Chris,

Your post regarding the alteration of a work of art brings to mind a
discussion that took place on the list a few years ago.

Someone asked if once a bonsai, Goshin for example, became part of a public
collection does the curator have an obligation to maintain the original
artist's design and direction, or is he free to change it at will?

Some felt that the curator should maintain the tree as designed, while
others felt it could be changed and redesigned as the curator saw fit.
Personally I feel that the curator of a collection has an obligation to keep
to the original artist's design. After all, what would be the point of
having a composition like Goshin in a public collection, and then
redesigning it to suit someone else's artistic vision? (Obviously, a living
work of art will need constant maintenance, but the original design intent
can be maintained.) One might compare that to doing a major repaint on the
Mona Lisa to improve the painting. :-)

Regards,
Roger Snipes Spokane, WA Zone 5, or maybe Zone 6.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it, misdiagnosing it,
and then misapplying the wrong remedies. Groucho Marx (1895-1977)



----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Cochrane"

Yesterday's (Sunday) paper had an interesting article in its Everyday Ethics
column by Randy Cohen entitled "Altered work of art can't be
misrepresented." He referenced federal law making the distinction between
art and ordinary property, "to prevent any destruction of a work of
recognized stature." He notes Section 106A of the Copyright Act (a.k.a.,
the Virtual Artists Rights Act) empowers an artist "to prevent the use of
his or her name as the author of a work of visual art in the event of a
distortion, mutilation or other modification of the work which would be
prejudicial to his or her honor or reputation." He summarizes: "some laws
guard the arts and some guard the reputation of the artist. Ethics also
demands the protection of truly worthy art and an honest account of what the
artist actually did."

Good summary-- especially considering its legal source ...JUST KIDDING re'
the source.... :-)

Mr. Cohen's concluding paragraph notes that if a specific work has no
particular aesthetic merit, owners can do whatever they want with it as long
as they don't misrepresent who did what. What about the bonsai with
aesthetic merit that is not of recognized stature? That seems to cover a
wide band of enriching but untapped work.

My reading of this is that a bonsai would need to be a work of recognized
stature to be protected for-itself as a work-of-art legally. The artist,
however, is protected from being misrepresented at a much lower standard if
his or her work (purported to be visual art) is misrepresented. Goshin &
the Yamaki Pine at the National Bonsai and Penjing Museum are works of art
by recognized stature-- the Yamaki Pine's stature rises greatly from its
history as well as its form in creating emotion. Standing alone without
recognition by others, they would be questionable candidates as art, IMO.

Establishing objects as art requires that they become part of a discursive
network-- a network which leads to appreciation of certain qualities over
others. I don't see the discursive network which is art as a conspiracy to
force appreciation of certain works over others or to subjugate craft or
pastime endeavors. They are not mutually exclusive-- a work of recognized
stature may or may not be good craftwork and can be created by an
artfully-engaged professional or an amateur with little or no intention of
entering the network of art evaluation. Since the second quarter of the
20th century (and arguably much earlier) art often questions the discourse
(and especially meta-narratives of "what art is?") and questions the
confines of cultural exchange.

Bonsai 'artistry' is a moving target regarding what is valued. Japanese
bonsai exhibited immediately prior to World War II suggest the postwar
concept of "representative Japanese bonsai" changed radically with decreased
availability of wild material. The discourse on bonsai continues to change
as well as its forms.

Bonsai enthusiasts are not necessarily creating art. Those who contribute
to aesthetic understanding through their bonsai production-- sometimes based
on factors quite apart from their craft competence-- will own art. Artists,
even those who have consummate skill but fail to enter discussion, will not
own art until they are recognized.

The Internet Bonsai Club is an artifact, too, and changes over time yet with
past traces. Today's subject (on any day) is its most revealing because
the topic is only open at those areas. If someone chooses to act by
initiation or responding publicly or privately they are engaging in
discussion that likely has extremely modest effects.

On creativity in bonsai as in other arts, I'm not very convinced that visual
form matters so much as resonance of the object for the viewer. The poet
Soji (mid 14th century) had a favorite incense burner later owned by the
teamaster Rikyu (later 16th century). Rikyu's wife noted that the legs were
too long. Rikyu agreed and he cut them down immediately. This was a
classical art object-- the Goshin (the presently revered bonsai) of its day.
When Rikyu made the decision (not your average Joe), the burner's value rose
for him & for his wife... and it rose for others as having a creative
alteration chosen by tastefulness.

Who among present bonsai enthusiasts would alter Naka's Goshin? Perhaps
John is THE Head Knocker. Lots of folks want to second-guess Walter Pall's
Bear on the IBC Gallery while he is among the most recognized talents in the
bonsai community and tells us his effort is sincere. Some think he is
teasing, I suppose, but I think most believe this is Walter's taste. It
could easily grow to be more appreciated than taste for "Japanese classical
bonsai" and there are signs of much interest in bonsai revealing Walter's
taste.

Alteration of a bonsai is a legal issue, but perhaps not always so clearly
an aesthetic one of art ownership if creativity is the measure.

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

From: Roger Snipes

Chris,
Your post regarding the alteration of a work of art brings to mind a
discussion that took place on the list a few years ago.

Someone asked if once a bonsai, Goshin for example, became part of a
public
collection does the curator have an obligation to maintain the original
artist's design and direction, or is he free to change it at will?

Some felt that the curator should maintain the tree as designed, while
others felt it could be changed and redesigned as the curator saw fit.
Personally I feel that the curator of a collection has an obligation to
keep
to the original artist's design. After all, what would be the point of
having a composition like Goshin in a public collection, and then
redesigning it to suit someone else's artistic vision? (Obviously, a
living
work of art will need constant maintenance, but the original design intent
can be maintained.) One might compare that to doing a major repaint on
the
Mona Lisa to improve the painting. :-)

Hi Roger,
I am glad to see you pick this up, and I do recall some of the past
posts, as you did.
Chris has had experience in close quarters with these situations, so
I am curious how it may look to him, and what he knows of it.
There is a lot in the arts of changes from the original, each time
a necessary or a natural part of the whole, so I really wonder how Bonsai
stacks up with it.
I mean changes such as in plays where the playwriter's words stay
exact, but the action of a character can make them imply different content.
Still, it holds together.
Same in music, the quality of the original might alter from
orchestra to orchestra. I am not sure of that, but I think it is happening.
There are renovations of old paintings that are on the second
renovation with more advanced techniques found to be "less" than the
original and then claimed to be returned to their original more closely,
some of those recently.
I am inclined to think paintings or photographs would be harder to
withstand some alteration for any reason other than loss of some original
part altogether.
Somehow someone must have had a reasonable solution for bonsai,
since it could be that a restyle was necessary in some instances.
Lynn

Lynn Boyd, Oregon, USA

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

The original Lars Anderson collection at the Arnold Arboretum are some of the
first bonsai in the US. There is a booklet they published about the collection,
in which they explained that they have maintained most of the trees in their
original styles, as much as possible. However, there were a few that they were
forced to restyle, for various technical reasons.
Iris,
Central NY, Zone 5a, Sunset Zone 40
"If we see light at the end of the tunnel, It's the light of the oncoming
train."
Robert Lowell (1917-1977)

Good Day to All,

regarding Bonsai/Tree Penjing and the changes that
naturally occur with the passing of time,I tend to work
more with the idea of working towards a design,then
letting the tree/s free grow for a few years [this I base
on Horticultural health] and starting anew.

In the earlier issues of Bonsai Today I saw enough Kimura
make overs to be convinced that Bonsai/Tree Penjing are
essentially phoenixlike in nature.

I think that -living sculpture- requires a different type of
thinking and a new set of guidelines.So it's easy for me to
divorce the rules for say marble as sculpture or oil painting
or vitreous enamels from trees.

This is where the change or newness of concept starts.

A perfectly designed Bonsai/Tree Penjing can only exist for
me as a holograph [digital image with today's present
technology].
Khaimraj
[West Indies/Caribbean]


-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Snipes
To:
Date: 13 October 2003 19:29
Subject: [IBC] Altered work of art


Chris,

Your post regarding the alteration of a work of art brings to mind a
discussion that took place on the list a few years ago.

Someone asked if once a bonsai, Goshin for example, became part of a public
collection does the curator have an obligation to maintain the original
artist's design and direction, or is he free to change it at will?

Some felt that the curator should maintain the tree as designed, while
others felt it could be changed and redesigned as the curator saw fit.
Personally I feel that the curator of a collection has an obligation to
keep
to the original artist's design. After all, what would be the point of
having a composition like Goshin in a public collection, and then
redesigning it to suit someone else's artistic vision? (Obviously, a
living
work of art will need constant maintenance, but the original design intent
can be maintained.) One might compare that to doing a major repaint on the
Mona Lisa to improve the painting. :-)

Regards,
Roger Snipes Spokane, WA Zone 5, or maybe Zone 6.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it, misdiagnosing it,
and then misapplying the wrong remedies. Groucho Marx (1895-1977)

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

Roger I missed that discussion about altering Goshin for instance.
What we all seem to forget in the discussion on art yes or no is the fact
that bonsai is a living piece of nature put in a container by us.
As the late Hideo Kato use to say :"the moment you put a tree in a container
you are responsible for it". So this means that we first and for all should
respect it as a living beiing and it natuarally changes through the years.
Art or no art if the curator responsible for Goshin wants to maintain Goshin
the way it is intended by the creator (in my opinion the correct way ,also a
matter of respect however now for the creator ).
As history of some old Japanese masterpieces learns us this can only be done
for a couple of decades if correctly cared for the bonsai (as it stays
vigorous and grows on and on and pruning cannot maintain the original shape
after that period give or take a decade).Than inevitably restyling will be
neccesary ( isn't that also one of the interesting things in bonsai? that
it's never definately finished?).At that moment the respect for the original
creator is less important than respect for the tree and try to make it as
beautifully as possible without harming it's condition.
So if it's art or not is not that important because whether we like it or
not it is only temporarely; in the most positive situation a works of art
changes in a new works of art.
Greetz
Ab Demmendal
the Netherlands

"Roger Snipes" schreef in bericht
news:00de01c391fa$ebb8e380$fad3ffd8@46ndp01...
Chris,

Your post regarding the alteration of a work of art brings to mind a
discussion that took place on the list a few years ago.

Someone asked if once a bonsai, Goshin for example, became part of a
public
collection does the curator have an obligation to maintain the original
artist's design and direction, or is he free to change it at will?

Some felt that the curator should maintain the tree as designed, while
others felt it could be changed and redesigned as the curator saw fit.
Personally I feel that the curator of a collection has an obligation to
keep
to the original artist's design. After all, what would be the point of
having a composition like Goshin in a public collection, and then
redesigning it to suit someone else's artistic vision? (Obviously, a
living
work of art will need constant maintenance, but the original design intent
can be maintained.) One might compare that to doing a major repaint on
the
Mona Lisa to improve the painting. :-)

Regards,
Roger Snipes Spokane, WA Zone 5, or maybe Zone 6.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it, misdiagnosing it,
and then misapplying the wrong remedies. Groucho Marx (1895-1977)



----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Cochrane"

Yesterday's (Sunday) paper had an interesting article in its Everyday
Ethics
column by Randy Cohen entitled "Altered work of art can't be
misrepresented." He referenced federal law making the distinction between
art and ordinary property, "to prevent any destruction of a work of
recognized stature." He notes Section 106A of the Copyright Act (a.k.a.,
the Virtual Artists Rights Act) empowers an artist "to prevent the use of
his or her name as the author of a work of visual art in the event of a
distortion, mutilation or other modification of the work which would be
prejudicial to his or her honor or reputation." He summarizes: "some laws
guard the arts and some guard the reputation of the artist. Ethics also
demands the protection of truly worthy art and an honest account of what
the
artist actually did."

Good summary-- especially considering its legal source ...JUST KIDDING
re'
the source.... :-)

Mr. Cohen's concluding paragraph notes that if a specific work has no
particular aesthetic merit, owners can do whatever they want with it as
long
as they don't misrepresent who did what. What about the bonsai with
aesthetic merit that is not of recognized stature? That seems to cover a
wide band of enriching but untapped work.

My reading of this is that a bonsai would need to be a work of recognized
stature to be protected for-itself as a work-of-art legally. The artist,
however, is protected from being misrepresented at a much lower standard
if
his or her work (purported to be visual art) is misrepresented. Goshin &
the Yamaki Pine at the National Bonsai and Penjing Museum are works of art
by recognized stature-- the Yamaki Pine's stature rises greatly from its
history as well as its form in creating emotion. Standing alone without
recognition by others, they would be questionable candidates as art, IMO.

Establishing objects as art requires that they become part of a discursive
network-- a network which leads to appreciation of certain qualities over
others. I don't see the discursive network which is art as a conspiracy
to
force appreciation of certain works over others or to subjugate craft or
pastime endeavors. They are not mutually exclusive-- a work of recognized
stature may or may not be good craftwork and can be created by an
artfully-engaged professional or an amateur with little or no intention of
entering the network of art evaluation. Since the second quarter of the
20th century (and arguably much earlier) art often questions the discourse
(and especially meta-narratives of "what art is?") and questions the
confines of cultural exchange.

Bonsai 'artistry' is a moving target regarding what is valued. Japanese
bonsai exhibited immediately prior to World War II suggest the postwar
concept of "representative Japanese bonsai" changed radically with
decreased
availability of wild material. The discourse on bonsai continues to
change
as well as its forms.

Bonsai enthusiasts are not necessarily creating art. Those who
contribute
to aesthetic understanding through their bonsai production-- sometimes
based
on factors quite apart from their craft competence-- will own art.
Artists,
even those who have consummate skill but fail to enter discussion, will
not
own art until they are recognized.

The Internet Bonsai Club is an artifact, too, and changes over time yet
with
past traces. Today's subject (on any day) is its most revealing because
the topic is only open at those areas. If someone chooses to act by
initiation or responding publicly or privately they are engaging in
discussion that likely has extremely modest effects.

On creativity in bonsai as in other arts, I'm not very convinced that
visual
form matters so much as resonance of the object for the viewer. The poet
Soji (mid 14th century) had a favorite incense burner later owned by the
teamaster Rikyu (later 16th century). Rikyu's wife noted that the legs
were
too long. Rikyu agreed and he cut them down immediately. This was a
classical art object-- the Goshin (the presently revered bonsai) of its
day.
When Rikyu made the decision (not your average Joe), the burner's value
rose
for him & for his wife... and it rose for others as having a creative
alteration chosen by tastefulness.

Who among present bonsai enthusiasts would alter Naka's Goshin? Perhaps
John is THE Head Knocker. Lots of folks want to second-guess Walter
Pall's
Bear on the IBC Gallery while he is among the most recognized talents in
the
bonsai community and tells us his effort is sincere. Some think he is
teasing, I suppose, but I think most believe this is Walter's taste. It
could easily grow to be more appreciated than taste for "Japanese
classical
bonsai" and there are signs of much interest in bonsai revealing Walter's
taste.

Alteration of a bonsai is a legal issue, but perhaps not always so clearly
an aesthetic one of art ownership if creativity is the measure.


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

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

Lynn,

Good observations, I hadn't really thought about plays, musical
compositions, etc. that get changed and interpreted. I guess in my mind I
associate bonsai more with a painting or sculpture -- something that is the
same each time one looks at it, as opposed to a musical score or a play that
can change with the interpretation of the performers.

I know, of course, that a bonsai is anything but static and unchanging, but
when a bonsai is well maintained in the original style it gives that
impression to a certain extent.

I realize that when a bonsai becomes part of a public collection,
maintaining it in the original design may at times be difficult, especially
when unforeseen events happen -- the death of a major branch for instance --
which require a restyle to deal with the results of the event. But it is my
opinion that the curator should try, as much as possible, to stay with the
original design.

I too would be interested to hear what Chris may have to say on this.

Regards,
Roger Snipes Spokane, WA Zone 5, or maybe Zone 6.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it, misdiagnosing it,
and then misapplying the wrong remedies. Groucho Marx (1895-1977)



----- Original Message -----
From: "Lynn Boyd"

There is a lot in the arts of changes from the original, each time
a necessary or a natural part of the whole, so I really wonder how Bonsai
stacks up with it.
I mean changes such as in plays where the playwriter's words stay
exact, but the action of a character can make them imply different
content.
Still, it holds together.
Same in music, the quality of the original might alter from
orchestra to orchestra. I am not sure of that, but I think it is
happening.
There are renovations of old paintings that are on the second
renovation with more advanced techniques found to be "less" than the
original and then claimed to be returned to their original more closely,
some of those recently.
I am inclined to think paintings or photographs would be harder to
withstand some alteration for any reason other than loss of some original
part altogether.
Somehow someone must have had a reasonable solution for bonsai,
since it could be that a restyle was necessary in some instances.


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

Ab,

I think we are in agreement here. I feel that the curator of a collection
should do his or her best to maintain a bonsai in the design of the artist
who created it. I agree, however, that over time the design will evolve and
may even need to be drastically changed, whether due to normal growth on the
part of the tree, or other events that may occur.

Regards,
Roger Snipes Spokane, WA Zone 5, or maybe Zone 6.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it, misdiagnosing it,
and then misapplying the wrong remedies. Groucho Marx (1895-1977)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ab Demmendal"

So this means that we first and for all should
respect it as a living beiing and it natuarally changes through the years.
Art or no art if the curator responsible for Goshin wants to maintain
Goshin
the way it is intended by the creator (in my opinion the correct way ,also
a
matter of respect however now for the creator ).
As history of some old Japanese masterpieces learns us this can only be
done
for a couple of decades if correctly cared for the bonsai (as it stays
vigorous and grows on and on and pruning cannot maintain the original
shape
after that period give or take a decade).Than inevitably restyling will be
neccesary ( isn't that also one of the interesting things in bonsai? that
it's never definately finished?).At that moment the respect for the
original
creator is less important than respect for the tree and try to make it as
beautifully as possible without harming it's condition.
So if it's art or not is not that important because whether we like it or
not it is only temporarely; in the most positive situation a works of art
changes in a new works of art.

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

In a message dated 10/22/2003 11:10:45 PM Eastern Standard Time,
writes:
Ab,

I think we are in agreement here. I feel that the curator of a collection
should do his or her best to maintain a bonsai in the design of the artist
who created it. I agree, however, that over time the design will evolve and
may even need to be drastically changed, whether due to normal growth on the
part of the tree, or other events that may occur.
Roger:

I would even go one step further: there is no such thing as static bonsai art.

Cordially,

Michael Persiano
The Michael Persiano Bonsai Studio

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

Please pardon my late response on this thread.
For another perspective on this issue, you should read the editorial, The
Kiss of Death, by Doug Roth in the current issue of the Journal of Japanese
Gardening (JOJG, Sept/Oct 2003, p. 3). Mr. Roth asserts that, "Historical
preservation is the kiss of death for a Japanese garden." He explains that if
historic preservation is a garden owner's sole objective, it means that the owners
are no longer trying to improve it and are simply trying to "preserve" it or return
it to a former state. "If they truly wanted a great garden, they'd be thinking
about future glory and taking actions to move in that direction."
Roth notes that there is value in historic preservation, such as for
architecture, but it is not usually appropriate for gardens, because of the fact
that a garden is alive and in a never ending state of flux. "With skilled care a
garden gets better; with poor care it deteriorates. In Japan old gardens are
regularly rebuilt, repaired, and reshaped, often to improve the appearance. He
derides most cases of historic preservation for living things as "an uninspired,
ill-fated approach."
I would submit that Roth's logic is generally persuasive when applied to
bonsai as well. Just as the most skilled bonsai artists strive for excellence and
hope to improve their bonsai routinely, those who manage public collections should
have the flexibility to pursue the best design for a donated bonsai, just as the
donor would have done. A curator should regularly consult with other bonsai artists
(especially the donor artist, if possible) about design and maintenance plans for
individual bonsai. (S)he should also possess a self awareness of his/her design
biases and avoid making all the bonsai in the collection look like their own.
Beyond that, they need to be free of rigid constraints of trying to maintain a
design plan for a specific bonsai from a specific point of time. To do otherwise is
unrealistic and detrimental to the health and design quality of the bonsai.
Alan Walker, Lake Charles, LA, USA
http://LCBSBonsai.org http://bonsai-bci.com
====================================
Roger Snipes wrote:
Ab,
I think we are in agreement here. I feel that the curator of a collection should do
his or her best to maintain a bonsai in the design of the artist who created it. I
agree, however, that over time the design will evolve and may even need to be
drastically changed, whether due to normal growth on the part of the tree, or other
events that may occur.
Regards, Roger Snipes Spokane, WA Zone 5, or maybe Zone 6.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ab Demmendal"
So this means that we first and for all should respect it as a living being
and it naturally changes through the years. Art or no art if the curator responsible
for Goshin wants to maintain Goshin the way it is intended by the creator (in my
opinion the correct way , also a matter of respect, however now for the creator ).
As history of some old Japanese masterpieces learns us this can only be done
for a couple of decades if correctly cared for the bonsai (as it stays vigorous and
grows on and on and pruning cannot maintain the original shape after that period
give or take a decade). Then inevitably restyling will be necessary (isn't that also
one of the interesting things in bonsai? that it's never definitely finished?). At
that moment the respect for the original creator is less important than respect for
the tree and try to make it as beautifully as possible without harming it's
condition.
So if it's art or not is not that important because whether we like it or
not it is only temporary; in the most positive situation a works of art changes in a
new works of art.

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

Huzzah! Hurrah! Hurray! Rah! Yippee! Hot diggity! Banzai!
Hoch! and Vive! ;-)

Makes good sense.

Jim Lewis - - Tallahassee, FL - VEGETARIAN:
An Indian word meaning "lousy hunter." - "Borrowed" from a sig
by fellow Home-Ease listowner, Scott Peterson


Please pardon my late response on this thread.
For another perspective on this issue, you should read
the editorial, The
Kiss of Death, by Doug Roth in the current issue of the Journal
of Japanese
Gardening (JOJG, Sept/Oct 2003, p. 3). Mr. Roth asserts that,
"Historical
preservation is the kiss of death for a Japanese garden." He
explains that if
historic preservation is a garden owner's sole objective, it
means that the owners
are no longer trying to improve it and are simply trying to
"preserve" it or return
it to a former state. "If they truly wanted a great garden,
they'd be thinking
about future glory and taking actions to move in that
direction."
Roth notes that there is value in historic
preservation, such as for
architecture, but it is not usually appropriate for gardens,
because of the fact
that a garden is alive and in a never ending state of flux.
"With skilled care a
garden gets better; with poor care it deteriorates. In Japan
old gardens are
regularly rebuilt, repaired, and reshaped, often to improve the
appearance. He
derides most cases of historic preservation for living things
as "an uninspired,
ill-fated approach."
I would submit that Roth's logic is generally
persuasive when applied to
bonsai as well. Just as the most skilled bonsai artists strive
for excellence and
hope to improve their bonsai routinely, those who manage public
collections should
have the flexibility to pursue the best design for a donated
bonsai, just as the
donor would have done. A curator should regularly consult with
other bonsai artists
(especially the donor artist, if possible) about design and
maintenance plans for
individual bonsai. (S)he should also possess a self awareness
of his/her design
biases and avoid making all the bonsai in the collection look
like their own.
Beyond that, they need to be free of rigid constraints of
trying to maintain a
design plan for a specific bonsai from a specific point of
time. To do otherwise is
unrealistic and detrimental to the health and design quality of
the bonsai.
Alan Walker, Lake Charles, LA, USA
http://LCBSBonsai.org http://bonsai-bci.com

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