The "Rules" of bonsai

Of course the term "rules" is just a term. "Guidelines" could be used instead of the word "Rules".

Sometimes you look at a bonsai, and it just doesn't quite work. Oh, there's no obvious flaws, it's well groomed, potted well... but it still looks "off". So, you analyze it. What's wrong?

And after a while the "whatever it is" becomes apparent. Maybe the key branch is on the wrong side, maybe one side is fuller than the other, the apex moves the wrong way. Something.

So... is it "art" because "that's the way the owner sees trees?" Or just a mistake?

One of the bonsai pioneers in the Atlanta area was a Monk named Father Paul. He sold bonsai for years at the Monastary in Conyers, Ga. But almost all his trees shared the same flaw: he almost always styled trees with the apex moving back away from the viewer! He was largely self taught, and looked at books to study. I guess that's how he saw them.

Anyway, I don't think he did it intentionally. That is, I don't think he was thinking "I'll have my apex moving away because I want to break the rule." I think that's just the way he saw trees.
Bought more than a few pots from them.
 
I prefer "guidelines" to "rules". Most of the guidelines tend to address proportions that have proven to be attractive to a large percentage of viewers. Some of them address the health of the tree. But, are you supposed to destroy a tree that shows great character and age but has 2 or 3 features that are considered "wrong"? If you are out to win awards......maybe. If you are doing bonsai for yourself, I say anything that appeals to you, go ahead and do it.

As an aside.......it somewhat offends me when someone comments "That's not a bonsai." because it breaks one or more rules and/or it's a new piece of material. If it's a tree or shrub in a pot and it has had some work done to it to advance it on it's journey to a "finished' bonsai, it's a bonsai in my book. You may call it a bad bonsai or a good bonsai or bonsai in need of a lot of work, but give it the integrity of referring to it as a bonsai.
 
I prefer "guidelines" to "rules". Most of the guidelines tend to address proportions that have proven to be attractive to a large percentage of viewers. Some of them address the health of the tree. But, are you supposed to destroy a tree that shows great character and age but has 2 or 3 features that are considered "wrong"? If you are out to win awards......maybe. If you are doing bonsai for yourself, I say anything that appeals to you, go ahead and do it.

As an aside.......it somewhat offends me when someone comments "That's not a bonsai." because it breaks one or more rules and/or it's a new piece of material. If it's a tree or shrub in a pot and it has had some work done to it to advance it on it's journey to a "finished' bonsai, it's a bonsai in my book. You may call it a bad bonsai or a good bonsai or bonsai in need of a lot of work, but give it the integrity of referring to it as a bonsai.
Joe,

I have to disagree with your post. It's not a matter of whether the tree "breaks the rules" that defines it as a bonsai, it's the degree of work that's been put into it, and the amount of progress the tree has made.

I think there are many "bonsai in training", or "future bonsai".

But just because someone puts a stick in a pot doesn't make it a bonsai.
 
With all due respect, I think what Joe is saying is that "it is to the individual who is looking after it!"... I'll bet for every world class bonsai, there has been "10,000 sticks in pots"... the first step in a marathon is just that, the first step... but that doesn't mean that the runner won't finish the race; and to many, "winning" isn't even in the cards, taking part is... so for me, if there is a stick in a pot and someone wants to call it a bonsai, I'll be polite and go with that instead of playing the semantics game and risk making someone feel bad or turn them away.
 
Joe,

I have to disagree with your post. It's not a matter of whether the tree "breaks the rules" that defines it as a bonsai, it's the degree of work that's been put into it, and the amount of progress the tree has made.

I think there are many "bonsai in training", or "future bonsai".

But just because someone puts a stick in a pot doesn't make it a bonsai.


But, to play devil's advocate, what exactly is the "degree of work" that must be put in? How is it measured and defined - and by whom?

Similarly, "the amount of progress the tree has made." Progress - ??? Defined and measured how, and by whom?!

RMJ.jpg

How about this guy? Collected on a ridge in Montana a few years back; sat in a black plastic bag recovering for a couple of years; stuck in a pot at some point; survived; trimmed very lightly; maybe wire-brushed and lime-sulfered the deadwood a wee bit at some point, but I think not. How about him? Any rules he's breaking? Was there some requisite "degree of work" I did or did not put in? Any highly laudable "progress" he's made - or still needs to make - that wins him the honor of being a "bonsai" in your mind? Should I even care whether someone thinks this is a true or a good bonsai? Really - should such things matter to me? And, if so, why?!

Another favorite poem captures my thoughts here: the final poem by the great American poet Wallace Stevens (who made his living as an insurance salesman, BTW!)


Of Mere Being

The palm at the end of the mind,
Beyond the last thought, rises
In the bronze decor,

A gold-feathered bird
Sings in the palm, without human meaning,
Without human feeling, a foreign song.

You know then that it is not the reason
That makes us happy or unhappy.
The bird sings. Its feathers shine.

The palm stands on the edge of space.
The wind moves slowly in the branches.
The bird's fire-fangled feathers dangle down.
 
Nice tree Grouper 52 its a shining example of what we are or, errr what were not talking about.

For my part, when it comes to bonsai, what someone else does with their material cannot and does not effect me in the least... so, I never allow my illusions of grandeur to trod on someone else's pastime, pride, or intelligence. After all, that person has just taught me something about design, and its probably something that I don't want to emulate.

But, I understand where Adair is coming from... I just think that "at some point", this person is going to realize that they just have a stick in a pot and they'll appreciate their peers tolerance of their ignorance. I, would never trust a dog that bites me the first time I meet it, and the same goes for being called out on my use of terms and definitions; especially because I am lazy with my command of the english language and really don't give a damn anyway. lol

EROSION
E.J. Pratt
From: E.J. Pratt: Complete Poems. ed. Sandra Djwa and R.G. Moyles. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989.

It took the sea a thousand years,
A thousand years to trace
The granite features of this cliff,
In crag and scarp and base.

It took the sea an hour one night,
An hour of storm to place
The sculpture of these granite seams
Upon a woman's face.


June 1931
 
Adair, if I remember correctly, the original bonsai required almost NO work to be worthy of the title. They were naturally formed in the wild and collected for their current beauty. Some of the specimens coming out of the American Rockies are exquisite as they come out of the dirt. Are they not considered bonsai if there was almost no work done to them? Many of those certainly break the "first branch here, second branch here......... and no reverse taper rules. Would you have left these outstanding specimens on the mountain?

I have no problem if you refer to a "stick in a pot" as terrible, a waste of time, no potential, hideous, amateurish or whatever. I just think we should give it the dignity of calling it bonsai if the person doing it is at least trying his best. Is not a house with a couple of broken windows, a leaky roof, peeling paint and other glaring flaws still a house?
 
Well well, untill a few posts ago it seemed like everybody was in agreement, that couldnt last... Funny how a post about guidelines/rules turn into "a stick in a pot should be worthy to be called bonsai"... Seriously it should not
 
Rules and/or guidelines = same thing, just semantics. One should learn the rules before you can do your own thing. I think of a Japanese concept, "Shu Ha Ri."

Shu describes the beginner that learns the rules and imitates the master.
Ha - one is starting to do develop his own style.
Ri - you now have the knowledge and experience to break free of it all.

Raffle for a dog

Raffle for a dog
just as fit as a ring
he'll be 10 years old
if he lives to next spring
he has 4 legs
and a hole in his ass
he'll piss on your carpet
and shit on your grass
his eyes bulge out
and his ass sucks wind
not a bad dog
for the shape that he's in.

anon.
 
But, to play devil's advocate, what exactly is the "degree of work" that must be put in? How is it measured and defined - and by whom?

Similarly, "the amount of progress the tree has made." Progress - ??? Defined and measured how, and by whom?!

View attachment 121247

How about this guy? Collected on a ridge in Montana a few years back; sat in a black plastic bag recovering for a couple of years; stuck in a pot at some point; survived; trimmed very lightly; maybe wire-brushed and lime-sulfered the deadwood a wee bit at some point, but I think not. How about him? Any rules he's breaking? Was there some requisite "degree of work" I did or did not put in? Any highly laudable "progress" he's made - or still needs to make - that wins him the honor of being a "bonsai" in your mind? Should I even care whether someone thinks this is a true or a good bonsai? Really - should such things matter to me? And, if so, why?!

Another favorite poem captures my thoughts here: the final poem by the great American poet Wallace Stevens (who made his living as an insurance salesman, BTW!)


Of Mere Being

The palm at the end of the mind,
Beyond the last thought, rises
In the bronze decor,

A gold-feathered bird
Sings in the palm, without human meaning,
Without human feeling, a foreign song.

You know then that it is not the reason
That makes us happy or unhappy.
The bird sings. Its feathers shine.

The palm stands on the edge of space.
The wind moves slowly in the branches.
The bird's fire-fangled feathers dangle down.
It depends!

Personally, I would call that tree an unrefined bonsai. Work has been done to it to get the rootball reduced to fit in that pot. The deadwood has been cleaned, etc.
 
Perhaps this perception is more about "urbanization, the density of the art, and competition"...

Out here in the vast wide open spaces where there is only the odd bird that comes to pick the bugs off the plants, even the handle of a hoe standing inside a Home Depot bucket could be considered as bonsai... if Walter Pall wants to come and tell me that it isn't, he's welcome to spend the fare in a plane ticket, the bus, and a mule to tell me different; and I'll take his verbiage to mind until... ohhhhhh, about the time I see the ass end of that mule disappear back over the hill top whence he came... lol
 
Well well, untill a few posts ago it seemed like everybody was in agreement, that couldnt last... Funny how a post about guidelines/rules turn into "a stick in a pot should be worthy to be called bonsai"... Seriously it should not
The point is that it can by definition,---be called a bonsai, a tree in a pot. The problem is; those of us the grow them and take the artistic design seriously, mostly agree that a tree in a pot is not what most of us call a bonsai. So I am not going to dumb down the definition and perception of bonsai to accommodate the stick in a pot and dumb down the claim that it is indeed a bonsai, any more than a third grader's finger painting is a Picasso---- and should be thought of the same way.
 
Adair, if I remember correctly, the original bonsai required almost NO work to be worthy of the title. They were naturally formed in the wild and collected for their current beauty. Some of the specimens coming out of the American Rockies are exquisite as they come out of the dirt. Are they not considered bonsai if there was almost no work done to them? Many of those certainly break the "first branch here, second branch here......... and no reverse taper rules. Would you have left these outstanding specimens on the mountain?

This. This exactly.

Indeed, "bonsai" translates to "tree in a pot" if I'm not mistaken, and the original Chinese concept was exactly that. Now it has become a codified "art" to a certain extent, although the more it gets codified the more it becomes a mere "craft," not art, and quite frankly all the 1-2-3 manicured knock-offs that show up in shows are just plain boring to me: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."

And here we/I touch upon the Is-Bonsai-Art Wars from 2007. Two links to those wars can be found below. Enjoy your trees.

G52


http://www.bonsainut.com/threads/toward-a-definition-of-art-and-bonsai-as-art.872/

http://www.bonsainut.com/threads/is-it-safe-yet.503/
 
The rules should be used as guidance for creating a tree. They are there because they work. Should you blindly follow the rules? No, but neither should you ignore them.

I seams that there are many people out there that say they don't follow the rules on purpose when it is just a cover for their lack of skill. They try to be avant-garde but in reality they just have poorly designed trees.
 
But, to play devil's advocate, what exactly is the "degree of work" that must be put in? How is it measured and defined - and by whom?

Similarly, "the amount of progress the tree has made." Progress - ??? Defined and measured how, and by whom?!

View attachment 121247

How about this guy? Collected on a ridge in Montana a few years back; sat in a black plastic bag recovering for a couple of years; stuck in a pot at some point; survived; trimmed very lightly; maybe wire-brushed and lime-sulfered the deadwood a wee bit at some point, but I think not. How about him? Any rules he's breaking? Was there some requisite "degree of work" I did or did not put in? Any highly laudable "progress" he's made - or still needs to make - that wins him the honor of being a "bonsai" in your mind? Should I even care whether someone thinks this is a true or a good bonsai? Really - should such things matter to me? And, if so, why?!

Another favorite poem captures my thoughts here: the final poem by the great American poet Wallace Stevens (who made his living as an insurance salesman, BTW!)


Of Mere Being

The palm at the end of the mind,
Beyond the last thought, rises
In the bronze decor,

A gold-feathered bird
Sings in the palm, without human meaning,
Without human feeling, a foreign song.

You know then that it is not the reason
That makes us happy or unhappy.
The bird sings. Its feathers shine.

The palm stands on the edge of space.
The wind moves slowly in the branches.
The bird's fire-fangled feathers dangle down.

My addess is... Great tree here. What are you planning design wise for the tree?
 
"So I am not going to dumb down the definition and perception of bonsai to accommodate the stick in a pot and dumb down the claim that it is indeed a bonsai, any more than a third grader's finger painting is a Picasso---- and should be thought of the same way."

But Vance, both a Picasso and a third graders work are considered "art"... it's the same argument. Are they equal in quality, design, and appeal?... it the child's mother they may be, (let's face it, some people don't enjoy Picasso's work any more than a third graders').

But, from now on I want to be known as a gardener of trees and shrubs placed in a bowl shaped vessel, earthen or otherwise; with questionable substrate of known and unknown mediums or otherwise; trimmed, cut, wired, or otherwise; liked, disliked, and reviled, or otherwise; procured, grown, stolen (no not stolen, scratch that.) gifted or otherwise, for my own enjoyment.

Now NOT one of you can call yourself the same until you fulfill the requirements of MY check-sheet.... you can also call me "just another asshole", but if you call me an asshole, you have to first say the descriptive sentence in its' entirety... OR, you could just call me a bonsai artist of some disrepute and we'll leave it at that. :)
 
Adair, if I remember correctly, the original bonsai required almost NO work to be worthy of the title. They were naturally formed in the wild and collected for their current beauty. Some of the specimens coming out of the American Rockies are exquisite as they come out of the dirt. Are they not considered bonsai if there was almost no work done to them? Many of those certainly break the "first branch here, second branch here......... and no reverse taper rules. Would you have left these outstanding specimens on the mountain?

I have no problem if you refer to a "stick in a pot" as terrible, a waste of time, no potential, hideous, amateurish or whatever. I just think we should give it the dignity of calling it bonsai if the person doing it is at least trying his best. Is not a house with a couple of broken windows, a leaky roof, peeling paint and other glaring flaws still a house?
Wow, Joe, you must be really old to be able to remember the original mountain trees pulled off the mountains!

While the literal translation means "tree in a pot", bonsai is the art of representing an idealized tree in miniature.

The art developed due to fact that once the naturally stunted trees were taken from the mountains, there were no more. So techniques were developed to do by artificial means what it takes Mother Nature decades and centuries to do.

Today, here in the US, there are still vast mountain areas with collectible trees. Maybe in a couple decades they'll all be taken here, too. That's not the point of this thread, however.

About your house analogy: if the house is still habitable, it's a house. If it's deteriorated beyond that, it's an eyesore. And should either be demolished or rehabilitated.
 
I'd post "The Cremation of Sam McGee", but I'm certain everyone has read that poem... I liked that Raffle Dog poem that Augustine posted... I think he'd fit in good here with all my sticks 'n pots.
 
Back
Top Bottom