Missing the mark again. I said the interpretation of the whether the work is successful according to the definition is up to the individual not the interpretation of bonsai. In other words, do you interpret a work in front of you as entirely expressing the beauty and volume of a tree growing in a natural environment or not. (If you do, then it is a bonsai in your eyes). Not - do you interpret this thing in front of you as a bonsai. What's the difference? Well if the interpretation of bonsai was up to the individual the term bonsai would cease to have a meaning. There must a reference point. Otherwise a ball on a stick could be interpreted as a bonsai. After all, it is a tree in a pot. There must be a reference point and there must be a point beyond which the work ceases to be a bonsai and becomes something else. Hence my narrow definition. Where does that leave most of the plastic looking kokufu junipers etc. Well to me they are misguided attempts at true bonsai which do not meet the definition above and so they are failed attempts in my mind. It's that simple. Obviously convention dictates that I call them bonsai and I will continue to do that, but what I think is different. Also it goes without saying that there are various degrees of failure. Perhaps you suggest we should keep our opinions to ourselves? I say bullshit to that. If someone asks then I will tell them what I believe. Actually even if they don't ask I will tell them if the right opportunity comes along...
It's perfectly fine if you disagree and reject that definition. Most would. But now I ask you what is
your preferred definition and where does it start and end? If it has no end, I have some pictures to get your opinion on........
And BTW, the NBA's definition is hardly vague! It's about as clear as you can get. Later I will give you their new updated modern interpretation to better cater for a Western mind.