bnsaijim

eighten,

Thaks for your comments.

Well, I've always thought that monkies typing Shakespeare was practicably impossible... Stephen King maybe...

While I AM religious I was not necessarily taking an opportunity to plug the BIG GUY so much as I was unable to think of an example where forethought, even in the guise of experience, did not play a part in artistry, at least for us poor mortals.

On one of the half dozen "artistry spin-off threads" there is a mention of "random" artistic successes. Maybe there are true zen moments however, I think as luck favors the prepared, design forethought, at least as much as possible with natural media such as ours will increase the frequency and/or degree of such random successes...

As for your first set of comments:

1. I'd say that the criteria in (1) are "impossible" or at least bordering on 1-2-3 bonsai which I would contend negates it's qualification as art. Most natural material would fit your criteria of emotionally moving, it feels unique, magical, striking, vibrantly alive, etc. yet falls short on many of the bonsai design principles; it is not clear as to whether this is accounted for under (2)...

It is often possible to compensate or camoflauge such "defects" but not always. Often the Japanese accept a tree's defects simply based on it's status as a collected specimen and as an expression of naturalness. A branch might be left simply because it breaks all the rules.

It is the Westerner's mind that is caught up in design and rules.

2. "....If I am a naturally talented artist or if I have studied art and have gained a deep enough understanding of it, it is probably good art to a lot of people, and that is the good art that art critics and museum patrons like."

People like to use Van Gogh as an example on this forum. In the above context his art is unacceptable both to the unwashed masses as well as many of his peers.


Sincerely,

Jim Stone
TX