While Rip raises some good points about how far we have come in America, we are light years behind in the parts that count. "Patience".

First, we are content to train our trees by Clip and grow, we are content to pot them before their finished, and not ashamed to let people see our half assed trees and wonder why we don't get favorable reviews from the real bonsai experts.

I spent some time with Marybel Balendonck during the Bonsai-a-thon last Feb. At this time she was the docent in the room of display bonsai. We were standing in front of one of Harry Hirao's Cal. junipers. It is a very nice tree, full of sculpted dead wood which appears very natural. Lime sulpher looks great, the foliage is deep green and very healthy. the leaves of the juniper had been properly pinched to produce thick ramification, which is hard to do on C. juniper.

The problem with the tree is that the foliage mass atop the tree is just a green blob. There is no grooming nor detail wire. The outline of the tree is great sans foliage. When the foliage is factored in, the tree starts to fall off. I asked her why Harry had never wired the crown to add some artistic elements to the tree. She said Harry believes the tree should look natural and to much wire ruins the natural look of the tree. I asked if it was case of really believing that or a the in-ability to fullfill the task? She gave me a look like "Who the Hell are you, and why are you questioning a master?" The fact is, my question is still un answered and the tree still has this odd looking crown on it.

I wonder what would happen if someone like say, Liporace, or Nolander's or heck in our own state Boon or Kuo. Boon and Kuo are, in my opinion the only two that I have seen build canopy's on trees due to fine detail wiring and manicure a tree till it brings on the detailed and artistic look of a finely done Japanese tree.

Second, there is just too much politics in the governing bodies of GSBF to get anything done of any significance. It requires too much red tape, evryone has their hand out, and the governing rule is "how much money are we going to make".

Third, the local club level is just as bad. Too much time is spent on who is in charge of the goodies for the next meeting, how many trees is everyone going to donate so that the club can make more money to spend on bringing in local talant that don't believe in wiring trees till they look good.

These are just a few of the stumbleing blocks that are out there. These are not things that one person can fix. These are not things that two people can fix. These are things that the whole group must address as a unit and be unified towards the goal.

This is the tree I'm talking about. Can't you just see this tree with a crown finely wired on it. It would be spectacular!

Attached Images

harryhirao.jpg (11.3 KB, 101 views)

Here is another one this time by a great artist fron The LA area also. This tree really needs help. The trunk has been worked and overworked, too bad they never developed a crown that added something to the design.

Attached Images

benoki.jpg (26.1 KB, 98 views)

These are nice trees to be sure but I think both would benefit from more negative space in the foliage area. That would break it up into more individual leaf pads and let some of the living branches show through. They would be more "treelike" in my opinion.

Tony

Hi Al,

One of the factors in the California "situation" is the fact that some pioneers in American bonsai were and are there. These individuals, John Naka being the foremost, have put in a lot of years leading others toward improved bonsai work, but in many respects they've not kept pace with the new knowledge and techniques that have been discovered since they began to teach. Regardless, their students disregard anything that is not espoused by their teachers. While John Naka may advocate some techniques that are, by todays standards, antiquated and less effective (even detrimental), many of his students follow unquestioningly the way that he has always done these techniques. This is excellent, in a way, but it also denys the idea of shu, ha, ri - the learning process that involves 1) strict adherance, 2) divergence, and 3) transcendence. This has occurred to the detriment of their practice, perhaps.

While many in the West have no tolerance for the first step of strict adherance (following unquestioningly), it is just as bad (or worse) to then not begin to use the acquired teaching in one's own, unique way - trying new things based on the ongoing instruction. The last phase of transcendence (using the past instruction, meshed with one's own creative spirit and highly developed understanding to create a new, unique approach and ideal) is what is necessary for true progression in an art. The fact that many students in California are still in the first phase, even after several decades, means that while there may be a widespread high level of basic technique and understanding, there is also stagnation and a lack of growth and, perhaps, an unhealthy measure of closed-mindedness.

I guess that it can also be suggested that there is no reason that those who still follow unquestioningly the teachings of their pioneer teacher(s) should have to venture beyond the dogma of their teacher's method. It is not like it is a crime to just do what one wants. However, if these individuals also then go on to teach, their students may be getting a raw deal. Now that would be very bad - little more than demagoguery that is detrimental to the art. However, as some have pointed out here, the results speak for themselves, to some degree. Many will notice the lack of qualities that they may find appealing in bonsai work and avoid such examples as inspiration for their own work. So, there is always a balance that can assert itself.

Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
zone 8, Texas

Al, of the two trees you bring to our attention, the second seems to me to be flat. I realize that 2-d can do this but it does look a little blobish. The first one I disagree with you. I do see the makings of detail and pads, although they are very subtle. I will have to yield to your first hand knowledge of the tree and say it could also be in need of 'detail work'.

Andy, please clarify for me something. I am not looking to start a division but merely need to understand something. In a previous post you talked about the need to 'give yourself to the teachings of your chosen master' (my wording of what I think is your thought) while in this post you are questioning those who follow this path. It is possible I have remembered the old thread incorrectly or taken it out of context. I personally feel that at times both paths have merit!

Jay

Jay, I agree whith what you say in regards to what Andy has to say sometimes, and I am guilty with the same thing when I write. For me, I always feel that it is most important to research who is doing the teaching, what their collection looks like,and how they go about doing bonsai. It makes no sense to learn from a person that does not feel about bonsai the same as you. To go to a workshop to learn from someone just for the sake of saying you went because he was famous, but then teaches a lackluster approach to bonsai does neither of you any good.

I try to go to the workshops whenever I can, yet I mostly go as a silent observer. Why?
1. I can take in more info that way.
2. I get to see the artist work on a more diverse mix of trees.
3. I'm not bogged down working on my tree while waiting for the next go around.

So far most of the artists that come to Fresno do not work on trees the way I would like. So for me, it is easier to learn by emulating the written word of the people that I most admire. I think that this does work, and can be transfered to work at home through trial and error. Not the most effeciant way to do bonsai, but the way I wish to proceed at this time. Money and time to pursue the craft full time would go a long way towards making this a more fruitful endeavor.
Al wrote:
John does very adaquate work, but is it artistic, I think it falls way short. In fact their are people on the left coast that were doing great bonsai, artistic bonsai when John started or he taught that far exceeded John's artistic ability. I can name two. George Yamaguchi, and Umenori Hatanaka.

BTW, I'm wondering why I got no backlash for saying that I felt John Naka was not an artist. Seems that a few people agree with that statement and no one wished to argue the other way..Hmmmm..

Bonsai-al

Today is Sunday and the contest posting for the most part is done. I will go into this in depth at a later date to explain the Bonsai-al philosophy on detailing a tree. Man this should prove exciting to say the least.

Well I really don't agree with you but then you are entitled to your opinion.

I don't agree with you either, but I'm in no mood for arguing. I really like John Naka's work and would love to own one of his creations, but I can't afford any of them right now (maybe some day I will win the lotto).

Hi Jay,

You wrote:
"Andy, please clarify for me something. I am not looking to start a division but merely need to understand something. In a previous post you talked about the need to 'give yourself to the teachings of your chosen master' (my wording of what I think is your thought) while in this post you are questioning those who follow this path. It is possible I have remembered the old thread incorrectly or taken it out of context. I personally feel that at times both paths have merit! "
--------------

You're absolutly right - both paths have merit. In fact, they are each essential. Just as I detailed in that previous post, they each have to occur - shu, ha, ri - adherance (strictly following the instruction of your teacher), divergence (adding your own flavor to the teachings of your teacher), and divergence (rising above the mere letter of the teachings you've been offered to practice at a higher level that involves your whole creative self).

What is most often the case is that the individual has no teacher - or the individual has a teacher, but they merely look for "help" and do not start out by a few years of strictly following the instruction, unquestioningly. However, if this does occur, it is then time to imbue ones work with one's own flavor and try and expound on the verbatim teaching that one has received. Then, years later, it is generally time (provided that one has a solid foundation of shu and ha) to then transcend the strict letter of the teaching that one has been offered. At this time, the foundation is strong and one's own creativity is developed, intuitive and contextual - so one can then begin to really create unique and highly developed works of art.

This is what is supposed to happen. If it does not happen in this order, there is generally (generally) something underdeveloped in the work. So, just as it is important that a student be a blind follower in the beginning (for a few years), it is equally important that the strudent grow and ultimately grow beyond the teacher. To merely be the teacher's puppet for a lifetime is useless. However, many may find happiness in that. No problem.

By the way, I should qualify my remarks about Mr. Naka's students - this is not information that I know first-hand, but rather information that has been shared with me several times by trustworthy people.

Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
zone 8, Texas

So this shu, ha, ri would seem to be the key.

The general trend in the west to move away from this principle has led to a glorious release from stifling tradition, which will enable us westerners to take bonsai to new and exciting heights.

The general trend in the west to move away from this principle has led to a deplorable decline in standards, which unless we westerners address will lower bonsai to a poor and artless level.

Take your pick from the last 2 kind of tongue-in-cheek paragraphs.

The actual path I would guess to be somewhere down the middle, depending on circumstance.

Regards,

Chris.