The Ohio State University
Enigmatic Riverbank
Hanwei Cheng
HISART 4810
Christina Mathison
April 7, 2015
In Metropolitan Museum of Art, a Chinese landscape painting lies there silently. That
painting is called Riverbank attributed to Dong Yuan who is a famous artist in tenth century
which is five dynasties in China. Unlike the peaceful and beautiful scenery depicted in the
painting, the arguments around it that whether it is an authentic work by Dong Yuan or a modern
forgery has already last for more than ten years.
On one side, some of the scholars are in favor of the viewpoint that Riverbank is a modern
forgery created probably by Zhang Daqian not Dong Yuan in 10th Century. James Cahill is the
pathfinder of this point of view. He established an article called “The Case Against Riverbank:
An Indictment in Fourteen Counts” that list fourteen doubtful and suspecting points to support
his opinion against Riverbank is an authentic tenth Century artwork by Dong Yuan (Cahill 13). In
addition, Cahill further inferred that Zhang Daqian is the No.1 suspect who creates this
Riverbank. To sum up, fourteen points represented by Cahill can be sorted into two main parts.
First, Riverbank does not fit the characteristic features but coincides with Zhang Daqian’s style.
Second, the history related to Riverbank is unclear and Zhang Daqian was very likely to make a
lie on this artwork.
On the opposite side, there is another group of scholars that support the Riverbank should be
an authentic work fits the characteristics of tenth century’s Chinese landscape paintings. Wen
Fong (265), who is a representative of this idea, points out that James Cahill only cares about
“superficial form elements and motifs and compositional patterns” when comparing Riverbank
with Zhang Daqian’s works. That causes Cahill to make a mistake that the date of Riverbank
should not be in the tenth centuries. According to Fong (271), Dong Yuan is the one who
invented the evening light and reflection. So, Fong (260) argues that Riverbank fits the style in
Dong Yuan’s period and could not be created by Zhang Daqian.
To be frankly, I did not totally understand every detail mentioned in Cahill or Fong’s article
since there are some arguments in their articles that are difficult to understand without the
experienced knowledge of paintings. But as far as I could judge from what I saw and know, I
could still establish my point of view with what Cahill and Fong argues in their articles. That is,
Riverbank is similar to the artwork in tenth century spiritually as well as involving some distinct
elements in it. Maybe it was not created by Dong Yuan or only by him, but that should not be
attributed to Zhang Daqian.
First of all, to view the artwork more specifically, I divide how to appreciate the hanging
scroll into two different methods: from entire composition and partial details. When I see it
entirely, I focus on the general feeling it give to me and the relationship among every subject in
the picture. While viewing it partly, I focus more on how a specific subject is depicted and how
the artist connects them together.
The first sight and impression about one painting decides what the general feelings the
viewers have. In this hanging scroll, when I see it from a distance as a whole, I am impressed by
the rocks which account for major space most. Some other including like stream, river, pavilion,
and trees inset among one another, creating a wonderful scroll of Chinese ink painting. Referring
to the layout of scroll, the artist assigned different layers and shots clearly with the delicate use
of density and blank space. The orderly arranged mountains and surrounding stream and river
revealed the landscape motif. As far as I am concerned, overall layouts and subject depicted in
Riverbank fit the characteristics in the period near Northern Song Dynasty.
Then, I examined the painting carefully by part to find out the details contained in it. I
further divide the whole painting into three sections. First part is the bottom area divided by the
valley (the area below the moving water mentioned by Cahill). Second part is the upper portion
of the mountains on both sides and the river towards the upper direction of the scroll. Final one is
the area above the river, which in my opinion, is the blank space left by the creator. Comparing
with the viewpoints from experts, I could stand for nothing but some simple feelings and analysis
from little knowledge.
The first part mainly depicts the near shot objects in great detail. These details and ways of
drawing are also the main controversial points argued by different opinions. The object drown
most in Riverbank is the rocks. The artist uses thin and simple lines to depict elevated and strong
rocks for most part. From bottom to top, the rock and tree density becomes less and less, and the
roundness of rocks changes from sharp to smooth gradually. All of these characteristics fit the
natural rules and are my first clue. Second, on the left bottom corner, I can find linear
down-flowing spring with in the rocks. It is depicted as “white line” which is the blank space left
within the “inked rocks”. From top to the bottom leftward, the spring is drawn veritably and
three-dimensionally. That “white area” and the ways to draw spring remind me of the Early
Spring by Guo Xi. The only difference between the spring and small waterfalls in these two
paintings is that Guo Xi uses some curves and rocks as barriers to block the light and vision
while Riverbank uses more straight lines and clear waterways. Because Guo Xi is lives in the
later time comparing to Dong Yuan, I think the evolution theory which the depiction of
waterways develops more complicated can explain this phenomenon. And this also can be
concluded as my second clue. Third, the description of trees in Riverbank is in great details.
When examining trees, trunks and branches are obviously to be seen as well as the dotted like
leaves. In addition, the sparse and dense of the trees can be found if you look at them carefully. I
found than all the trees have denser leaves on the sides which pointing outward of the silk. This
characteristic not only fits the realistic style among court painter in the similar periods, but also
coincides with Dong Yuan’s style, which is my third clue. Final one is about the pavilion and the
figures in it. As we all know, artists in Tang Dynasty focus more on figure images while Song’s
artists enjoy painting on landscape. As a time between these two dynasties, it is not surprising
that Southern Tang period which Dong Yuan lived in blends these two elements together. In other
words, Dong Yuan’s period is a transition period which the characteristic was changing from one
side to another. In another work attributed to Dong Yuan, Scenery along the Xiao Xiang Rivers,
human involving objects including boats, house, and humans are also depicted. Although they
are not as abundant as in Riverbank, I would better believe that it is because the concept of new
landscape painting is forming instead of being created in modern period like Cahill (43) thinks.
In general, the near shot part of the painting shows many details designed wonderfully by the
creator. The brushwork, techniques and layouts that contained in my four clues all fit the artwork
in similar period like Early Spring and Scenery along the Xiao Xiang River. As a conclusion, it is
not convincing to claim that this painting does not belong to or is not similar to the painting style
in tenth century.
In my middle part, the most important object is certainly the river. Instead of thinking river
is blocked and the road makes the painting inconsistent (Cahill 17), I feel that the road talked in
Cahill’s points is independent to the river. As far as what I see, the water origins from top of the
mountain as spring, and then it falls and gathers together at the bottom left corner and then flows
around the whole bottom of the painting. Finally, it flows upwards to the top of the scroll and
infinite distance. It is a little strange that a part of the river is not included in the painting in
common sense, but it is also a little too serious to say that this is a fatal weakness and
inconsistence. From my perspective, the different use of light itself can help differentiate river
from road, and the interruption of river and boundary between road and river also help to prevent
readers from being confused. The artist has already done enough hints about that, so it is unfair
to still view it as a weakness since the artist would not make such a silly mistake. Instead, it is
because this difference to make riverbank more unique and the creator must design it on purpose.
Maybe this is an elaborate design.
Finally, the top part of the painting which I think is the most interesting and creative part.
The mountains origin from the distant river at the same time connects the mountains on the right
side. The right side seems relatively clear while it becomes vague gradually as it develops
leftwards. The unclear part is depicted with both pale ink and blank space. Seemingly, the artist
wants to show the effect that haze and clouds are covering the further top of the mountains. This
method or techniques used, in my perspective, is to leave enough space to viewers for
imagination. Under the unclear background of the top part, the direction river flows also
becomes uncertain, which also represents an uncertain world or future. Outside is another world,
it maybe horrible; maybe wonderful. All the answers are not provided by the painter but
depending on viewer’s imagination caused by the mood of uncertainty. In the painting Scenery
along Xiao Xiang River, I find similar method dealing with the top of mountains in a distance.
Although there is no river under the similar mood depicted in that painting, the idea of depicting
nebulous distance has the same effect. So, I do not see any problem of being inconsistent with
tenth century’s features mentioned by Cahill (16). On the contrary, I agree with what Fong (263)
argues that we should examine whether the methods used on judging are correct first.
After analyzing three parts above, I suddenly realize whether it is possible that some parts of
the painting were damaged after so many years. These damages would also influence the viewers’
judgments and not reflect the real situation at very first of the painting. More surprisingly, the
damage itself could also be an important clue. According to Menton (14), Maxwell Hearn tested
the Riverbank by modern techniques like X-rays. It shows under the X-ray that Riverbank has
many marks of repairing. The artwork could be copied but the repairs not. If Zhang does falsify
the painting, how could he falsify the repairs? The answer is obvious that Riverbank could not be
Zhang Daqian’s work. It is Zhang Daqian who imitates traditional characteristics of landscape
paintings instead of showing the techniques of Zhang in Riverbank.
Although I do not believe it is falsified by Zhang Daqian, I could not make sure the original
artist is Dong Yuan either because the works handing down by him today are so limited. Just as
Fong said, we could not judge before the method we use is unclear. I could not judge it either as
an art outsider. The arguing by experts would not stop unless deciding clues occur. However, the
riverbank is just lying there, waiting for every art fan to appreciate it. No matter it is the
authentic one or not, the great art accomplishment of Riverbank could not be denied, and it is and
will be a masterpiece forever.
Works Cited
Cahill, James. "The Case against Riverbank: An Indictment in Fourteen Counts." Issues of
Authenticity in Chinese Painting. Ed. Judith G. Smith and Wen C. Fong. New York:
Dept. of Asian Art, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1999. 13-63. Print.
Fong, Wen C. "Riverbank: From Connoisseurship to Art History." Issues of Authenticity in
Chinese Painting. Ed. Judith G. Smith and Wen C. Fong. New York: Dept. of Asian
Art, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1999. 259-291. Print.
Menton, Sara L. Authenticity and The Copy: Analyzing Western Connoisseurship of Chinese
Painting through The Works of Zhang Daqian. Diss. U of Oregon, 2014. Web.
6 Apr. 2015.
<https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1794/17918/Menton_orego
n_0171N_10895.pdf?sequence=1>.