Thread: Simple J-nat question

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

Please guys, rocks don't have skin.

Understood, it's just a Japanese colloquialism used to give familiar names from nature to interesting stone figuring. Skin is just a change in strata that is left attached to the stone, probably to not waste any good bit of rare stone during mining, but also for identification. Just the Japanese choice of the term "skin" makes me think that identification plays some role. Otherwise, why not the use term rind, or shell, or crust? Or maybe I'm reading way too much into this, hehe.

This seems to me to be unique to Japanese stones, so there must be some reason they do it. I've never seen a Coticule, Thuringian, or Arkansas stone sold with non-honeable strata still left attached to it, it's always cut off. When I first saw the skin left on a Japanese natural I had bought, I honestly thought it looked crude and unfinished. But over time, I've really grown to like it, and think it lends an individual personality and fingerprint to each stone.

There are lots of other similar, colorful terms, like renge (lotus) for feathery reddish or purple surface figuring, or nashi-ji (pear skin) for light-colored dots on the surface of the stone. There are accurate geologic terms for these things, but these work and are mnemonic.

Originally Posted by FatboySlim

Understood, it's just a Japanese colloquialism used to give familiar names from nature to interesting stone figuring. Skin is just a change in strata that is left attached to the stone, probably to not waste any good bit of rare stone during mining, but also for identification. Just the Japanese choice of the term "skin" makes me think that identification plays some role. Otherwise, why not the use term rind, or shell, or crust? Or maybe I'm reading way too much into this, hehe.

They do...all those meanings full under the same word. 皮, kawa. Skin, shell, rind, husk, bark, wrapping, etc.