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

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.

First time I saw a "melted nebari" it was in Omiya Bonsai Village, in Saitama, Japan.
It was an Ebihara Maple, stunning.
Then I started paying attention to "real" big trees around, and...
Bingo!
Right there, on my sidewalk, a crape myrtle with a naturally melted nebari.
AND twisted trunk also.

How tall? Six times caliper?

Forsoothe! said:

How tall? Six times caliper?

Click to expand...

Roughly.

Clicio said:

First time I saw a "melted nebari" it was in Omiya Bonsai Village, in Saitama, Japan.
It was an Ebihara Maple, stunning.
Then I started paying attention to "real" big trees around, and...
Bingo!
Right there, on my sidewalk, a crape myrtle with a naturally melted nebari.
AND twisted trunk also.

View attachment 342284

Click to expand...

Looks to me like you found the "square root"

I appreciate keeping a scale in mind.

You should be able to visualize the same sized person next to the trunk and in the branches, but usually the scale of these imaginary people are different.

That makes it look fake and stupid. Whatever ones definition of "bonsai" is.

Sorce

I'm less than a noob, so please keep that in mind for the rest of my comment.

Small versions of big trees still have relatively thick trunks, so up to a point, it makes sense to get a thick trunk and chop it. Only after the top branches are allowed to thicken does it start looking realistic.

The main thing that gets me is when bonsai are overly curled and twisted into S shapes or worse. It doesn't look natural to me. I understand a wind-swept look or a crooked old tree look, but just having curls for the sake of curls just isn't very attractive to me. (ducking)

Wulfskaar said:

I'm less than a noob, so please keep that in mind for the rest of my comment.

Small versions of big trees still have relatively thick trunks, so up to a point, it makes sense to get a thick trunk and chop it. Only after the top branches are allowed to thicken does it start looking realistic.

The main thing that gets me is when bonsai are overly curled and twisted into S shapes or worse. It doesn't look natural to me. I understand a wind-swept look or a crooked old tree look, but just having curls for the sake of curls just isn't very attractive to me. (ducking)

Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from. I have the same preference. And S-shaped trees certainly aren't realistic. That said, Picasso wasn't interested in realism, nor was Salvador Dali. Done with artistic vision, an unrealistic tree could be a groundbreaking work of art. Meanwhile, S-shaped trees specifically are the stick figure comics of the bonsai world. Are they artistic masterpieces? Of course not. They're just meant to be fun and accessible.

From “The Tale of the Hollow Tree”, Japanese fiction from appx 970: “A tree that is left growing in its natural state is a crude thing. It is only when it is kept close to human beings who fashion it with loving care that it’s shape and style acquire the ability to move one.”

Bonsai were never intended to look identical to “real trees”. They represent an idealistic tree, shaped to evoke a human response. If your trees accomplish that personally, that is all that is required. If your trees can evoke that from others, you truly have succeeded.

Forsoothe! said:

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.

Click to expand...

A tapered deciduous tree like the ones you describe can be realistic. The pin oak (Quercus palustrus) grows that way in the wild. Unfortunately, it's a style I see too often applied to Maples, etc., which look better as a multi-trunk or clump style, mimicking their natural growth habit. Thus, usually, I agree that the overly stylized trees are often the least impactful. It's fine to deviate from natural forms in bonsai, but there should be a good reason beyond, "It's what everyone else is doing."

On another note, I have a similar complaint about driftwood.

Clicio said:

First time I saw a "melted nebari" it was in Omiya Bonsai Village, in Saitama, Japan.
It was an Ebihara Maple, stunning.
Then I started paying attention to "real" big trees around, and...
Bingo!
Right there, on my sidewalk, a crape myrtle with a naturally melted nebari.
AND twisted trunk also.

View attachment 342284

Click to expand...

Note that the tree is artificially constrained to a square container.

There is room for both and all styles in-between, no?

Forsoothe!, you need to consider the origins of bonsai. As I understand it. Chinese Monks who ventured high in the mountains were impressed by the naturally dwarfed trees they encountered on the tops of the mountains. They would collect them and bring them back down the mountain. Once in more favorable climate, the trees no longer stayed dwarfed, but started growing big. The monks had to invent bonsai techniques to maintain the original image.

What I’m getting at is the original “bonsai” were mountain dwarfs, not miniature representations of trees growing around the monastery.

Now, we take great liberties with “styles”. Much like there are different styles of music, there can be different styles of bonsai. If you don’t care for Sumo styles, that’s fine, no one is forcing you to make Sumo bonsai. Certain styles are more difficult to achieve than others. Melting base nebari take years of dedication to create. It is a testament to the devotion the bonsai artist has had to make to be able to successfully create a “dinner plate” nefarious. It doesn’t matter if it’s natural or not. Hopefully it’s beautiful, but just the fact the artist was able to achieve it is worthy of admiration.

You mentioned a tater trunk full of scars. Well, that’s not the goal. A tater trunk free of scars, or scars that have healed to the point they no longer look like obvious scars is the goal.

The Japanese have a highly tuned “attention to detail”, and they apply it to bonsai. Every little thing matters to the Japanese. We Americans tend to have far lower standards. A typical comment (complaint) I hear is that I’m too picky. They say, “who cares if the wire job looks good, as long as it moves the branch into the correct position”, for example. My training says that bonsai is a work of art, and it should be pleasing to the eye. So, wiring should be done so that it is as unobtrusive as possible.

But, this is a hobby. At least, for most of us. It should be something you enjoy doing. Personally, I like to wire. I take pride in producing a tree that’s fully wired, but uses as little wire as possible. It’s like doing a puzzle. It can be challenging to wire the tree to have good anchors, use the proper caliper of wire, to not cross wires, to not have 4 parallel pieces of wire wrapped together, etc. It’s fun. The tree gives me a challenge, and tests me.

One final thought: I used to not like the deadwood junipers that much. Here in Georgia, we don’t have the growing conditions where they would grow naturally. But, I have been to places in California and Nevada where, up in the mountains, they occur naturally. And seeing them in their natural environment gave me an appreciation that I had not had before I saw them.

Yup. most trees outside are not tapered like the ones in bonsai.



In bonsai one tries to portray an image of a large, old tree. And for most bonsai, the image is of one towering over you. This is also clear from the ideal situation where the tree leans over towards the viewer a little, giving the impression that you are looking up to a large tree. In this perspective, a trunk line with exaggerated taper fits.

Forsoothe! said:

giant scars and terminus of the trunk which is most often still a stump or a big wound.

Click to expand...

I doubt many would call that good bonsai. I know that there is a push to include all sorts of carving and scarring in trees often to hide big chops. It does fit with some of the very old deciduous trees found in forest.I prefer to aim for trees without obvious chops. If done properly one will have a hard time finding the chops. Main challenge here is time & patiences: Most people are not willing to take the time to have a project on their benches for a decade to close all cuts.

leatherback said:

Yup. most trees outside are not tapered like the ones in bonsai.

View attachment 342327

In bonsai one tries to portray an image of a large, old tree. And for most bonsai, the image is of one towering over you. This is also clear from the ideal situation where the tree leans over towards the viewer a little, giving the impression that you are looking up to a large tree. In this perspective, a trunk line with exaggerated taper fits.

View attachment 342325

View attachment 342326


I doubt many would call that good bonsai. I know that there is a push to include all sorts of carving and scarring in trees often to hide big chops. It does fit with some of the very old deciduous trees found in forest.I prefer to aim for trees without obvious chops. If done properly one will have a hard time finding the chops. Main challenge here is time & patiences: Most people are not willing to take the time to have a project on their benches for a decade to close all cuts.

Click to expand...

Taper does give the illusion of a larger tree. My too-little ficus...blew Adam Lavigne's mind that one could easily hold it one handedly. He even took it to the front of the room during his demonstration...to point out just that. Taper...gives the illusion of a bigger tree.

Realists verses Traditionalists​

btw.. I think this is a bit cynical.

To state then

the Good Guys verses...​

is basically insulting.

How would you feel if someone would say there are beginners verses bonsaiists. One could say that if you do not understand the importance of taper and the skills needed for developing this well you have not passed the mindset of a beginner, lacking the understanding and scope of bonsai. Nebari - Trunk - Branchplacement - refinement. Steps in developing bonsai? So if you do not value nebari and trunk, you are not doing bonsai.

Does not feel right, does it?

So maybe just stay away of putting people with another vision down, and just focus on why you prefer the way you do bonsai.

Trees and art come in all shapes and sizes, both the traditional and natural styles are not 100% accurate scaled down images of a tree both are stylized images created by the artist. Some times in art and nature certain features are exaggerated to the extreme or not, there is a broad scope for variation

leatherback said:

...​

is basically insulting

Click to expand...

If you filled in the blank with something insulting, fill it differently!

I used "the Naked guys".

Sorce

sorce said:

If you filled in the blank with something insulting, fill it differently!

Click to expand...

Well, you know what they say.

There are two kinds of people.

First, those that can extrapolate from incomplete data.

Adair M said:

Chinese Monks who ventured high in the mountains were impressed by the naturally dwarfed trees they encountered on the tops of the mountains. Th

Click to expand...

I have never heard this one. It is interesting. Do you have a source I can read.