Wooden Mask Identification

JD makes good points; I might mention that is best to approach the "holes/no holes" issue with some knowledge of the particular culture; some cultures traditionally have holes through the eyes; others might have holes or slits near the eyes.
In particular, larger Northwest Coast Native masks made for native use will usually not have eyeholes, and are an exception to the rule that lack of eyeholes means non-authentic. Smaller ones may have eyeholes and a "shelf" that the wearer grips in his teeth; others may be hand-held over the face; but larger ones are usually danced "blind," requiring an assistant who leads the dancer around.
These big ones may weigh 40 pounds, and are generally balanced on the wearer's head and shoulders by a cord running from the back of the mask to the wearer's belt; and one can judge authenticity or possibly even "has been danced" by the presence of the necessary padding and belt-rigging.
Many Northwest Coast artists will carve items intended only for display, sale to collectors; and my own practice is to refer to these as masks, if the artist does so; even though intended only for wall-hanging.
In the artists mind, the distinction is not whether they have eye-holes or not, or whether they are called "masks" or not; the distinction is that some items are carved for sale to collectors, and for wall-hanging; others are made for use by those natives who are entitled to the crests they represent, and have inherited the right to the dances that they will be used in. One can't always tell that difference by viewing the mask itself, though sometimes, if lucky, there might be provenance available, or even a listing of the dances where the mask has been used.
But I digress....it is indeed true that for many cultures, a mask intended to be worn will have eyeholes; one intended for décor will not. In those cultures, the eyes are certainly a useful diagnostic feature.
But because this particular "mask" is too small to be worn, any eye-holes will be purely decorative, and not an indication of "authenticity."

 

reply posted twice

 

Okay, maybe seeing this one from the Met will be more convincing:

https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/45501

 

"I collect ethnic masks (several each japanese, mexican, indonesian, african)"

What?? no Native American..??? Pushawwww !!!! ..

 

I didn’t mean to imply that you couldn’t place eye holes in the pupils of a mask but the picture you reference from the met shows sizable square holes. Much more accommodating to a performer being able to use them.

If you do a reverse image search of the Yamaguchi mask you’ll find scores of examples of that mask having been made (quite a traditional character)




The pupils in many cases are lightly carved to infer depth but only a few show all the way through and in those examples the pupils are markedly larger.

 

In many cultures masks don't accomodate the performer to such an extent that performers can see well. They accomodate the sanctity of the character.

Below is a hand-held mask from Malang, East Java, Indonesia. The performer changes masks, playing different characters while enacting the story of prince Panji.
This is a real Javanese mask, and as you can see the style is very different from yours:



The performer has very little vision, but he can breathe through the nostrils of the mask and small holes in the corners of the mouth.
Since it is a traditional Malang mask, there is no way to attach the mask to anything, so I strung some wire through the nostrils to hang it.
Detail of an eye slit:

 

I'm just not seeing the issues you are with the Yamaguchi mask vs other Noh masks.

 

I don't understand what you mean by issues, I just don’t think the Yamaguchi has eye holes. I suppose we could write and ask him if we really need to know

Not that it particularly matters at this point. Several people (and visual examples) have pointed out that eyeholes do not a mask and that was all I was alluding to.

 

.

 

I think I may understand where some of our crossed wires are happening.

Are you under the impression that I that I think my mask is traditionally Indonesian, because I do not.

As to some masks having limited (or zero) vision on stage I understand that as well.

I was simply saying that if the Yamaguchi mask did have eye holes in the pupils (from my perspective) they would have been useless to the performer (as opposed to the slits in your mask which while daunting would still allow a degree of vision to multiple users)

 

No, I knew we were past that point. I posted the Javanese mask to show another way in which the vision of the performer is extremely impaired. When you hold it in front of your face, you can hardly see anything. You can breathe reasonably well though.

But I also thought it good to post a Javanese mask because it seemed to be a recurring thing. And to show anyone who comes across this thread what a Javanese mask actually does look like. (Not that they all look exactly like this one.)

 

the mask didn't look like indonesian mask style i think,but i'm interested with the ears,it make me remember to javanese traditional costume wear by the king