king kong,
and you seriously think that the previous bonsai looks very much like the pine from Florida? This example shows how corrupted bonsai folks are in their vision. The bonsai does not look like your pine tree at all. It is not even an abstraction of it. It is universes away from resembling your pine tree. I believe that you think it is, but this is due to your bonsai background which distorts our vision of real trees totally.
Walter,
Whatever KK’s position, or whatever his interpretation of that tree… the use of his previous example, which involved a tree of yours, shows that he sees just fine.
I’m not sure how one makes the leap from his bonsai background (which is more than acceptable in its own right) and the distortion of our vision of real trees. I’ve seen some of his bonsai; I can assure you that I came away none the worse for ware. ;o)
To say that there is a skewed vision of what bonsai can be from a naturalist’s perspective is quite true. Often people have no idea just what is possible in nature. As a dear friend has said, a person is limited by the scope of their visual experience. If you have never seen great trees in nature, how would you know you were getting it right? What might seem like a fantastical expression is clearly possible…. again…. referencing the example KK showed of the “krum-whatever-that-word-is” and your tree. Look at the mountain hemlock trees from North Vancouver Island… again… amazing trees which could very well look like the tree currently under contention.
In any case…
To avoid a total hijack of this thread, I will answer the original question with my own thoughts… I do not think that our work must/needs to represent a real tree in nature. If one is trying to connect with another individual through the medium, creating a “real” looking tree can be a useful tool to making that connection. Take Elandan… there is a tree there which is a perfect representation of a very typical conifer. The reaction people have to it often tells me a lot about their experience/exposure to the art. Often those who have no level of involvement in the art love that tree the most. It reaches across, enchanting and delighting them. I do not do this art solely for my own pleasure. If I can create something that connects with other people, especially those who are not part of the art… because I want to intrigue them… then I am content enough. Then again… I equally enjoy creating visions which are not exclusively meant to engage a non-enthusiast… so it’s about what is possible with the material at hand. But does it have to be a recognizable tree to be credible? Not in my opinion.
Kindest regards to all,
Victrinia