Bill S
Masterpiece
Ahhh!
"Naturalistic has very little to do with what exists in nature, more so having the appearance of being untouched by man."
Will I quoted your line here because I think this part is useful, this may be the crux of this debacle, my opinion here is that many lined up on the other side do not feel this way. The "more so part" I believe is part of the classification of naturalistic, but not the end all. I could be wrong ( not the first or last time for sure) but I think the majority feel that Ma Nature is the answer, with artistic license thrown in on top of it all.
I think there are numerous methods and examples of how a tree can look untouched by man but not represent an actual tree, to me that heads away from "Bonsai", topiary, and sumos come to mind (Sumos get more leway). Many times when you talk to someone about thier tree you come away with the artists version of how/why the tree has grown the way it is presented. Other times such as an exhibit, you don't get to speak with the artist, and you have to use just the image to feel how the tree has grown this way, and often hear that the tree isn't acceptable because "how could a tree grow like that". The story of how a tree can or cannot grow many times is the measure of the believability of a tree, hence the value or greatness of the bonsai.
"Naturalistic has very little to do with what exists in nature, more so having the appearance of being untouched by man."
Will I quoted your line here because I think this part is useful, this may be the crux of this debacle, my opinion here is that many lined up on the other side do not feel this way. The "more so part" I believe is part of the classification of naturalistic, but not the end all. I could be wrong ( not the first or last time for sure) but I think the majority feel that Ma Nature is the answer, with artistic license thrown in on top of it all.
I think there are numerous methods and examples of how a tree can look untouched by man but not represent an actual tree, to me that heads away from "Bonsai", topiary, and sumos come to mind (Sumos get more leway). Many times when you talk to someone about thier tree you come away with the artists version of how/why the tree has grown the way it is presented. Other times such as an exhibit, you don't get to speak with the artist, and you have to use just the image to feel how the tree has grown this way, and often hear that the tree isn't acceptable because "how could a tree grow like that". The story of how a tree can or cannot grow many times is the measure of the believability of a tree, hence the value or greatness of the bonsai.
