of the Academia in Italy.

Japanese Woman can be counted among Ragusa's most outstanding works. Among the critiques of those Japanese artists who saw this painting, one finds statements that describe it as exquisite, as if it were about to issue forth words. This type of verisimilitude was what the Imperial School of Arts hoped for in inviting the Italian artists. Indeed, the Regulations of the School state, "...to supplement the shortcoming's of the art of our country, and to newly lecture upon and research the accurate copying of the truth... " However, one can already find this theory during the Edo period among Western-style artists.

Fontanesi stipulated during his lectures, "What is the goal of a painter? It is to copy natural and manmade objects." This, however, was said out of consideration for the education of his Japanese pupils, and Fontanesi's true view of painting was Romanticist. Elsewhere he stated, "The purpose of painting is not to reproduce the colors and form of objects of nature. It is important to use one's own thinking in painting." Fontanesi's Romanticist philosophy of painting was naturally conveyed to his students. Although this may have been a great shock to them, on the other hand it may also have been easy for them to understand. This is because from ancient times onward, Japanese art has displayed a strong tendency towards subjectivism.

In addition, Fontanesi stressed that no matter what one paints, the first thing to pay attention to is the direction of the light. As an examples he raises the case of the pyramidal tree. In Japan, too, there is a famous anecdote concerning Hiraga Gennai and Odano Naotake that is similar in content. Even though the parallel relationship between Fontanesi and Western-style painters may seem natural, we must not overlook the fact that Fontanesi's lectures are quite similar to Maruyama Okyo's painting theory. Okyo emphasized objectivity over everything else. Both are also quite similar in their rejection of free and undisciplined brushwork.

There existed a certain relationship between Fontanesi's philosophy of painting and Japanese and East Asian painting. Of course it cannot be forgotten that Fontanesi's lecture were translated and recorded by Japanese. Thus it would be natural for them to be similar. While acknowledging this fact, the similarity is nevertheless of great interest. It is possible to say that Fontanesi's pupils were drawn by their Italian teacher's similarity to Japanese painting, and through it attempted to understand Fontanesi's theories and works.

From the beginning the Regulations of the School of Arts stated, "The art school should transplant the technique of modern Europe to Japan's traditional craftsmanship..." This attitude is similar to the one Japan took in incorporating China's culture and might be termed, "Japanese spirit, Western ability. " It must have been easy for the Japanese pupils to absorb. If the way of thinking or philosophy behind that technique was considered most important, then learning would have been extremely difficult.

(translated by Yukio Lippit)