Troublemaker :-)
Andy Rutledge
I'm going to ask what is probably a very naive question, but why on earth do
style/form names matter in the first place? Bonsai is a visual
art/craft/science and when one looks at a bonsai, one can see the form and
its style-label is rather inconsequential. Style/form names are useful when
describing a tree to someone who can't see it, but why should we want to be
concerned with what style someone says a particular tree is?
I vote that not only do we not get too technical with expanding/modifying
the taxonomy, we completely ignore and eschew style labels. :-) Seriously.
Regards,
Andy Rutledge
k...@fastlane.net
********************************************************************************
+++++This list is supported, in part, by a contribution from Jim Ranshoff+++++
>>-->> The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ <<--<<
To leave the list, send SIGNOFF BONSAI to: LIST...@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM
Billy M. Rhodes
<< Style/form names are useful when
describing a tree to someone who can't see it, but why should we want to be
concerned with what style someone says a particular tree is? >>
I think these ideas help us decide the design we want to attempt with our
tree. These designs have proven to be attractive over time for good reasons.
Billy
Iris Cohen
object, whether it is a tree in the botanical sense or a bonsai. The bonsai may
not be present when we are communicating, but if we have both seen "Reiner's
twin-trunk ficus at such-and-such a show", then we both know which tree we are
talking about.
In discussing art, we communicate better if we know the difference between a
Post-Impressionist and an Abstractionist.
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"It is forbidden to live in a town which has no greenery." Jerusalem Talmud,
Kiddushin 4:12.
Ron Martin
>
> I'm going to ask what is probably a very naive question, but why on earth
do
> style/form names matter in the first place? Bonsai is a visual
> art/craft/science and when one looks at a bonsai, one can see the form and
> its style-label is rather inconsequential. Style/form names are useful
when
> describing a tree to someone who can't see it, but why should we want to
be
> concerned with what style someone says a particular tree is?
>
> I vote that not only do we not get too technical with expanding/modifying
> the taxonomy, we completely ignore and eschew style labels. :-)
Seriously.
>
> Regards,
> Andy Rutledge
Just about the only time I use the labels is when I am teaching a bonsai
class. And only then in the most basic way. Formal upright , slant etc.
I use to use all the Japanese terms and divide the 5 ( 6 if you count
banyon) into sub categories . But I found that there were just too many
people in the audience yawning. Now I keep it simple and there are fewer
yawns.
I am with Andy. If we get too technical with the descriptions no one without
a college degree will understand what we are talking about. And that will
set bonsai back decades.
Ron Martin
Richard Zieminski
US since we are getting functionally illiterate with the advent of video
media. The written word is a dieing art it itself. So lets join the band
wagon and not write or try to discribe or communicate at all. Then we will
all be happy in our own little digital worlds.
Now for the serouse note. Each field of study has its own vocabulary. To
work in the field requires learning the vocabulary in order to communicate
effectively. Even hobbies have vocabularies that the enthusiest needs to
learn to communicate with others. To miss out on this will not allow the
individual to grow in the hobby.
Just a thought from an illiterate bonsia novis.
Richard The Z-man
Lynn Boyd
You say:
> . . . . . . . Each field of study has its own vocabulary. To
> work in the field requires learning the vocabulary in order to
communicate
> effectively. Even hobbies have vocabularies that the enthusiest needs to
> learn to communicate with others. To miss out on this will not allow the
> individual to grow in the hobby.
> Just a thought from an illiterate bonsia novis.
> Richard The Z-man
The response to the present thread that Jay thoughtfully
introduced is possibly restrained because the former thread is not really
completed. It continues under study, but it is really necessary to keep
such lengthy discussions from using bandwidth and overwhelming the everyday
concerns and needs of our trees so much of it is probably continued on the
gallery or privately with those who have achieved a position in the art to
know what is appropriate, the Masters who both produce and teach, have
need of closely scrutinizing various language meanings. They wander
internationally teaching and demonstrating. This is a greater concern for
them and their discussion goes to depths the rest of us might never need
even teaching locally. Walter has posted drafts to the list as he
proceeded. I think it reaches a slower state as time goes on and questions
multiply, so we can see what happens to that thread in due time. We cannot
rush nor push it.
You are so right, Richard, about a vocabulary for each
discipline of study.
The thing about this vocabulary is that in the arts (and other disciplines)
they are transferable to a degree, more or less, between different arts,
so the better-known or more universal we keep a concept of style, form,
etc., the more opportunity we have to communicate. Overall in the arts our
first thread selected the vocabulary of painters as being the best known
and understood, based upon a universal usage in schools, galleries, museums
and artists. This was the basis for Walter's attempt. Of course,
concepts will deepen and for a specific art will be "held" in its context,
so that using a classification in one art will carry a shift in context and
a slightly differentt meaning in another art. It still works, however.
How well, is what those experienced in using them find in practice - those
who exhibit and teach and establish the continuity of usage.
We are encultured by Japanese aesthetics in bonsai art, we are
encultured in other aesthetics in painting - from more than just Japanese
aesthetics, so it becomes an expansion to fit the universal nature Bonsai
is becoming. This is not for the Present time altogether, but selecting a
"way" to go is a way to "proceed" to accrue what helps everyone. The way
of artists that have this leadership is already showing us new boundaries
within the vocabulary - they are ahead of a vocabulary as we felt debating
Kimura. Just extending a presently held concept does not work for long
when new movements began to multiply. We cannot see ahead what is next in
the mind of leaders who ask for leeway from traditional.
To speak of building a taxonomy is like putting up twobyfours
for the building. There is whole lot more to it. And we will never all
agree now, but the future will shift it out in good old usage under fire!
No ONE person will have the final word.
Also, a reminder, a term changes its meaning. Impressionism
which started with light and color freed the artist's brush go ahead for a
romanticism, a naturalism , and expanded its usage from France, to UK, to
America with new spontaneity and the concept grew. I think we have seen
that happen in the Japanese terms we use. Eventually the expansion brings
about need to review vocabulary, ad infinitum - (or ad nauseam -
whichever :)
Lynn
(who will forever be running behind, yelling, "Wait for
me." )
Andy Rutledge
From: "Billy M. Rhodes" <GOPHE...@AOL.COM>
> I think these ideas help us decide the design we want to attempt with
our
> tree. These designs have proven to be attractive over time for good
reasons.
> Billy
Hi Billy,
I agree that the styles have proven to be attractive - and for good reason.
I just don't see the point of spending too much time thinking up more and
more detailed ways of describing these styles.
Regards,
Andy Rutledge
k...@fastlane.net
nick
email Richard.! Maybe an indication that the communication thing extends to
written words as well!!!?
Nick Rôbin
Castle Gardens
07747 635301