A True Bonsai Tree...

[Woocash]

I am also a member of a Liverpool FC forum and there is a poster on there who likes to come on and be contrary just for entertainment as well. He’s not offensive or abusive or even straight up wrong, he’s just someone who like to upset the apple cart with odd leanings and inflammatory ideas.

As infuriatingly stupid as these people seem at times, sometimes they get you thinking.

Take, for example, a Spitfire airplane. They stopped being built in 1948, but over the last few years several replicas have been built to exact spec and using the same techniques. Now, are these replicas or they true Spitfires? Bolero may be just trying to be incongruous but the argument still stands in relation to bonsai. Can modern trees actually be called bonsai just because they have been created using the same techniques? Or, are they in fact, only tress created in the bonsai style?

Of course that thought process is going to nark off lots of people who have spent their lives with a particular idea, but it still makes sense. Kind of. (I haven’t decided yet)

 

[penumbra]

I am leaving now, not to return to this subject any longer....but I have more to speak on other bonsai subjects so stay tuned to Bolero post's..

I have mixed feelings. I feel you have contributed nothing but divisiveness, but it has been infuriatingly entertaining. This may sound cruel and I really don't mean it to be, but I can't imagine anyone missing your attempts at bonsai and penjing look alikes. It seems that even when you start with a decent idea, you ruin it by trying to get a little too cutesie. Much of what I have seen of your work looks like it was made for Disney Studios. Sorry dude but you years of experience has not paid off.

 

[Bolero]

I am also a member of a Liverpool FC forum and there is a poster on there who likes to come on and be contrary just for entertainment as well. He’s not offensive or abusive or even straight up wrong, he’s just someone who like to upset the apple cart with odd leanings and inflammatory ideas.

As infuriatingly stupid as these people seem at times, sometimes they get you thinking.

Take, for example, a Spitfire airplane. They stopped being built in 1948, but over the last few years several replicas have been built to exact spec and using the same techniques. Now, are these replicas or they true Spitfires? Bolero may be just trying to be incongruous but the argument still stands in relation to bonsai. Can modern trees actually be called bonsai just because they have been created using the same techniques? Or, are they in fact, only tress created in the bonsai style?

Of course that thought process is going to nark off lots of people who have spent their lives with a particular idea, but it still makes sense. Kind of. (I haven’t decided yet)

Thank you & it's good to see someone finally figured it out...Spitfires & Hurricanes

 

[Bolero]

I have mixed feelings. I feel you have contributed nothing but divisiveness, but it has been infuriatingly entertaining. This may sound cruel and I really don't mean it to be, but I can't imagine anyone missing your attempts at bonsai and penjing look alikes. It seems that even when you start with a decent idea, you ruin it by trying to get a little too cutesie. Much of what I have seen of your work looks like it was made for Disney Studios. Sorry dude but you years of experience has not paid off.

Clueless is all i can think of for now & I don't want to sink to your level for a detailed response...

 

[Traken]

Take, for example, a Spitfire airplane. They stopped being built in 1948, but over the last few years several replicas have been built to exact spec and using the same techniques. Now, are these replicas or they true Spitfires? Bolero may be just trying to be incongruous but the argument still stands in relation to bonsai. Can modern trees actually be called bonsai just because they have been created using the same techniques? Or, are they in fact, only tress created in the bonsai style?

Except that the Spitfire is a model of airplane, whereas bonsai is an art form. What he's describing is more like saying you can't make a sculpture unless you're Michelangelo. It's just a "sculpture look-alike."

 

[Saddler]

I am also a member of a Liverpool FC forum and there is a poster on there who likes to come on and be contrary just for entertainment as well. He’s not offensive or abusive or even straight up wrong, he’s just someone who like to upset the apple cart with odd leanings and inflammatory ideas.

As infuriatingly stupid as these people seem at times, sometimes they get you thinking.

Take, for example, a Spitfire airplane. They stopped being built in 1948, but over the last few years several replicas have been built to exact spec and using the same techniques. Now, are these replicas or they true Spitfires? Bolero may be just trying to be incongruous but the argument still stands in relation to bonsai. Can modern trees actually be called bonsai just because they have been created using the same techniques? Or, are they in fact, only tress created in the bonsai style?

Of course that thought process is going to nark off lots of people who have spent their lives with a particular idea, but it still makes sense. Kind of. (I haven’t decided yet)

I think a better analogy would be that, are all planes, including the Spitfire replicas of the Wright Flyer? Do they have to be built in North Carolina? No, that is absurd. No one is making replicas in bonsai. Each tree is unique. There are no replicas in the bonsai world so there can be no bonsai look alike. Maybe if we one day are able to get to the point in genetically modifying a tree to grow to look just like a previous well know tree, then maybe we should call it a bonsai look alike. Until then, each tree is unique and not an imposter.

 

[Smoke]

I am also a member of a Liverpool FC forum and there is a poster on there who likes to come on and be contrary just for entertainment as well. He’s not offensive or abusive or even straight up wrong, he’s just someone who like to upset the apple cart with odd leanings and inflammatory ideas.

As infuriatingly stupid as these people seem at times, sometimes they get you thinking.

Take, for example, a Spitfire airplane. They stopped being built in 1948, but over the last few years several replicas have been built to exact spec and using the same techniques. Now, are these replicas or they true Spitfires? Bolero may be just trying to be incongruous but the argument still stands in relation to bonsai. Can modern trees actually be called bonsai just because they have been created using the same techniques? Or, are they in fact, only tress created in the bonsai style?

Of course that thought process is going to nark off lots of people who have spent their lives with a particular idea, but it still makes sense. Kind of. (I haven’t decided yet)

So does that mean any piece of art painted after (pick your classic) Mona Lisa is just a copy of art? I say art because everyone knows in bonsai no one can make an exact duplicate of another tree. You have used an airplane as a reference, but there are blueprints and it is not a living object requiring water and fertilizer to continue to live. Anyone can make a duplicate of an inanimate object. Bonsai is about working in the living realm of art. Thats the difference. By its very nature it cannot be duplicated. Sure you can make a very close reproduction of an outline, but I guarantee you that is not what bonsai artists are TRYING to do.

When making a copy of an inanimate object, no one cares about who made it, they only care about the precision to copy achieved. In bonsai the maker has so much invested in the creation and how much creativity he has in it is what distinguishes him/her as an artist. The two are inseparable

Bolero is so far off the mark it is comical. There is no contemplation here......

 

[Woocash]

Interesting. But then again, you couldn’t paint a Renaissance picture nowadays, it would merely be in the renaissance style, an original work or not.

To be honest, I don’t know why I got involved as a noob to the forum, so i’ll back out before I get too big for my boots. I’m just playing devils advocate really and I find it an interesting philosophical debate. What I do know is that all opinions are valid and a straight shut down of any idea is just as disrespectful as the idea in the first place. There is more often than not a benefit to exploring the reasons behind an idea, even if it just ends as a lesson in humility.

 

[Smoke]

Interesting. But then again, you couldn’t paint a Renaissance picture nowadays, it would merely be in the renaissance style, an original work or not.

Why not?
Because the period in time is not the Renaissance? Thats absurd. Thats like saying that a Spitfire made in 2019 is not a Spitfire because it wasn't made in 1945. You need to take a trip to the Reno Air Races, starting next week BTW. They will school ya in whats old and whats new, whats good and whats bad.

In your mind what makes it Renaissance? My highlight above should be your clue.

 

[Woocash]

Well, I do agree that it would be a Spitfire still, just not an original. The price and pedigree would reflect that, I think. The same goes for a Renaissance painting. You can paint with all the style, skill and technique of a painter of the time period, but in my mind it still would not be a true renaissance painting.

Really it is all about semantics rather than actual fact which is why you won’t get everybody agreeing and like I said, I’m still not sure myself. Perhaps someone or some society from Japan or China could shed some light on it as opposed to some people from half way round the world deciding what constitutes a ‘true’ bonsai. I don’t know, I’m just an amateur running my mouth off.

Think Nevada may be a little outside my bus routes, but it looks cool. We are right under an RAF flight path so get some pretty cool aircraft over head, especially when the local air show is on.

 

[Smoke]

So...in the end it's age that sets a true Spitfire from a look alike Spitfire? Inanimate object

It's age that sets apart a true Renaissance painting apart from a look alike Renaissance painting made in 2019? Inanimate object.

So both of those object are no longer made in any quantity and are collectable because:
A. rarity
B. Age

The Renaissance ran from appx 1160 to 1600. A very long time period for art. What distinguishes a Renaissance from say a more modern painter painting the same subjects? What if Leonardo was suddenly back alive from cryogenic freezing and painted again. Would it now be a modern painting or a Renaissance painting. Nothing has changed except the time period. Renaissance is collectable and rare and that makes it famous, much like the airplane.

Let me give an example.

Spitfire


Look alike


Renaissance Painting


Look Alike


Ok the difference is staggering, and it is the same with bonsai. What they did 1000 years ago was great, but what they do today is great to. They are not Look alikes in any way shape or form. I think everyone can agree that Kimura is probably one of the most recognized bonsai greats of the century.

Some of his work.









Based on that body of work and made in the last fifty years, very short time compared to the whole of Bonsai and Penzai combined, think that Kimura is making bonsai look alikes?

Based on Kimura's work Is Bolero making bonsai Look alikes? ...or just making conversation, and comical also!!!

 

[Woocash]

Kudos, Smoke. You put forward some great examples there and some beautiful trees. Like I said, I was just playing devils advocate and there is a clearly defined difference between simply being ‘a tree in a pot’ and bonsai, old or new.

Even if there is a distinction between original masterpieces and modern ones I don’t know how to separate them by means of language and I suppose that has to be as clear a marker as any.

I think Bolero is just opening up a philosophical conversation about an interpretation of an art form. It’s what my art teachers told us to do all the time (much to our general annoyance, so I get it). I only chimed in because of the disgust of people reactions at the suggestion that there could be a defined difference between the old masters and the new. But hey, you guys know what his usual mantra is, I’m new to the whole shebang.

 

[Smoke]

Kudos, Smoke. You put forward some great examples there and some beautiful trees. Like I said, I was just playing devils advocate and there is a clearly defined difference between simply being ‘a tree in a pot’ and bonsai, old or new.

Even if there is a distinction between original masterpieces and modern ones I don’t know how to separate them by means of language and I suppose that has to be as clear a marker as any.

I think Bolero is just opening up a philosophical conversation about an interpretation of an art form. It’s what my art teachers told us to do all the time (much to our general annoyance, so I get it). I only chimed in because of the disgust of people reactions at the suggestion that there could be a defined difference between the old masters and the new. But hey, you guys know what his usual mantra is, I’m new to the whole shebang.

There is one thing to question art, there is another to make a term that history is right and the present is wrong. I think Bolero knows that too, his antics are some that crop up here from time to time, and I am reminded of a person some years ago that tried to put too much college learnin into something as simple as bonsai. The two just don't mix. The person doing the art is doing it from their gut and heart. Those appreciating the result are doing so from their mind and education on how best to classify the work. Stop trying to classify the work and just enjoy it for what it is. Tryin like Hell to make something pretty out of rough piece of shit!

Period!

If you wish.... This is a long boring read. It is a treatise on how not to look at bonsai and forums in general. Had it been any good, it would still be here, sadly...... no

Google Domains Hosted Site

 

[Smoke]

Kudos, Smoke. You put forward some great examples there and some beautiful trees. Like I said, I was just playing devils advocate and there is a clearly defined difference between simply being ‘a tree in a pot’ and bonsai, old or new.

Even if there is a distinction between original masterpieces and modern ones I don’t know how to separate them by means of language and I suppose that has to be as clear a marker as any.

There is another remark you will hear around here also. "Green Helmets" and "Wizard Hat Maples". Both derogatory terms for a maple tree that is seen far too often in the bonsai picture galleries. Funny thing is, the people calling these fine bonsai Wizard Hat Maples and Green Helmets have nothing to show you to counter their belief in this derogatory term. I simply think it's plain jealousy, but what do I know.

 

[Vance Wood]

I think a better analogy would be that, are all planes, including the Spitfire replicas of the Wright Flyer? Do they have to be built in North Carolina? No, that is absurd. No one is making replicas in bonsai. Each tree is unique. There are no replicas in the bonsai world so there can be no bonsai look alike. Maybe if we one day are able to get to the point in genetically modifying a tree to grow to look just like a previous well know tree, then maybe we should call it a bonsai look alike. Until then, each tree is unique and not an imposter.

I may be wrong (Probably so) I think some of these heritage trees Bolero has been equating as the only true bonsai have a different classification in Japan, but all are bonsai. He is trying to forward a definition of bonsai that in reality does not exist even in Japan.

 

[Smoke]

Maybe if we one day are able to get to the point in genetically modifying a tree to grow to look just like a previous well know tree, then maybe we should call it a bonsai look alike. Until then, each tree is unique and not an imposter.

Problem is, the parent tree did not grow like a bonsai. Some master had to make the bonsai out of the material.

So, if we could get plants to reproduce exactly, we could have the exact same starting material as the original master had. I would be willing to bet my lifetimes salary that if ten clones existed and ten different people got their shot at it, we would have ten different trees. Who knows, we may even have a couple that are better than the original.

None would be a look alike!
Period!!!

 

[Saddler]

Problem is, the parent tree did not grow like a bonsai. Some master had to make the bonsai out of the material.

So, if we could get plants to reproduce exactly, we could have the exact same starting material as the original master had. I would be willing to bet my lifetimes salary that if ten clones existed and ten different people got their shot at it, we would have ten different trees. Who knows, we may even have a couple that are better than the original.

None would be a look alike!
Period!!!

I didn’t mean clone. I mean to have a tree grow with every branch and leaf where you want it. No human required in the styling. Programmed to grow a certain way before the seed sprouts. Something many decades if not centuries away if possible at all.

I do agree with you after the first sentence though.

 

[Saddler]

I may be wrong (Probably so) I think some of these heritage trees Bolero has been equating as the only true bonsai have a different classification in Japan, but all are bonsai. He is trying to forward a definition of bonsai that in reality does not exist even in Japan.

I expect him to come up with a “better” definition that fits his OP but will be stretched at best and in the end, as completely pointless as the original.

 

[Woocash]

Thanks for that, Smoke. 13000 words, yeesh! It’s a good job I like a ripping yarn, so i’ll wait for the next rainy day and have a look then.

Like I said in my original post, you get people like it on all forums. I’ve been lurking on here for a little while and have seen there is quite a lot of bickering, mixed in with all the gems, of course. It’s just human nature. Some people like to throw ingredients in the pot, some people like to stir them up.

As for the green helmets and wizards hats, I’m pretty sure I know what they are without having to look. Thick, perfect, rounded canopies and really thick trunks with exaggerated unnatural taper, perhaps? If it is that I do prefer a more naturalistic approach, myself, but that is half of what the bickering I have seen has been about - derogatory remarks about the style of peoples’ trees. They are an interpretation of what the artist likes, so if that’s your thing then more power to you.

 

[Bolero]

To anyone still following this Thread and Subject I want to say......

The point of my OP was to verbally illustrate the difference between Sticks in a Pot versus Bonsai created by The Serious Bonsai Gardeners of yesteryear....

Guess I got a little carried away with that OP.

After reading the informative Post's here by Smoke and a few others I have come to the Conclusion that Bonsai as a Generality is Alive and Well World Wide, even the Sticks in a Pot...

No more Bonsai Look Alikes !

Now I fully anticipate a New Flaming Discussion based on this Post so lets hear it folks....