Hey all,

As another installment in my defense of the role of artistry (artificial affectations to evoke reality), I offer the following examples:

Movies

In the movie "Saving Private Ryan," the director (artist) chose to render the color in the film toward the muted side. The colors were not crisp and realistic, but rather artificially muted. This was an affectation that was effective because most viewers have a mental concept of that period based on antiquaited footage and old movies where the color is absent or muted. The result of this non-realistic affectation is that the movie experience was "more real" for viewers. Artistry is a slave to human perception.

Movie soundtracks usually constitute far more than 50% of the viewing experience. This might seem odd since real life has no soundtrack. Dramatic events in real life occur most often with nothing but the ambient sounds of nature/city/home/car/etc.. Case and point: Imagine the movie "Jaws" without the familiar soundtrack theme for the shark (Dun dun dun dun dun dun....). That movie would have been a complete flop without that theme. The public's ensuing fear of sharks and the ocean in the years that followed the release of that film would likely have never surfaced as a result of the movie. It was the music that produced all the fear. The fake shark was just a supporting prop.

More on soundtracks; while good moviemaking can be accomplished without the use of a soundtrack in every (or most) scene(s), an inappropriate soundtrack will completely ruin any chance of the desired viewing experience. Interesting how something that has nothing to do with real life drama has so much power.

By the way, the idea in bonsai that the pot is like the "frame" of a painting is not one that I support. I rather believe that the job of framing the work is best performed by the stand. The pot is the soundtrack. The pot establishes the entire mood. The tree just supports it. Screw up the pot and nothing about the bonsai will work.

FWIW

Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
www.bonsai365.com/
zone 8, Texas

Andy,

I wouldn't disagree with a word of your main thesis here. Well said, though you convinced me the first time around, so perhaps I'm not the best judge.

But then you surprised me, and hinted a whole new topic in the final afterthought to your post:



Interesting. I guess I don't know enough about the art (?) of chosing frames for artwork to know whether the analogy holds, or not. Can the wrong frame screw up a Rembrandt? I would have thought so, but perhaps not as badly as the wrong pot can screw up a tree. Does the frame really not engage in a dialogue with the painting so as to setting the mood, or is this dialogue there, but just more subtle than in bonsai?

It may well be that the soundtrack-to-film metaphor better captures the even balance. I guess some of my objection merely reveals a lack of imagination on my part: soundtrack and film are displayed in two separate sensory modalities that then fuse at some cognitive level to provide the experience as a whole, where as pot and tree are experienced through a common sensory modality as a common whole.

But I didn't post this as much to listen to myself ramble as in the hope that I could persuade you to expand on this metaphor. I've been thinking about the interplay between pot and tree a great deal, lately, and so your comments seem particularly timely.

With my best regards,
Carl

Hi Carl,

You write:
"Interesting. I guess I don't know enough about the art (?) of chosing frames for artwork to know whether the analogy holds, or not. Can the wrong frame screw up a Rembrandt?"
--------------

Maybe, but not as much as would the wrong color scheme (the soundtrack). The wrong frame is distracting, but the wrong soundtrack ruins the whole thing.

By the way, the analogy may hold or not, but it's just my opinion. I don't suggest that anyone who contradicts me is wrong. This anology is absolutely true - for me, not necessarily for everyone.

As for how artistry can facilitate direct communication and make an acted out scene more real, imagine a scene where a demented madman is killing a hapless victim - with an axe. Such a scene is surely brutal, even gross on just its visual basis. However, if the director wants to communicate that the guy is crazy, the soundtrack - instead of being ominous and scary - could be a nursery rhyme sung by children. With that element, we instantly understand that he's nuts. Further, the actor (an artist in his own right) can help too. Instead of having a grimace of anger on his face could rather be smiling while he hacks up his victim. If the director (an artist) wants to make the madman more imposing, more monstrous, he can shoot the scene from behind the man - showing only the back of his head, shoulders and the axe being slammed down onto some unseen victim below the camera's field of view. In all of these cases, the visual is just a guy chopping up a victim. The work of artistry is to communicate something beyond this boring fact.

By way of bonsai (remember bonsai?), ;-) I hope that this illustrates how seemingly inconsequential, unnatural or seemingly irrelevant elements add more realism to the viewer's experience. The argument that "naturalistic" composition is as effective in communicating as composition supported by artistic affectations would, in my opinion, hold very little water. Artistry is far more powerful than is literal anything.

Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
zone 8, Texas

Andy, instead of trying to contribute anything this time, I'm just going to lean back in my computer chair and enjoy. You have a great gift for words.

But what's happened to the old Andy? I thought the message was supposed to be, "Listen up and pay attention! You're about to get the TRUTH!"

Best regards, Fred

Woops! What happened to the smiley face at the end?

Fred

"I thought the message was supposed to be, "Listen up and pay attention! You're about to get the TRUTH!"

Now look here, Fred. I resemble that remark. ;-)

Naw, I'm just a loveable little fuzzball of warmth. I realize that this is the internet - and on the internet there is no such thing as truth; only opinion (remember my "Things I've learned from online discussion groups" column?). Let's all hold hands and sing together. After all, if we can't all agree on something, it must not be true.

;->

Kind regards,
Andy "loveable little fuzzball" Rutledge
zone 8, Texas (the land of loveable little fuzzballs)

Andy,
I agree with everything you say except your choice of words, which I find misleading.

I think you've meant "Unnatural = More Real"

Naturalistic means to suggest the natural. In a restricted and minimalistic environment, such as a pot, a canvas, or the Big Screen, this can only be achieved by entirely artificial means, such as muted colors, exaggerated sounds, background music, forced perspective, etc.

The purpose of "Naturalistic" is to suggest "Realism". The only thing that's real is the feeling evoked. Everything else is artificial.
A lot of people mistake "naturalistic" for "natural". They have nothing to do with each other.

I like your analogy for the bonsai pot as soundtrack. I agree that the pot is much more than a frame.
Here in Los Angeles, even at the highest quality bonsai exhibits, I believe that more than half of the exceptional trees have pots that don't live up to the high standard of the tree.

Regards,
Attila

Hi Attila,

Hmm, you may be right, but I'm not necessarily convinced on the whole. In the context of bonsai, naturalistic tends to be represented as raw and literal - devoid of artistic mechanisms. The connotation of my title may well be off, though. I do, however, appreciate the definitive/declative tone of your post. Good stuff.

Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
zone 8, Texas

Andy, this is interesting.
Not only can you write....But you very often are right.... sorry had to say it! ;^)

If you are saying that pots can be more noticeable than stands, why is it we sometimes see displays where the pot is somewhat subdued but the stand is very much drawing our eyes to it. Again this is not an arguement just looking for additional input.

Keeping with the music/movie idea, in a good movie we do not notice the music, but probably come out humming the tune. It is one of the most important supporting roles to the theme of the movie.

Jay

Hi Andy,



It may be because it's Monday morning. Not my favorite time of the year.

Kind regards,
Attila