When does a tree in a pot become bonsai.

[cquinn]

I think Greerhw on bonsainut said this: "A good bonsai is like a beautiful woman, you know one when you see one, and nobody has to explain it to you."

 

[grouper52]

I agree.

I imagine it would also be safe to say that plants meeting the above definition AND succeed in evoking an inspiring emotional response cross over into the realm of art.



Oops, sorry, I arted.



Will

Not familiar with art as a "realm" - you'd have to define that, Will.

On re-reading, it occurs to me that the definition I offered also addresses several other "realms" that people touch upon here, so let me ramble on further.

Once again, my definition indirectly addresses, or points to, the separate issue of whether or not a particular bonsai succeeds in evoking the desired emotional response in the viewer, i.e. whether or not a bonsai is "good" or not, whether it achieves the goal for which it was created.

But also, the definition points to the original question of this thread, which was not necessarily just about definition, but about WHEN, exactly, a tree that otherwise fulfills the definition also is capable of evoking the desired emotional response in a viewer. If we assume that the word "viewer" will also include the artist himself, then I imagine that there is a point in the development of each bonsai's creation (as with a painting or sculpture) when it no longer becomes for the artist a mere "work-in-progress," but an actual bonsai. I imagine that this moment is defined for the artist when he (yes, women are also included, but it's finally getting to be OK in most writing circles to simply use ONE gender for pronouns again, thank God!) - when he steps back with the realization that the tree he has been working on now evokes something of the desired emotional response in him, with the extrapolation that it would then also be likely to do so for others he might want to show it to, other viewers.

Only THEN would he consider the tree a bonsai, and show it as such, even if it is still in need of ongoing refinement, as is always the case. For instance, before then he might post it here on BNut as a "work-in-progress," and the photos would be designed to primarily show the work underway, whereas later, when he considers it to be a bonsai and therefore thinks others might also do so, he would post a different, "better" picture that down plays the ongoing work in progress and instead emphasizes or "displays" that which helps to evoke the inspiring emotional response in himself and others. This then gets into the entire "realm" of display that some folks touched on here.

This also touches on discussions related to the level of the artist. As with painting or sculpture, different bonsai artists at different levels of expertise, and traveling in circles at different levels of bonsai appreciation, might have a different set point for the shift from work-in-progress to bonsai. Someone posting for peers in the beginners section of a forum might correctly post a tree they, and their peers, correctly would call a bonsai - one which evokes an inspiring emotional response. And yet, that same tree in the hands of a master might be viewed as a mere early work-in-progress, or as an example of something fairly hopeless of ever becoming a bonsai they would display for their peers.

Anyway, just some more thoughts.
G52

 

[rockm]

This argument is always the same as asking "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin." It's interesting, but mostly navel gazing and has no definitive answer.

Bonsai are never completed and they also don't "remain" bonsai once they "become" one. Paintings are completed and remain static. Bonsai dance back and forth visually between shrub and "art." One man's shrublike growth is another's "bonsai." One man's "mallsai" is another's "masterpiece." One man's "Velvet Elvis" is another's "lifetime achievement." It's all pretty subjective...

There is no a singular, linear progression that allows a lowly shrub to become a kingly bonsai. It is one when it moves you. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

 

[grizzlywon]

To me, that is the wild card in bonsai. For me, it doesn't take a lot to invoke emotions in me when I view a tree.

And for those of you on this site that are masters or have been doing this for many, many years, it takes more for you? From what I gather, the longer you do this, the more you see, know what to look for and the more you expect from a tree.

I guess just like in any art, the masters have more refined tastes than a student of art. That is why I read a lot of your books and study your trees, to learn what to look for. Not that I need to tweak how I feel when I view a tree, but because I think that this knowledge of what a tree should look like, will only help me in making some of my trees look more like bonsai. And help me when buying stock to know more what to look for.

 

[shohin kid]

I guess just like in any art, the masters have more refined tastes than a student of art.

I don't know that I agree with this statement, at least concerning myself. I would consider my taste refined, my problem is just lack of experience and material to pull it off.

 

[grouper52]

This argument is always the same as asking "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin." It's interesting, but mostly navel gazing and has no definitive answer.

It's all pretty subjective...

It is one when it moves you. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

Ah, post-modern solipsism: facile and fashionable, yet hard to refute, and completely destructive of meaningful dialogue. For me THAT is true navel gazing, and it's not remotely interesting. But I agree, there's no sense having such a discussion. Or any discussion. None CAN be had.

G52

 

[Vance Wood]

To me a tree in a pot becomes a bonsai when it no longer suggests visions of what it can or could be and begs for questions of how it became what it is.

 

[Rick Moquin]

To me a tree in a pot becomes a bonsai when it no longer suggests visions of what it can or could be and begs for questions of how it became what it is.

Vance that is profound!

... short and sweet!!!

 

[Vance Wood]

Vance that is profound!

... short and sweet!!!

Thanks Rick, it means something coming from you.

For what it's worth, anyone wishing to use that quote is more than welcome to as long as it is followed by an attribution.

 

[rockm]

"Ah, post-modern solipsism: facile and fashionable, yet hard to refute, and completely destructive of meaningful dialogue. For me THAT is true navel gazing, and it's not remotely interesting. But I agree, there's no sense having such a discussion. Or any discussion. None CAN be had."

AHHH the voice of one who hasn't participated in 100s of versions of this exact "argument." Sorry, but I know the course of this discussion well--after participating in it for a decade or so. When everyone is through pontificating on how "Art with a Capital A" is served through twigs and branches, we will probably arrive at the conclusion of "I know if when I see it."

as for the "post-modern solipsism" and me being "facile and fashionable," well, I'm hardly facile, I wear plaid and stripes together, and I think I had a bowl of solipsisms for lunch yesterday.

I meant none of that. I simply meant "here we go again."

 

[Bill S]

Vance I like it too, nice and simple.

This gets away from the eye of the beerholder being the qualifying aspect of art, because we all know each of us are all correct, because we all see something a little different, I guess that is why it can't be discussed, because the you's are all wrong cuz this is the way I see it.

 

[rockm]

"To me a tree in a pot becomes a bonsai when it no longer suggests visions of what it can or could be and begs for questions of how it became what it is."

This covers the territory well I think.

The more you "do" bonsai, the more intriguing they become. The overall image is backed by a sense of wonder at "how he/she DO THAT?" Once you know the "tricks" and know how to spot them and have used theme, some "bonsai" fall by the wayside, at least for me, anyway.

 

[rockm]

There's an interesting discussion kind of related to this one over on IBC:

http://ibonsaiclub.forumotion.com/bonsai-f1/when-is-a-bonsai-not-a-bonsai-t886-30.htm

The discussion of the definition of bonsai is intriguing. Haven't seen the ideogram explained this way before and it sheds alot of light on what bonsai is--hint--it isn't simple plant in a tray...From what I can gather from the discussion, putting the two Kanji characters together goes beyond the simple meaning and carries other implications.

 

[Rick Moquin]

"Ah, post-modern solipsism: facile and fashionable, yet hard to refute, and completely destructive of meaningful dialogue. For me THAT is true navel gazing, and it's not remotely interesting. But I agree, there's no sense having such a discussion. Or any discussion. None CAN be had."

AHHH the voice of one who hasn't participated in 100s of versions of this exact "argument." Sorry, but I know the course of this discussion well--after participating in it for a decade or so. When everyone is through pontificating on how "Art with a Capital A" is served through twigs and branches, we will probably arrive at the conclusion of "I know if when I see it."

as for the "post-modern solipsism" and me being "facile and fashionable," well, I'm hardly facile, I wear plaid and stripes together, and I think I had a bowl of solipsisms for lunch yesterday.

I meant none of that. I simply meant "here we go again."

Don't worry about it, he his negative today, tomorrow he might be positive.

 

[Rick Moquin]

Thanks Rick, it means something coming from you.

For what it's worth, anyone wishing to use that quote is more than welcome to as long as it is followed by an attribution.

Vance you are welcome. Although we have differing opinions at times, I always pay Caesar his dues. Take a bow! a BZ is extended to you.

 

[greerhw]

Send me a picture of your tree and I will tell whether I think it's a bonsai or not, assuming you want to hear the truth. If you want an atta boy, I don't have the time..................

Harry the asshole