Jim, this whole thread is nothing more than opinion but your post read like your opinion is the only correct one.

You missed the point I was making anyway. When I said: "I leave it to others to call him master but he is certainly good at what he does. "

I simply don't get caught up in the whole bonsai hierarchy thing. The way I see it we are all bonsai practitioners. Some of us are bad, some of us are good and some of us are excellent at it. If I like a tree I'm really not concerned whether it was created by someone with a certificate from Japan or the 15 year old kid up the street. Everything will show in the trees one creates.

Tony

Rip writes:

But if you are going to be bold enough to critique the artists work you had better know as much as the artest or more. If you don't you stand the chance of looking very foolish.

Ah, I don't know. That would mean that it would sorta suck to be Kimura - you know more than everyone so no one would critique your work, and you'd never learn anything from anyone else.

--

I critique Al's work on here all the time, just to give an example, but I'd bet my bonsai collection against his that he knows more about bonsai than me!

(Now perhaps I do stand the chance of looking very foolish - and perhaps it's more than a chance - but it's a chance I'm more than happy to take.)


All the best,
Old Mister

OMC, Right on the head. You and I talked about the Cal Juniper. I feel your comments made me continue to dig for ideas to improve the tree. I think we both agree that the present design could be a good one.

The one thing that is good in bonsai is that if the artist has an open mind and is willing to listen, they may gleen many ideas that they may have not seen. The bonsai is a living artwork and therefore can be changed unlike two dimensional art. If the artist thinks that he or she is better than everyone else, their mind is closed and can not be opened. Free exchange of ideas is a good thing.

Hey Rip now that you have joined a club, you may get the chance to do the very most fun thing of all. Go to a convention with all you freinds a critique the show as a group. Critique the club show for that matter. I have done this with many important people. I have done critiques with Harry Harao, John Naka, Ted Matson, Dennis Makashima, Warren Hill, Joe James. Some of these were done as a club, and some were done on a one on one just because we are friends. While none of these people posess the true ability that Kimura has, they are very good artists in their own right. These people pass judgement on other peoples work all the time. There is nothing wrong with criticism whether good or bad. Trust me you don't have to be a Master to find something wrong with a tree. It all boils down to how petty you want to be. I have seen people count the trees in forest's. They get to 26 and say:" I knew it, something was not right, this grove has an even amount of trees, it's to symetrical". Give me a break!

Bonsaial

re Kimura
"De gustibus disputandum non est"

...and I think he's great.

Robert I also feel that the discussion and dispute over Kimuras abilitys are mute. He is great. I also want you to know that I like the layout of your web page, very neat and easy to get around.

Al To have an openion is to express your ideas.
To critique is to teach.
To teach by knowing what to do is wise.
To teach by not knowing what to do is foolish.

OMC It is one thing to express your ideas about an artests work, it is another to presume to teach the artest.

Al I look forward to all of the club experiances.

Thoughtfully

All,

I've been thinking and praying about all this the last few days. In way of explanantion and apology...

Obviously the interpretation of any statement is in the mind of the reader - this has happened at least a half dozen times in this thread... I think that sometimes the alternates provide additional or better debate than the original... As I somewhat sarcastically pointed out- "me too's" just don't stir the gray matter... nor does it further the art...

And probably more fitting the "Profile Section"...

I'd like to ask that you respect my background- "I are sci-uhn-tist/enghuneer" (Industrial hygiene/Environmental Toxicology) so I'm used to arguing vehemently in a supported manner, trying to leave as little unsaid as possible. Doing what I do to earn money for my bonsai fund... I tend to deal in black and whites- my mind is geared for that- So I do tend to think and write in a direct manner, usually in an attempt to keep some idiot (i.e., PhD, MD, MD/PhD) from killing or maiming him/herself. But they keep building better idiots...

Please excuse my "style". I WILL come off PREACHY, OPINIONATED, ARGUMENTATIVE, COCKY, ARROGANT, (does that cover it all?)

But,

I do usually come from the heart and am very passionate about what I consider the ART of bonsai.

I've been doing bonsai since I was a teen and in a half dozen zones... and if doesn't have legs I've probably stuck it in a pot...

I am a strong proponent of starting with the basics (typically Japanese) even if it gets in the way of artistic freedom and expression- that certain principles will transcend species, climate, or any other variable 99.99% of the time...

If I have a beef with someone I won't cloak it in innuendo's = I'll call you out. I won't generally attack anyone... I expect some of the same consideration- if you think I'm busting your huevos a bit much, let me know, esp. off-forum...

I guess all I'm asking is that y'all assume a smiley face whether there is one or not and take my problem solving approach into consideration realizing also, that I too will change the context of other's statements...

And yes, I will tend to ramble on...

Sorry to all whose fur I've rubbed the wrong way...


Peace,


Jim
TX

Jim, your first reply"s while seemingly sarcastic in tone did make everyone think. I don't like to see threads just fall apart and die. I find the conversation stimulating here to say the least. I wish I had the ability to form my thoughts into the words you laid down. Obviously your education comes thru.


Rip, Rip, Rip. Where do you come up with stuff?


Rip said: Al To have an openion is to express your ideas.
To critique is to teach.
To teach by knowing what to do is wise.
To teach by not knowing what to do is foolish.

Do you even know what a critic is? Rex Reed, Roger Ebert, Gene Siskel, are all critics. They watch movies and TV shows, review them and give a thumbs down or a thumbs up. I don't think any of these gentlemen have the potential to go out and make a movie of the caliber as Steven Spielberg. Yet, they criticize his work year after year. These men are highly respected and are not deemed as teachers. I have watched many movies that have recieved poor critiques, yet found them very entertaining. The Dictionary states:critic :judge of literary or artistic works.
criticize:judge as a critic, find fault.

I don't know, I think you fell head first into your own proverb. I think it's foolish to try to teach when you don't know the meaning of the word.

Rip said: Robert I also feel that the discussion and dispute over Kimuras abilitys are mute.

mute :unable to speak, silent, muffling device.

The correct word would be, moot which means open to question. Normaly I would not even go here. I have many faults with my grammer, and I know this. When you bring teaching into the disscusion, then you have opened up a whole new bag of tricks. I have never thought of myself as a teacher, I don't have the education for it. Though I wish I had. I would have made a wonderful teacher. If you want to start thinking about looking foolish check out this proverb. Better to remain silent and thought the fool, then to speak and remove all doubt.

Buy a $3.00 dictionary, it will be the best bonsai tool you will ever own.

Jim,

Foot-in-mouth is not a style. Please stick with the Japanese basics: formal upright, informal upright, slanting, windswept, semicascade, full cascade, etc.

OMC, PhD., TIC*





*Tongue-in-cheek

LOL!!!

Groan {no papers to speak of}

Jim I appreciate your first post in this thread. I think the first hand knowledge and respect for the individual came through, and even if it got derailed a little bit toward the end it was a post that was well worth reading.

Regards,

Matt