Is it a personal preference?

[berobinson82]

So, without trying to stir the pot, I'd like to propose a question.

In my short life, I've never seen a sumo looking tree. When we discuss trees on this board, very often, the consensus is to "cut it back to the lowest branch" in order to make a more powerful looking tree. There is a rule of thumb of 6:1 width to height as well.

My thought is, I've never seen a tree in nature that looks like a sumo tree. Below are two images lift from this blog:

http://samedge.wordpress.com/

These images were taken at the Bay Island Bonsai Exhibit of Fine Bonsai 2013.

I wish I could give credit to the artists. Both trees won recognition. In my opinion, the tall slender tree is a more natural looking one. One I'd see in the woods. One that would look natural if it was photoshopped into a landscape. The second, a sumo shohin, has that "powerful" trunk but it's not something I've ever seen naturally besides in bonsai. I suppose some Bald Cypress come closest. My question is this, what's wrong with tall trees?

I'm thinking the taller tree, if it were being discussed here would be a candidate for a chop. In my opinion, it's got the right look and feel of a real tree. Some of BVF's trees are similar; more slender and realistic. Take that lovely beech for example or the Chisio maple.

My goal here is understanding and conversation.

Your opinion is most appreciated. Here are the subjects mentioned above:

http://samedge.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/img_01651.jpg


http://samedge.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/img_01841.jpg

 

[Poink88]

I wanted to type an answer but the chapter on "Emphasis" here answers it better....

http://www.andyrutledge.com/book/contents/bonsaesthetics.htm

It is a good read and worth going through all seven pages.

I also like the simplistic approach and explanation given by Francois Jeker in his book Bonsai Aesthethics. Get it if you can.

 

[Poink88]

Now that is out...there seems to some shift between Japaneses and European bonsai. Both are good but there are differences in ideology. I can see the advantage on both and believe you can follow both and be on the right track.

 

[GrimLore]

Me and the Wife do both and honest we do not follow the "standards". They are still Bonsai simply because they are potted trees. We enjoy them and really have no plans to "show" them anywhere anyways. Also in real life I have a photo or two of some severely chopped trees one being an Apple on Grandmothers property as a result of lightening so the word "natural" well I see that word as a loose term at best.

 

[nathanbs]

I think its definitely just a preference. I tend to like very dramatic, exaggerated sumos and cascades. Both don't exist true to form in nature with the same proportions. I tend to appreciate a true to form tree but quickly move on as we all see real trees just about everyday all day. I like to look at something that evokes a greater feeling and imagination out of me.The beech I don't think would ever be recommended to chop as it is a very well proportioned tree. The first few inches of trunk(straight, little taper) dictate the rest of the tree and you either like it or don't like it but you have to go with it. Often times a picture of a tree will be posted with great taper in the first few inches and then wham above that its straight or there's no taper. That is when you definitely should chop down to where the taper and movement stopped. By the way even the beech would be a giant tree in real form.

 

[rockm]

Sumo style trees are often just not looked at correctly They are not intended to be wrote identical copies of trees in nature. They are intended to force the viewer into seeing a much larger tree from a forced perspective.

To "get" what sumo trunks are trying to convey, stand about three feet away from a large, full-sized forest tree. Look it up and down. Since you're so close, your perspective is skewed. The base will look enormous and the top will immediately taper away far above you and appear to curve over you a bit.

It is that forced perspective that the better sumo trees convey.

Additionally, some sumo trees AREN'T meant to portray trees at all, but are meant to resemble Mt. Fuji.--all dramatic taper in a symmetrical (but natural) cone. Mt. Fuji figures very prominently in the Japanese psyche and is rife with symbolism of the Japanese culture. It is a constant, ever-present image in most Japanese artforms, including bonsai. the mountain inspired the logo for Infiniti cars, for instance, as well as poetry and painting back to the first century.

 

[bonsaibp]

Most definitely a personal preference.
Personally as long as everything is in proportion I don't think it matters whether your tree is 4" or 4'.

 

[Gene Deci]

It certainly is personal preference. I personally prfer the more natural looking trees. My appreciation of sumo trees is more learned, a regard for the skill, time and artistry it takes. My appreciation of great "natural" trees is viseral. A gut reaction that after all these years still takes my breath away.

But perhaps more to your question, I have never been to a professionally judged show where the sumo trees didn't take the honors. For some reason, in this country, the naturalistic style gets little respect from the powers that be.

 

[stacy allen muse]

??????????

 

[nathanbs]

bero can we discuss why it is that one seems to get more attention or accolades than the other or is that potentially getting into the controversy?

 

[jk_lewis]

IMO, sumo trees are grotesques.

 

[RichKid]

IMO, sumo trees are grotesques.

+1

I personally prefer the natural looking trees. I guess to each his own, but I feel like the sumos are just outright ugly. I wonder if they have been around since the beginning of bonsai or if theyre some modern age contraption by people looking for something new to do. Even looking at a tree from three feet away the branches are still in proportion to the tree. Not twigs on huge trunks. Just my humble opinion though.

 

[RichKid]

And I also think that bonsai is not just for the artist but for the general public to enjoy, and I would bet dollars to doughnuts if you grab any joe schmoe off the street and show him the two pics, he would mostly likely be inclined to say that the first one gives him the realest impression of a minute tree, as well as the most aesthetic appreciation. To me that first tree is almost perfect, the second, not so much LOL

 

[berobinson82]

bero can we discuss why it is that one seems to get more attention or accolades than the other or is that potentially getting into the controversy?

Hell, I'd love to. I guess the controversy I anticipated is one of Japanese bonsai vs European/American bonsai trees. I guess my understanding is that the Japanese prefer the triangular tops on triangular bases. Some of my mentors have advised me to cut trees down to nothingness and make them more... Japanese and it bothers me treemendously. My eye prefers the more natural look of trees. So I'm always curious why folks would coach a newb to make thick, stocky trunks but Bill V or BVF or Dan R can get away with tall slender trees...

I'm understanding that it's a different representation of nature. One is more fantasy, one more true to form. Neither more correct than the other.

I think I can identify most with Gene's appreciation of the method and time it takes to produce sumo trees but prefer the natural look. Initially, I thought we were to make bonsai look like trees, not like bonsai.... So now I'm wondering why those sumo trees win..

I had read the link Poink responded with previously. But I don't know if I can force my mind into the idea of looking up at a tree. rockm expanded on this notion with the cultural significance of why that triangle is so ingrained in Japanese culture. I want to be a giant looking at a miniature piece of landscape. Not a regular sized me looking up perhaps.. (GO MURICA!)

I'm having a tough time finding my words right now, tbh. Just rambling now..


Is the preference for sumo vs natural personal preference; or acculturation. Perhaps the better question.

 

[stacy allen muse]

????????????

 

[rockm]

There is no real distinction between "Japanese" and "Naturalistic" trees. It is a matter of degree, like pornagraphy. It's an "I know it when I see it" kind of thing. I've seen some extremely "naturalistic" Japanese trees and some "Japanese" naturalistic trees...

When does a sumo become a sumo (and don't throw mathmathetical equations at me--art transcends math). When does it stretch into a WP big honking trunked tree? When does a tree with a big nebari shrink to a sumo...?

If you think you can define that line, I have some swampland in Jersey for ya...

Over the years, I have found myself less and less inclined to draw such distinctions. If the tree works, it works. And some sumo trees work for me.

And BTW, "grotesque" has been used by the bonsai-ignorant public for a very long time to describe trees that we'd call terrific...Just sayin'...

 

[stacy allen muse]

?????????????

 

[nathanbs]

Ok game on My vote is sumo, here's why......I like it! I like looking at them as I said earlier, it gets my gears turning. I also mentioned earlier that we can look at trees in nature any day all day unless you are locked up in prison and even then they probably have some to look at when they are out in the yard. Why do a painting of something that is often times right out your window, paint something more interesting or more challenging. It is immensely more difficult and challenging to make a "sumo" style bonsai, not to mention the time it takes. If the material is already mature then the material will typically dictate the design. You do not take a beautiful beech tree like in your intro and then try to make a sumo out of it, that would be silly. That tree has for the most part reached its pinnacle, if its not your style then sell it, don't butcher it. Remember the first couple inches of trunk will speak volumes to you on what the design of the tree shall be. If you're growing from seed or cutting that's another story.

 

[PaulH]

There is definitely a place for both styles in my appreciation of bonsai. As an analogy I think it is possible to equally enjoy the painting of Picasso and Norman Rockwell.
Sumo, and bunjin style trees are more of bonsai abstract art and somehow a little more emotionally charged for me than more naturalistic trees. On the other hand, I think it takes much more skill to create a good natural style tree.

 

[nathanbs]

There is definitely a place for both styles in my appreciation of bonsai. As an analogy I think it is possible to equally enjoy the painting of Picasso and Norman Rockwell.
Sumo, and bunjin style trees are more of bonsai abstract art and somehow a little more emotionally charged for me than more naturalistic trees. On the other hand, I think it takes much more skill to create a good natural style tree.

interesting that I being fairly new to this think naturalistic is easier. You've done this way longer than me so I have to respect your input. What do others think about difficulty when executing naturalistic versus "sumo" or "bunjin"?