bonsaial1

Wait a minute here, I think some things need to be straigtened out here. This thread has taken a turn towards art in bonsai. Not the most stable ground on the forum. It has also taken up sides. This is not about the messengers. Take Andy's name out of the equation. He is just the messenger, albeit not the most tasteful person I know. ( I'm sure Ron has put me in that catagory already...) but, Art and bonsai do go together.

Originally posted by Chris,



Just what exactly do you agree with. That Ron got no credit for the quote or do you believe that sculpture and paintings have nothing to do with bonsai artistry. ( I hope its not the latter, thats a clue).

Ron, to quote Forest Gump: "I"m not a smart man" but I know when I'm being patronized. I have no beef with you. I have been where you are right now with Andy. Check out this quote I made back in 2001 with Andy:

Originally posted by Bonsaial1:


The whole thread can be read here:Bonsai in Europe

Andy's Response to The question: Al Wrote:
" are you talking about the tree itself, or the way they are displayed to the public."

Yes. My main thrust for the artistic rendering of each is (and these may address a few points brought up by Scott as well...):

[b:cc0bf6232b]for the tree [/b:cc0bf6232b]- My hope is that more people will take the trouble to recognize the difference between simple "trees in pots" and the art that is in bonsai styling. So far as I can tell, bonsai is not and never has been (in the modern era - last 50 years) about copying nature. Nor is it about just letting a tree in a pot do its own thing (that's natural after all, right??). Neither is artistic. Bonsai is, from what I've discerned from teachers, other artists, etc... concerned with styling trees to be evocative of nature, evocative of specific settings in nature, compositions that hint at scenes in nature in an artistic way and by using artistic tools and means. The result is not wholly "natural", but rather evocative of nature, but above all, artistic.

Some (usually Americans) criticize the triangular form found in most bonsai. Well, they must realize that that form is there for 2 very important reasons: 1. it is a natural form, a common form in nature, the result of all branches needing sunlight (it therefore works), and 2. the triangle is the most basic and essential artistic form. Human beings "get it", understand it and it therefore "works" too. Sure there are other canopy and compositional forms for bonsai, but the triangle is the most common and easiest for the human eye to understand.

The specific, smaller elements of styling must also, 1. be consistent with the desired overall image, and 2. must be consistent with one another so that the image has the full measure of integrity (nothing in glaring conflict). Both of these elements help to create harmony in the tree itself.

The styling technique should be good. Bent branches should be bent in the proper way, with the proper line formed (not rounded bows and directional lines that are illogical or in conflict with that of other branches, etc...)

Further, each tree species has its own important features, characteristics and reasons for being selected as a subject for bonsai. These elements should usually be the focal points around which the tree composition is built. To ignore them is to often fail to capture the essence of the tree - what makes it beautiful. This often keeps a bonsai from realizing its full artistic potential.

The pot should be selected with the above factors in mind so that it contributes to the composition and does not distract nor detract. The whole image should be consistently feminine or masculine (allowing for certain instances of tension, but not conflict).

These are just a few of the concerns that help to make a tree a figure of art rather than just a manipulated tree in a pot.

[b:cc0bf6232b]for the display as a whole[/b:cc0bf6232b] - The display should also be done in an artistic manner in that it tells a story - using artistic tools and means. The tree, obviously the focal point, first has to be a composition of integrity (all the parts work together consistently) and the overall presentation enhance this image to expound on the story told by the tree. The display composition is usually influenced by the season - after all, it is supposed to be evocative of nature. How can one ignore nature in display if the aim is to evoke its essence!? The tools and methods used in creating the presentation also have to be artistic tools and methods. The same kinds of rules and methods used in othe art forms have to be obeyed in this one as well.

All too often, bonsai in the U.S. are displayed without regard for the "story" nor with any regard for art. First, they are usually displayed out of season - during a growth time when juvenile growth sits atop mature growth - rather than at the best time for display - when the trees are dormant or when the current season's growth is finished.

Different tree species have different optimim display times and different species have different display forms (full-leaf, bare branched, in flower, etc...) and it is a disservice to bonsai as an art to ignore these facts. Consequently, the public gets the wrong idea about what bonsai is, what is artistic about bonsai and what quality is in bonsai.

A bit about art....
If art is the creative expression of a culture, bonsai art also has to capture the beauty of a culture. As bonsai is a Japanese art (Yes it is! Just as penjing is a Chinese art and ballet is a French art and Ikebana is a Japanese art, etc...) it is the Japanese culture which influences (even dictates) the display and design of bonsai. This is a major sticking point for many Western bonsai artists. Many can't get past the fact that the Japanese artistic aesthetic is not indicative of the artist's own culture. This gives rise to the sentiment that "if you are doing bonsai as the Japanese do, you are a copycat!" And them's fightin' words! Nobody likes to be accused of being a copycat.

Well, this leaves us with a quandary. The problem (as you've pointed out, Al) is that this brings on much criticism without much offered by way of a solution. After all, how can we do "bonsai" (Japanese word, Japanese art) and stay true to our own culture and art aesthetic? Hmmmmm? So far as I can figure out, we can't.

So, IMO, enough of the belly aching about that cr@p and either follow the proven, beautiful, deep and distinctive Japanese artistic aesthetic or, God forbid, CHANGE THINGS. Create a new aesthetic that is artistic, beautiful, deep and distictive from the Japanese. I'm not seeing anyone do so to a significant degree.

Right now, it is the Japanese example that should, IMO, be followed until one has the skills to diverge. Overall, the Japanese blow away all others with technique and horitculture - and for good reason; they've been at it a while. There's a lot to learn there. There is nothing wrong with putting forth effort to learn from the best.

Now, as to the ideal of art vs. hobby (not the right characterization as many hobbyists are excellent artists), the crux of the point is that some recognize that bonsai is art and some do not. Some don't care - and they don't have to care if they get enjoyment out of the endeavor. HOWEVER, by no means does this mean that it is their ideal that should be accepted as what bonsai is. It is fine that they don't care to participate in art, but unless it is artistic, it is not bonsai - in the sense of the full definition. So the argument that John Doe's tree (a dinky $5 juniper in a plastic pot) is just as beautiful as Ernie Kuo's tree falls on its face. Not everyone is a skilled and formidable artist. This fact must be recognized.

This brings us to some of the issues addressed by both you, Al, and Scott in his last post. No one begins an endeavor as an expert. We all, in any endeavor, start out without skills or knowledge and have to build those things. Those who are trying to do so have to be instructed as to what is good and what is bad, what is acceptable and what is unacceptable. This cannot be accomplished by others telling them that anything they do is just fine. Criticism is a greatly important component of instruction and in the learning process. Efforts that are bad, poor, lacking - these must all be criticized and efforts that are good, promising, excellent - these must all be encouraged and praised. This is how one learns good and bad. The idea that "bad" does not exist, only less than perfect, is an affront to excellence. Excellence is the point. We may not all reach the levels of skill and understanding to be able to consistently produce excellence, but we should never decide that mediocrity is equal to excellence. That is the danger to any endeavor. That is the danger to art.

Having said all of that, there's no reason that everyone involved in bonsai must be an artist, must produce excellent work, must follow the "rules" of bonsai, etc... It's just an endeavor like any other. There are some who are interested in pushing the artistic envelope. Great for them! There are many as well who just like the peace of growing trees in pots in the backyard, the fellowship of others who like doing the same thing, the outlet for creativity and mental exercise - whatever. These individuals don't need to be concerned with meeting the expectations of others; only their own expectations.

This fact does not, however, mean that what they create is the acme of bonsai. They, by their own choice and definition, have opted out of the artistic pursuit of the endeavor. If they recognize this fact, it is to their credit. If they do not, they are deluded and misguided and their criticisms are harmful to the art.

It is not wrong to criticize, it is not wrong to point out shortcomings. Surely this can be done in a constructive manner, but constructive criticism is not "gentle" criticism or "encouraging" criticism as it is often characterized by those who cannot endure criticism of any kind. Constructive criticism is that which teaches (and this does not mean "spoonfeeding!" the difference between good and bad, right and wrong, the desired and the undesirable. There's no two ways about it.

Al, I hope that I've explained by position a bit better in answer to some of you points, and Scott, I hope that I've addressed your concerns as well. Sorry this was sooooooo long.

Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
zone 8, Texas

Now forget that Andy has written this. Someone would have to be a fool to think that what has been written here has no bearing on the way bonsai is practised. To simply ignore this information is ignorant by definition. Better to think you are working towards this end than to defend ignorance of the subject. This makes no sense. I can tell you this, The way I do bonsai has changed alot since 2001. I feel I work in a much more artistic manner, and simple details make a difference.

My points to you were from experience, I have been there dude. I do not say much anymore about other peoples trees , or get on the Feely-sofical threads. They have not much to do with real bonsai. I am sure you and I are much more alike then you realize, and I'm sure that you would much rather be in the backyard making great bonsai. I'm just hopin you see the artistic side of the endeavor and how much it has to do with the other arts we love so much.

The most important tool I know is Andy's essay about art and bonsai. The Fundamental's of Bonsai Design.
How can anyone not read this and have any other point of view then "Bonsai is art" plain and simple.

Best regards, .:|:. Bonsai-al

__________________
Real men don't wear coats with "happi" in the title.