TheSteve
Chumono
Appearantly it's an independant country:
http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Siam
I'm thuroughly lost now.
http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Siam
I'm thuroughly lost now.
Getting back on track to the issue of extreme Nebari and other features and whether they are over-done or not. IMHO it all depends on the eye of the beholder. Some people, rightly or wrongly so, would view the Nebari from Siam (Viet Nam) as being extreme and grotesque.
Isn't Siam that country that was renamed Thailand "Land of the free" in 1939?
I believe you are correct, I mis-spoke reffering to Viet Nam.
Personally I look at the Nebari Issue as being a bit extreme in this case, making bonsai that are demonstrations of technique more than expressions of art---the old art versus craft argument. I find this conundrum in music. I play renaissance Lute music on an historically accurate Lute, some of you know this. However; I do not particularly find Baroque Lute music as interesting because of the art of ornamentation, which is taken to such an extreme in the Baroque era that it seems the music is more about how many ornaments you can squeeze into a composition than the actual musical quality of the composition. Even when beautifully performed, after a while the music becomes boring and redundant. But of course this is just my opinion as too is my take on the Nebari issue.
Here's another photo of one of the trees in process. It looks to me like the grower has wounded the places where the roots have grown together in order to get the bark to fuse better. I'd like to see other trees like this and how they look after this treatment.
Chris
I am surprised to hear this and I disagree on many levels with the thoughts put forth here. This borders on the old "it's all subjective" cop out that is usually put for by the ignorati of art, or the retardataire, the French term for latecomer or for those bringing up the rear.Generally speaking, I don't see any point where the nebari can be overbearing, since there is no absolute measurement for personal taste. It CAN be overbearing to each of us individually, but not as a group (i.e.: what is overbearing to you, may not be overbearing to me; what is artistically successful to you, may not be artistically successful to me). Some of us like these trees, others don't. Obviously, those who enjoy them cannot be told to stop liking them. It would make no sense.
They same people who sets the standard in any other art form. This was well discussed here.I've often heard that bonsai doesn't have to look natural, but it needs to work artistically. This is of course true, but the question is who sets the standard for "artistic".
As far as being artistically successful, the nebari won't decide that, it's not a race to see who can make the fattest trunk or fill a pot with pancake nebari, save that for the craftsmen.
They same people who sets the standard in any other art form. This was well discussed here.
Will
Ye, you did miss something. I never claimed that such nebari couldn't be successful artistically, I simply said that there is a point where they would become distractive, counterproductive, and indeed hamper the artistic presentation, a view shared by others in this thread.Have I missed something here? There are a great many learned and masterful bonsai artists around the world who like these kind of nebari, as is seen in this thread itself, and in the work of many others. If they don't qualify as some who might decided it's art or not, to whom would you accede that power?
My guess would be that most "competent" artists would also say that there is a point at which such nebari become counterproductive, in fact we have already heard from Walter, one of the world's top bonsai artist, stating the same.I don't know this to be a fact, but my guess is that more competent artists would appreciate the well done super nebari than would disparage it.
You lost me here, sorry. Can we stick to the subject?I personally have deep philosophical disagreements in many areas with that collectivist (and at the same time elitist) thought process. But if that's the worldview you promulgate, then to live by the sword is to die by the sword. Unless of course, you wish to crown your chosen critics. Then it all becomes a game.
Take crap in a jar, for example, some like it, some think it is art, so by the logic above, it, or anything else under the sun, is art and is acceptable, because some may like it. By the same logic, a stick in a pot is acceptable because some may like it, dead bonsai are acceptable because some may like them.....even fake bonsai are acceptable, because some people like them....still subjective?
When nebari, or any other component of a bonsai becomes distracting, unbalanced, or otherwise visually un-pleasing, it fails.
Nebari have a place in bonsai, that place is not, nor ever has been the main focal point.
This is not to say it can not be, but unless the entire tree tells the same story, so to speak, it fails.
Nebari can indeed be over done, just as trunks, ramification, deadwood, and all other aspects of bonsai can be. So what if we can create a huge foliage mass on a literati? So what if we can create so much ramification that the main branches can no longer be seen.
Before someone rewrites my thoughts in this thread, there is nothing wrong with these super nebari, as long as they support the image as presented and do not distract visually from it. This can be done and there are good examples of this, however, they can also be overdone, and there are examples of this.
Where is the line? The line is reached when the image presented fails.
As far as being artistically successful, the nebari won't decide that, it's not a race to see who can make the fattest trunk or fill a pot with pancake nebari, save that for the craftsmen.
They same people who sets the standard in any other art form. This was well discussed here.
But....yet you do respond?Sorry, but the above is not worth honoring with a response.
I never claimed everything was art, I simple followed your flawed logic that because someone may like something, it is automatically validated.The logic that anything is art, is your assumption, not mine. Art, like anything else that has to do with imagination and creativity, has a subjective component, but that does not mean that anything is art.
Nah, you're doing a good enough job without calling you on your own words.By the way, I wrote a whole article on your website about the entire tree telling the same story. I wouln't be surprised if you used one of my quotes to argue against myself.
Then we are in agreement on this subject. Thank you.Of course it can be overdone.
And back to personal slights, I see....shame, for a minute I thought we were actually going to discuss the subject.So, you see Will, if you only read carefully what I post, and stop making outrageous claims on my behalf, you can actually come up with the same conclusion as myself. Of course, that wouldn't be much fun, would it. It is much more fun to waste other people's time - as I just wasted 30 minutes writing this, and trying to separate what I said from what I did not say. I am not sure that you really understand how annoying is when you waste someone's time just for your own personal enjoyment.
I responded in kind, you made your points, I debated them. This is called having a discussion, it is not a bad thing, nor does it have to turn from the subject to the person.
Will, you don't get it.
You did not debate one single point that I've made. You cannot disagree with anything that I said, and yet you are happy to spend another 10 pages on this subject. Don't you understand that if I have to repeat one single idea from a previous post, that's already one too much?
Clearly, when you so recklessly waste your own time in regurgitating the obvious (such as: not everything is art; a tree needs a story; a nebari that is too big, is...too much, etc.), you have no sense of how much of other's time you are wasting.
Am I turning personal?
When someone is wasting my time, I will not hesitate to point that out.