American Bonsai at the NC Arboretum

Many thanks for sharing Walter, very inspirational.
Cheers Graham

Thanks Walter for continuing this discussion.
I have had a close look at each of your examples. It is very true that some of these trees could easily fall into the old traditional way of styling from the East. The first two pines, the third Spruce, the apple could easily have come from a Japanese magazine. This kind of shows that the line between these styles is very thin or blurred and there is no real demarcation between one and the other unless we look at the extremes of each.

I really like some of these trees. The second last one is a great depiction of an old conifer in the mountains. Very natural. The last one too.
Some of the deciduous trees you posted have the appearence of trees in their last few years of life. While they may look natural, for me they lack the visual appeal of a tree with more vitality. (that may be just a personal preference) Do you agree that a full healthy tree with a vigorous crown can be just as naturalistic as one which appears to have been hit by one too many lightning strikes?

Trees 6,7 and 8 do not look very naturalistic to me yet. Perhaps in a few more years? At the moment they still have the ''attacked by a human'' feel to them. In my opinion you don't need over-do the ''untidyness'' to convey the natural. But I totally understand what you are trying to achieve.

The design of the Larch crown does not look at all naturalistic to me. That is not to say it is bad or wrong of course just that it gives me the feeling that the wild trunk and domesticated top do match each other.

The scots pine(?) I love the wild and natural branch development on this tree. I think I have seen it before when it was slighly more leafy. This tree has a very bright future IMO but to me it appears to be betting a bit too twiggy and this feature is detracting from it's ''treeness'' and starting to make it appear more shrub like. Do you agree? If so, how will you resolve this issue in the future? If not please explain your viewpoint and your future plans for this tree.

Thanks again for posting these pictures. I for one am very interested.

If different bonsai styles exist then it must be possible to define the essential characteristics and at least general parameters of each style. However, for the reasons that Walter has already stated this is not so simple. It's not an exact science and there will always be trees which combine features of different styles and others which defy convenient classification all together.

Some have suggested that considering this is a thankless and indeed pointless task anyway so why bother? Well I think that Kyle T has spelt out the benefits quite well in a previous post so I wont repeat his points. I will only add that at least some of the stylistic differences referred to in this thread appear self evident to me and if the differences can (at least in some cases) be plainly seen then it would be perverse not to at least acknowledge them.

Having said that, I must confess that I'm struggling to come up with a unique set of essential characteristics for the different styles myself at this point. The problem of course is in the complexity of the subject. How might we reduce this complexity so as to focus on the essence of each style?

Perhaps the solution is to go back to basics. Instead of seeking to identify subtle differences between complex examples perhaps we should look instead for typical or even extreme examples of different styles where those fundamental differences are somewhat more exaggerated?

For example I would consider this tree to be strongly neo-classical,



But what in my view makes it neo-classical? Obviously it conforms to one of the recognised neo-classical tree forms, Myogi ( informal upright) but more than that the structural elements are neo-classical. The single trunk line from base to apex, the regular branch placement, left, right, left, right, the fact that the branches exit the trunk at 90 degrees and are almost perfectly horizontal. The trunk is not perfectly vertical, Chokkan (formal upright) but the apex is still within the footprint of the base so it is not shakkan (slanting). Despite the irregularity in the trunk the overall outline is both very symmetrical and also rather triangular. Its height is also approximately the same as its width.

It's a highly stylised tree. It would still be stylised even if it were a conifer but as a deciduous it is positively abstract!  

These features are no accident they are clearly designed. The bonsai world is full of trees which conform to these recognised structural norms.

Do you like the tree? I think most bonsai enthusiast would. It is not the very best example of it's kind but it's very nice. Being neo-classical is not an insult.

Now compare it with this. I would consider this tree to be strongly naturalistic,



But again, what in my view makes it strongly naturalistic? Well for a start it doesn't easily conform to any of the recognised neo-classical tree forms. This isn't just stating the obvious, some neo-classical tree forms can be quite naturalistic, at least for coniferous trees. This isn't one of them though. It is debateable whether this tree has one trunk which splits into three, essentially three trunks or a primary trunk and a secondary one (Sokan - twin trunk style). However it is clearly not a clump or a group. The tree has many branches but almost none exit their respective trunk at 90 degrees. None are really horizontal either. They appear random and chaotic (but in reality have almost certainly been very carefully placed). The overall outline is again quite symmetrical (not necessarily a naturalistic characteristic) but it certainly isn't triangular.

You could argue that it is also a very stylised tree but it certainly isn't abstract. It could be described as some type of Broom form but it isn't really Hokidachi (formal broom) because of the multiple trunks. It's what Walter has previously called the Informal Broom form. This is exactly the kind of form which a mature, wild grown deciduous tree commonly takes when growing in relatively open ground. This in my view is what makes it "naturalistic".

Do you like it or do you think it's a mess? I think most bonsai enthusiasts would like this tree. It is a very literal and easily identifiable image of a tree in nature and in my opinion it is clearly NOT a classical or neo-classical Japanese style tree.

Of course not all non-classical/neo-classical trees are naturalistic. Some are highly abstract. I could go on to talk about this tree which I think is highly modernistic,



This also doesn't really conform to any of the neo-classical tree forms but it's distinctly un-naturalistic. It's a very abstract image. You could call this the "broccoli on dead wood" style but I know that many would consider such a derogatory comment blasphemy so I'll follow convention and call it modernistic style.

Anyway, I hope you take my point. The objective was to try and present three different tree which exhibited typical characteristic of their respective styles in a way which made their respective differences obvious. You can decide whether I did a worthwhile job of it. If you disagree feel free to rip my argument to pieces.

I have nothing invested in it beyond a couple of hours of my time and a genuine interest in advancing my own understanding.

Regards

Richard

MichaelS

I didn't read your comments before making my post but it is interesting that you say you see no real demarcation between styles except in extremes.

Obviously the distinction will be clearest in extreme examples which is kind of the point I was trying to make. However I don't think that means that different styles don't exist or that it is of no value to consider them. Just that there is and in some cases always will be some cross over.

What do you think of the examples I chose?

I don't mean do you like the trees or find them pleasing (that's your prerogative of course). I mean do you accept that they represent different styles?

It seems self evident to me that they are fundamentally different in stylistic terms and that each exhibits at least some of the fundamental characteristics that define their type.

Having said that, I freely admit that I can't narrow those characteristics down to a set of unique stylistic parameters in my own mind yet so I accept you point that the lines remain blurred. However, I also believe that if you can perceive those differences then ultimately it must be possible to articulate them in a coherent way.

I haven't got there yet but I'm finding the journey very interesting.

Regards

Richard

Hi Richard,

Personally, I don't really feel the need to classify bonsai. Whenever I look at a new tree I try to observe it without pre thought to what I have seen before and just let the tree tell me it's story. If it speaks to me and I like what it's saying then all is good. If I don't like something about it for whatever reason then I might point out what I see to anyone interested. For me, two ''styles'' are enough. The traditional ''pine tree'' style as your example with the trident maple, and the natural style where one follows a plant's natural habit of growth.(more or less) I have no problem with any style if it is ''believable'' to my eyes. It could be (and often is) an idealized representation of the natural tree. If I can imagine the tree sitting in it's surroundings - be it a mountain top, field, forest, cliff or whatever and it ''works'', it is a good tree. Well designed. If however the design has some feature which distracts from the illusion, then I would regard the tree as inferior.

The concept of ''neo classical'' bothers me. If we are to assume that classical bonsai is a style (and I can only accept it as a style if you include all the great ''naturalistic bonsai produced in Japan over the last several decades) and that style is learned and taught by it's traditional practitioners to others, ( ie: the Japanese masters teach other Japanese people but they also teach westerners who teach more westerers) then are they not then practicing classical bonsai design? When does it suddenly become neo classical? Do you have to be Japanese to practice classical bonsai art? What if a European was born there but then moved to the US? Would he be practicing classical or neo classical, Is it only classical if it is practiced where it originated? What if he lived there for 10 years, 10 months, 10 days?

But really what interest me is the trees and moving to a naturalistic design is the right thing to do for me. Steering clear of the ''Mount Fuji Trident Maple style'' is a good thing. Nothing is ''wrong'' in art but if you are trying to achieve a miniature version of a trident maple, this kind of thing definately is wrong simply because you won't achieve what you set out to do.

Your example of a ''naturalistic'' tree. It is hard for me to comment on this tree without seeming negative to Walter. It is not a criticism of the artist as Walter has produced some magnificent pieces and I regard him highly for his thoughtful points so my comments are exclusive to this tree! Some folks on this forum seem to be rather sensitve to critique but surely if we post a picture it should be to open to discussion? By all means disagree!!

You can classify this tree as naturalistic if you like. That is not really important to me. What is important to me is the quality of the tree as presented. Although you can find all the features of the specimen as naturally occuring, they do not satisfy me. some of those features include: *The similar thickness of some of the primary branches and the secondary and even some tertiary branches. *Many areas with ramification on the tips only. *Lack of grace in the movement of the branching. *Too much disorder and lack of smooth visual rhythm as your eye ascends the trunk. Generally, it doesn't give me the impression of a tree in it's natural habitat. In other words the tree draws your (my) attention to these distractions and away from the ''bigger picture''. So ironically enough, because of these features, and although styled with the intent of ''naturalism'', to me misses the mark and looks ''man made''. The exact opposite to what was intended.  IN MY OPINION!!!!!!!!!!!
Remember also I am only going from what I see on the screen in front of me!

richard - i, for one, feel that your efforts were well worth it and that your examples really do bring out the distinctive features that you were looking to exemplify...

michael - re: your critique of the naturalistic tree, i agree that there may be a couple branches that do not agree with me from a design perspective, but would changing them or removing them make it more naturalistic ? perhaps so, but i think perhaps not. (like you said, these are only our opinions...)

by the by - assumptions are being made that all the trees walter posted were his own...


as an aside, arthur asked that i post some more pictures from the expo and i will do so soon
(american bonsai at the north carolina arboretum being the initial thrust of this thread)
but at this time i did not want to step on the discussion at hand....... yet.  

Mike & Kevin

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

Mike, I will take a little time to think about what you've said before responding because although I don't fully agree with all of it you do raise some good questions. Questions that deserve a considered answer.

I will offer one comment now though. I believe that the image Walter posted which I chose to use as a representation of Modern Bonsai style is a Kimura tree (Dancing Dragon or something it's called isn't it?). Masahiko Kimura is I believe Japanese which if it proved nothing else proves at least that it is a misconception to assume that all Japanese bonsai artists produce or necessarily want to produce classical bonsai.

To quote Kimura from the preface of Junsun Yamamoto's book (the Beauty of Bonsai),

"My aspiration is to produce a totally new kind of bonsai, taking inspiration from the natural world to create works of art with a different look, a different ambience to classical, conventional bonsai."

I think many would agree that he has achieved this. I wonder how this impacts of what we consider to be classical Japanese bonsai?

Regards

Richard

Richard S wrote:
I think many would agree that he has achieved this. I wonder how this impacts of what we consider to be classical Japanese bonsai?

Richaerd,

in Europe he has smashed Classical Bonsai style. It is considered old fashioned by most artists today. All young guys do mdoern bonsai only. In America you are just about experiencing the same thing in my opinion. The Artisan Cup will cause the pardaigm shift.

I agree. Though I personally don't care much for images like the Kirby and Pine tree planting I do favor trees that not only look natural but have a style and grace that makes me go wow! I look at a lot of trees in the wild and in their own ways they are beautiful but only now and then and few in numbers do I see a tree with the wow factor. For my preferences a bonsai must have just the right amount of grooming without looking like something from some book.

Vance Wood wrote:For my preferences a bonsai must have just the right amount of grooming without looking like something from some book.  

and from what i have seen, you do it very well, vance.

now, per arthur's request, and if you all will forgive me, i will interrupt this irregularly scheduled program with some more pictures from the 20th anniversary of the carolina bonsai expo !

today it will be just pictures of the exhibit... including, yes, full shots of trees
in the days to come i will also be posting some pictures from the various demos that took place...
(anyone know of a bulk uploader for the image hosting service used for this forum ?)

























most of the group displays were hard to capture in their entirety due to foot traffic, but i did wait patiently for this one as i thought it really captured the appalachian aesthetic :




and more pictures of the road trip adventure can be found on my personal blog: http://beercitysnake.blogspot.com/
along with a few more from the expo on the arbor arts collective blog: http://arborartscollective.blogspot.com/

more to follow...

Dear Arthur,

Arthur Joura wrote:
Thank you for taking the time to post your most recent reply, which has generated at least some commentary. As I write this, you are in Portland, OR being one of the judges at the Artisan's Cup event, and I wonder how that is going. I look forward to hearing your impressions of the show and all that goes with it.[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

It's now about four weeks ago and the impressions have settled. I said this immediately right there and still think so: this event was a major milestone in American bonsai history in my opinion. America has arrived at the Modern Bonsai Style. The overwhelming majority of the first twenty or so trees were in that style and certainly the ones upfront. Although from the choice of judges it was not clearly to be expected the taste has changed as far as I can see. Very impressive massive trees with lots of deadwood , very individualistic, very loud are now in. Quiet is nice to have in between bout quiet cannot really win against loud noways. This is a paradigm shift. Bonsai has arrived as an art form as the exhibit took place in the Portland Art Museum and the whole setup was very unique and very dramatic to show trees artistically. Very successful though, regardless  of what many on the internet think because the pictures were so lousy. This was not for picture taking it was for being deeply impressed.
This paradigm shift will not be welcomed by many. It does not value what many believe of believed to be the essence of bonsai, the quietness, Zen feeling, working on a piece from the start over decades and loving it. All this is more for accent now than it is the main show. Broadleaved trees have very little chance now may they be as good as they can possibly be. I think it is essential to give the quiet trees and the broadleaved trees a podium. Extra awards would be a solution rather than a  extra show devoted to them.
For about twenty years I was thinking that when comparing the state of bonsai art in Europe and in the USA Europe had a strong lead. This is not so anymore. They are now at par is my observation. While Europe is still growing in quality steadily America is doing this in a steeper curve since a couple of years. So I foresee the USA will be leading against Europe and, since material is crucial and America has the best material, it will lead the world in the not so distant future.
Coming back to American Bonsai at the NC Arboretum it is clear that the 'new' style of the Artisan Cup is definitely not the style at the arboretum. Such is life and I can tell you a lot about this. It is well known that I am also not following the mainstream style in general. This I do as you do out of conviction and with success. But we will not win an award against modern bonsai. So what! But , interesting to note, I had the honor of being one of the judges in Portland. And it is partially through my judgment that the modern trees won.
Well, all this is just my personal opinion and one should take it for that and to more.

Arthur Joura wrote:
I have asked you about different styles in bonsai, with a particular interest in the Naturalistic style. You have provided a good overview, and even though you are giving it only a simplified, stripped down, cursory treatment I think you are already over the heads of a good many people. I have spent a lot of time thinking over this business of bonsai styles and find it is not so easy a topic to dissect, but for myself I have decided this:

The Classical Style, as viewed from the standard Western perspective, refers to bonsai made in Japan and reflecting the prevailing Japanese aesthetic, from a period dating back at least 100 years and perhaps more, but reaching its zenith in the late-middle of the 20th century. It is the stuff one would find in the Nippon Bonsai Association publication "Classic Bonsai of Japan", or at the major shows in Japan prior to advent of Mr. Kimura and those who followed in his wake. For many practitioners it represents the Holy Grail of bonsai perfection.

The Neo-classical Style is all the bonsai made in imitation of the true Classical bonsai. By following a prescribed methodology people attempt to emulate the Classical look, and some get very close to it while others produce results that border on grotesque parody. The overwhelming majority of bonsai I see in this country, and those from bonsai shows in many Western countries, as we often see represented by photos posted on this forum, fall into the Neo-classical or Western Classical style.

The Modern Style appears to have sprung largely from the loins of Mr. Kimura, and his apprentices cum disciples have carried it throughout the world. It is typified by power, precision, overt technical prowess and as much impressive deadwood as possible. It is the stuff that generates the most excitement in bonsai circles these days, the stuff that bonsai rock star dreams are made of.

The Naturalistic Style reverts back to the example of trees in nature as the prime source for inspiration. For most people in the West the reference for this style is typically one of the naturalistic schools of Penjing from China, although there is a fair amount of unrecognized naturalism in the handling of deciduous material in Japanese bonsai. Although true naturalistic bonsai exist in the US they are comparatively rare and often not appreciated.
[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

So far I agree to your assessment of bonsai styles.

Arthur Joura wrote:
It is not possible for me or any of the other people on this forum to produce actual Classical bonsai. [url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

May I add that it also not possible for any other folks including Japanese. The time of classical bonsai is over. Whatever one does now is a retro. Some retros can come very close to the original style, but they are still a retro.

Arthur Joura wrote:The best those inclined toward Classical bonsai can hope to do is Neo-classical bonsai.
[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

Correct, you can also call it a retro.

Arthur Joura wrote:Neo-classical bonsai has no roots in Western culture, therefore pursuing it entails trying to assimilate a foreign culture, or at least cultivate some deep understanding of it.

[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

True, but then bonsai in general has no roots in our culture one could say. But still many succeed to have a deep understanding and many create great masterpieces without these roots. Does one have to be born in Salzburg, Austria to do classical music or understand it very well?

Arthur Joura wrote:A comparatively minuscule number of Western people have the desire to completely assimilate a foreign culture, which is very difficult if not impossible to do.
[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

Agreed. And most fail. While a Japanese would never openly admit it I happen to know that they make jokes about this. For me bonsai is not a Japanese or Asian art form anymore. It has become universal. And there is absolutely no need to creep into another culture to do it well.

Arthur Joura wrote:A larger but still comparatively minuscule number of Western people have the desire to cultivate a deep understanding of a foreign culture, but they often do a poor job of it and end up being awkward. [url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

Sorry to say – yes. And even if they did a great job what difference would it make.

Arthur Joura wrote:Modern bonsai requires old plant material with impressive trunks, typically collected, which is not available to many people due to the rigors of collecting it or the cost of buying it.[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

Mostly true.

Arthur Joura wrote:Modern bonsai also requires a degree of technical skill most bonsai hobbyists do not possess.[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

Mostly true.

Dear Arthur,

Arthur Joura wrote:
Thank you for taking the time to post your most recent reply, which has generated at least some commentary. As I write this, you are in Portland, OR being one of the judges at the Artisan's Cup event, and I wonder how that is going. I look forward to hearing your impressions of the show and all that goes with it.[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

It's now about four weeks ago and the impressions have settled. I said this immediately right there and still think so: this event was a major milestone in American bonsai history in my opinion. America has arrived at the Modern Bonsai Style. The overwhelming majority of the first twenty or so trees were in that style and certainly the ones upfront. Although from the choice of judges it was not clearly to be expected the taste has changed as far as I can see. Very impressive massive trees with lots of deadwood , very individualistic, very loud are now in. Quiet is nice to have in between bout quiet cannot really win against loud noways. This is a paradigm shift. Bonsai has arrived as an art form as the exhibit took place in the Portland Art Museum and the whole setup was very unique and very dramatic to show trees artistically. Very successful though, regardless  of what many on the internet think because the pictures were so lousy. This was not for picture taking it was for being deeply impressed.
This paradigm shift will not be welcomed by many. It does not value what many believe of believed to be the essence of bonsai, the quietness, Zen feeling, working on a piece from the start over decades and loving it. All this is more for accent now than it is the main show. Broadleaved trees have very little chance now may they be as good as they can possibly be. I think it is essential to give the quiet trees and the broadleaved trees a podium. Extra awards would be a solution rather than a  extra show devoted to them.
For about twenty years I was thinking that when comparing the state of bonsai art in Europe and in the USA Europe had a strong lead. This is not so anymore. They are now at par is my observation. While Europe is still growing in quality steadily America is doing this in a steeper curve since a couple of years. So I foresee the USA will be leading against Europe and, since material is crucial and America has the best material, it will lead the world in the not so distant future.
Coming back to American Bonsai at the NC Arboretum it is clear that the 'new' style of the Artisan Cup is definitely not the style at the arboretum. Such is life and I can tell you a lot about this. It is well known that I am also not following the mainstream style in general. This I do as you do out of conviction and with success. But we will not win an award against modern bonsai. So what! But , interesting to note, I had the honor of being one of the judges in Portland. And it is partially through my judgment that the modern trees won.
Well, all this is just my personal opinion and one should take it for that and to more.

Arthur Joura wrote:
I have asked you about different styles in bonsai, with a particular interest in the Naturalistic style. You have provided a good overview, and even though you are giving it only a simplified, stripped down, cursory treatment I think you are already over the heads of a good many people. I have spent a lot of time thinking over this business of bonsai styles and find it is not so easy a topic to dissect, but for myself I have decided this:

The Classical Style, as viewed from the standard Western perspective, refers to bonsai made in Japan and reflecting the prevailing Japanese aesthetic, from a period dating back at least 100 years and perhaps more, but reaching its zenith in the late-middle of the 20th century. It is the stuff one would find in the Nippon Bonsai Association publication "Classic Bonsai of Japan", or at the major shows in Japan prior to advent of Mr. Kimura and those who followed in his wake. For many practitioners it represents the Holy Grail of bonsai perfection.

The Neo-classical Style is all the bonsai made in imitation of the true Classical bonsai. By following a prescribed methodology people attempt to emulate the Classical look, and some get very close to it while others produce results that border on grotesque parody. The overwhelming majority of bonsai I see in this country, and those from bonsai shows in many Western countries, as we often see represented by photos posted on this forum, fall into the Neo-classical or Western Classical style.

The Modern Style appears to have sprung largely from the loins of Mr. Kimura, and his apprentices cum disciples have carried it throughout the world. It is typified by power, precision, overt technical prowess and as much impressive deadwood as possible. It is the stuff that generates the most excitement in bonsai circles these days, the stuff that bonsai rock star dreams are made of.

The Naturalistic Style reverts back to the example of trees in nature as the prime source for inspiration. For most people in the West the reference for this style is typically one of the naturalistic schools of Penjing from China, although there is a fair amount of unrecognized naturalism in the handling of deciduous material in Japanese bonsai. Although true naturalistic bonsai exist in the US they are comparatively rare and often not appreciated.
[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

So far I agree to your assessment of bonsai styles.

Arthur Joura wrote:
It is not possible for me or any of the other people on this forum to produce actual Classical bonsai. [url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

May I add that it also not possible for any other folks including Japanese. The time of classical bonsai is over. Whatever one does now is a retro. Some retros can come very close to the original style, but they are still a retro.

Arthur Joura wrote:The best those inclined toward Classical bonsai can hope to do is Neo-classical bonsai.
[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

Correct, you can also call it a retro.

Arthur Joura wrote:Neo-classical bonsai has no roots in Western culture, therefore pursuing it entails trying to assimilate a foreign culture, or at least cultivate some deep understanding of it.
[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

[/quote]

True, but then bonsai in general has no roots in our culture one could say. But still many succeed to have a deep understanding and many create great masterpieces without these roots. Does one have to be born in Salzburg, Austria to do classical music or understand it very well?

Arthur Joura wrote:A comparatively minuscule number of Western people have the desire to completely assimilate a foreign culture, which is very difficult if not impossible to do.
[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

[/quote]

Agreed. And most fail. While a Japanese would never openly admit it I happen to know that they make jokes about this. For me bonsai is not a Japanese or Asian art form anymore. It has become universal. And there is absolutely no need to creep into another culture to do it well.

Arthur Joura wrote:A larger but still comparatively minuscule number of Western people have the desire to cultivate a deep understanding of a foreign culture, but they often do a poor job of it and end up being awkward. [url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

[/quote]

Sorry to say – yes. And even if they did a great job what difference would it make.

Arthur Joura wrote:Modern bonsai requires old plant material with impressive trunks, typically collected, which is not available to many people due to the rigors of collecting it or the cost of buying it.[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

[/quote]

Mostly true.

Arthur Joura wrote:Modern bonsai also requires a degree of technical skill most bonsai hobbyists do not possess.[url=https://servimg.com/view/18135461/858]

[/quote]

Mostly true.

[/quote][/quote]
[/quote][/quote]

Dear Arthur,

Arthur Joura wrote:
Thank you for taking the time to post your most recent reply, which has generated at least some commentary. As I write this, you are in Portland, OR being one of the judges at the Artisan's Cup event, and I wonder how
hat is going. I look forward to hearing your impressions of the show and all that goes with it.

It's now about four weeks ago and the impressions have settled. I said this immediately right there and still think so: this event was a major milestone in American bonsai history in my opinion. America has arrived at the Modern Bonsai Style. The overwhelming majority of the first twenty or so trees were in that style and certainly the ones upfront. Although from the choice of judges it was not clearly to be expected the taste has changed as far as I can see. Very impressive massive trees with lots of deadwood , very individualistic, very loud are now in. Quiet is nice to have in between bout quiet cannot really win against loud noways. This is a paradigm shift. Bonsai has arrived as an art form as the exhibit took place in the Portland Art Museum and the whole setup was very unique and very dramatic to show trees artistically. Very successful though, regardless  of what many on the internet think because the pictures were so lousy. This was not for picture taking it was for being deeply impressed.
This paradigm shift will not be welcomed by many. It does not value what many believe of believed to be the essence of bonsai, the quietness, Zen feeling, working on a piece from the start over decades and loving it. All this is more for accent now than it is the main show. Broadleaved trees have very little chance now may they be as good as they can possibly be. I think it is essential to give the quiet trees and the broadleaved trees a podium. Extra awards would be a solution rather than a  extra show devoted to them.
For about twenty years I was thinking that when comparing the state of bonsai art in Europe and in the USA Europe had a strong lead. This is not so anymore. They are now at par is my observation. While Europe is still growing in quality steadily America is doing this in a steeper curve since a couple of years. So I foresee the USA will be leading against Europe and, since material is crucial and America has the best material, it will lead the world in the not so distant future.
Coming back to American Bonsai at the NC Arboretum it is clear that the 'new' style of the Artisan Cup is definitely not the style at the arboretum. Such is life and I can tell you a lot about this. It is well known that I am also not following the mainstream style in general. This I do as you do out of conviction and with success. But we will not win an award against modern bonsai. So what! But , interesting to note, I had the honor of being one of the judges in Portland. And it is partially through my judgment that the modern trees won.
Well, all this is just my personal opinion and one should take it for that and to more.

Arthur Joura wrote:
I have asked you about different styles in bonsai, with a particular interest in the Naturalistic style. You have provided a good overview, and even though you are giving it only a simplified, stripped down, cursory treatment I think you are already over the heads of a good many people. I have spent a lot of time thinking over this business of bonsai styles and find it is not so easy a topic to dissect, but for myself I have decided this:

The Classical Style, as viewed from the standard Western perspective, refers to bonsai made in Japan and reflecting the prevailing Japanese aesthetic, from a period dating back at least 100 years and perhaps more, but reaching its zenith in the late-middle of the 20th century. It is the stuff one would find in the Nippon Bonsai Association publication "Classic Bonsai of Japan", or at the major shows in Japan prior to advent of Mr. Kimura and those who followed in his wake. For many practitioners it represents the Holy Grail of bonsai perfection.

The Neo-classical Style is all the bonsai made in imitation of the true Classical bonsai. By following a prescribed methodology people attempt to emulate the Classical look, and some get very close to it while others produce results that border on grotesque parody. The overwhelming majority of bonsai I see in this country, and those from bonsai shows in many Western countries, as we often see represented by photos posted on this forum, fall into the Neo-classical or Western Classical style.

The Modern Style appears to have sprung largely from the loins of Mr. Kimura, and his apprentices cum disciples have carried it throughout the world. It is typified by power, precision, overt technical prowess and as much impressive deadwood as possible. It is the stuff that generates the most excitement in bonsai circles these days, the stuff that bonsai rock star dreams are made of.

The Naturalistic Style reverts back to the example of trees in nature as the prime source for inspiration. For most people in the West the reference for this style is typically one of the naturalistic schools of Penjing from China, although there is a fair amount of unrecognized naturalism in the handling of deciduous material in Japanese bonsai. Although true naturalistic bonsai exist in the US they are comparatively rare and often not appreciated.

So far I agree to your assessment of bonsai styles.

Arthur Joura wrote:
It is not possible for me or any of the other people on this forum to produce actual Classical bonsai.

May I add that it also not possible for any other folks including Japanese. The time of classical bonsai is over. Whatever one does now is a retro. Some retros can come very close to the original style, but they are still a retro.

Arthur Joura wrote:The best those inclined toward Classical bonsai can hope to do is Neo-classical bonsai.

[/quote]

Correct, you can also call it a retro.

Arthur Joura wrote:Neo-classical bonsai has no roots in Western culture, therefore pursuing it entails trying to assimilate a foreign culture, or at least cultivate some deep understanding of it.

[/quote]

True, but then bonsai in general has no roots in our culture one could say. But still many succeed to have a deep understanding and many create great masterpieces without these roots. Does one have to be born in Salzburg, Austria to do classical music or understand it very well?

Arthur Joura wrote:A comparatively minuscule number of Western people have the desire to completely assimilate a foreign culture, which is very difficult if not impossible to do.

[/quote]

Agreed. And most fail. While a Japanese would never openly admit it I happen to know that they make jokes about this. For me bonsai is not a Japanese or Asian art form anymore. It has become universal. And there is absolutely no need to creep into another culture to do it well.

Arthur Joura wrote:A larger but still comparatively minuscule number of Western people have the desire to cultivate a deep understanding of a foreign culture, but they often do a poor job of it and end up being awkward.

[/quote]
Sorry to say – yes. And even if they did a great job what difference would it make.

Arthur Joura wrote:Modern bonsai requires old plant material with impressive trunks, typically collected, which is not available to many people due to the rigors of collecting it or the cost of buying it.

Mostly true.

Arthur Joura wrote:Modern bonsai also requires a degree of technical skill most bonsai hobbyists do not possess.

Mostly true.[/quote]

Well! Anyone who wishes to analyze and cross check the theories posted from page 40 to now can only come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as "classical'' or ''neo classical'' (or retro now?) in bonsai. (a non static art form) Or am I the only one who sees this as pure nonsense. Plainly, any form of bonsai design can and has been practiced by anyone anytime. To apply artificial separation to it is absurd. Confusion will reign supreme as has been proved in this thread.
http://www.kingsgalleries.com/classic-art/

MichaelS wrote:Personally, I don't really feel the need to classify bonsai.

well, it seems like you do spend a considerable amount of time pondering something you find no need for...
and me saying that is exactly and only that... "just saying"  




more expo pics to follow on monday.

I'd like to read, and see more about "American Bonsai at the NC Arboretum".

Beer City Snake wrote:
more expo pics to follow on monday.

Why don't you start another thread then? There are already dozens of pages of blah blah that I find totally vain. I don't care a fig what your religion is, or who's got the biggest one (I mean the best argument, oeuf corse )

Sorry to be so blunt, but even if Arthur wanted this thread to go on, I think he was wrong: this thread was not meant for the battles of egos initially. I'm an old timer, I much prefer the "Battle of the Bands" (the Turtles, you know, "So happy togetheeeeer...)

Thanks Arthur, Walter and other for this discussion. (Though I will be glad to return to Arthur's discussions.)

I am continually confused with this discussion of "styles". When someone uses the word bonsai style I immediately think of Hokidachi , Chokkan, Shakan etc. This current discussion is not of the structure of individual trees but of a grouping of trees with similar characteristics. This is similar to the Chinese penjing schools.

SO FOLKS might I humbly suggest that in this current discussion that we not use the term styles, but instead use schools to depict the various groupings. Such as the Neo Classical School, or Classical Japanese School or the American Naturalistic School, or .............

What say you?

DougB wrote:
What say you?

Me says :

Yohaku no bi
(the beauty of empty space)

AlainK wrote:I'd like to read, and see more about "American Bonsai at the NC Arboretum".

Beer City Snake wrote:
more expo pics to follow on monday.

Why don't you start another thread then?  

alain - i want to believe that i am misreading that or that something is lost in the transalation...

are you saying i should start another thread to show pictures from the arboretum's expo ???

At this point I suspect we're all a bit confused as to where this topic/thread is leading us.  I think Doug B is at least close to the mark when he suggests "schools" rather than "styles" as what we're talking about here.  As it was. we were comparing Golden Delicious vs. Honey Crisp apples (and everyone knows Honey Crisps will win THAT battle). 

It is ARTHUR's thread, however, and he seemed to want it to go on in this direction.  I suspect, however, that aside from subbing "school" for "style" (where appropriate, wherever that is) we may have beaten this into the ground, then stomped all over it to boot. 

Maybe, rather than blithering repetitively on as we have been doing lately, we let Arthur, once he has fully recuperated from #20, step in to guide us further along this path -- or elsewhere. 

Hopefully . . .

beer city snake wrote:

are you saying i should start another thread to show pictures from the arboretum's expo ???

Oops, sorry. I wasn't following (yawn...), I couldn't imagine it was a post about the arboretum, and I had missed this post : https://ibonsaiclub.forumotion.com/t12772p645-american-bonsai-at-the-nc-arboretum#173952 I don't have time to read the comments though, but there are some trees that I find remarkable, others inspiring, and some that are quite nice - and what "school" they belong to is none of my concerns.

So, please, do: I really enjoyed the first posts in this thread, the ones about the arboretum.

Alain

With respect, if you find this discussion on bonsai styles so boring (yawn, yawn) then why not simply skip by it and move on to one of the other many threads running on this forum?

Personally I find it fascinating and informative.

As someone who has no specific bonsai or even general art education this (and other similar threads) have prompted me to think about bonsai in a whole new way. This has greatly impacted on the way I now look at trees (the ones that grow in the countryside as well as the ones in pots) and in time I have no doubt that it will also impact on the way try to style my trees.

Regards

Richard

Richard S wrote:Alain

With respect, if you find this discussion on bonsai styles so boring (yawn, yawn) then why not simply skip by it and move on to one of the other many threads running on this forum?

 

Because I was following a discussion about "American Bonsai at the NC Arboretum", not a byzantine discussion about the sex of angels!

As I wrote before, this thread was not started for that purpose, and I regret that Arthur gave in: this part of the discussion (that I personally find very vain) should find its place in the section https://ibonsaiclub.forumotion.com/f11-bonsai-contemplations :

Bonsai Contemplations
This forum is for threads concerning your thoughts and deliberations about the art/craft/hobby of Bonsai in general as opposed to individual trees. It includes in particular the more philosophical discussions on the artistic side of bonsai such as Bonsai: Art or Horticulture? What actually is American Bonsai? etc. This forum could also include pictures or videos of trees that have inspired you (remember the AUP though), items about your benches/winter storage areas, travelogues, the weather, links to other bonsai sites you think people might enjoy and so on. Essentially if it doesn't fit anywhere else, then put it here. This section now also includes show reports.

I could express my "philosophy" in a such a section (I really would!), but in this thread, I'm expecting news, pictures and comments from Arthur about "American Bonsai at the NC Arboretum", right?

[quote]

beer city snake wrote:

MichaelS wrote:Personally, I don't really feel the need to classify bonsai.

well, it seems like you do spend a considerable amount of time pondering something you find no need for...
and me saying that is exactly and only that... "just saying"  

Kev, While I don't feel the need to classify bonsai into classifications, Classically, I classify myself as one who has a classic need to classify those who classify.

MichaelS wrote:

beer city snake wrote:

MichaelS wrote:Personally, I don't really feel the need to classify bonsai.

well, it seems like you do spend a considerable amount of time pondering something you find no need for...
and me saying that is exactly and only that... "just saying"  

Kev, While I don't feel the need to classify bonsai into classifications, Classically, I classify myself as one who has a classic need to classify those who classify.

aahhhh... now i see !!! (said the blind man to his deaf wife )

and thanks for not taking umbrage at my observation