Can you give me a precise, accurate definition for the term literati bonsai?

I'll give you and example of the "bubble" thing. If you have ever been around biblical scholars, OT guys are normally super limited on their "expertise" on the NT texts and vice versa. It's extreme specialties with concepts and jargon understood within the community and if you want to swim in their pond, you have to take your own swimming lessons many times. Also some of the artists in the pictures that I posted were loyalists of one Dynasty and when the next crew came in they became fugitives often resorting to a live as a monk in the high mountains and from that came the art. It can be taken as pejorative I guess but it's also true if you've been around them and from this came the term "ivory tower", which while pejorative is somewhat descriptive. I recall the difficulty of preparing a sermon that parishioners would actually care about after grad school. I was so used to the (forgive the bluntness) "mental masturbation" of grad school that making things practical became difficult.

My overall point was that, in general terms a "master" (not me by any definition) would understand the "essence" of a "literati bonsai" but likely not be able to put it into a bullet point definition. Allow me expand on that a bit:

Let's compare and contrast two bonsai styles in terms of two philosophical schools of thought. First, let's start with a formal upright, (chokkan). It has an extremely specific definition from which, one cannot diverge without breaking the style. This style is rather Aristotelian in nature as it is empirical, categorical, rule-bound. You can teach this style through explicit instruction and evaluate success against measurable criteria.

On the other hand we have literati or bunjin style bonsai which exist more in a Platonic school of thought. For him, Forms were the perfect, abstract ideals, the "chair-ness" of all chairs, the "beauty" behind all beautiful things. Physical objects are imperfect shadows or participations in these eternal essences. You can't point to the Form itself; you can only recognize its presence in particulars through reason and intuition. Literati bonsai operates similarly. There is no checklist. No prescribed trunk angle, no required number of branches, no specified pot shape. What exists is an essence, a feeling of elegant struggle, austere loneliness, scholarly defiance of convention. You recognize a literati tree the way you recognize melancholy in music, not by measurement, but by resonance with an ideal that exists somewhere beyond the physical specimen. So you can say at the end of the day that it is "defined" by what it "evokes" rather than what it "contains". Sure it has generally agreed upon elements:
  • Sparse, not lush
  • Tall and reaching, not grounded
  • Imperfect, not symmetrical
  • Suggestive, not declarative
I would say it returns us to were we started in this discussion with your Justice Potter Stewart quote. Thus as @Michael P suggested, go work on your trees and create something that "evokes" the feeling you are after. If successful, call it literati (it may very well fit into another more literal (see what I did there) category as well) . Truth be told, your own personal definition that you started in the beginning is quite functional in my opinion.

Brilliant. This is the level of discourse I was hoping for.

I'm going to attempt to paraphrase your definition. Tell me if I have it right.

Lumping literati in with the other styles is something of a category error. Literati is not a physical description of a type of tree. Literati is about the effect on the viewer, rather than the measurements and proportions of the tree itself. The goal in literati is to elicit a sense of simplicity, aloofness, perseverance, and quiet dignity. As a result, literati trees tend to be tall, slender, sparse, subtle, and intentionally imperfect, but these are not strict requirements for a literati tree—merely techniques for creating the literati effect.

Does that about sum it up?
 
I find this a strange thing to say. If you know how to use a word, that means you have your own working definition for it. Please share it.
Proportionally to the size of the tree slender trunk, almost all foliage in upper 1/4-1/3 of the tree, sparse foliage and a good amount of negative space within the foliage area. As Ryan would say the trunk can't look like a struggle to live while the foliage looks like it's young and partying. Yet somehow all this beauty must brilliantly appear untouched by human hands☺️
 
Brilliant. This is the level of discourse I was hoping for.

I'm going to attempt to paraphrase your definition. Tell me if I have it right.

Lumping literati in with the other styles is something of a category error. Literati is not a physical description of a type of tree. Literati is about the effect on the viewer, rather than the measurements and proportions of the tree itself. The goal in literati is to elicit a sense of simplicity, aloofness, perseverance, and quiet dignity. As a result, literati trees tend to be tall, slender, sparse, subtle, and intentionally imperfect, but these are not strict requirements for a literati tree—merely techniques for creating the literati effect.

Does that about sum it up?
Exactly! Leave it to me to be verbose.
 
Proportionally to the size of the tree slender trunk, almost all foliage in upper 1/4-1/3 of the tree, sparse foliage and a good amount of negative space within the foliage area. As Ryan would say the trunk can't look like a struggle to live while the foliage looks like it's young and partying. Yet somehow all this beauty must brilliantly appear untouched by human hands☺️
That is unless the emotion one is seeking to evoke is a the coming through a period of nearly succumbing to death and then finding a way to flourish. For one, I can see this being an amazing presentation from a tree. I would truly value this emotion having been through that in a personal way. I often like to describe my relationship with my trees as a dance of give and take between partners. Often they look like crap when my life also does. I have one that I am working on where the look and the species represents something intimately personal and traumatic that happened when I was young but the tree lives on. The problem with your statement is it's too clean... There is something to be gained philosophically when one's lived long enough to see tragedy and come out on the other side.
 
I think what is happening in a lot of this discussion is the difference between the mathematical/technical meaning of the characteristics of "literati" and the visual evocation to the viewer of the actual tree. I think that is inherent to all the "rules" of structure in bonsai. I think for me literati is both, but primarily the visual feeling imparted by the tree. I would not say that the winner at the nationals should be categorized as such, but it is a lovely tree. We learn by seeing, so get out there and study literati and penjing (yes I know seperate, but lots of great examples within that structure). The book listed is a great resource.
 
I think what you're getting to is Wittgenstein's family resemblance, and I think you may be onto something.

Also, I should point out the notion of academics in a bubble is pejorative. It means they're out of touch. There's a reason the number one piece of advice we give to beginners is to join a local club. Notwithstanding, I suppose you could draw an analogy to an ascetic living alone in a cave in search of enlightenment. I guess it's a tradeoff.
Now we're getting somewhere. I like this explanation. That said, I do not think it precludes a definition. It just means the definition will be vastly more complex. See my prior comment about family resemblance.
I've been waiting 41 years (since I first began my interest with bonsai) for someone to find a link between bonsai and Wittgenstein!
Thank you and congratulations.
 
I think what you're getting to is Wittgenstein's family resemblance, and I think you may be onto something.

Also, I should point out the notion of academics in a bubble is pejorative. It means they're out of touch. There's a reason the number one piece of advice we give to beginners is to join a local club. Notwithstanding, I suppose you could draw an analogy to an ascetic living alone in a cave in search of enlightenment. I guess it's a tradeoff.

I've been waiting 41 years (since my first bonsai tree) for someone to make the link between Wittgenstein and bonsai!

Thank you and congratulations!
 
I'm enjoying the contention this discussion has brought up. I guess the answer is no, we cannot give you a precise, accurate definition for the term literati bonsai.

A little while ago i created a list of books on the topics of the chinese southern school, the nanga school, and the philosophy of wabi-sabi. All of which I am yet to acquire or read, but this thread has given me a push to work my way through them.

• Zong bing - introduction to landscape painting
• James cahill - scholar painters of japan: the nanga school
• Stephen Addis- nanga painting
• Susan Bush - the Chinese literati on painting
• Wen zhenheng - Elegant Life of the Chinese Literati
• Mai-mai Sze - Mustard Seed Garden Manual of Painting
• Junichiro Tanizaki - In Praise of Shadows
• Okakura Kakuzo - the book of tea
• Donald Richie - A tractate on Japanese aesthetics


If anyone has any more recommendations, please feel free to add.
 
Here's my best shot. Feel free to disagree with something better.

My dad had a blue-green car. Some people called it the blue car, while some called it the green car. The definition of literati as as clear as the color of my dad's car. There are no hard rules when looking at the actual definition(s) of literati.

The word "Literati" has a meaning before bonsai, so that may give us a clue of how to use it in bonsai terms. I found most of this on the internet, a little on ChatGPT, and the rest from my own mind.

Literati Definition:
1. The educated class.
2. Persons interested in literature or the arts.

Literati in Art and Culture:
1. Minimalistic, with emphasis on suggestion rather than detail.
2. Personal and expressive, not commercial or realistic.
3. Rooted in intellectual or spiritual reflection, not technical perfection.

Literati in Asia:
Literati, scholars in China and Japan whose poetry, calligraphy, and paintings were supposed primarily to reveal their cultivation and express their personal feelings rather than demonstrate professional skill. The concept of literati painters was first formulated in China in the Bei (Northern) Song dynasty but was enduringly codified in the Ming dynasty by Dong Qichang. In the 18th and 19th centuries, literati painting became popular with the Japanese, who exaggerated elements of Chinese composition and brushwork. See also Ike Taiga.
1. Elegance through minimalism.
2. Strength through restraint.
3. Individuality over conformity.

Literati in Bonsai:
From what I gather, Japanese artists took the Chinese art to a new level, exaggerating the artistic elements. Instead of painting a normal tree, they paint one with very elegant and simple strokes, evoking some level of artistic feeling or emotion from the painting. A long tree becomes longer. Sparse foliage becomes more sparse. I think if we think of it in terms of the paintings (or even poetry), then the application of literati in bonsai becomes a bit more clear:
1. Long, slender trunk, evoking the same feeling as a long brushstroke of a painting.
2. Sparse foliage that doesn't overtake the main topic, the trunk. Refined simplicity.
3. Unconventional form, defying bonsai "norms". "Spirit over structure".
4. Emotive silhouette. The tree shape can tell a story of survival, time, wind, and endurance.

TLDR:
Literati is a term to describe the educated class, brought over to the art of the educated class (poetry and paintings), brought over to the art of bonsai. Because of this, the word is not a perfect translation to the bonsai art form, so there are not a lot of hard rules to follow.
1. Long trunk that breaks the normal bonsai trunk ratio rules. Exaggerated features.
2. Focus of the tree is the trunk, not the foliage. The trunk is what tells the story. Foliage is most-often minimal. Trunk can be elegant or chaotic.
3. Evokes some kind of emotion or feeling. What emotion or feeling is between the artist and viewer.
4. All other rules of what makes a bonsai a literati are either made up or are suggestive guidelines.
 
My 2 cents. Like music and many other art forms what is left out can say more than what you see or hear and can make you think or contemplate it.
In music too many notes or instruments can get in the way of an incredible song, remember classics like (and I'm dating myself here) "Bridge Over Troubled Waters" or "First Time Ever I Saw Your Face".
Simple but powerful.. Visual art is the same and most times you can not explain what makes it so but when you hear it or see it you just know.
I've heard it said many times that improv jazz is all about playing the notes not heard, or something to that effect.

“The piano ain't got no wrong notes.” Thelonious Monk. To Monk, imperfection was part of expression—dissonance was honesty.
 
Been trying to follow the conversation in this thread but my attention span the last 3 weeks hasn't been good from the meds I am on, lack of sleep and just generally tired.

I can't state a definite definition but I see literati as a long slender, sinuous trunk with most of the foliage coming off the top 3rd of the tree.

I know there are those that say only conifers can make "proper" literati but Id disagree.

I have a BRT that I would consider to be a literati. It needs a trim and might have more foliage than some would consider proper for a literati but I also disagree that it has to be sparse in foliage.

1000003860.jpg
 
I know there are those that say only conifers can make "proper" literati but Id disagree.

I have a BRT that I would consider to be a literati. It needs a trim and might have more foliage than some would consider proper for a literati but I also disagree that it has to be sparse in foliage.

I see this thread as a circular argument to re define or dilute the true definition to American standards.
 
If anyone has any more recommendations, please feel free to add.
You can find some good quality scans of reprints of Mustard Seed Garden on some online museum sites as addition to Mai Mai Sze
imho also worth looking (and finding better ocr and translation because cell phone and steel walls look a bit out of context ;)

I'll definately look into books You mentioned

https://www.chinasage.info/chinese-painting.htm not book but nice index of some chinese painters
Literati is a term to describe the educated class, brought over to the art of the educated class (poetry and paintings), brought over to the art of bonsai
this seems very accurate
Like trying to catch the spirit through knowledge of art and symbolism
attention span
last nights i got extreme focus on old books and trying translating what i can and watching ton of paintings (all online ofc) and getting tired in the process
i wake up empty minded but my download folder is full
damn i come here to get knowledge about trees and ofc i drifted into old books and interesting things - as always :)
 
I heard Walter Pall say several times that, in his opinion, literati are sort of naturalistic trees. During the workshop with him, when he was standing next to a pine tree which Andrija Zokic later styled, I asked him why he thinks so. You can find some of his ideas about literati in this video, first around the 6-minute mark and then again during the evaluation of the result. Some of the concepts could be valuable for this discussion.
 
@leatherback
I don't understand what you're getting at with these quotes. As I said, following every detail/nuance of the discussion of this thread has been a struggle. Maybe also not understanding what the argument is about in the first place? No offense to the OP.

Im not arguing or trying to redefine anything. I've been meaning to go look at a couple of my books to see exactly what they "define" literati as but eh....I don't have the energy right now.

So my basic understanding of what a literati is a long sinuous trunk with most foliage off the upper 3rd of the tree. I know that is very basic, and there may be greater complexity but I can't dive into it right now.
 
After reading the 79 posts of this thread, I must confess I'm not sure if my juniper can (or will ever) qualify as literati. I think some of the rules are followed, but not some others.. Anyway I like it, and at least I have had the chance to "attempt" to it.....

IMG20251230164134.jpg IMG20251229103705.jpg

BTW, this how it looked like 5 years ago after my first styling

IMG_20210508_183553__01 (1).jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom