Natural style... What is hidden

[october]

Recently, there was a discussion about Walter Pall's maple. Also, there was talk about natural style vs a well manicured tree. About 6 months ago, I had some thoughts on this that I was going to post a thread about. However, I never did. Seeing as how it has come up again. Maybe now is a good time. For the topic of this thread I am going to use Walter Palls natural style pine. For 2 reasons, one, is that his work is already in a discussion and two, this tree is an exception bonsai. Actually one of my favorite bonsai out there. I would like to add, that I mostly, but not completely, subscribe to the Japanese principles and guidelines. However, there is no bias here. Just visual points.

When someone sees this tree. We see a beautiful tree that looks like something you see in nature. It is masterfully done. Lets take a closer look at the tree. The following 3 virts will explain things.

1) Virt one in blue. The branch placement. The Japanese branch format guidelines are as follows. First branch, second branch, back branch/third branch, forth, fifth, front branch and apex. This tree has almost this exact format.

2) Virt in green. Although there is no taper at the bottom, the tree begins it's taper about 1/3 up and continues to the very top. Nest, the biggest space is usually in between the first and third/ fourth branch. Also, the rounded look of the apex on a mature tree.

3) Virt in tan. The guidelines for bonsai pots are generally a pot's length is 2/3 the height of the tree. Also, the pot is as deep and the diameter of the trunk. Both criteria are exhibited here.

4) Virt in orange. It is said that most bonsai form a triangle image. Even if it might be an uneven triangle. Here is the triangle for this tree.

Walter is a master at his craft. He has worked for decades do be able to do this. Also, he works on 200-300 year old material. Between the quality of his skill and the material, he creates many masterpiece bonsai. They are "natural style" because he has taken decades to learn, study and know how to translate the guidelines. It is not about rebelling, it is not about the throwning around the phrase "I am going to do my own thing". It is about bonsai. It is about the constant journey to further one's knowledge. Ironically enough, the more individuals say they want to do their own thing, the only thing there are hurting are their own trees. If you like the natural style and want to pursue trees like Walter, you need to know what you are pursuing. Like Bjorn has said a few times in his videos. The biggest problem with bonsai in the west is our attitude of doing our own thing without having the foundation first.

I love to look at bonsai, whatever they may be and whatever stage. However, for the amount of people saying they want to create naturalistic style trees and do their own thing, I would think there would be more quality naturalistic style bonsai in existence. Could it be that they are having difficulty creating this "natural" image because there needs to be a greater understanding of the foundation..Something to think about.

I hope that some might find this information useful.

Rob

 

[misfit11]

Well said and illustrated, Rob.

“Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively.” --Dalai Lama

Cory

 

[John Ruger]

An exceptional tree without a doubt. However, I've never grasped as to what the "Naturalistic" style means. In other words, if you presented me this picture without acknowledging that Walter Pall developed it I would have no way to comprehend as to what makes this "Naturalistic" if side by side with comparable bonsai.

What is WP doing or not doing that makes this style unique while at the same time applying the basic principles of bonsai?

Disclaimer:

I'm in no way trying to start an argument, I'm just trying to understand the differences.

 

[Smoke]

I been saying that Walters trees are more Japanese than he cares to admit for years.


+1

 

[coh]

An exceptional tree without a doubt. However, I've never grasped as to what the "Naturalistic" style means. In other words, if you presented me this picture without acknowledging that Walter Pall developed it I would have no way to comprehend as to what makes this "Naturalistic" if side by side with comparable bonsai.

What is WP doing or not doing that makes this style unique while at the same time applying the basic principles of bonsai?

Disclaimer:

I'm in no way trying to start an argument, I'm just trying to understand the differences.

I was trying to figure out how to respond, and realized that the above comment pretty much sums up my thoughts.

So - question to Rob (or whoever else wants to tackle it) - what is it about this particular tree that makes it a good example of the "naturalistic" style, other than the fact that it is a Walter Pall tree?

I've spent a fair amount of time looking at Walter's blog and website and have seen many trees that I would consider more naturalistic. If I have time later I'll try to find some examples. I've also seen many examples of trees that I'd consider quite "Japanese" for lack of a better term. I think this one leans heavily toward the latter category, but with some naturalistic touches thrown in...if that makes any sense.

Chris

 

[october]

In some aspects, one could assess that the "natural" depiction of a tree is nothing new. Now, here is some real food for thought... If you are familiar with John Naka's work. His older work, such as the trees depicted in his books and earlier. Many of them resemble or have the "natural" quality.

Perhaps we should stop using the term natural style. One, because it is not a style, it is more of a way or a depiction of nature. Realistically, one could arguably make the assessment that all trees, deemed to have this natural quality, are in fact, bonsai as the way it was depicted 50 years ago and prior. If you go back even further, like 70-80 years plus, the bonsai were not as well manicured. They were looser interpretations of what we have today.

Truth is, when you look at trees that were styled decades ago, Walters tree resemble those trees. This brings the thought that there really isn't a "natural" way. It is still %100 bonsai. It is still Japanese tradition in the true sense of the word. Since bonsai was like that even before Walter started doing bonsai, one could say that his trees are not necessarily natural, but early bonsai like. Kind of makes you think doesn't it. I know it certainly makes me think.

John Naka said " make your bonsai look like a tree, not your tree like a bonsai"

Rob

 

[october]

I was trying to figure out how to respond, and realized that the above comment pretty much sums up my thoughts.

So - question to Rob (or whoever else wants to tackle it) - what is it about this particular tree that makes it a good example of the "naturalistic" style, other than the fact that it is a Walter Pall tree?

I've spent a fair amount of time looking at Walter's blog and website and have seen many trees that I would consider more naturalistic. If I have time later I'll try to find some examples. I've also seen many examples of trees that I'd consider quite "Japanese" for lack of a better term. I think this one leans heavily toward the latter category, but with some naturalistic touches thrown in...if that makes any sense.

Chris

In regards to my reply (post #6) and to respond to the reply quoted here. I really don't know if I/we should be using the term natural. I think traditional bonsai would be more appropriate. However, to answer this question, what makes it natural is that the foliage pads are not perfect or well manicured. It has uneven nebari. The trunk is imperfect (not in a bad way). It has taper, but is somewhat like a tree you might see in the hills/mountains. Also, the random look of some drooping branches.

Rob

 

[Smoke]

However, to answer this question, what makes it natural is that the foliage pads are not perfect or well manicured. It has uneven nebari. The trunk is imperfect. It has taper, but is somewhat like a tree you might see in the hills/mountains. Also, the random look of some drooping branches.

Rob

Careful with this kind of assesment because before you know it, this could fit the specifics of many of the trees we find that look ametuerish. It may be random and imperfect in its perfection. ( verb not a noun)

 

[coh]

In regards to my reply (post #6) and to respond to the reply quoted here. I really don't know if I/we should be using the term natural. I think traditional bonsai would be more appropriate. However, to answer this question, what makes it natural is that the foliage pads are not perfect or well manicured. It has uneven nebari. The trunk is imperfect. It has taper, but is somewhat like a tree you might see in the hills/mountains. Also, the random look of some drooping branches.

Rob

Fair enough...the qualities you listed above are basically the same ones I was thinking of when I said "with some naturalistic touches thrown in."

I'm assuming this was a collected tree? If so...it almost seems it's more a case of taking advantage of what the tree has to offer, using that as the base and building on top of it with "bonsai rules". I mean, the tree has straight trunk segments but is obviously not a formal upright, but the way the trunk starts out straight, curves in the middle, then ends straight on top isn't really what I think of as a classical informal upright either. I think a lot of collected material is treated this way...as opposed to stock that is groomed for decades or centuries to more exactly represent the classical upright styles.

So maybe it's more of a case of "material grown and developed for a specific bonsai" style vs "collected or natural material" style. You can certainly bludgeon (some) collected material into a classical tree but what would be the point? And not all collected material can be turned into attractive trees, the skill/art is to identify the ones that can and then actually do it. Something that Walter is obviously very good at.

Chris

 

[october]

Careful with this kind of assesment because before you know it, this could fit the specifics of many of the trees we find that look ametuerish. It may be random and imperfect in its perfection. ( verb not a noun)

Good caveat!

How about this. Here is a juniper that John Naka started training in the 1950's. Very early bonsai or "natural" if you prefer.

Rob

 

[october]

My purpose for this thread was to maybe get some people that are interested in older or natural looks to go down the right path. To hopefully make achieving their goals easier. To put forth that learning the foundation will eventually be the key to what you are trying to achieve. Sometimes, I hear and see people just really speaking about Japanese traditional bonsai guidelines in a real negative light. Which, there is no need of. It is all bonsai. The way to achieve creating nice trees is to respect the art and respect it's tradition. Not refer to it like it is some kind of bad or detestable thing.

Rob

 

[Smoke]

Well..... as a student of bonsai in California, and know most of the big names in the state, I can say without hesitation that the Southen California Japanese bonsai movement and the Northern Califronia Japanese bonsai movement were light years apart. It is still that way today. Times are changing though as new blood more indoctrinated in the Japanese way thru apprenticships nudges away at the old guard.

I look at this juniper of the Southern crowd as just another juniper that wasn't wired correctly or at all in most cases.

It wouldn't take much to "slick"* that bad boy up in a few hours.


* Slick, a term used by Walter Pall on a tree that is too manicured to the point of looking plastic.

 

[october]

Well..... as a student of bonsai in California, and know most of the big names in the state, I can say without hesitation that the Southen California Japanese bonsai movement and the Northern Califronia Japanese bonsai movement were light years apart. It is still that way today. Times are changing though as new blood more indoctrinated in the Japanese way thru apprenticships nudges away at the old guard.

I look at this juniper of the Southern crowd as just another juniper that wasn't wired correctly or at all in most cases.

It wouldn't take much to "slick" that bad boy up in a few hours.

Yes, everything changes. Also, I edited the word evolve from one of my posts. Evolve could carry the connotation that bonsai now is simply better than 50 years ago. That is not my point or the message I wish to convey.

Rob

 

[amcoffeegirl]

I like a tree that makes me think I could actually encounter it in the forest, in the mountains, on the prairie, or in the swamp. When I see a tree like that it relaxes my whole self. Usually it is imperfect in its perfection. I can't remember who's tree this is but I adore it.

 

[mat]

I like a tree that makes me think I could actually encounter it in the forest, in the mountains, on the prairie, or in the swamp. When I see a tree like that it relaxes my whole self. Usually it is imperfect in its perfection. I can't remember who's tree this is but I adore it. View attachment 40996

That's Paul's excellent Elm. He's a member here.

http://bonsainut.com/forums/showthread.php?6845-Ulmus-parvafolia

 

[Eric Group]

[REDIRECT][/REDIRECT]

Recently, there was a discussion about Walter Pall's maple. Also, there was talk about natural style vs a well manicured tree. About 6 months ago, I had some thoughts on this that I was going to post a thread about. However, I never did. Seeing as how it has come up again. Maybe now is a good time. For the topic of this thread I am going to use Walter Palls natural style pine. For 2 reasons, one, is that his work is already in a discussion and two, this tree is an exception bonsai. Actually one of my favorite bonsai out there. I would like to add, that I mostly, but not completely, subscribe to the Japanese principles and guidelines. However, there is no bias here. Just visual points.

When someone sees this tree. We see a beautiful tree that looks like something you see in nature. It is masterfully done. Lets take a closer look at the tree. The following 3 virts will explain things.

1) Virt one in blue. The branch placement. The Japanese branch format guidelines are as follows. First branch, second branch, back branch/third branch, forth, fifth, front branch and apex. This tree has almost this exact format.

2) Virt in green. Although there is no taper at the bottom, the tree begins it's taper about 1/3 up and continues to the very top. Nest, the biggest space is usually in between the first and third/ fourth branch. Also, the rounded look of the apex on a mature tree.

3) Virt in tan. The guidelines for bonsai pots are generally a pot's length is 2/3 the height of the tree. Also, the pot is as deep and the diameter of the trunk. Both criteria are exhibited here.

4) Virt in orange. It is said that most bonsai form a triangle image. Even if it might be an uneven triangle. Here is the triangle for this tree.

Walter is a master at his craft. He has worked for decades do be able to do this. Also, he works on 200-300 year old material. Between the quality of his skill and the material, he creates many masterpiece bonsai. They are "natural style" because he has taken decades to learn, study and know how to translate the guidelines. It is not about rebelling, it is not about the throwning around the phrase "I am going to do my own thing". It is about bonsai. It is about the constant journey to further one's knowledge. Ironically enough, the more individuals say they want to do their own thing, the only thing there are hurting are their own trees. If you like the natural style and want to pursue trees like Walter, you need to know what you are pursuing. Like Bjorn has said a few times in his videos. The biggest problem with bonsai in the west is our attitude of doing our own thing without having the foundation first.

I love to look at bonsai, whatever they may be and whatever stage. However, for the amount of people saying they want to create naturalistic style trees and do their own thing, I would think there would be more quality naturalistic style bonsai in existence. Could it be that they are having difficulty creating this "natural" image because there needs to be a greater understanding of the foundation..Something to think about.

I hope that some might find this information useful.

Rob

What a beautiful tree!

 

[october]

I been saying that Walters trees are more Japanese than he cares to admit for years.


+1

I am inclined to agree.

 

[drew33998]

Exposure

My take on it is that it really depends on one's perspective due to specific exposure to trees they have seen and the frequency of such exposure. For example, I myself have never truly seen in person, very old scarred mountain pines and junipers. I have seen tons of older longleaf and slash pines, acer rubrum, and live oak, therefore when I see a bonsai resembling the growing habit of said trees, this to me means it looks "naturalistic". What I am really trying to communicate is that the bonsai looks like something that I could envision in nature based on my exposure.

For example, a person that lives in a mountainous region will have a different exposure of species and growth habits based on their location. When they view certain pieces of bonsai material they may have a different perspective, based on their exposure.

 

[Paulpash]

Naturalistic means that there is beauty in imperfection.... in a hollow or secondary trunks or maybe sprawling limbs. Walter uses the term 'seems untouched by the hand of man' to describe some of his trees - that is his goal more often than not. This seems at first thought to be fairly easy to achieve but is in fact extremely difficult.

My bucket list is to see Walter's garden one day and that amazing Acer of his.

 

[tmmason10]

Great observations Rob. I do prefer Walters style of this pine as well as a more manicured pine. I just consider them different flavors.

If his trees are closer to bonsai 50 years ago, should we call it retro styled bonsai?