Friends,

Finally, a topic in which i feel i can contribute. I have a lack of
experience in the world of bonsai, admittedly. However, although
experience relates to knowledge, it is not prerequisite. Or perhaps it is,
but then may one say that hour upon hour of absorbing information is not
experience? Different maybe than 45 years of growing bonsai, true, but we
do not speak of who can cultivate the best bonsai in this case, rather is
that, or is that not, "art."

Several things have prompted me to write. There are people stepping on the
toes of others, where there feet may need more guidance. This is, of
course, only my opinion, however I am both knowledgeable and experienced
in art. One is not a necessity or precursor to the other and should not be
confused. I am a sculptor, a printmaker, a painter and a draftsman.
"Classically trained" is completely superfluous, arbitrary, and and
therefore meaningless.

The idea of "classical art," i contend, is a falsehood. This is based
solely on the relative and subjective nature of art, and it's
interpretation. Objective determinations, such as "this is art" and "this
is not" cannot then truly exsist. Personally, i believe that there is no
such thing as a true objectivity, but you can personally email me for a
debate on that, i'd love to entertain mentally stimulating conversation.

"How can the classics be subjective and relative? I thought they were
classics?"

How did you come to the conclusion they were classics? If you feel they
are, then maybe they are. However many people never stop to consider this
fact. Do you feel that way because you've read in a book that they are?
most likely yes. how do i know this? how many people have been to see the
mona lisa in person, without prior knowledge of it's exsistence, then came
to the determination that, of all works of art created, for the mona
lisa's intent, agenda, process and execution, among all others, it is or
should be therefore deemed, a classic? My guess, not many. Therefore that
leaves most people to fall under the category of those of us who believe
that because we are told something it is true, we accept it as such. does
this mean that it really is? no, not neccesarily. who is to say? art is
too subjective and relative to exsist as such.

"so then who is right? how do we know who to believe? are there then no
classics?"

addressing those questions actually isn't fruitful. if you would like me
to address them, email me personally, and again, i would be happy to. i
feel the real question people should be asking, is never asked "What do i
think, and does what other people say matter to me enough to forsake my
own independent thought, and its value or worth?" Not enough people ask
this question. I believe herein lies the problem. People read things and
believe them. they think that because a man has a phd in say, art history,
his opinion matters more. does it? because one man says that something is
a classic, is it? or maybe more people are needed? 10? 100? 1,000? The
Nazi's (used only as an example, i hope we can steer clear of debate about
WWII) all got together. many millions saying the same thing? were they
right? My opinion is that they were not. I therefore ask, who is to say
who's opinion is right or wrong?

"then what is there left to discuss?"

Well, the interpretation of what is and is not art is still left
specifically unaddressed, so i will now, based upon things i have
mentioned, attempt to address it. The short answer is "no one is right, no
one is wrong." Spineless? if you think so, so be it. I'm convinced that it
is the product of years of thought and experience, and a truly open mind.
if that's spineless, or perhaps non-confrontational to you, there's not
much i can say that i have not already, and i'm sorry.

for the rest of us who think that art is truly subjective and relative,
how do we deal with these questions? well, as these questions look for
objectivity where i maintain none is to be found, i propose then that they
are as such futile to ask. art therefore becomes a personal thing of
opinion. where then do i propose this debate go?

If i have picked up a paintbrush for the first time, and i am 6, is the
scribble work i create not art? to who? i certainly would feel it is. i'm
6. yes, i lack experience, knowledge, and skill, but does that mean this
is any less valuable to me? in my world and reality, who's opinion
matters? why do we lose sight of this as we grow older? perhaps that's a
little bit of a stretch. a better example: I have been watercolor painting
for 15 years. my landscapes will never be "museum worthy" or "gallery
worthy," does it therefore have less meaning to me? is it of less worth or
value? i would say not. what is this discussion about then? about the
worth of something, about something's value. drawing perhaps a general
destinction between types of art would be the most fruitful thing for this
debate to discuss. I draw art into 2 general categories. i say general,
because there cannot be any clear definitions in art i feel, and as such,
i only make general ones for the sake of an attempt at clarification of
thought.

The first category is "low art." i'm sure many of you understand this
concept at least partially, but let me clarify one or two things for the
sake of being thorough. My designations do not, as i will shortly explain,
determine worth. I would loosely group artworks that do not or will never
enter an exhibition of any kind (gallery, museum, whatever). these would
include people who create art as a "hobby" perhaps, non-proffessionals,
and the like. again, this does not mean it is worth any less than "high
art." for a better application to this argument, this would include
part-time hobby bonsaiists. people who do bonsai for fun, or are serious,
but would not be generally considered masters. this does not mean it is
worth any less than a master's work. what price or value would you put on
your first succesful jin? What is that first successful jin worth, with
all that you learned, and the feeling you get when you do something right
after so many failed attempts?

"high art" is the other grouping i would loosely make. this includes all
proffessional artists, whose work is produced as a means of income, or for
the purpose of appearing in an exhibition, gallery, museum or otherwise.
also a love for making art and creativity, etc. is included but becomes
one of many primary goals beyond "low art" though not neccesarily
disparate. is this worth more because a general audience say it is? i have
made works that many have not deemed "successful," but personally
speaking, with an understanding of the worth of what i have accomplished,
i would not trade that work or its experience for a so-called "classic"
that i would have perhaps not gotten anything out of. i feel then that no
one, save the beholder or the artist decide for themselves what they deem
to be the "wort" of something, with the understanding that it does not and
can never actually describe that thing's true worth.

this is where i feel the debate goes astray. people are having difficulty
drawing a distinction between low and high art, and whether or not these
distinctions therefore attatch work. this is another area where people
step on toes. a "master" displays his tree. he feels it is beautiful, and
a masterful creation, a display of his experience and skill. I think it's
an ugly tree. who is truly right? his skill is better than mine, his
experience is unmatched, etc. etc. it may technically be a better tree
than anything i could ever hope to accomplish, but because he says it is
beautiful, and others agree, does that make it so? does this then
determine it's worth? you display an "ugly" tree. you successfully create
a jin. everyone else says it's ugly. is it ugly to you? what worth do you
assign to that tree, and what it means? what does the worth that other
people assign to your work mean to you?

i feel that's what is at the heart of this debate. people mix and mash
terms when they should perhaps use them more delicately. what is and what
is art should be left to the individual. what is a good bonsai and what is
not a good bonsai should be left to the individual. none are better than
others.

Please keep in mind that these are my opinions and do not reflect those of
other "artists," "bonsaiists," or anything else that i may be grouped as.
People mistakenly neglect to add a disclaimer and now i have as a member
of a group they also fit in, have been cast in a manner other than what is
the actual case. please take my opinions, and everyone else's with a grain
of salt.

please feel free to contact me personally if you would like to continue to
debate specific topics. i hope that i may have in some way helped to
maintain the debate/discussion, and perhaps add to it.

Keep an open mind.

Justin Diaz

"Youth is Wasted on the Young."
Richmond, VA by way of Allentown, PA

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

Justin,

Your dissertation was, I'm afraid, a complete denial of human understanding,
human nature and clearly illustrates the dangers of relativism and drunken
subjectivism. Your thesis regarding objectivity (and your erroneous
conclusions) describe your apparent misunderstanding of human nature and the
workings of the mind. Yours was not so much a contribution to the art
debate as it was an attempt to argue that no one knows what he/she is
talking about, so we should all just shut up.

Let me take issue with the many falsehoods you presented:

---------------
"Classically trained" is completely superfluous, arbitrary, and and
therefore meaningless.
---------------

Absolutely wrong. If you understand the basic common process, syllabus and
elements of classical training (in any number of arts), you can clearly see
what is meant by "classically trained" and know that it is neither
superfluous nor meaningless. That you don't understand this is lamentable,
but is not evidence of non-existence.
---------------


The idea of "classical art," i contend, is a falsehood. This is based
solely on the relative and subjective nature of art, and it's
interpretation. Objective determinations, such as "this is art" and "this
is not" cannot then truly exsist. Personally, i believe that there is no
such thing as a true objectivity, but you can personally email me for a
debate on that, i'd love to entertain mentally stimulating conversation.
----------------

Your ridiculous argument that there is no such thing as objectivity leaves
us without any means to classify or define anything. Definitions and
classifications are important tools for us, our perception and our
functioning intellect. We humans *have* to define and classify, lest every
new thing we encounter is a complete surprise and then occupies its own,
unique place in our perception, exclusive of any other things that are
similar in nature. This is not how humans function and it is ridiculous to
suggest that it is or should be.
-----------------

snip
i
feel the real question people should be asking, is never asked "What do i
think, and does what other people say matter to me enough to forsake my
own independent thought, and its value or worth?"
-----------------

Opinion does not exist in a vacuum. What you describe as "the" way to
classify things is utter anarchy and denies the fact that we calssify things
based on pertinent information. If I think that the sky is pink, because in
my mind blue is the same as pink, I have opted out of common human
perception and societal structures. Mine would be a worthless idea and have
no contribution to our world.

Like everying else, art is classified by its widely agreed upon features.
Like everything else, there is room for individual interpretation, but there
are core concepts and features that make art "art." Your sad attempt to
suggest that everything is an arbitrary, worthless determination is naive
and denies this simple fact.

Art is communication and all art pulls to some degree from the pool of
features and elements that we have determined (and that thousands of years
of human history supports) to be characteristic of art. That you don't
understand this is, again, lamentable, but simply not evidence to the
contrary.
----------------

People read things and
believe them. they think that because a man has a phd in say, art history,
his opinion matters more. does it? because one man says that something is
a classic, is it? or maybe more people are needed? 10? 100? 1,000? The
Nazi's (used only as an example, i hope we can steer clear of debate about
WWII) all got together. many millions saying the same thing? were they
right? My opinion is that they were not. I therefore ask, who is to say
who's opinion is right or wrong?
----------------

Here you have used a contemptable ploy to support what you cannot support
any other way, I guess. This is inflamatory and irrelevant.
----------------

Well, the interpretation of what is and is not art is still left
specifically unaddressed, so i will now, based upon things i have
mentioned, attempt to address it. The short answer is "no one is right, no
one is wrong." Spineless?
----------------

Absolutley. Not just spineless, but erroneous and specious.
----------------

this is where i feel the debate goes astray. people are having difficulty
drawing a distinction between low and high art, and whether or not these
distinctions therefore attatch work. this is another area where people
step on toes.
----------------

Your again ridiculous, arbitrary classifications (not listed above for the
sake of brevity) ignore what we humans have already arrived at by way of
classifying art. The aim is not the determining factor. Rather the
quality - the degree to which the work communicates within the already
established artistic language norms and its resultant success with viewers
(how it communicates directly to each or groups of viewers/listeners).
Again, you have completely disregarded how humans appreciate art and how art
is meaningful to humans.

You have constructed a thesis based on your own lack of understanding and
have used it as an (empty) illustration of how things should be or how you
believe they are. In this process you have denied what has come before you
and ignored what is clearly evident to most intelligent people.

Your attempt to deny the value of societal structures, concrete and
conceptualized ideals, logical arbitrary classification and the depth of
history upon which we have built these valuable elements of our lives is
both naive and dangerous. There are further implications and dangers
inherent in your thesis that are not appropriate for this forum, but there
nonetheless.

Keep an open mind.

Justin Diaz
-------------------

Justin, you have opened your mind so wide that your brain has fallen out. A
lesson to us all. Further, I note that you preface every opinion of yours
by saying "i feel that..." I should think you should do much more
"thinking" and much less "feeling" in your personal examinations of what
"is" in human society.

In the end, we are left with the very real and very valuable, widely
acknowledged characteristics of art and intelligent people can understand
that inventing our own, individual, "languages" for art is in no way
valuable as it would then have no social or widespread value. I am thankful
that we don't live in the anarchist and non-cohesive world you have
suggested here.

Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
zone 8, Texas

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

Andy: You've been watching too much Fox news and its ilk. It's not that your ideas
are bad; I agree with many of them, but the unblunted hostility in which you express
them are rude and intimidating.
I have no problem with you taking a strong stand on an opinion. Just try to
show a modicum of respect for those who might believe otherwise.
And try to lighten up on the absolutes and overgeneralizations. The real
world is not so black and white.
Alan Walker, Lake Charles, LA, USA
http://LCBSBonsai.org http://bonsai-bci.com
==================================
Andy Rutledge wrote:
Justin,
Your dissertation was, I'm afraid, a complete denial of human understanding,
human nature and clearly illustrates the dangers of relativism and drunken
subjectivism. SNIP
Absolutely wrong. SNIP
Your ridiculous argument SNIP This is not how humans function and it is
ridiculous to suggest that it is or should be.
SNIP
Your sad attempt to suggest that everything is an arbitrary, worthless determination
is naive and denies this simple fact.
SNIP
SNIP Here you have used a contemptible ploy to support what you cannot support
any other way, I guess. This is inflammatory and irrelevant
..SNIP
Your again ridiculous, arbitrary classifications (not listed above for the
sake of brevity) ignore what we humans have already arrived at by way of
classifying art.
SNIP Again, you have completely disregarded how humans appreciate art and how
art is meaningful to humans.
You have constructed a thesis based on your own lack of understanding and
have used it as an (empty) illustration of how things should be or how you
believe they are. In this process you have denied what has come before you
and ignored what is clearly evident to most intelligent people.

Your attempt to deny the value of societal structures, concrete and
conceptualized ideals, logical arbitrary classification and the depth of
history upon which we have built these valuable elements of our lives is
both naive and dangerous. There are further implications and dangers
inherent in your thesis that are not appropriate for this forum, but there
nonetheless.

Keep an open mind.
Justin Diaz
-------------------
Justin, you have opened your mind so wide that your brain has fallen out. SNIP

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

Put your rain boots on folks. They are good for this to.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Rutledge"
To:
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 8:16 AM
Subject: [IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.


Justin,

Your dissertation was, I'm afraid, a complete denial of human
understanding,
human nature and clearly illustrates the dangers of relativism and drunken
subjectivism. Your thesis regarding objectivity (and your erroneous
conclusions) describe your apparent misunderstanding of human nature and
the
workings of the mind. Yours was not so much a contribution to the art
debate as it was an attempt to argue that no one knows what he/she is
talking about, so we should all just shut up.

Let me take issue with the many falsehoods you presented:

---------------
"Classically trained" is completely superfluous, arbitrary, and and
therefore meaningless.
---------------

Absolutely wrong. If you understand the basic common process, syllabus
and
elements of classical training (in any number of arts), you can clearly
see
what is meant by "classically trained" and know that it is neither
superfluous nor meaningless. That you don't understand this is
lamentable,
but is not evidence of non-existence.
---------------


The idea of "classical art," i contend, is a falsehood. This is based
solely on the relative and subjective nature of art, and it's
interpretation. Objective determinations, such as "this is art" and
"this
is not" cannot then truly exsist. Personally, i believe that there is no
such thing as a true objectivity, but you can personally email me for a
debate on that, i'd love to entertain mentally stimulating conversation.
----------------

Your ridiculous argument that there is no such thing as objectivity leaves
us without any means to classify or define anything. Definitions and
classifications are important tools for us, our perception and our
functioning intellect. We humans *have* to define and classify, lest
every
new thing we encounter is a complete surprise and then occupies its own,
unique place in our perception, exclusive of any other things that are
similar in nature. This is not how humans function and it is ridiculous
to
suggest that it is or should be.
-----------------

snip
i
feel the real question people should be asking, is never asked "What do
i
think, and does what other people say matter to me enough to forsake my
own independent thought, and its value or worth?"
-----------------

Opinion does not exist in a vacuum. What you describe as "the" way to
classify things is utter anarchy and denies the fact that we calssify
things
based on pertinent information. If I think that the sky is pink, because
in
my mind blue is the same as pink, I have opted out of common human
perception and societal structures. Mine would be a worthless idea and
have
no contribution to our world.

Like everying else, art is classified by its widely agreed upon features.
Like everything else, there is room for individual interpretation, but
there
are core concepts and features that make art "art." Your sad attempt to
suggest that everything is an arbitrary, worthless determination is naive
and denies this simple fact.

Art is communication and all art pulls to some degree from the pool of
features and elements that we have determined (and that thousands of years
of human history supports) to be characteristic of art. That you don't
understand this is, again, lamentable, but simply not evidence to the
contrary.
----------------

People read things and
believe them. they think that because a man has a phd in say, art
history,
his opinion matters more. does it? because one man says that something
is
a classic, is it? or maybe more people are needed? 10? 100? 1,000? The
Nazi's (used only as an example, i hope we can steer clear of debate
about
WWII) all got together. many millions saying the same thing? were they
right? My opinion is that they were not. I therefore ask, who is to say
who's opinion is right or wrong?
----------------

Here you have used a contemptable ploy to support what you cannot support
any other way, I guess. This is inflamatory and irrelevant.
----------------

Well, the interpretation of what is and is not art is still left
specifically unaddressed, so i will now, based upon things i have
mentioned, attempt to address it. The short answer is "no one is right,
no
one is wrong." Spineless?
----------------

Absolutley. Not just spineless, but erroneous and specious.
----------------

this is where i feel the debate goes astray. people are having
difficulty
drawing a distinction between low and high art, and whether or not these
distinctions therefore attatch work. this is another area where people
step on toes.
----------------

Your again ridiculous, arbitrary classifications (not listed above for the
sake of brevity) ignore what we humans have already arrived at by way of
classifying art. The aim is not the determining factor. Rather the
quality - the degree to which the work communicates within the already
established artistic language norms and its resultant success with viewers
(how it communicates directly to each or groups of viewers/listeners).
Again, you have completely disregarded how humans appreciate art and how
art
is meaningful to humans.

You have constructed a thesis based on your own lack of understanding and
have used it as an (empty) illustration of how things should be or how you
believe they are. In this process you have denied what has come before
you
and ignored what is clearly evident to most intelligent people.

Your attempt to deny the value of societal structures, concrete and
conceptualized ideals, logical arbitrary classification and the depth of
history upon which we have built these valuable elements of our lives is
both naive and dangerous. There are further implications and dangers
inherent in your thesis that are not appropriate for this forum, but there
nonetheless.

Keep an open mind.

Justin Diaz
-------------------

Justin, you have opened your mind so wide that your brain has fallen out.
A
lesson to us all. Further, I note that you preface every opinion of yours
by saying "i feel that..." I should think you should do much more
"thinking" and much less "feeling" in your personal examinations of what
"is" in human society.

In the end, we are left with the very real and very valuable, widely
acknowledged characteristics of art and intelligent people can understand
that inventing our own, individual, "languages" for art is in no way
valuable as it would then have no social or widespread value. I am
thankful
that we don't live in the anarchist and non-cohesive world you have
suggested here.

Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
zone 8, Texas


************************************************** **************************
****
++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++

************************************************** **************************
****
-- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ --
+++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++

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

Put your rain boots on folks. They are good for this to.



Yes. Maybe we can all forget this version of the "art" thread
even started up?

Please?

Jim Lewis - - Tallahassee, FL -- Bonsai List
manager

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

I would like to apologize for this debate getting as far as it did, and as
away from it's point as it has come. I would however like to say a few
things, in respect to the email response that Mr. Rutledge has sent to the
list. I clearly stated that any responses of a personal nature should be
directed to me personally. so as not to clog the list. I would classify
his email as one of a personal nature, and i'm astounded that despite his
apparent thourough reading of my email, he seems to have missed that part,
or parts, for what reason, i will not here speculate. He will recieve a
personal reply to his email, which i greatly appreciate. for all others, i
would like to say that although his email was a personal attack on me, i
do not take offense to it, as i do have an open mind, contrary to what he
submits, and i appreciate a view different than mine without needlessly
taking offense to it and resorting to name calling and personal attacks. I
genuinely appreciate this differing view, and others like it, and i
welcome more of them. However, Please, again i beg you, if you have
personal issue with me or my comments, and do not feel the need to
belittle others because you disagree with them, email me personally and
save everyone else who does not want to hear what perhaps either of us
wants to say, and email me personally. To all those whose time has been
wasted on fruitless or uninteresting emails (including my own) i
apologize, my intent was only to take the discussion further, and to bring
a new viewpoint, in hopes of enriching the discussion.

Here is my email address again to prevent further clogging of these
message boards:



My apologies,

Justin Diaz

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

Wow...glad I stayed out of this one! I could see that coming, even from the
cheap seats!
It looked a bit too "heavy" for me anyway from the couple I read.
but, was wondering....
If I sell all my collection from 25 years, and buy a few all new imported
masterpieces...
Will I need to defend my "Artistry" ?
:)
Dale


----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Walker"
Subject: [IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.


Andy: You've been watching too much Fox news and its ilk. It's not that
your ideas
are bad; I agree with many of them, but the unblunted hostility in which
you express
them are rude and intimidating.
I have no problem with you taking a strong stand on an opinion.
Just try to
show a modicum of respect for those who might believe otherwise.
And try to lighten up on the absolutes and overgeneralizations.
The real
world is not so black and white.
Alan Walker, Lake Charles, LA, USA
http://LCBSBonsai.org http://bonsai-bci.com
==================================
Andy Rutledge wrote:
Justin,
Your dissertation was, I'm afraid, a complete denial of human
understanding,
human nature and clearly illustrates the dangers of relativism and drunken
subjectivism. SNIP
Absolutely wrong. SNIP
Your ridiculous argument SNIP This is not how humans function and it
is
ridiculous to suggest that it is or should be.
SNIP
Your sad attempt to suggest that everything is an arbitrary, worthless
determination
is naive and denies this simple fact.
SNIP
SNIP Here you have used a contemptible ploy to support what you cannot
support
any other way, I guess. This is inflammatory and irrelevant
.SNIP
Your again ridiculous, arbitrary classifications (not listed above for the
sake of brevity) ignore what we humans have already arrived at by way of
classifying art.
SNIP Again, you have completely disregarded how humans appreciate art
and how
art is meaningful to humans.
You have constructed a thesis based on your own lack of understanding and
have used it as an (empty) illustration of how things should be or how you
believe they are. In this process you have denied what has come before
you
and ignored what is clearly evident to most intelligent people.

Your attempt to deny the value of societal structures, concrete and
conceptualized ideals, logical arbitrary classification and the depth of
history upon which we have built these valuable elements of our lives is
both naive and dangerous. There are further implications and dangers
inherent in your thesis that are not appropriate for this forum, but there
nonetheless.

Keep an open mind.
Justin Diaz
-------------------
Justin, you have opened your mind so wide that your brain has fallen out.
SNIP

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

Thanks.

Jim Lewis - IBC Moderator


"Justin Diaz" wrote in message
news:1087.216.164.18.88.1066068446.squirrel@spider mail.richmond.edu...
I would like to apologize for this debate getting as far as it
did, and as
away from it's point as it has come. I would however like to
say a few
things, in respect to the email response that Mr. Rutledge has
sent to the
list. I clearly stated that any responses of a personal nature
should be
directed to me personally. so as not to clog the list. I would
classify
his email as one of a personal nature, and i'm astounded that
despite his
apparent thourough reading of my email, he seems to have missed
that part,
or parts, for what reason, i will not here speculate. He will
recieve a
personal reply to his email, which i greatly appreciate. for
all others, i
would like to say that although his email was a personal attack
on me, i
do not take offense to it, as i do have an open mind, contrary
to what he
submits, and i appreciate a view different than mine without
needlessly
taking offense to it and resorting to name calling and personal
attacks. I
genuinely appreciate this differing view, and others like it,
and i
welcome more of them. However, Please, again i beg you, if you
have
personal issue with me or my comments, and do not feel the need
to
belittle others because you disagree with them, email me
personally and
save everyone else who does not want to hear what perhaps
either of us
wants to say, and email me personally. To all those whose time
has been
wasted on fruitless or uninteresting emails (including my own)
i
apologize, my intent was only to take the discussion further,
and to bring
a new viewpoint, in hopes of enriching the discussion.

Here is my email address again to prevent further clogging of
these
message boards:



My apologies,

Justin Diaz


************************************************** ***************
***************
++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++

************************************************** ***************
***************
-- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ:
http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ --
+++++ Questions? Help? e-mail
+++++

Will I need to defend my "Artistry" ?


Yup. Don't we always? ;-)

Jim Lewis - - Tallahassee, FL - REMEMBER:
Hit THINK before your hit SEND

That depends Dale.
If you send a few my way, I'll defend your artistry for you !!

Mark Hill - Harrisburg, PA


-----Original Message-----
From: Internet Bonsai Club ] On Behalf Of
dalecochoy
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 3:59 PM
To:
Subject: [IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.

Wow...glad I stayed out of this one! I could see that coming, even from the
cheap seats!
It looked a bit too "heavy" for me anyway from the couple I read.
but, was wondering....
If I sell all my collection from 25 years, and buy a few all new imported
masterpieces...
Will I need to defend my "Artistry" ?
:)
Dale


----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Walker"
Subject: [IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.


Andy: You've been watching too much Fox news and its ilk. It's not that
your ideas
are bad; I agree with many of them, but the unblunted hostility in which
you express
them are rude and intimidating.
I have no problem with you taking a strong stand on an opinion.
Just try to
show a modicum of respect for those who might believe otherwise.
And try to lighten up on the absolutes and overgeneralizations.
The real
world is not so black and white.
Alan Walker, Lake Charles, LA, USA
http://LCBSBonsai.org http://bonsai-bci.com
==================================
Andy Rutledge wrote:
Justin,
Your dissertation was, I'm afraid, a complete denial of human
understanding,
human nature and clearly illustrates the dangers of relativism and drunken
subjectivism. SNIP
Absolutely wrong. SNIP
Your ridiculous argument SNIP This is not how humans function and it
is
ridiculous to suggest that it is or should be.
SNIP
Your sad attempt to suggest that everything is an arbitrary, worthless
determination
is naive and denies this simple fact.
SNIP
SNIP Here you have used a contemptible ploy to support what you cannot
support
any other way, I guess. This is inflammatory and irrelevant
.SNIP
Your again ridiculous, arbitrary classifications (not listed above for the
sake of brevity) ignore what we humans have already arrived at by way of
classifying art.
SNIP Again, you have completely disregarded how humans appreciate art
and how
art is meaningful to humans.
You have constructed a thesis based on your own lack of understanding and
have used it as an (empty) illustration of how things should be or how you
believe they are. In this process you have denied what has come before
you
and ignored what is clearly evident to most intelligent people.

Your attempt to deny the value of societal structures, concrete and
conceptualized ideals, logical arbitrary classification and the depth of
history upon which we have built these valuable elements of our lives is
both naive and dangerous. There are further implications and dangers
inherent in your thesis that are not appropriate for this forum, but there
nonetheless.

Keep an open mind.
Justin Diaz
-------------------
Justin, you have opened your mind so wide that your brain has fallen out.
SNIP

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

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

Justin,

This was about your thesis; the words you put forth, the opinions you put
forth - not about you. Deal with it, and without the empty claims of having
been personally attacked. Didn't happen.

I'm really not sure what was so inappropriate about my post. It was a blunt
catalog of the mistakes you made in your post and the flawed concepts behind
them, nothing more. If you read any obtuse emotion in to it, it was your
mistake, not there on my account. The fact that your post was about as
insulting as it gets was beside the point, even if you did wrap your insults
in a warm and fuzzy cloak of passive aggressiveness.

In spite of your repeated descriptions of my comments are "personal attacks"
and being of a "personal nature," I hope that you and others note that but
for the comment about your "open mind (which was just an ironic cliché),"
every one of my observations had to do with and specifically referenced your
flawed opinions and suppositions - not "you." There was nothing personal
about my remarks, no matter how much you'd prefer that there were. Again,
this was about your thesis; the words you put forth, the opinions you put
forth - not about you.

So how about you climb down from your martyrdom pyre and address the
substance of your remarks and of mine rather than feeling sorry for yourself
and trying to garner sympathy for having been called on your errors.

Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
zone 8, Texas

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

Alan,

I'm sorry that this seems to be an issue, but you are mistaking plain speak
and meaningful words for hostility. The two don't necessarily have anything
in common and I was not begin hostile. Rather I was being plain spoken and
clear. I made no personal attacks and but one personal observation (about
his "open mind" - a humorous cliché). It would be patronizing to try and
beat about the bush with words that left anything but clarity in their wake.

To be clear, referenced Justin's words, his thesis and his errors - not him.
He spouted drivel presented as fact (to us poor imperceptive children who
don't understand such complicated matters) and his insults were cleverly
cloaked in a non-threatening passive aggressiveness that were made
ridiculous by the fact that every point he made was erroneous - and its
basis philosophy vacuous.

So please try not to read so much emotion in to my post(s). Give me the
benefit of the doubt without requiring me to sugar-coat every statement in a
bunch of worthless niceties so that no living person could possibly take
offense.

Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
zone 8, Texas

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Walker"
Andy: You've been watching too much Fox news and its ilk. It's not that
your ideas
are bad; I agree with many of them, but the unblunted hostility in which
you express
them are rude and intimidating.
I have no problem with you taking a strong stand on an opinion.
Just try to
show a modicum of respect for those who might believe otherwise.
And try to lighten up on the absolutes and overgeneralizations.
The real
world is not so black and white.
Alan Walker

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

Andy & Jim - enough already! If this is what our IBC has deteriorated to, I
better start looking for a new venue. I will gladly accept the apologies
from both of you.
MARTY
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Rutledge"
To:
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 5:48 PM
Subject: [IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.


Justin,

This was about your thesis; the words you put forth, the opinions you put
forth - not about you. Deal with it, and without the empty claims of
having
been personally attacked. Didn't happen.

I'm really not sure what was so inappropriate about my post. It was a
blunt
catalog of the mistakes you made in your post and the flawed concepts
behind
them, nothing more. If you read any obtuse emotion in to it, it was your
mistake, not there on my account. The fact that your post was about as
insulting as it gets was beside the point, even if you did wrap your
insults
in a warm and fuzzy cloak of passive aggressiveness.

In spite of your repeated descriptions of my comments are "personal
attacks"
and being of a "personal nature," I hope that you and others note that but
for the comment about your "open mind (which was just an ironic cliché),"
every one of my observations had to do with and specifically referenced
your
flawed opinions and suppositions - not "you." There was nothing personal
about my remarks, no matter how much you'd prefer that there were. Again,
this was about your thesis; the words you put forth, the opinions you put
forth - not about you.

So how about you climb down from your martyrdom pyre and address the
substance of your remarks and of mine rather than feeling sorry for
yourself
and trying to garner sympathy for having been called on your errors.

Kind regards,
Andy Rutledge
zone 8, Texas


************************************************** **************************
****
++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++

************************************************** **************************
****
-- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ --
+++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++

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

In spite of your repeated descriptions of my
comments are "personal attacks"
and being of a "personal nature," I hope that you
and others note that but
for the comment about your "open mind (which was
just an ironic cliché),"
every one of my observations had to do with and
specifically referenced your
flawed opinions and suppositions - not "you." There
was nothing personal
about my remarks, no matter how much you'd prefer
that there were. Again,
this was about your thesis; the words you put forth,
the opinions you put
forth - not about you.


I don't think I ever posted here, although I do read
posts daily. I am not proud that I am breaking my
silence by replying to this thread, or egoic chest
beating...

I was just curious...how can opinions be flawed? And
isn't saying "it isn't about you it's about your
words..." still the same? Isn't it only natural that
Justin would react equally to either an attack on his
words or an attack on him? Hasn't this whole
undebateable debate eroded to something that belongs
on a playground, or at a Senate meeting?

Anytime you folks want to start filling my email box
with useful information about, I don't...let's
say...Bonsai...go right ahead.

Take care,

Jason

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com

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

To:
Date: 13 October 2003 15:06
Subject: [IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.


"If this is what our IBC has deteriorated to,"
[truncated message]
___________

Response:

I often wonder when these types of questions start to
spring up,if folks haven't reached the - I have mastered
the Horticultural part - so what's next ?

It's what you bring with you to Bonsai/Tree Penjing that
makes all the difference.
The more you cultivate yourself,the more you have to
give.

All these discussions on Art or Craft or Professional or
Hobbyists always feel like lost souls looking for a path.

Some of us just love trees,others like to prune.I guess
it's what is important to you and how you refine it all.
The desire to grow or mature in some manner.

However you should be first comfortable with yourself.

The tree is a reflection of your inner,often hidden mind.
Khaimraj

[ and some where in the distance temple bells sound
as bowls are filled with tsampa[parasad]]

Apologies for the mystical approach,it's the only way
I could put it.

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