Talk:Tamotsu Yatō

Yato's bibliography

Yato completed three volumes of photography, not "several". Hadaka matsuri is the Japanese name of Naked Festival, Taidō: Nihon no bodibirudā-tachi is the Japanese name of Young Samurai. I am removing double references. InMemoriamLuangPu (talk) 08:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Order of references

Donald Richie's published accounts are considerably more detailed than the Internet links, so they should come first in the list of references. InMemoriamLuangPu (talk) 08:47, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Arranging sources in order of importance is most unusual and perhaps more importantly it's unlikely to be understood by readers. I suggest that you add an explanation after each item. (I tried to do that for the two links, but my PDF reader crapped out before it could load the PDF, so I only did it for one.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

You're certainly right, as far as the academic practice goes... but then the references would be arranged in order they are cited. Since there are no in-text citations here, that approach does not apply. I do think that, in a list of four references, the first one is much more likely to be noticed... that's mere common sense... A large part of Richie's book is actually available for browsing on books.google.com, though I am not sure if it's appropriate to give a link for that... InMemoriamLuangPu (talk) 09:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

No, other than in the natural sciences and medicine, a list of references is typically ordered alphabetically by author (where the author is known; otherwise by title); and for each author chronologically. Here's an example for another Japanese photographer. (This reminds me: Yatō seems pretty obscure -- he's not even mentioned in 日本の写真家. I'm not saying that his obscurity is deserved, and of course he may have been recently rediscovered.)

I can't fault your common sense, but I can say that it's unlike mine. My own common sense tells me to put the sources in order and describe them informatively (though briefly).

It's quite OK to link to Googlebooks. -- Hoary (talk) 10:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, sure, you're right :) I guess I've revealed my backgrounds through this remark on bibliography ordering...

As to Yato's obscurity, my understanding is that his work was distributed semi-clandestinely back in the 60es, and he is not broadly known in Japan (though he does have a cult following in some circles, and some of his friends/collaborators are certainly well-known). You may see him mentioned in Takahashi's interview as "a photographer who is certainly worth re-evaluating"... InMemoriamLuangPu (talk) 10:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Mishima's role

All the biographical accounts state the importance of Mishima's formative influence on Yato. For that reason, all the introductions by and dedications to Mishima in Yato's books are quite relevant for understanding his artistic position and must be mentioned.InMemoriamLuangPu (talk) 09:14, 17 February 2008 (UTC)