aml1014
Masterpiece
Great thing about bonsai, is the only finished tree is a dead one, othwise it's ever changing!
Aaron
The "Rules" of bonsai
- Thread starter Adair M
- Start date
Aaron
Starfox
Masterpiece
Many Australian native trees such as wattles are naturally short lived and often people disregard them for that reason. Yet I recall reading that as bonsais they can have that lifespan increased. How true that is I can't say but I believe the thread was over on ausbonsai somewhere. Not so scientific but time will tell as the trees age I guess.
Anthony
Imperial Masterpiece
Actually @PiñonJ ,
I was more interested in the Biological aspect, but I will mention that to Michael [ anglo ] next time
we meet at his Pieta [ I have a tardus, loaned to me by Dr.Who ]
"Once again --------- History determines what is Art.
Even the Atelier / Academy trained Fine Artists [ job title ] know that in their lifetimes, they pays
their buck and takes their chances [ Unca K ]"
Good Day
Anthony
I was more interested in the Biological aspect, but I will mention that to Michael [ anglo ] next time
we meet at his Pieta [ I have a tardus, loaned to me by Dr.Who ]
"Once again --------- History determines what is Art.
Even the Atelier / Academy trained Fine Artists [ job title ] know that in their lifetimes, they pays
their buck and takes their chances [ Unca K ]"
Good Day
Anthony
PiñonJ
Omono
Well, Anthony, as always, you make your points with flair, even if I have no idea what they are! You're not in the same league as @sorce, but maybe you could do an intensive with him!Actually @PiñonJ ,
I was more interested in the Biological aspect, but I will mention that to Michael [ anglo ] next time
we meet at his Pieta [ I have a tardus, loaned to me by Dr.Who ]
"Once again --------- History determines what is Art.
Even the Atelier / Academy trained Fine Artists [ job title ] know that in their lifetimes, they pays
their buck and takes their chances [ Unca K ]"
Good Day
Anthony
You seem to have a very rigid definition of what makes someone an artist, or a master, and you place a lot of stock in degrees (as do I, but history is replete with self-taught artists). OK, Ryan Neil has a degree in horticulture and a six-year apprenticeship under his belt with a world-renowned master, and he regularly consults university horticulture departments. I can't think of better qualifications to become a bonsai professional, but maybe you were referring to others with fewer qualifications. I wouldn't know, as I chose him as my teacher and therefore know more about him. Whether you consider him an artist is a matter of opinion. If one of your points is that only works that are meant to be permanent qualify as art, then, on your way to visit Michelangelo, you should set your Tardis for Rome, 21 May 1972, and watch a particularly harsh critic attempting to destroy the Pietà with a geologist's hammer! If you choose a long-enough time scale, nothing is permanent, but bonsai works will be preserved photographically, just as are works in other media. And, of course, there are bonsai that have been around for hundreds of years. At any rate, thanks for contributing to a lively discussion!
Joe Dupre'
Omono
How about this? From no lesser source than Merium-Webster. Art:
Simple Definition of art
But, words have no absolute meaning. They are recorded in a dictionary according to the way they are used. Old bonsai masters of 100 years ago ( and maybe even today) may have had their own use for the term bonsai........and they are just as correct as people who use it in their own way today.
Simple Definition of art
- : something that is created with imagination and skill and that is beautiful or that expresses important ideas or feelings
- : works created by artists : paintings, sculptures, etc., that are created to be beautiful or to express important ideas or feelings
- : the methods and skills used for painting, sculpting, drawing, etc.
But, words have no absolute meaning. They are recorded in a dictionary according to the way they are used. Old bonsai masters of 100 years ago ( and maybe even today) may have had their own use for the term bonsai........and they are just as correct as people who use it in their own way today.
Random User
Guest
- Messages
- 1,313
- Reaction score
- 1,170
My understanding is that trees basically out grow themselves... "What you see above is what you see below", so the larger the canopy is, the further out the roots go.... and it gets to a point, where the roots are no longer effective in taking up moisture for the tree, or the top gets so large that it breaks opening up the tree to disease, etc. Of course there are also a lot of people who simply love to cut big trees down...
The general thought is that if we keep the roots pruned, and the tops small, the tree will live "x" number of years past its natural lifecycle... but I haven't outlived any masterpieces to really know.... and to revert to your original post and say that I have definitive proof, or have access to it, the answer would be "no"...
As far as what happened to the trees... "I" am going to say that they are pruned and re-pruned until some sort of disease gets them, some one drops a nuclear bomb on it, they are deliberately thrown away through ignorance, etc.
The general thought is that if we keep the roots pruned, and the tops small, the tree will live "x" number of years past its natural lifecycle... but I haven't outlived any masterpieces to really know.... and to revert to your original post and say that I have definitive proof, or have access to it, the answer would be "no"...
As far as what happened to the trees... "I" am going to say that they are pruned and re-pruned until some sort of disease gets them, some one drops a nuclear bomb on it, they are deliberately thrown away through ignorance, etc.
Maloghurst
Chumono
I take offense of the use of the word craftsman! The term we use today is Artisan!
M. Frary
Bonsai Godzilla
Oh me! Pick me!
Maloghurst
Chumono
It's a strange coincidence that the same people that are arguing against the rules are the same people that say Bonsai is not art.
I think I have come to accept, at least when it comes to visual arts, that the term "rule" is overwrought. Rules are just shorthand for what-is. To a pure artist, rules are self- evident and not really rules at all, they don't refer to them, they refer to what is in front of them, they refer to what is inside of them. Rules are a product of teachers. It's a lot easier to form a bunch of basic rules to guide folks, especially bone heads. The teachers are so good and so practiced and so use to dealing with boneheads they save themselves a lot of endless explanations and headaches and instead come up with rules--a bunch of footnotes for what usually works or what usually matters--as they see it. In the purest sense, when a teacher sees and approves of a bonsai he would say the designer followed the rules, therefore it is good, however, the designer may never have even thought of a rule. The problem with rules is they are an abbreviation, incomplete concentrative ideas, and if solely focused on, one starts missing the nuance that is the essence of great art, that being said, I think being a rule-breaker can often be just as rule-centric as sternly always focusing on complying to rules.
JudyB
Queen of the Nuts
Truth.
amcoffeegirl
Masterpiece
Well I'm not a guy so- no.
Solange
Shohin
That is incredibly dry wit there. You are correct. I was utilizing the term in an assumed gender neutral way, but I also understand that may be offensive to some. I apologize. We are all "not so bad" women or men or nonbinary persons to someone.
wireme
Masterpiece
Yes! No! Maybe?
Well you got me thinking about things I don't normally spend much time thinking about anyways.
I can't come up with any reason to say it's not art, someone else here might very easily.
I agree about the tree by itself even to the point of claiming it's not bonsai at all, I could understand that.
It's funny in most ways I'm happy to take the tree in a pot definition literally but at the same time I wouldn't give any of my own trees the title bonsai yet. Full contradiction there but oh well.
Is it an art piece with a bonsai in it or is it a bonsai art piece, is that the question? I could argue both ways to the point it seems an impossible question to answer for anyone else. Let the viewer decide, or the creator maybe?
If I ask myself why it might even matter then I'd like to call it bonsai art just for the sake of variety in the world of bonsai.
I think most people would agree with your view on the tree itself, do you think the composition as a whole would belong in a bonsai show?
namnhi
Masterpiece
This is so truth! I observed that posters that make rules a big deal are the ones has a teacher that apprenticed in Japan. These posters are well trained by their teacher! The reasons for rules are well explained by crust.
I agreed with MichaelS on art doesn't have rules because of that I do think bonsai is an art. An overcharging form of art.
Good day.
NN
JudyB
Queen of the Nuts
This is where the answer lies -for me at least. The viewer decides, even if the viewer is the creator.... What some consider art, I consider junk, and vice-versa.
Anthony
Imperial Masterpiece
@namnhi ,
you missed the hidden agaenda.
How much did you pay to study, and what happens if you paid so much, and can't get anything $$ back.
I re-mention our Ceramic period of late 1970 to early 90's.
Convinced that they could make money on not a craft, but an Art many took courses, bought moulds,
kilns, glazes, and got gypped, nothing sold.
Money down the drain.
This is why we do for ourselves, don't want to be victims.
Yi-Xing wares by master potters --------- ha ha ha
Tools that keep going up in cost -------- not value ---------- ha ha ha
Here is a master potter's work ---------- http://syracusethenandnow.org/Nghbrhds/Strathmore/ScarabVase.jpg
Adelaide Alsop Robineau
Master Ceramist
Note she is listed as ----- Master Ceramist ---------------- Art clay body
Same as the suckers who did the Ceramics courses down here - art clay body - totally nonfunctional
also falls apart with time, just standing there - body formula had a slight change to make it
commercial.
Apologies, the big letters, machine is doing as it wishes -------- Not shouting.
JudyB,
"beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
The sincerest compliment is when someone purchases your effort.
Good Day
Anthony
you missed the hidden agaenda.
How much did you pay to study, and what happens if you paid so much, and can't get anything $$ back.
I re-mention our Ceramic period of late 1970 to early 90's.
Convinced that they could make money on not a craft, but an Art many took courses, bought moulds,
kilns, glazes, and got gypped, nothing sold.
Money down the drain.
This is why we do for ourselves, don't want to be victims.
Yi-Xing wares by master potters --------- ha ha ha
Tools that keep going up in cost -------- not value ---------- ha ha ha
Here is a master potter's work ---------- http://syracusethenandnow.org/Nghbrhds/Strathmore/ScarabVase.jpg
Adelaide Alsop Robineau
Master Ceramist
Note she is listed as ----- Master Ceramist ---------------- Art clay body
Same as the suckers who did the Ceramics courses down here - art clay body - totally nonfunctional
also falls apart with time, just standing there - body formula had a slight change to make it
commercial.
Apologies, the big letters, machine is doing as it wishes -------- Not shouting.
JudyB,
"beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
The sincerest compliment is when someone purchases your effort.
Good Day
Anthony
Random User
Guest
- Messages
- 1,313
- Reaction score
- 1,170
For a Prairie-boy who never intends on showing what he creates, the rules for both Bonsai AND Haiku poetry are nearly invaluable. Traditionally written on rice paper, you should "always" carry them in your hip pocket when you go hunting jamadori just in case you've consumed too much pizza and beer the night before, and you don't wanna tear the pocket off of your good plaid shirt to wipe...
Light weight, lengthy, and can be multi ply; they can also provide you with reading material during the "job"... but tend to be a little boring for that purpose.
Light weight, lengthy, and can be multi ply; they can also provide you with reading material during the "job"... but tend to be a little boring for that purpose.
M. Frary
Bonsai Godzilla
I follow there rules.
First rule. I'm always right
Second rule. See first rule.
First rule. I'm always right
Second rule. See first rule.
music~maker
Shohin
Wow, this thread has been both fascinating and bizarre. Too many people get hung up on semantics. As if any one person has the right answer to "what is art" or what is bonsai". Hah! I can't believe how many pages of threads were taken up by that conversation.
For me, bonsai is a process and a state of mind as much as anything. It's a way of thinking about my trees. For some folks, it seems that they won't deem trees fit to wear the label "bonsai" until they're at some mythical level of refinement or completion, as if a living tree can ever be "complete".
For me, that's way too hard. I work on lots of trees. Everything from "finished" trees in bonsai pots all the way back to seedlings growing in my yard, and everything in between. Mostly, I like to develop trunks. I don't do it to exhibit them, although I may some day do that. I don't do it to meet anyone's approval or to try and conform to the rules, although I do find those guidelines to be useful tools. Naka's guidelines that he saw fit to write down in his books are fantastic starting points. Good luck finding trees that can perfectly conform to those. Sometimes you do, most often you don't. At some point, you start with raw material and have to make your own judgements.
From my point of view, the second you apply a technique to a tree that you intend to possibly be a bonsai, you are doing bonsai. Whether it's wiring a seedling to create a future trunk, reducing root mass of nursery stock, or pruning a refined masterpiece. If the intent is to ultimately create a miniaturized tree, and you are developing a tree to that end, you are doing bonsai.
Otherwise, there's this arbitrary line that must be defined somewhere, and I don't know where that line is, or who gets to set it. I don't think anyone does really.
Am I suddenly doing bonsai when I put a tree in a bonsai pot? I could point out 10,000 mallsai that would meet that definition, but those clearly don't meet many people's definition. Does the trunk have to be of a certain caliber or size to make it a bonsai? Does it require perfect nebari? Or the right number of branches? A certain amount of refinement? There are just far too many arbitrary ways to define what it is that makes something a "true" bonsai, and there will be exceptions to every rule. "I know it when I see it" is way too subjective.
So I'll stick to just calling what I do bonsai, even though a large percentage of what I work on is not yet in a bonsai pot. I don't care about semantics, and I don't care whether people think I'm doing bonsai or not. I'm largely self-taught, so I have found my own path, and I've learned a lot over the years about ways to reduce the scale of a tree to get it in a pot. I pull wisdom and knowledge from wherever I can find it, not just all from one place. But everyone has their own path, and their own way of expressing themselves through their trees. Who am I to say that what they're doing isn't bonsai or isn't art. How arrogant would that be?
This whole concept of labeling somebody else's trees (or even one's own) as "not yet bonsai" or "potential bonsai" requires an arbitrary line in the sand that I'm not comfortable drawing, and I'm guessing if you got a lot of old timers together, they'd probably all draw it differently.
I try to make my trees look like they could be real trees, just at a smaller scale. If that's not bonsai, I don't know what is. Whether they conform to some specific style or not, I don't care so much. I let nature be my guide. If my tree is doing something that is plausible on a full-scale tree, and it doesn't ruin the scale of my miniature tree, then I feel comfortable keeping it if I want to. Real trees have reverse taper sometimes, just like real tree have trident branches sometimes, and branches coming from inside a curve, etc, etc, etc.
In fact, sometimes I'll knowingly break a rule for some period of time because the rule-breaking branch serves some future purpose that can be better met by letting it grow for 3-5 years before removing it. Maybe that would be a tree somebody would call "not bonsai yet", but I say that's hogwash if I can anticipate what the tree is going to do by keeping it there for a while.
I think my views probably most closely align with @grouper52 here. I just hang out with my trees when I water them, and I tend to study them a bit every day. When I'm ready to prune/wire/style them, I'm thinking a lot less about rules, and more about how can I express a miniature tree using what I have before me? If there's something on the tree that ruins the sense of scale, I change it. If I can't change it, I remove it. Simple as that. I let my eye guide me more than a subservience to the rules or to anybody else's style or technique, although I do factor those things in where I deem appropriate.
I do study the rules, and I have studied the rules. As I said before, they are useful starting points. But more often than not, I study actual trees. Those provide a slightly different set of rules, and for me, those rules always trump the ones in the books.
As for whether what we are doing is art or not, I have similar views to that as to whether something is bonsai or not. Art, to me, is one of those things that is defined by the one doing it. How can I point to something that somebody else created and say that it's "not art" if they think it is? If they say it is, then it is. The artist is the final arbiter of what is art.
I can judge it, or call it bad art, but who am I to say that it's not art? To my understanding, art is just a way of expressing some thought, feeling, or vision that you have in the form of a particular medium. Differentiating between art and craft is silly and pointless to me. Even if what you're doing is a "craft", it's still your unique expression of that craft. How that's not to be considered an artistic expression is beyond me. And especially when we're talking about using living things as our medium. Every year that tree grows and changes, and through the actions of the artist, evolve and (hopefully) become more representative of a miniature tree in nature. It baffles my mind that anyone would argue that this is not art just because somebody, somewhere may have done this before.
Every tree is unique, and every bonsai practitioner is unique, so their expression of themselves onto that tree is likewise unique, even if it's similar to others who have gone before. To me, that is both bonsai, and it is art, and I declare it my right as an artist to say so. =)
One last point to add - I am also a martial artist. I may practice a block 10,000 times, and it may be the same block handed down from sensei to sensei, but my unique interpretation of that block, and my particular execution of it is mine and mine alone. I would argue that my particular implementation of that block is an artistic expression as well, even though I did not invent it, and I practice it the way it was taught to me. I have made it my own over many years of practice. My bonsai techniques are no different.
For me, bonsai is a process and a state of mind as much as anything. It's a way of thinking about my trees. For some folks, it seems that they won't deem trees fit to wear the label "bonsai" until they're at some mythical level of refinement or completion, as if a living tree can ever be "complete".
For me, that's way too hard. I work on lots of trees. Everything from "finished" trees in bonsai pots all the way back to seedlings growing in my yard, and everything in between. Mostly, I like to develop trunks. I don't do it to exhibit them, although I may some day do that. I don't do it to meet anyone's approval or to try and conform to the rules, although I do find those guidelines to be useful tools. Naka's guidelines that he saw fit to write down in his books are fantastic starting points. Good luck finding trees that can perfectly conform to those. Sometimes you do, most often you don't. At some point, you start with raw material and have to make your own judgements.
From my point of view, the second you apply a technique to a tree that you intend to possibly be a bonsai, you are doing bonsai. Whether it's wiring a seedling to create a future trunk, reducing root mass of nursery stock, or pruning a refined masterpiece. If the intent is to ultimately create a miniaturized tree, and you are developing a tree to that end, you are doing bonsai.
Otherwise, there's this arbitrary line that must be defined somewhere, and I don't know where that line is, or who gets to set it. I don't think anyone does really.
Am I suddenly doing bonsai when I put a tree in a bonsai pot? I could point out 10,000 mallsai that would meet that definition, but those clearly don't meet many people's definition. Does the trunk have to be of a certain caliber or size to make it a bonsai? Does it require perfect nebari? Or the right number of branches? A certain amount of refinement? There are just far too many arbitrary ways to define what it is that makes something a "true" bonsai, and there will be exceptions to every rule. "I know it when I see it" is way too subjective.
So I'll stick to just calling what I do bonsai, even though a large percentage of what I work on is not yet in a bonsai pot. I don't care about semantics, and I don't care whether people think I'm doing bonsai or not. I'm largely self-taught, so I have found my own path, and I've learned a lot over the years about ways to reduce the scale of a tree to get it in a pot. I pull wisdom and knowledge from wherever I can find it, not just all from one place. But everyone has their own path, and their own way of expressing themselves through their trees. Who am I to say that what they're doing isn't bonsai or isn't art. How arrogant would that be?
This whole concept of labeling somebody else's trees (or even one's own) as "not yet bonsai" or "potential bonsai" requires an arbitrary line in the sand that I'm not comfortable drawing, and I'm guessing if you got a lot of old timers together, they'd probably all draw it differently.
I try to make my trees look like they could be real trees, just at a smaller scale. If that's not bonsai, I don't know what is. Whether they conform to some specific style or not, I don't care so much. I let nature be my guide. If my tree is doing something that is plausible on a full-scale tree, and it doesn't ruin the scale of my miniature tree, then I feel comfortable keeping it if I want to. Real trees have reverse taper sometimes, just like real tree have trident branches sometimes, and branches coming from inside a curve, etc, etc, etc.
In fact, sometimes I'll knowingly break a rule for some period of time because the rule-breaking branch serves some future purpose that can be better met by letting it grow for 3-5 years before removing it. Maybe that would be a tree somebody would call "not bonsai yet", but I say that's hogwash if I can anticipate what the tree is going to do by keeping it there for a while.
I think my views probably most closely align with @grouper52 here. I just hang out with my trees when I water them, and I tend to study them a bit every day. When I'm ready to prune/wire/style them, I'm thinking a lot less about rules, and more about how can I express a miniature tree using what I have before me? If there's something on the tree that ruins the sense of scale, I change it. If I can't change it, I remove it. Simple as that. I let my eye guide me more than a subservience to the rules or to anybody else's style or technique, although I do factor those things in where I deem appropriate.
I do study the rules, and I have studied the rules. As I said before, they are useful starting points. But more often than not, I study actual trees. Those provide a slightly different set of rules, and for me, those rules always trump the ones in the books.
As for whether what we are doing is art or not, I have similar views to that as to whether something is bonsai or not. Art, to me, is one of those things that is defined by the one doing it. How can I point to something that somebody else created and say that it's "not art" if they think it is? If they say it is, then it is. The artist is the final arbiter of what is art.
I can judge it, or call it bad art, but who am I to say that it's not art? To my understanding, art is just a way of expressing some thought, feeling, or vision that you have in the form of a particular medium. Differentiating between art and craft is silly and pointless to me. Even if what you're doing is a "craft", it's still your unique expression of that craft. How that's not to be considered an artistic expression is beyond me. And especially when we're talking about using living things as our medium. Every year that tree grows and changes, and through the actions of the artist, evolve and (hopefully) become more representative of a miniature tree in nature. It baffles my mind that anyone would argue that this is not art just because somebody, somewhere may have done this before.
Every tree is unique, and every bonsai practitioner is unique, so their expression of themselves onto that tree is likewise unique, even if it's similar to others who have gone before. To me, that is both bonsai, and it is art, and I declare it my right as an artist to say so. =)
One last point to add - I am also a martial artist. I may practice a block 10,000 times, and it may be the same block handed down from sensei to sensei, but my unique interpretation of that block, and my particular execution of it is mine and mine alone. I would argue that my particular implementation of that block is an artistic expression as well, even though I did not invent it, and I practice it the way it was taught to me. I have made it my own over many years of practice. My bonsai techniques are no different.
Last edited:
