Pet Peeves - Misnomers

dbonsaiw

Masterpiece
Messages
2,616
Reaction score
3,446
Location
New York
USDA Zone
7b
Maybe I woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning, but there are some bonsai terms that irritate me as they give off the wrong impressions. Some examples:

1) Training one's bonsai - bonsai are not trainable. They are not sentient and have no brains. A dog may naturally poo where he wants, but can be trained to poo on a pad. You can never change the nature of a tree. It will always poo where it wants. We can never obtain even a Pavlovian response from a tree. Trees will always want to grow big and tall. We are DEVELOPING our trees to do something else. But make no mistake, no one has ever trained a tree out of its nature.

2) Fertilizing as feeding one's tree - fertilizer is not tree food. The only thing a tree eats are the sugars produced from photosynthesis. Fertilizers is more akin to a multi-vitamin for humans - essential minerals, but not the protein and fat (calories) that humans live on. Trees get fat by "eating" a lot of sugars produced from lots of foliage, not by fertilizing more.

3) Indoor bonsai - ?como? what exactly is an indoor tree? Almost like an out-of-water fish. Fish live ok out of water I guess if you attach something to it that pumps water through its gills. Which is to say there are no out of water fish really. Same with trees. If we put the tree under lights with fans and watch the humidity, we basically "attached something to it that pumps water through its gills." Which is to say there really are no indoor trees.

4) Forest planting - more often than not, this is just not the case. Group plantings, maybe, but not forests.

5) pre-bonsai - a pretty meaningless term. Basically, anything other than a finished tree.

6) Bonsai rules - there are no bonsai rules. You don't get in trouble for breaking any such rules. You are free to do what you want. There is, however, bonsai theory which provides certain guidelines for how to develop a realistic looking tree.

7) starter material - another meaningless term, as we all have different ideas of what we want to begin with.
 
Dang, who pissed in your cheerios!?🤣

…and that’s not a short post.

I will say things get irritating when there are a half dozen terms that all mean the same thing, or worse, slightly the same thing.
 
Maybe I woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning, but there are some bonsai terms that irritate me as they give off the wrong impressions. Some examples:

1) Training one's bonsai - bonsai are not trainable. They are not sentient and have no brains. A dog may naturally poo where he wants, but can be trained to poo on a pad. You can never change the nature of a tree. It will always poo where it wants. We can never obtain even a Pavlovian response from a tree. Trees will always want to grow big and tall. We are DEVELOPING our trees to do something else. But make no mistake, no one has ever trained a tree out of its nature.

2) Fertilizing as feeding one's tree - fertilizer is not tree food. The only thing a tree eats are the sugars produced from photosynthesis. Fertilizers is more akin to a multi-vitamin for humans - essential minerals, but not the protein and fat (calories) that humans live on. Trees get fat by "eating" a lot of sugars produced from lots of foliage, not by fertilizing more.

3) Indoor bonsai - ?como? what exactly is an indoor tree? Almost like an out-of-water fish. Fish live ok out of water I guess if you attach something to it that pumps water through its gills. Which is to say there are no out of water fish really. Same with trees. If we put the tree under lights with fans and watch the humidity, we basically "attached something to it that pumps water through its gills." Which is to say there really are no indoor trees.

4) Forest planting - more often than not, this is just not the case. Group plantings, maybe, but not forests.

5) pre-bonsai - a pretty meaningless term. Basically, anything other than a finished tree.

6) Bonsai rules - there are no bonsai rules. You don't get in trouble for breaking any such rules. You are free to do what you want. There is, however, bonsai theory which provides certain guidelines for how to develop a realistic looking tree.

7) starter material - another meaningless term, as we all have different ideas of what we want to begin with.
Sorry, but you can train a plant. That is, literally, part of the definition of the word. See #3 in "verb" 😁

The definition of a forest is rather slippery IRL, as it is in bonsai. After all, "groups" of trees is kiiinda what a forest is...



The others, yeah 👍
 
Sorry, but you can train a plant. That is, literally, part of the definition of the word. See #3 in "verb"
Semantically correct. As an early newb I thought that at some point the tree actually is forever dwarfed by the process. It was pretty eye opening when I learned that an old, tiny bonsai will become a full grown tree if allowed to.
 
6) Bonsai rules - there are no bonsai rules. You don't get in trouble for breaking any such rules. You are free to do what you want. There is, however, bonsai theory which provides certain guidelines for how to develop a realistic looking tree.
I can understand where your coming from with this one. But all forms of art have "rules" and no one is really arguing about whether the rules of music or photography are absolute.

Forest plantings are called that as they present an image of a forest not that they *literally* are a forest.
 
Forest plantings are called that as they present an image of a forest not that they *literally* are a forest.
I'm just nit picking. Was actually looking at pics of forests the other day and thought to myself that I really haven't seen that many bonsai plantings that capture the feel of this. To be sure, I have seen these in plantings with many, many trees. My 10-year old is working on a port forest and currently has about 25 trees in there. It started at 6 and he also felt that it didn't feel like a forest.
 
Semantically correct. As an early newb I thought that at some point the tree actually is forever dwarfed by the process. It was pretty eye opening when I learned that an old, tiny bonsai will become a full grown tree if allowed to.
That was one of my first questions on this website. 😋
 
I've already made it known what my biggest pet peeve is: grafting shimpaku foliage onto other junipers. It's not that I'm a big fan of other species or cultivars of juniper, but I'm really not a fan of franken-trees.

For that matter, I'm really not a fan of grafting in general. If the only way to propagate a tree is by grafting, you're not really propagating the tree. The most important part of the tree—the shin and the nebari—isn't the tree. It's something else.

Anyway, my point is that I think it's normal to find certain things incoherent and/or nonsensical, and it's admirable to put those ideas out into a public forum to test them, even at the risk of looking silly if others disagree. Opinions are like @$$holes. Everyone has them, and it's important to get yours checked by an expert from time to time to make sure there's nothing wrong with it.
 
I'm just nit picking. Was actually looking at pics of forests the other day and thought to myself that I really haven't seen that many bonsai plantings that capture the feel of this. To be sure, I have seen these in plantings with many, many trees. My 10-year old is working on a port forest and currently has about 25 trees in there. It started at 6 and he also felt that it didn't feel like a forest.
Its true that most group plantings don’t actually hit the forest vibe. Here’s one of the few I’ve seen in person that truly made me feel as tho i were standing at the edge of a forest. Believe its a trident maple, with 57 trees, at the Pacific Bonsai Museum.
IMG_0387.jpeg
 
Its true that most group plantings don’t actually hit the forest vibe. Here’s one of the few I’ve seen in person that truly made me feel as tho i were standing at the edge of a forest. Believe its a trident maple, with 57 trees, at the Pacific Bonsai Museum.
View attachment 510748

Obviously, I can't dispute your subjective experience, but one thing I've noticed is that plantings with parallel trunks tend to evoke a forest feel, whereas plantings with trunks that lean away from the center feel more like a "group planting" than a forest.

For example:

1695844527906.jpeg
 
The pre-bonsai thing has been discussed before, but in my mind there’s absolutely a difference between a nursery tree and a pre-bonsai (i.e. normal root work done, combing out the roots and making them more radial, pruning to avoid reverse taper, etc.)

Now whether those things have actually been done to a tree labeled as a “pre-bonsai” that’s entirely dependent on who is labeling it as such.
 
The term that really grinds my petunias is when noobs talk about adding "fresh soil". Like you're changing the batteries or something.
 
Obviously, I can't dispute your subjective experience, but one thing I've noticed is that plantings with parallel trunks tend to evoke a forest feel, whereas plantings with trunks that lean away from the center feel more like a "group planting" than a forest.

For example:

View attachment 510751
"I've noticed is that plantings with parallel trunks tend to evoke a forest feel, whereas plantings with trunks that lean away from the center feel more like a "group planting" than a forest."

This can be a bit misleading, as sometimes, as in the trident maple forest pictured, trees are angled out to increase the forced perspective of the planting to make it look like it has more depth. That trident forest is meant to evoke looking far away through a forest. The dramatically reduced height of the back trees, combined with the outward splayed forward trunks draws your eye into the forest and the depths beyond.

Kimura's mountain forest is not in the same category, as it is a straight ahead close view perspective of a mountain forest.
 
Obviously, I can't dispute your subjective experience, but one thing I've noticed is that plantings with parallel trunks tend to evoke a forest feel, whereas plantings with trunks that lean away from the center feel more like a "group planting" than a forest.
My terminology could be wrong, but the word that comes to my mind with a "group planting" where the outer trees lean outwards is "grove".

Your example feels like a forest, while @pandacular 's example feels like a grove. EDIT: In that pic, I think the fact that the edge of the "planting" is round and not straight implies that it's a smaller grove rather than an endless forest.

EDIT: As far as leaning for perspective is concerned, leaning too much makes it look odd rather than forcing perspective, but that's just me. I think a slight lean would be more appropriate and also the trees on the edges should not be solitary but instead should have something behind it to give the edges more depth. I hope that makes sense.
 
Last edited:
My terminology could be wrong, but the word that comes to my mind with a "group planting" where the outer trees lean outwards is "grove".

I almost used the word "grove" myself, but OP stipulated to the term "group planting," so I stuck with OP's terminology to avoid confusion. Ultimately, it's just a matter of how expansive a group of trees is.
 
Bonsai's
That's mine.
"The Plural of Bonsai is Bonsai" -- I need this shirt! lol

Yeah.

And the singular of species is species. "Specie" is a word, but it's a term from numismatics, not biology.

Also, the format is Genus species 'Cultivar.' Abbreviated, it's G. species. In school, I'd get my answers marked wrong for improper formatting, and it still bothers me to see "Genus species," "Genus Species," "genus species," or "G Species."
 
Last edited:
I almost used the word "grove" myself, but OP stipulated to the term "group planting," so I stuck with OP's terminology to avoid confusion. Ultimately, it's just a matter of how expansive a group of trees is.
When I was growing up my parents had this sign in the bathroom that said "Baths 10¢. Group rates available."

I think I was in high school before I realized that was a dirty joke.
 
Back
Top Bottom