Well, I have to throw my thoughts in on this thread.


And very good ones they were. Thanks.


First, as far as 'art' or 'artist'. Some people use a very
broad brush
when defining the words, some use a very tiny brush. I myself
use a fairly
small brush. Some things that I just don't understand are
called 'art' (the
exhibit of road kill in a northwestern usa art gallery or the
explicit
homosexual photo exhibit that caused such a fuss in the states
a few years
ago comes to mind).

I personally, with my small brush, think that there are some
very good
artists in bonsai (insert name of your favorite Master here).
Mostly,
though, I think we are artisans and craftsmen (and
craftswomen) and
enthusiasts. The artisans etc. at their best, can create a
good bonsai. The
artist can take that same bonsai and bring it to the great and
excellent
level. The debate about what is art and what's not will never
end because
it is such a subjective thing.

And, some rather forceful opinions here to the contrary
notwistanding (or something like that ;-), there is absolutely
nothing wrong with bonsai as a craft. Craftsmanship is an
honorable goal -- and throughout history, a craftsman has often
had a much higher staus in the community than the artist -- who
often was considered a community ne'er-do-well (at least until
he/she dies). The crafts -- and their guilds -- played important
roles in the community. (Frankly, I'd rather be an acknowledged
craftsman than hold an MBA -- especially these days. ;-)

snip


This thread started with the topic 'collector or artist'
Again, with the word 'collector' we have different size
brushes. I think
everyone who does bonsai is a collector (I think of my trees a
collection),
but It seems the context of the word in this thread is aimed
at people who
purchase finished 'great' bonsai and either maintain them
themselves or pay
someone to do the job. I see nothing wrong with being that
sort of
collector.

Yes. There are collections and then there are collections --
just as there are collectors of various stripes, too. Anyone
with more than two bonsai can probably claim a "collection." At
the beginning of this year, I had 300 trees: a COLLECTION. I
now have about 75, the rest gathering termits in the woods, or
growing in my garden (the unwanted azaleas and camellias).
That's a more manageable "collection," IMHO.

As I said in one of my dissents in BT Online, I have never bought
a "finished" bonsai and cannot imagine an instance when I would.
To me, much of the enjoyment of bonsai is in the making --
however, good or indifferent the results might be. I also enjoy
learning how the different trees grow and behave. You don't do
that by purchasing someone else's work, then hiring out the
regular maintenance.

I've bought a lot of nursery stuff. I have even bought a couple
of pre-bonsai (a couple of Satsuki that had had a bend or two put
into their trunks and roots pruned at least once).

I do not (and probably cannot) understand the person who buys a
tree (or a dog) and never tries to train it himself. As I said
in another BT Online piece, I wouldn't know what to say to
someone like that (and if you, dear reader, are one of them . . .
.. sorry).

I collect; lots of things: netsuke, Japanese swords, old maps,
prints -- especially Japanese woodblocks -- and books, among
others. But all of them are pretty passive things. They get
dusted occasionally, and I like to read them and about them and
learn about their makers, etc. but they won't change (assuming I
keep the humidity adjusted, the silverfish away, and polish the
blades occasionally). Collecting bonsai -- and hiring out the
upkeep (thus learning little or nothing about the tree) -- is
totally foreign to me.


I think though, that if there is any animosity at all toward
this kind of
collector, it's because some (Not all. This is probably one of
those areas
where a few give the rest a bad name) of these folks try to
take credit for
the great bonsai as if they were responsible for it's design
and creation
and greatness, when in reality they are only the owner or
'maintenance man'
Collectors in other areas have pride in owning their
collection but their
pride comes from the association (of the collection) with the
person who
created the thing(s) in the first place.

I've never run into one of these -- and hope I don't.

You don't see collectors displaying something by a complete
unknown as the
centerpiece of their collection. It's the provenance of a
piece that gives
it value to honest collectors, not the fact that they own it.
You don't see people scraping Van Goghs signature off a
painting and
putting
their own in its place or prying the emblem off their rare
Rolls Royce and
affixing their own emblem or buying a Gucci handbag and
rebranding it.
Someone made a comparison to horse racing. Yes, the owner gets
praise and
congratulations for owning the winning horse, but the trainer
gets the
credit and as much publicity (if not more) for creating the
winning horse.

So, folks, let's continue this debate. Try to do one thing
though. If you
haven't got a reasonable argument on a subject, don't resort
to calling
things 'stupid' or someone a 'idiot' or ridiculing someone's
viewpoint.
Doing that just reduces your credibility.

A-dang-men! So far (mostly) it's been a good-spirited,
un-acrimonious, discussion with only a moderate amount of
sanctimony cropping up. ;-)


The above are just my own personal opinions. Others have and
are welcome to
their different views. Thank goodness we are not all the same!
What a
boring world it would be.

BUT . . . probably a lot more peaceful.

Jim Lewis - - Tallahassee, FL - Alas for the
lack of peace!

************************************************** ******************************
++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++
************************************************** ******************************
-- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ --
+++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++