Chan is a charlatan of the highest order at this point, and it's his ego that is doing it to him. Clearly, he can run a successful business, but that's about it. Here's just one example video of what I'm talking about, which he has since edited to cut out the part where he broke the tree in half. I'm copy/pasting my comment from the video as well as the link. Every styling video he makes is a bragging session about how super speedy fast he is at styling trees, how he's the only one in the UK that gets called on to style xyz because there's no one that can do what he does, etc etc etc, followed by a video of him absolutely mutilating a tree. Anyway, here's the link and my comment for an explanation.
"I'm seeing a lot of comments on here from the “True Bonsai Artists™” praising Peter for this. This is bullshit, and if you can’t acknowledge that, you’re blind. He fu*cked this tree up royally, and it’s obvious from the noise he made when he snapped the damn tree in half, but then he just kept on going like it was nothing because he was doing it in front of a live audience, and then had the gall to post this abomination on YouTube. This was not intended in the least, and it was obvious from the stream of bullshit he was spewing after the moment of disaster. Everyone makes mistakes, I’ve seen some wonderful work from bonsai masters that will really chop a tree down but shape it for the future and I’ve seen others that let their ego get in the way and absolutely brutalize a tree. You don’t have to be a “True Bonsai” whatever to be able to see that this was a disaster... and it’s not his first time. There’s another video on here where he mutilated a tree live in front of an audience AND the owner of the tree. The guy was nice enough to grin and bear it, but it was obvious that he was not happy in the least."
After reading this post and some of the response, I would like to offer a few comments regarding this specific project and Chan's actions.
1. This was an older tree (20 years, or so), brought to Chan for restyling. (Learned in the First minute or two of the video). The customer had attempted to make a cascade and had failed. I can't believe most here would consider the original tree as any kind of success. Typical successful bonsais usually have a defined Nabari, well defined trunk structure, a good "front" with visual interest, movement in the trunk to help give the appearance of age and a defined shape in the foliage. Any customer bringing a bonsai to Peter Chan likely knows he usually designs trees with a triangular shape in the foliage. Also, he has said hundreds of times that he does not like jins.
2. Back to what he was given as starter material - Basically he had a tree with age and a good pot. Work had been completed on carving of the trunk, and since it was there, he needed to accentuate the carving, rather than ignore or hide it. The cascade was horrible, in that a large segment of the trunk was absolutely horizonal, terminating in multiple (3?) forks from a single point in the main trunk. From a classic design point, this is a huge no-no. The tree was healthy, but the foliage was much too thick.
3. What he had as starter material left him with few options. He knew he had to do something with the 3 limbs coming off the trunk. He knew he had to include the lower trunk carving in the final design. He liked the nebari, but not much else and he knew drastic work was needed if the tree would ever become a suitable specimen. I think a loose restatement of his words were that he had been given a 20 year old "Bush in a nice pot" to redesign/improve.
4. My opinion was that Drastic Changes ad to be made to the tree. They would be changes that altered the tree for several years before there would be any way to call it a worthy bonsai IMO, that is a shame, because 20 years had been invested in the tree, with almost nothing accomplished, other than a failed attempt to make a semi-cascade bonsai. That had to be the original intent of the owner, because of the pot they chose. Many of us try and fail. That goes with the desire to make bonsai.
5. After visually examining the tree, I believe Peter, knew it would never be a semi-cascade, but he was willing to give it a shot, and in his words, he was willing to crack the main trunk in order to attempt bending it into some sort of cascade shape. I think he knew this would not work, but doing it was a chance to instruct by taking his saw and showing the trunk could be cracked by making a small saw cut on the top side and then breaking some of the fibers to pull the trunk down. He did say that was what he was going to do. It was his stated desire to "crack the trunk (and bend it)" to see if enough motion could be achieved to make a semi-cascade. This was good instruction, because we got a chance to watch him do it, but I believe he knew it was not what he wanted, because more than once, he had shown the horizonal trunk section and stated it was a horrible design element and would never work on the bonsai.
6. With this shown, he led us through the decision process that eliminated most other considerations to take advantage of the only real front view and the one good feature, which was the lower trunk and the possibility of eventually adding trunk movement. That possibility would only come through removing the long horizonal section that terminated in 3 limbs from a common point and a poor semi-cascade feature. Knowing this, he cut and broke away many years of trunk growth and set up a new Apex limb. To do this, he walked away from the semi-cascade design of the original tree and the "Nice pot".
7. Pretty quickly, he reshaped the tree, made obvious improvement in the truck movement, and started the tree on a journey toward a new apex. I can't quote statements he made, but in my mind, I knew he understood he was adding another few years to any hope of having a better tree. In his mind, that was acceptable, because the original design (semi-cascade) was never going to work. He ended his demonstration by saying more wiring would be needed and more work, that he would not attempt because of the massive changes he had already made to the tree. Finally, he chose a temporary pot that he said would not be the permanent home for the tree.
8. I could tell he was not happy with the tree, but I knew he had done the best possible things to make the tree better at some future date. Then he said something that clarified several things to me. He said basically that "Someone would buy the tree". The unspoken thing from the first was that his customer - the one who brought him the tree for restyling, No longer owned the tree before Peter began his attempts to change the design into something he had any chance of eventually making into something he could sell.
This was long, but I thought Peter actions could use another opinion. Thanks for reading this.
Bonsai
Bonsai, Pinus sylvestris 'Beuvronensis', approx 55 years, RHS Gardens, Wisley
Juniperus Chinensis Bonsai
Bonsai Juniper
