Bonsai is for Morons?

[Smoke]

You are right to a point but your reasoning is a bit flawed. It can be pointed out what things look like from the moon, volumes have been written about that subject, but according to your reasoning only those who have been there are qualified to say anything about it. The same can be said about any number of things concerning history, science, medicine and art. I would like to remind you of how many times certain individuals got "Bent out of shape" when I suggested that they post pictures of their own work to back up the high flying condescension of their words.

Yes Vance but we are not talking theory or what it might be like on the moon. No one can really convey the feeling of walking on the moon except those that have been there. We are talking about actually doing something with ones own hands. I surly would want to be taught about building a rocket to go to the moon from someone who has built five or six of them, rather than some guy who read and regurgitated some out dated text of Russian rockets gone bad. While I am not intelligent by the measure of an education I do have enough common sense to read through veiled attemps of writing to sound like a person that knows what they are doing. I know when someone knows what they are talking about when it comes to bonsai. I know, (i'm sure like you) when someone is blowing sunshine up my skirt. Your preachin to the choir about showing ones work. I say let them get "bent out of shape" and keep the hammer down till they pony up the work. Untill that time they are just an annoyance in otherwise good discussion about doing actual bonsai work.

Re-read the thread from Chris Johnston about the twisty junipers. I think it was called "a question on technique". In all of that thread I think I was the only person that had ever even held one of these twisty junipers in my hand. I have seen many grown, and am growing them myself, and own a very fine example of an Itowigawa yamadori style juniper. There was a whole super heated discussion going on about how they might be done instead of doing the research and actually finding out about the technique. That thread went all sideways, with name calling and sarcasim yet nearly everyone in the thread had never even seen one up close. I find it rather comical to argue about what might be seen in a photograph and purport to explain a whole industry based on a picture. But oh well such is the game of discussion groups...everyones an expert, based on two years experience.

Cheerio, Al

 

[Victrinia Ridgeway]

My teacher is a gardener.... a landscaper.... and possibly the most intelligent man I will ever meet. And with every breath, in every moment he is a creative artist... because if he isn't doing it, he's thinking of it. Frankly... he's exhausting. It's the one reason I'll never be as good as he is... for all my love, and devotion... his passion is an ocean compared to my backyard pool.

He is representative of every aspect of this discussion... but it is his passion... his burning fire for the art which makes him great.

The man lays on the ground in a snowstrom gently seeking out the base of a tree, while everyone else is trying to huddle in the trunk next to the heater... and he doesn't even notice it's cold. That is how single minded he often is.

Intelligence and the ability to craft are not mutally exclusive. I don't even think Al was trying to say it is. He's too intelligent for that.

But I do believe (in the original post Will so kindly linked) that his comment was about this... That creating bonsai... good, dare we say great bonsai.... requires a passion... commitment... and shear inspiration born of doing.... not talking... about bonsai.

At some point, I hope to be delighted, and find my passion has turned into a lake... that'll be something. It used to be a tea-cup... man there is no comparison to what is gained by shear experiance. But even I know, that long after the teacher is gone, I'll still only be able to remember his ocean.

But I confess... I went to the art museum the other day, and there was some art which was too cunning to be discerned by me. I guess I'm not as smart as I thought. It forces me to concede that sometimes it takes a pretty broad intelligence to appreciate the art crafted by passionate hands.


With kind respects to all,

Victrinia

 

[Vance Wood]

My teacher is a gardener.... a landscaper.... and possibly the most intelligent man I will ever meet. And with every breath, in every moment he is a creative artist... because if he isn't doing it, he's thinking of it. Frankly... he's exhausting. It's the one reason I'll never be as good as he is... for all my love, and devotion... his passion is an ocean compared to my backyard pool.

He is representative of every aspect of this discussion... but it is his passion... he burning fire for the art which makes him great.

The man lays on the ground in a snowstrom gently seeking out the base of a tree, while everyone else is trying to huddle in the trunk next to the heater... and he doesn't even notice it's cold. That is how single minded he often is.

Intelligence and the ability to craft are not mutally exclusive. I don't even think Al was trying to say it is. He's too intelligent for that.

But I do believe (in the original post Will so kindly linked) that his comment was about this... That creating bonsai... good, dare we say great bonsai.... requires a passion... commitment... and shear inspiration born of doing.... not talking... about bonsai.

At some point, I hope to be delighted, and find my passion has turned into a lake... that'll be something. It used to be a tea-cup... man there is no comparison to what is gained by shear experiance. But even I know, that long after the teacher is gone, I'll still only be able to remember his ocean.

But I confess... I went to the art museum the other day, and there was some art which was too cunning to be discerned by me. I guess I'm not as smart as I thought. It forces me to concede that sometimes it takes a pretty broad intelligence to appreciate the art crafted by passionate hands.


With kind respects to all,

Victrinia

I don't think you should sell yourself short. Sometimes shiet is shiet even if some art critic says it's art. If there is anything that can be said about our culture over the last twenty-or-so years is that in our quest to be "nice" and "fair" we have sold out our ability to be honest.

 

[Victrinia Ridgeway]

shhhhhhhhhhh.... Vance................................. I was trying to be nice to the "intelligentsia" who pick out that stuff for the edification of the masses.


oh wait... that may be what you were refering to. lol

In any case... you are certainly on to something there as well.


Kindest regards,


Victrinia

 

[Anonymous User]

This might be a good time to revisit a quote from my very first post in this thread.



"From its very inception, penjing has been an art of the Chinese Scholar. The literati of traditional China created this special art form for the purpose of self-cultivation, the development of character, and the refinement of aesthetic taste." - Quingquan Zhao, "Penjing: Worlds of Wonderment"

 

[Smoke]

Every once and a while someone will post something very noteworthy but for some reason like vacation or work you miss reading a thread. Such was the case tonight. In reading a very good thread on shimpaku, in which all the participants were in left field, Bill Valavanis comes along and clarifies some points.

The serendipity in all this was a quote from bill in the article. I will post it here in its entirety since it is very good information anyway.

Vance,

Why is Ezo spruce a question. There is nothing mysterious here.

Picea jezonensis is NOT used for bonsai in Japan, or very rarely. It is too coarse and has large needles. In Japan it is botanically correctly known as Kuro Ezo Matsu, which means Black Ezo Spruce. In the Japanese bonsai world it is called Kuro Ezo Matsu.

Picea glehni, IS the spruce which is most commonly trained for bonsai in Japan. It is botanically correctly called Aka Ezo Matsu in Japanese which means Red Ezo Spruce. In the Japanese bonsai world it is simply called Ezo Matsu.

NOW in the west and in early Japanese translations of publications they referred to Ezo spruce as Picea jezoensis.

In the west Ezo spruce is Picea jezoensis (but rememer it is not used for bonsai in Japan)

In the west Sakhalin spruce is the common name for Picea glehni.

Yes, Korean Hornbeams are a botanical nightmare. In Japan, many years ago Kindai Bonsai made an announcement that they would call the tree "Korean Hornbeam" since it originated in Korea. There are several hornbeams native to Korea. But the one most commonly trained for bonsai is Carpinus coreana. There are a couple of others with different names too, but this is the most commonly trained species for bonsai in Japan and Korea too. Please remember that most of the Japanese bonsai artists do not have formal educations and nearly the entire Japanese bonsai world ONLY uses common names, not botanical name, they are not interested in that sort of things.

NOW, shimpaku.

In Japan, and botanically speaking the juniper we use for bonsai training is Juniperus chinensis var. sargenti. It is commonly known in Japan and in the west as Shimpaku (which is a made up name in the bonsai world).

Shimpaku junipers are collected in Japan, from several areas, so that makes it a subspecies. However, in the west, it is maintained as a cultivar, and is vegetatively propagated by cuttings, graft or layering. NOT by seed. Only certain plants with the best characterists are used. So, in the west the Shimpaku juniper is maintained as a cultivar and is correctly known as:
Juniperus chinensis var. sargenti 'Shimkaku'.

Yes, there are many differences between Itoigawa and Kishu shimpaku junipers, both are good. But if you go to Japan you can collect Itoigawa shimpaku, so it is not a cultivar. In the west it is maintained as a cultivar and only vegtatively propagated as cuttings, grafts or layering.

Both Kishu and Itoigawa are subspecies, but maintained as cultivars in the west.

Hope this helps and sorry it was so long..... just trying to help.

Bill
__________________
William N. Valavanis

I find the highlighted portion most entertaining, and if there is anyone that knows about this it would be Bill.

Thanks for reading, Al

 

[Anonymous User]

Good morning Al.

You orginal words on this subject were, "There is nothing intelligent about the art of bonsai. Creating bonsai art is not the domain of the intelligent. It is owned by the domain of the creative, those with heart, those that seek creative technique and posess the ability to work with their hands. The masters of the last century in Japan were farmers and gardeners, as well as the many Asian masters we have had in the USA."

You were talking about the masters of the last century, in this aspect, historical references clearly point to the literati and bunjin, intellectuals, as the artists who created and refined what we now know as bonsai.

Valavanis's words, "Please remember that most of the Japanese bonsai artists do not have formal educations and nearly the entire Japanese bonsai world ONLY uses common names, not botanical name, they are not interested in that sort of things." clearly refer to modern bonsai practice, quite a far cry from your orginal statement about bonsai in the last century. He also made no reference to "farmers and gardeners" or that these people are not intelligent, just that they had no formal education.

However, all this being said and put in proper perspective, I concide. You may well be the only one that could have convinced me that you do not need to be intelligent to create bonsai, but you have proved the case remarkably well.

Good job,


Will

 

[Gardener]

Have you thought about that philosophy? Sometimes we buy into a way of thinking or looking at things authored by some glib individual that can put his thoughts on paper and we wind up buying what is said without question. The end result of letting someone else do your thinking for you, or discourage you from doing your own thinking is to stand in line at the Kool Aid stand. To say that intelligence is not applicable to bonsai is ludicrous. If it were not so, we would not be having these discussions, every dumb thing plopped in a pot would be wonderful; beyond critique. A critique takes intelligence, a guideline for that critique takes intelligence to apply, a rebuttal to that critique takes intelligence and ability; to get P.O.ed at someone who disagrees with you takes intelligence.

If it were me I would reject this axiom as being of questionable worth. The only people that want you to believe in having no intelligence are those who profit from making sure you stay that way.

This is really well said...if people don't think for them selves then who are they?

I had a teacher in high school tell me that smart people make money - they profit from the people who aren't as smart...to profit from people you need to be able to think out side the box instead of "following the herd". Something different needs to be done and not every one can think of a solution.

 

[Smoke]

Good morning Al.

You orginal words on this subject were, "There is nothing intelligent about the art of bonsai. Creating bonsai art is not the domain of the intelligent. It is owned by the domain of the creative, those with heart, those that seek creative technique and posess the ability to work with their hands. The masters of the last century in Japan were farmers and gardeners, as well as the many Asian masters we have had in the USA."

You were talking about the masters of the last century, in this aspect, historical references clearly point to the literati and bunjin, intellectuals, as the artists who created and refined what we now know as bonsai.

Valavanis's words, "Please remember that most of the Japanese bonsai artists do not have formal educations and nearly the entire Japanese bonsai world ONLY uses common names, not botanical name, they are not interested in that sort of things." clearly refer to modern bonsai practice, quite a far cry from your orginal statement about bonsai in the last century. He also made no reference to "farmers and gardeners" or that these people are not intelligent, just that they had no formal education.

However, all this being said and put in proper perspective, I concide. You may well be the only one that could have convinced me that you do not need to be intelligent to create bonsai, but you have proved the case remarkably well.

Good job,


Will

My bonsai world is clearly not as black and white as you make yours out to be.
Being the moron that I am, I except your high praise.

Ok my work is done here. Carry on.

 

[bwaynef]

You were talking about the masters of the last century, in this aspect, historical references clearly point to the literati and bunjin, intellectuals, as the artists who created and refined what we now know as bonsai.
...
However, all this being said and put in proper perspective, I concide. You may well be the only one that could have convinced me that you do not need to be intelligent to create bonsai, but you have proved the case remarkably well.

I'm not sure if you confusingly (and incorrectly) punctuated the first part of what I quoted purposefully or not (the only purpose of which I'm able to determine would be to confuse the reader), but to be clear, you're confusing what Al said. The quote you refer to is not Al claiming the literati didn't concoct bonsai. Al says that last century, the gardener types were the masters, not necessarily (solely, only, just) the "intelligents".

In your confusingly-punctuated quote (some would say run-on sentence), you speak of an aspect, the only one to which you refer being Al's "talking about the masters of the last century". What doesn't compute is that you then go on, completely out of that aspect, and start talking about something not involving the last century or the masters thereof, but going entirely back to the roots of bonsai or penjing, which in at least one article you wrote puts the roots "even before ... two thousand years ago" (Thats more than 20 centuries ago. Al was just talking about the most recent one). Seems there are now two (2) aspects in that quote (I refuse to call it a sentence) while you confusingly say there's only one.

(To help visualise, I created an image. Al speaks of the time represented by the area between the red line (representing the year 2000) and the first black line to the left of the red one (representing the year 1900) when he says "last century". This is the representation of 100 years, or a century. Your comments about the creation and refinement of bonsai happen to the left of the green line, many centuries ago. I hope that this visual will help you to understand the context of Al's post.)

Also, congratulations on being the first person to "concide".

 

[Vance Wood]

Interesting; I haven't seen this attack since the Bonsai Forum days. Complaining about sentence structure, run on sentences and all this other gobble-de-goop is meaningless drivel. In short: So What? I don't understand why you had to take an attitude that seemed a bit harsh, especially when it seems that WH admitted that Al had convinced him of his point.

 

[bwaynef]

The ambiguity in his "sentence" structure makes it hard to understand what exactly it was he's talking about. I broke it down to explain ...#1 that its ambiguous, and #2, assuming I've surmised what he was TRYING to say, he's wrong.

The picture ....well, some people are visual learners.

Looks to me like he wanted to take a cheap shot at Al rather than to "concide" anything, when you take into account that he'd gone to such length to tie what Al had said to ANYTHING about literati or the Chinese bringing trees off a mountain. Argumentum ad hominem ...or some such.

 

[Vance Wood]

The ambiguity in his "sentence" structure makes it hard to understand what exactly it was he's talking about. I broke it down to explain ...#1 that its ambiguous, and #2, assuming I've surmised what he was TRYING to say, he's wrong.

The picture ....well, some people are visual learners.

Looks to me like he wanted to take a cheap shot at Al rather than to "concide" anything, when you take into account that he'd gone to such length to tie what Al had said to ANYTHING about literati or the Chinese bringing trees off a mountain. Argumentum ad hominem ...or some such.

Maybe, but are you sure? Sigmund "Fraud" said: Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

 

[Smoke]

This whole thing started with a simple misunderstanding. I have no idea how these things happen. Many times in a thread over the last 11 years I have made what I thought were very good points in replies to threads. The good points get completly missed, and someone will only focus on the self serving part looking at this as an opportunity to get even. I have no idea what the driving force is this keeps this going. I have ideas but am not sure, so why dredge them up here.

The point is what I meant in my statements is that bonsai, the practise of, the learning of, the hobby of is not necessarily the domain of only the educated. I am not educated, at least in the sense that I meant the term. I know many educated people that can't change a tire. Doesn't make them stupid, just means that they have never learned how to use thier hands. I was taking apart my go kart engine and putting it back together when I was 10 years old. My Dad was fairly impressed. I lived on a farm and was discing our pasture at the same age. I learned how to use my hands at a very early age.

After the war, Many Japanese Americans had a very hard time finding employment. Many of the signs that were put up after the attack on Dec. 7th remained in retail store windows far into the fifties. Japanese Americans had a very hard time in Cal. and the West coast in general had a very high concentration of Japanese Americans. Many of the people found employment in the only way they could, they started gardening businesses. John Naka, Ben Oki, Tosh Subamaru, Mas Imuzuma, Dennis Makashima, Harry Hirao, Koto Matsubara and Katsumi Kinoshita. Most of these men are of substantial enough age that they can probably consume most of the last century enough to fullfil my part of what I was saying. I know these men. They are local hero's in the bonsai world on the left coast. I can speak of them because I know them. This is not recited from the pages of some guy that wrote this ten years ago. I can't speak intelligently about what the literati did, how they styled bonsai, what their inspiration was and who did the actual work. The same with the Samari. I was not there. Why would I even dare to bring them up. I know nothing about them. Sure I can read about them but that means nothing about the actual day to day goings on in the life of a Monk.

That is why you have never seen me engage in a thread about black pine or mugo pine. Not ever. I do not have enough experience to even begin to tell anyone intelligently about how to handle the species. I know enough for myself but I would never begin to coach someone on how to style a tree. I see these threads on how to handle black pines via internet. Scarry!

Is intelliegence important to bonsai? Sure it is. Is it mandatory? No it is not. Bonsai is not for morons, but then I never said it was. I said that intelliegence was not the most important part of the "whole" equation.

Cheers, Al

 

[Bonsai Nut]

I said that intelliegence was not the most important part of the "whole" equation.

Cheers, Al

Lucky for you, eh Al? (You can hit me next time you see me)

 

[Smoke]

I see no need to hit anybody. We each do bonsai to the best of our ability.

With my own work I have recorded years of progress on the internet. I hope each of you can say the same.

 

[Anonymous User]

We all record, but progress is subjective.

http://artofbonsai.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=946




Will

 

[king kong]

Mr. Pall's post

Reading Walter's post. The expression "blind in one eye", what does this mean to you? His illustration shows an image if one was colorblind in one eye. Some kind of artistic license factor here? The whole concept escapes me.

 

[Walter Pall]

Quod erat demonstrandum

google it

 

[king kong]

Good morning. I love clue games. Lets see here. I was a 'C' student in Latin so bear with me here. QED "which was to be demonstrated or proven" or a reach "tongue-in-cheek"?