Flawed Trees

ripssurf

in light of some of the recent and very interesting threads on this site, i have a question about flaws.

there are flaws that are flaws because they simply break "the rules". there are flaws that greviously detract from said trees (like 2-D trees - sorry bonsaial ), and there are flaws that compliment these same trees.

my question is about the last set of trees. what kind of flaws actually enhance the standing of a tree? are we just talking about things like jin or hollows in the trunk? or is it something else - something that cant be quite described (a subtle break of the rules for instance)?

im quite serious about this question. what flaws in a specimen are acceptable?

jeff

Advertisement

Aurelius

Without overthinking the question, the acceptable ones are the ones that work for the overall piece in question, whatever it happens to be.

Vonsgardens

I'll weigh in. A flawed tree is a tree who's total sum doesn't allow you to overlook the obvious faults- they don't have Jizz (an old Uk birdwatchers (twitcher) term). To writ, some of the great "famous trees" of Japan are so badly flawed as bonsai that if they didn't have the aura of great age and status (and generally scale) you would look at them and go 'bad bonsai". But because they have the aura, the Jizz, they give a feel that everything about them is right and you overlook the obvious flaws (many of which include reverse taper). They speak to you.

Good homegrown bonsai speak to you beacuse they too have "jizz"- look at Vance Hanna's 30 year old black pine from seed in the gallery (among many others) or JVC's juniper or many of the ither trees that have a degree of provenance- they speak to you. It isn't formulaic- if you want that look at the cookie cuter trees out of asia for the box store market.

On that note, I'll go back to grading essays before my pen injures the graduate students.
John

bonsaikc

At the risk of begging the question, how can a flaw enhance the standing of the tree? By doing so, does it not cease to be a flaw and become a point of interest or a focal point?

I am reminded of a fantastic tree that belonged to Mas Imazumi, that is now in the care of the Golden State Bonsai Collection North, in Oakland, CA. If I am not mistaken, this is a collected tree. It was shown in the last couple of years, and posted on a web forum much like this one. One of the comments exemplified the immaturity of the poster. They looked at this tree, and the only thing they could say was that it seemed to have some inverse taper at the base.

The point of this is that this tree is a masterpiece of careful collection and decades of assiduous care. To remark on what may seem to be a flaw according to the "rules" as set forth in some book or magazine is an insult to the totality of the tree. This tree was magnificent, and one may hope that it will be in the future with proper care.

What you are suggesting is that what might be called a flaw on a lesser tree would be politely ignored to show honor to this tree. Or, what might be called a flaw on a lesser tree could become a focal point of another tree. So how then can they be called flaws? Are they not character? Are they not the wrinkles that make our grandparents the beauties that they are? No one has their own face until they are in their mid to late thirties, and as we age, if we have a true perspective on what is gained through experience, we only become more beautiful. So when a bonsai has lived long enough to become venerable, it is proper to avert one's eyes when the slip is showing.

Attached Images

gsmasimazumijbpcomp.jpg (71.6 KB, 82 views)

__________________
Chris Johnston
"She was a critic, and lots fo critics who aren't called to do what they write about grow jealous and mean and small in their disappointment." - Stephen King, Duma Key
Sashi-no-eda.blogspot.com

Vonsgardens

Chris, I believe that we are saying the essentially same things. Being in the presence of a "famous" tree is something to behold. But, if you follow the generalized model for teaching bonsai..... the "flaws" (which I too believe enhance their overall character/image) can be difficult for some to overcome. However, the character of a well aged tree (Yamadori or raised from seed in a container, or some combination thereof) is obvious. John

John Dixon

I have to agree that "flaws" are a fact of life. Everybody and everything has them. Sometimes it is the flaw that shows the character (jin and shari are representative of something dead on a live tree.....wabi-sabi). I usually like deadwood on bonsai, it is dramatic, but it isn't always appropriate.

I see flaws as having limits to adding character though. Let's say there is a finger "snapping" contest. One guy has a small part of the tip of a middle finger missing from a woodworking accident, but because of that, he can snap his fingers extremely loud. The other contestant has no opposing digits (thumbs). Who do you think will win?

Sorry, I'm having a strange morning. For some reason that made sense to me.

I'm off for some caffeine.

John

__________________
John Dixon

Si vis pacem parabellum

Stay off the trails of others, that's where the booby-traps are.

Will_Heath

Good thread!

I believe it is the ability to use flaws and not hide them that makes a great artist.

All things have flaws, turning the flaw into a asset is the talent we all strive to achieve.

In an attempt to answer the original question that was posed. Flaws that do not distract from the overall composition are acceptable, those that draw the eye from the whole, are not.


Will

Bart Thomas(deceased)

A flaw is an opportunity in disguise.

That's what keeps "Disney" out of great trees.

However, there are flaws, and there are flaws.

An example I might offer is an arborvitae I have given to a nursery to sell.

It has a greatly flawed, partly broken, but healed, great first branch. That is the flaw that is a design opportunity. Unfortunately, the whole back of the tree is dead stubs, and the tree has nothing else going for it. That is the flaw that makes it hopeless for me.

Yes, with 20 years of tending, it might make a great cascade. I'll never see it if that happens.

ripssurf

i hear and understand what you guys are saying. i understand what you are saying in the context of wabi sabi. i understand what you are saying from a design standpoint. i also understand that when design flaws detract from the overall tree, it is a fatal flaw.

im really very curious as to what examples are there of where rules are broken but are either A) unoticeable or B) an enhancement of the tree.

for instance, in bonsaikc's (chris's) post, he gave an example of a specimen that definitely breaks a rule (reverse-taper) yet that tree is considered a specimen. understandably, if i were to do the same thing, my tree would , ewll id throw it away before someone say it!

are there other good examples of where a design flaw or otherwise actually adds to the tree?

regards,
jeff

ps thanks for all the great answers so far.