The Art of Bonsai Project

Will,
In answering this, it would not be harm, but you would lose a very important thing....space.
If the absolute importance of the bonsai was a 360* display, then to show it in that light, you tremendously limit the number of trees a finite area could have. This applies for gardens and shows, and it is not a mere matter of quality over quantity. I think we would all agree that the majority of bonsai enthusiasts display their works on benches or pedestals with an obvious "front area". Usually close to a wall or other type of backing that allows the silhouette to stand out. The "back drop" is not a possibility with a 360* display (unless the tree is rotating against a backdrop viewed by a standing person). This is a negative aspect of the display you are so passionate about. A LOT can be lost by the cluttered background that would result from this type of display.
How much have we covered the "show-quality" photographs we require for bonsai on this very site? An integral part of that is the background. No doubt a well-executed bonsai is the subject, but without a neutral background, how much of the composition is lost from view? That is an issue that hasn't even been addressed, as far as I know, in this discussion, but one of tremendous importance.
Now remember, from the very beginning I have said you should make each and every bonsai as beautiful as you can from all angles as long as it doesn't take away from a primary view. But this thread has floundered a little between bonsai styling and bonsai display. My remarks above are directed at bonsai display. Now having said that, my challenge to you is to explain why it is so important to consider multiple views, if you are only going to see one. And the compromise for multiple good views over one great view is one I am not willing to accept. I think that gets us down to the brass tacks.
John

John,
You are trying to divide what can not be divided. In order to show how well a tree is styled in all dimensions, you must show it in all dimensions. I believe the style should dictate the display and not the other way around. Why, after all, should we limit the styling potential of a bonsai simply because of the way it is displayed?
You challenged me to "explain why it is so important to consider multiple views, if you are only going to see one." My answer is why must we only see one? You are limiting the potential of your bonsai with the chains of traditional display. There is nothing wrong with traditional display, it has served us well and we should keep in mind that a three-dimensional tree can just as well be shown in such. However, a tree styled for one view only could never be shown in a three-dimensional display.
As far as space considerations go, I fell that designing bonsai to fit more into a given space is somehow completely missing the point. I must have misunderstood your intent here.
Again back to sculpture. While Mark was correct in stating that sculpture also has a preferred viewing angle, it must also be remembered that most sculpture is displayed so that the viewing public can walk around it. The same pedestals that sculpture is displayed upon are mirrored with the monkey poles we use. Mark states that sculpture has a front and I agree, but sculpture also has other sides, all as technically perfect and artistically done as the front. You can enjoy the artist's talent and attention to detail on all sides.

Will Heath

I'm not entirely sure, but I think that perhaps some of us are laboring under the misapprehension that basic or classical bonsai styling of the branches is accomplished so that they only look good from the front. This might explain the need to champion the idea of bonsai being made to be nice from all angles.
But this is a false notion - that branches and such, in the classic form, should be created to look good only from the front. On the contrary, good bonsai technique is to make the structure "right" so that it looks "good," generally - and then viewed from the front will look "good."
A good branch is a good branch. The only reason that one might use artifice to appease the front view is in cases that cannot otherwise be remedied; like when a branch is too long leggy on a conifer and it is bent several times in order to visually shorten it. Or when the branch is pointed more toward the front to visually shorten it.
It is a simple fact that bonsai does need to employ visual tricks and illusion in order to achieve a high degree of communication. There's simply no getting around that. Sometimes those techniques are focused on the front view - and rightly so.
Otherwise, a bonsai should always look good from any angle. But this is true only up to the point where specific artistic techniques are employed so that the idea of great size or "treeness" is suggested. But these are, again, medium-specific techniques that are not bad, just necessary for our medium (like leaning the tree toward the front and angling the first couple of branches toward the front to embrace the viewer).
Barring these things, why not enjoy a bonsai from all angles. But the idea that classic or classical bonsai are made only to have good structure as seen from the front is patently false.
Kind regards,
Andy

John Dixon wrote:

I know you didn't challenge me with this, but I would like to answer it anyway. I think the main reason to consider how it looks from all angles would strengthen the tree as a whole, as I mentioned in my previous post.
Do you feel that using the tradition of only having one front to conceal the sloppy technique that may be used to achieve a "fast bonsai" instead of a great bonsai. Will addressed the issue of people grafting trunks and such in order to skip that long annoying waiting period that it takes to achieve a great bonsai tree and they use the tradition of only viewing from one side only to hide the sometime hideous flaws that would otherwise be able to be corrected with time and skill.
What do you think? If trees were judged not only on their "front view" but also on their technical merit would some of the "show quality" trees out there no long be show quality because as soon as the judge had a good look at it, he/she would realize that it was really no more than a well disguised sloppy "cut and paste" job, in reference to the bad grafts Will spoke of.
I love the idea of 3D bonsais for 2 reasons. One of those reasons is the fact that it's another way to look at the same medium. "Cubism vs. Impressionism". The other is because I believe that it adds a lot to traditional bonsai because it strengthens the entire foundation that the "front" is built upon.
michael

Will,
Yes, I do believe you did miss my point. It really isn't an issue though. I know enough to realize you and I differ greatly on this subject.
You answered that 3D must exist in the bonsai itself AND it's display, it can't be divided. I do not agree, but I respect your opinion.
This is not meant as a slight, but I don't see how that is possible without revolving pedestals for every one of them. Maybe that's why the idea doesn't appeal to me. I am with you about making the bonsai as visually appealing from all angles as possible but with the caveat that a primary angle has to be given priority. There may be exceptions, but I have not seen one yet. I have seen bonsai with a good front and almost as good a back, but that is about it.
"Challenge" was probably the wrong word to use. I didn't mean it to sound combative. What I should have said was convince me. That has not happened. I will remain open about it, but I am not optimistic.
John

Deleted by John due to a posting error

Michael and all others,
I am all for good technique THROUGHOUT the bonsai, not just a front. I said that from the beginning. On that issue we are in complete agreement.
From your above remarks, you are categorizing front view displayed bonsai as inferior trees made with substandard material and shoddy workmanship. Obviously, SOME do exist, but not the vast majority of show quality bonsai. A good judge is looking for the same attributes that you are championing. A guideline in display is that any significant scarring should NOT appear from the display view. I can see where this is no longer an issue if displayed 360*. In that respect, you who are enthralled with 3D display have a good point.
Now, how do you implement basic bonsai design like tree/container compatibility and pot positioning? These are factors in any bonsai composition and the possibility of "acceptance" with bad pot placement INCREASES in 360* display. A moyogi in a rectangular style pot is NOT going to look right from some angle, I assure you. If I'm wrong, show me one.
What I believe is that this idea trades one set of guidelines for another. It specifies what faults can be rationalized - like pot placement - for the increase in less "scarred" material (this philosophy is already a guideline in bonsai, but it seems that the 3D display has an agenda to ensure it).
This may sound a little aggressive, but hear me out. How many of you who are adament about the 3D display ideology, PRACTICE what you preach in your own backyard? I mean exclusively. No benches or pedestals in front of a wall or other backdrop. How many?
I stand by my convictions that "3D" design is integral in bonsai design from conception, and that 3D display is decidedly a different topic altogether.
Show me proof otherwise. Not ONE bonsai has done that as far as I know. When it does, should we just burn the rest? This ideal has some merit, but it comes extremely close to alienating the vast majority of previous bonsai efforts. I'm talking about the GOOD stuff, not mallsai quick buck trees. I don't see the gain in compromising that for this newer philosophy.
I'm not form Missouri, but I will use there motto again...show me.
There's an old saying about wars; "Old men discuss them, young men die in them". Let's paraphrase a little and change that to "young men fight them". This has been discussed to the saturation point. The actual efforts though are few. It's time to walk the walk. One of you who truly feel this ideal is the future of bonsai, submit one, just ONE, bonsai on a revolving pedestal that is beyond repproach. No flaws from ANY angle whatsoever.
Now there is a challenge, and I mean it as a challenge. You do that and it survives criticism, I will wave the white flag of surrender. If you don't, it's just a bunch of talk with no tangible evidence to support it. The bonsai of Walter's is an excellent one, but it does not have the attributes you claim for 3D design. What it has is several possible display views, but not from the entire 360 degrees of the compass. And I think it is important to note that Walter never claimed it satisfied the criteria. He just said it was his experiment in the philosophy. This thread is getting very close to the feel of having something shoved down your throat. Don't expect that to be warmly received.
John

After reading this thread again I begin to realize that I am guilty of exhibiting my trees three-dimensionally all the time in my garden.
We know that it makes sense horticulturally to turn your trees every few days to make sure that they get full sunlight eventually on all sides of the tree. I do this about every three weeks and turn all of my trees about 45 degrees wherever they stand. I got so used to this that I keep forgetting the fact that the trees are rarely at the right angle when looking at them directly in front of the stand .
Consequences: I see my own trees more from the sides and from the back than from the front. I am forced to see trees from where they possibly look awkward, all the time. And believe me, some of them do look awkward from many sides. I try to correct this at the every next opportunity.
I have found several major design flaws that I have made as a rule. One is that I very often have designed trees form the ?front? and had them leaning forward at me. This is standard bonsai design. When looking at them from the side I realized that they do not look credible. The leaning itself is fine. A tree that leans toward the viewer from the ?front? will be a slanting tree form the ?side? and can look fine. But I found that on many trees I had placed the apex right up in front. This looks fine from the ?front? but looks very unnatural from the ?side?. I have started to change this and move the apex back so that it is over about the center of the tree from ALL sides. The result is that I have a good feeling to look at the trees from all sides (which I am forced to do anyway!). But in addition also from the ?front? they look better somehow.
But the real impact of this I realize every time I have visitors in my garden who are not really into bonsai. They just want to look at them. So what happens? I welcome them and tell them that the trees do NOT stand with the ?correct? front to see when you are right in front of them. The viewer must find the front to really appreciate them. And then what happens? I get the feeling they have no clue of what I am talking about. They look at the trees wherever they stand, from whatever point in the garden. They make statements and judgments of trees which they have NOT seen according to normal bonsai understanding. They are just unable to grasp the concept of ?front? for a bonsai. I tell them to move and point at the spot where they are supposed to stand to appreciate what they are seeing. They do it once or twice and then seem to get annoyed by me trying to ?push them around?. They give me the feeling that they feel patronized by telling them where to look at what. They just cannot grasp the concept of ?front?.
Well, these are bonsai ignorants. What can you expect? I have visitors who are more or less bonsai ?experts?. I find it hard to believe that they cannot find the front of many trees. I find it more annoying than amusing when they make pictures and I get to see them later on. They seem to be unable to stand right in front of a tree, move the camera to the right level and make a decent picture. They are just unable! The pictures show the trees from all angles, but normally NOT from the front at the right eye level. Well, these are people who have a name in bonsai, who are active in the bonsai scene. If they find it so difficult, maybe there is something artificial about the whole concept?
I had this movie crew in my garden for a full day. They were experts for making movies but had no clue about bonsai. I explained to them that there is a ?front?. I explained to them that these trees are really to be viewed in front of a neutral background form one side only. That the present position in the garden meant nothing really. That bonsai is NOT about a garden, but about sculptures to be viewed individually. That my garden is only the main storage area.
So what did they do? They ignored everything I said and produced this movie about the ?bonsai garden?. Not a single tree was seen from the front in this movie. Not a single tree in front of a neutral background. But with bees on the flowers and with the nice sounds of birds, cows, sheep, horses of a garden in a rural area. The movie crew had spent one full day in my garden and never ever had grasped the concept of bonsai as something to be seen in a special setting with a well determined front. They just did not understand it.
What can we learn form this? Either all these people are ignorants. Well, fine with me, they are. Or that our concept of ?front? is not in tune with the way we are placing our trees. Or that we are very far away from a ?natural? way of viewing bonsai. Or that 'real' bonsai is only for an elite in an ivory tower which has no connexion to the vulgar world.
Anyway, normal people who are not corrupted by bonsai theory view bonsai as little trees that can be seen from all sides just a big trees. We should take this as a fact and should not be surprised if they do.

Walter,
I for one am glad that I have been corrupted. The bonsai Will posted here is a great example. You have a wonderful bonsai here. I will stick my neck out and say the upper left photo is my favorite. The foliage flowing to the left, the live vein apparent from the "front", the "depth" of foliage, the pot placement with the trunk starting right and coming back over the mid-line to balance out the design, are all factors that make me see this as the front. I see the drainage "slot" in the feet as needing to be either centered or balanced with one on the opposing side, but I suspect that the pot is not set up for being viewed specifically from any precise angle. The photo in the upper right is my second favorite (the bottom right is the same view as the upper left, but I don't care for the virtual pot, personally), but the sharied trunk (of the upper right photo) is overwhelming the design, although the foliage still looks good flowing right, and maybe is even displaying greater depth than my first choice. the other views are still good, but the canopy starts to become less defined and a little confusing in those angles.
I certainly mean no disrespect to you, and I am not trying to imply I am qualified to critique YOUR work. You are many times my equal in bonsai design. I am just trying to say if this were mine, the upper left would be my preferred view, without question. It is a marvelous bonsai, with character to be envied. I could appreciate it from the "front" view ALL day, and never even care about another view. If I had to choose between a bonsai like this with a great front view, or a chokkan centered in a round pot with good views from 360*, I would choose this bonsai every day, and twice on Sunday.
Back branching gives depth, and a visible trunk line for most of the bonsai gives it stature. That is bonsai 101. It still works for me, and until I am convinced otherwise, I'm going to stick with it. Experimentation is okay, but most experiments never prove correct. I applaude those who are willing to try, I will not belittle them, but I am a difficult "sell".
I hope you realize that your previous work is an integral part of my bonsai corruption. I am the better for it.
Respectfully,
John

John,
I wonder whether you are too much on the 3D-or nothing theme.
I also have my clear favorite as front usually. Sometimes there are more than one that I really like.
I have never said that a bonsai will be or should be looking equally good from all sides. I am only saying that it should look credible from all sides and that a 3D-view should prove the integrity of design from all angles.
I wonder really whether Will is saying what you ponder at. May well be you are speaking about things said in bonsaiTalk but not here on this thread.

"Anyway, normal people who are not corrupted by bonsai theory view bonsai as little trees that can be seen from all sides just a big trees. We should take this as a fact and should not be surprised if they do."
"Normal uncorrputed bonsai ignorants" love the way Wal Mart mallsai looks too. Doesn't surprise me. I am still trying to evolve from being a mallsai addict. Bonsai is appealing even if it's badly done, or if it's not viewed "correctly." Does that make the fried juniper on the night stand, or kitchen island a nice 360 degree bonsai?

And here lies the crux of the debate. John, your preferred "front" satisfies your sense of what is bonsai, it matches your experience, your learning, your world view. However, the next person to view the tree may very well prefer another "front" that matches what the see and how they see it. if Walter displayed any other "front" than the one you personally prefer, others may love it, you may not. Why then not show them all?
Walter hit upon a basic truth, the uneducated masses have absolutely no clue what a "front" is, they only see a beautiful tree in a pot. It's the total, overall, complete effect that gets the "oohs and ahs" from the viewing public. The sculptured, planed, molded for front viewing only bonsai appeals to the elite but this same elite can not help but to consider the possibilities involved with a bonsai that can be viewed from all sides.
The argument that styling all sides of a bonsai to be visually pleasing somehow negates the front is flawed. Adding to the visual viewing pleasure of the whole does not automatically take away from the front, in fact given the greater depth and attention to detail on the whole, it should and can improve a "front."
John,
The put up or shut up response you gave above has been beaten to death. Walter and Colin both have shown remarkable bonsai that are visually pleasing from many views. I for one applaud there efforts and the courage it takes to break away from the norm to try and make this wonderful art better. Walter took a lot of slack with his natural looking trees, but who now can debate their beauty?
I have seen a few efforts made to show that this 360 idea is not impossible and there have been words quoted and pictures posted. I would ask that you prove that it can not be done, I ask you to do the same that you have asked of us, prove it impossible.
There is aways room for improvement. The word Bonsai itself is less than 150 years old, the use of wire was heavily fought against and there are still some who refuse to use it, soil is still debated hotly, and almost everything involving bonsai was or still is hotly debated, concave cutters, native plants, styles, root pruning, etc.
The fact remains that most bonsai are just plain ugly when viewed from any angle but the narrowly defined front. Are we not better artists than this? I again bring up sculpture, are we sculpting our trees or just simply doing bas reliefs, a pale imitation, a painting of a tree?
Again, there will always be a front the artist prefers, you will always have a preferred front to view, these may not be the front I prefer, but with only one choice, are we not limiting the viewing experience?

Will Heath

Mark,
Let's stay on subject here please. 360 bonsai must be visually pleasing from many views. A mallsai would hardly qualify, in fact I doubt any would be visually pleasing from any side. Even the ignorants talked about could well tell the difference in quality between Walter's bonsai and mallsai.
You simplify to the point of insult. I would be greatly interested in hearing intelligent debate against the principle put forth.

Will Heath

Walter,
I type this with a smile on my face. I agree with your statement I highlighted above. I just differ with what a 3D view should prove and what it will prove.
Now the highlighted AND underlined question is one I can't answer. This subject has apparently went beyond my understanding (not a hard thing to do).
I guess the things I'm speaking about include what I said to Will in the Editor section (although mirrored on the bonsaiTALK post), but not visible on this thread. Maybe that confuses the subject here, and I apologize for that.
I still remain skeptical that 3D design and 3D display are in a state of symbiosis. That has not been proven to me, but I will remain open to the idea.
Warmest regards,
John[/i]

Will,
No sir, I ain't buying that. This 360* display theory has not been proven to my satisfaction. I asked for proof, I have not received any. I have the highest regards for both Walter and Colin, but the mere use of their names isn't proof, it's posturing. Walter just wrote that he still has a "clear favorite front, usually" on his bonsai. I am the same way. To not have a clear front could be viewed as indecisive styling, as quickly as it can be called innovative design. That's why I require visual proof of this theory.
From my read of your remarks above, it sounds like a step towards the "elite" catering to the views of the uninformed. They MAY prefer a different view because they don't understand the concept of a front view? So let's re-invent the wheel? That is dangerous terrain to tread on, my friend. The very concept of this forum is to discuss bonsai styling among those who are a little more along the way of how bonsai has evolved and should be approached, but it sure sounds like you are saying we should give those just starting out more options than real guidance. That's backing up, not going forward. I'm sure you will disagree with that, but that's how it came across to me.
I have said it repeatedly; I agree with making bonsai as visually appealing from all angles as you can, but not at the expense of one preferred view. I won't continue to state that because I think I have satisfied any doubt about my mindset on that topic. I do NOT agree with the 3D display being a required part of bonsai. It's okay, I'll accept it as a possibility, but I do not foresee it as the next big step in bonsai creativity.
Multiple display possibilites, yes. 360* displays being superior, no. More words will not likely change my opinion. Actual visual proof can, but we are not "seeing" any. It's just my opinion, maybe that has some weight, maybe it doesn't. I'm not trying to convince anyone I'm right and you are wrong. I just disagree with you on this, respectfully.
You remarked earlier on how much you love Lenz creations. Okay, now let's critique his "pelican". How will THAT bonsai look from the back? Is the aesthetic value of it as good from other views as it is from the one that clearly shows the silhouette of a pelican? Is that bonsai better viewed "static" with a plain background, or on a pedestal that can be walked around? Maybe that helps with justifying my stance on this.
John