Two kinds of bonsai attitudes: Realists verses Traditionalists, or the Good Guys verses...

[_#1_]

Can somebody please show what a natural bonsai is?

 

[James W.]

We're not done in this thread until we come to some general agreement that there is more than one way to skin the cat. I think we can come close to agreeing that the amount of effort and to a lesser extent amount of time exerted are closely correlated to the quality of the tree. We want to see all kinds presented here, and in every stage of development. It's important to have greenies feel free to show sticks in the pot because they need to hear opinions from many people on what to do next. The same could be said for more experienced hands. Sometimes the advice will be pretty much the same from all, sometimes there will be diametrically different paths to different ends, and everything in-between. New and old hands are introduced to different forms. @BobbyLane has a style all his own and constantly demonstrates his art to the whole world which would not likely see a demo of this form in our own backyards. There are others who have unique experiences with species we have never heard of from the far corners of the world. Whether someone likes or dislikes Japanese disciplines, there is a lot to learn from practitioners of the formal side of bonsai. We can also learn from the biologists, chemists, botanists, professional hort trained and hobby gardeners, wood carvers and people with just about every kind of artistic background. Only a world-wide forum would allow this wide variety of people to interact at every hour of the day.

With all this variety of inputs, why would we choose to have a single "standard" of what is "good" bonsai? Maybe what we have here is a failure to communicate. Maybe we do need new names for the outcomes. Who among us is willing to give up the moniker "bonsai" to the other side?

I think probably everybody agrees that many different potted trees can be aesthetically pleasing and that it is very subjective.
The problem is with the term "bonsai". We have taken a term that means a very specific thing to it's originators and apply it in a very broad sense. Kind of like calling all kinds and styles of fighting "karate".
Maybe we need a new, general term for the hobby. Personally I usually call mine "little trees".

 

[Maros]

I think probably everybody agrees that many different potted trees can be aesthetically pleasing and that it is very subjective.
The problem is with the term "bonsai". We have taken a term that means a very specific thing to it's originators and apply it in a very broad sense. Kind of like calling all kinds and styles of fighting "karate".
Maybe we need a new, general term for the hobby. Personally I usually call mine "little trees".

We call paintings of Delacroix, Monet, Picasso and Warhol paintings. Seems fair even if they all represent different styles, looks completely different and they are from different times.
Common things are colors, canvases and frames.

So we are taking trees, pots, soils more less height restrictions and try to do it. In every corner of the world little bit differently.
To me it does not seem like problem of the terminology. Even if I personally don't care if anybody call my trees bonsai or not.

 

[Gabler]

“Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively.”​

– Dalai Lama XIV​

 

[Gabler]

Can somebody please show what a natural bonsai is?

I think this tree from the North Carolina Arboretum—even if it were planted in a rectangular pot—is very naturalistic. That's the way I expect to see conifers growing in the wild. By contrast, the tree below from the "Royal Bonsai Garden" (not sure which country) is technically excellent, but it looks nothing like a tree in the wild.

 

[Gabler]

I would expect a deciduous tree to look more like this in the wild.



Credit to Suthin Sukosolvisit.

 

[Dav4]

View attachment 342773
Arthur Joura is most definitely a proponent of naturalistic bonsai, but I'd swear this is a Walter Pall tree

I think this tree from the North Carolina Arboretum—even if it were planted in a rectangular pot—is very naturalistic. That's the way I expect to see conifers growing in the wild. By contrast, the tree below from the "Royal Bonsai Garden" (not sure which country) is technically excellent, but it looks nothing like a tree in the wild.

View attachment 342774
Royal Bonsai Garden is/was Suthin Sukosolvisit's bonsai nursery in Stoughton, MA. Suthin is one of the more longstanding bonsai professionals in the USA and routinely has produced classic Japanese bonsai such as this over the years.

 

[BobbyLane]

View attachment 342773

I think this tree from the North Carolina Arboretum—even if it were planted in a rectangular pot—is very naturalistic. That's the way I expect to see conifers growing in the wild. By contrast, the tree below from the "Royal Bonsai Garden" (not sure which country) is technically excellent, but it looks nothing like a tree in the wild.

View attachment 342774

Did Walter's Spruce jump on a plane

the Trident could probably pass for a pine in the wild maybe? its not a convincing image though. for a pine or a deciduous. but the trunk is impressive, thats it

the trident could be made to look more tree like with some work. i could show you unpollarded oaks and beeches with taper like this

 

[BobbyLane]

View attachment 342774
Royal Bonsai Garden is/was Suthin Sukosolvisit's bonsai nursery in Stoughton, MA. Suthin is one of the more longstanding bonsai professionals in the USA and routinely has produced classic Japanese bonsai such as this over the years.

Im a fan of A Joura's work. i saw quite a bit of it on the IBC forum just before it began to die out. you can catch a lot of his stuff on youtube still.

 

[Gabler]

View attachment 342774
Royal Bonsai Garden is/was Suthin Sukosolvisit's bonsai nursery in Stoughton, MA. Suthin is one of the more longstanding bonsai professionals in the USA and routinely has produced classic Japanese bonsai such as this over the years.

I just Googled some pictures and provided the limited citation information from the websites that provided the pictures. I haven't been involved in the bonsai community long enough to recognize famous trees, so your input is genuinely valuable here.

 

[_#1_]

Can a traditional style tree look like this? Is it because there's no defining pad groups? Speaking on the tree alone.

 

[leatherback]

Can a traditional style tree look like this? Is it because there's no defining pad groups? Speaking on the tree alone.

I would say it is not refined enough for traditional Japanese stylings

 

[HorseloverFat]

I don’t want to be a “guy”.

 

[Iconoclast]

Speaking of hornets' nests, there are really two kinds of bonsai: those that look like trees, and those that look like bonsai. I'd like to begin this discussion with the small area of nebari. Nebari is highly regarded, and in my view to the point of ridiculousness, or should I say out of proportion to real life. I suppose there are places in the world with trees that are very old that have nebari that are in the proportions that are specified as good bonsai of nebari verses trunk caliper verses height of the tree. There are zero in Michigan. As a matter of fact, I have never seen one anywhere outside of pictures from distance lands, and very few of those fit those bonsai relationships. To me, the standard "good" bonsai proportions don't look like real trees. Real trees with giant nebari are a hundred feet tall.

Those standard "good" bonsai trees can be beautiful. A large number of people in hobby bonsai go through all the machinations to get to that end product and almost always they have to make their way through the chop, grow, chop, grow cycles that take years and years and years and come out with a 'Tater. I see others patting them on the back and raving how great these trees are. They don't have proportional branches and still have ordinary leaves that cover the giant scars and terminus of the trunk which is most often still a stump or a big wound. My bias doesn't allow me to do more than wince because they do not look like real trees, and again, I say absolutely no real trees that I have ever seen in the flesh.

I invite others to explain why or how a bonsai that doesn't look like a tree is superior to a tree in a pot that looks like the trees in my yard, my local forests, my whole country. And while you're at it, show me some pictures of real trees in your environs that meet these "good" bonsai proportions that I consider absurd. I grant all comers the privilege of calling me bad names if you feel you must. Try to add something of substance to the conversation while you're at it.

It seems I’ve heard this before.

 

[Iconoclast]

There is a style or type that appeals to everyone, and the more we look, the more we like. To each their own. The question of whether one form or another is or is not "good" bonsai because it is harder to achieve, or made to an ancient standard, or is a species favored by the old Japanese, is the real bone of contention. The world evolves in all aspects, maybe especially in artistic form and tastes. As much as the old masters (in European arts) are admired, modern artists don't spend much time trying to duplicate their works. And therein lies the rub. I have never heard of critiquing today's painters' works by comparing them side-by-side to the Mona Lisa, ad infinitum. While we study the old masters to acquire an understanding of how and why they achieve impact upon viewers, we don't limit ourselves to just reproducing copies of "traditional" art. Neither should bonsaiists.

The question of whether a tree in a pot that looks like a tree in nature is more worthy or less worthy than a highly stylized tree in a pot can't be answered in the absence of their presence, and especially in an abstract discussion. Artistic value and impact are like pornography, "I know it when I see it".

Let’s see your trees.

 

[badatusernames]

View attachment 342774
Royal Bonsai Garden is/was Suthin Sukosolvisit's bonsai nursery in Stoughton, MA. Suthin is one of the more longstanding bonsai professionals in the USA and routinely has produced classic Japanese bonsai such as this over the years.

I think that's no longer around unfortunately, I heard about it too late... called a few times and was told it's not there any longer. It sounded like it may have been their house?

I'd love to see his work, but maybe he's retired.

 

[ShadyStump]

Let’s see your trees.

Said the guy with EVERYTHING to prove.

“Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively.”​

– Dalai Lama XIV​

For real artists THIS is an important part of expanding your horizons, without a doubt, however...

The problem is with the term "bonsai". We have taken a term that means a very specific thing to it's originators and apply it in a very broad sense. Kind of like calling all kinds and styles of fighting "karate".
Maybe we need a new, general term for the hobby. Personally I usually call mine "little trees".

I agree that there are certain connotations in the term, "bonsai," that might imply an inherent superiority of the Japanese style, and this can be limiting for some.
I would argue that any culture that made a habit of styling potted trees could be said to have it's own, "bonsai," tradition, but the very word itself automatically brings one back to the Japanese tradition. There are records of ancient Romans having parties and even contests for potted plants, evidence that the Maya may have had some tradition of potted trees, and we can trace what we call, "bonsai," elsewhere back to China, though we still don't call it, "penjing." I think there's a strong argument for saying we only say, "bonsai," because the western world was introduced to it during the post WWII occupation of Japan, even though Europe had its own tradition of potted topiary going back to time en memoriam, which is arguably a style of the same practice.
So, "bonsai," may not be the most universal term to use, though I can't for the life of me think of what I'd rather call it, and am ok with using, "bonsai," very loosely.

 

[Wulfskaar]

I agree that there are certain connotations in the term, "bonsai," that might imply an inherent superiority of the Japanese style, and this can be limiting for some.
I would argue that any culture that made a habit of styling potted trees could be said to have it's own, "bonsai," tradition, but the very word itself automatically brings one back to the Japanese tradition. There are records of ancient Romans having parties and even contests for potted plants, evidence that the Maya may have had some tradition of potted trees, and we can trace what we call, "bonsai," elsewhere back to China, though we still don't call it, "penjing." I think there's a strong argument for saying we only say, "bonsai," because the western world was introduced to it during the post WWII occupation of Japan, even though Europe had its own tradition of potted topiary going back to time en memoriam, which is arguably a style of the same practice.
So, "bonsai," may not be the most universal term to use, though I can't for the life of me think of what I'd rather call it, and am ok with using, "bonsai," very loosely.

This, to me, is a great point that I had not considered. The word "bonsai" is Japanese, so it kind of points to Japanese bonsai.

According to wikipedia, bonsai translates to "tray planting", so we could just call everything else a tray planting. You'll have to change the website name to "Tray Planting Nut" so that we'll all be included.

 

[Adair M]

I think that's no longer around unfortunately, I heard about it too late... called a few times and was told it's not there any longer. It sounded like it may have been their house?

I'd love to see his work, but maybe he's retired.

LOL, Suthin would love to retire, but he still has many trees! He is selling them off, but they’re not cheap.

 

[badatusernames]

LOL, Suthin would love to retire, but he still has many trees! He is selling them off, but they’re not cheap.

Are they online somewhere?