AusBonsai

This question has been posted on many forums, and this one, has added one more dimension to that question. What is Australian style?.

I was taking pictures of trees today, then I thought about the style, I had put into some of my tree's. As you know, or most of you do, that I am passionate about our native tree's being used for Bonsai.

When this has been discussed before, there are those among us that like to use our tree's as Bonsai, with the proviso, that they are not styled like exotics!.

What prompted me to ask this question again was, that a lot of our native flora is being hybridized, including some tree's Callistemons, Gums and Melaleucas.
To name just a few, these trees are also being used in Bonsai. M, bracteata golden gem makes a nice tree, and is very good for Bonsai.

So what is the natural style of a hybridized tree?.

I now open this up for discussion and please keep it nice
Cheers Pup

I don't think it comes down to an Australian style of bonsai, I think is is more to do with growing Australian natives in a more naturalistic way as bonsai. But this is happening in Europe, USA and other parts of the world where enthusiest are growing native trees in a more natural way and using the more traditional (Japanese) bonsai techniques for pines, junipers, elms, etc. So these new hybred australian natives will be styled according to the artist. After all, no matter what style is used, isn't it the artist choice?

by the way Pup, love your work.

chris

What is this style thing ?? Is an excellent way of putting it Pup.

Humans have an obsession with classifying complex things into simple systems and bonsai is no different. Most literature on bonsai divides trees into ‘styles’ and bonsai styles are essentially very artificial categories based on the straightness and angle of inclination or even the presence of the primary stem of the tree. This alone does not even come close to explaining the full diversity of tree form. For example a straight stemmed tree trained to look like a forest-red-gum from Australia would be categorically grouped with a straight stemmed tree trained to look like a Japanese cedar under the ‘formal upright’ category. However the two trees would naturally be very different. That is because the primary stem is only one of at least nine primary elements available in the palette of bonsai artist. The obvious elements are the pot, bark, roots, trunk, primary branches, secondary & tertiary branches, foliage, reproductive structures and death. The shape, angle, weight, colour and textures and even the absence of these elements is what is varied to produce a different tree.

To me there can be no one unified 'Australian style' bonsai because the trees that grow in this country are so different from each other and there is no one all encompassing Australian species of tree. However in saying that the evocative representation Australian flora in bonsai is a beautiful thing. We can definitely train a particular bonsai to look more like a particular Australian tree species. As for plants that do not occur in the wild- it is up to the grower what model they choose. I try to grow trees evoke places I have been. For horticultural reasons I can not always achieve the look of one species in the wild with the exact same plant as bonsai. Sometimes I have to use a bit of artistic licence and choose another species.

Ash

If we are to do an Australian style then we can forget about taper, and that is probably one of the most important of the traditional bonsai rules, taper is probably over exaggerated anyway in bonsai when compared to the real trees that we are trying to emulate, I’ve seen plenty of Aussie native trees that have been styled to represent Aussie natives out in the bush and they are usually taperless leggy sticks yet they do represent another important bonsai "rule" which is they must look like a credible miniaturized copy of the full grown tree.

to be honest i dont try to conform to any style hehe.

when one walks down the street and looks at the trees that grow naturally, do these trees obey any set rules? no they dont. i figure if you want your bonsai to mimic nature then dont be so strict in following the rules. allow a little leaniency.

some of the best tree's i have seen have broken a good rule or two. i completely understand that the rules are useful for creating bonsai as they steer people into a more realistic impression but i choose to use the rules as a guide and let the tree show me what it wants to look like to an extent.

for this reason i agree that aussie natives probably wont look their most natural as bonsai if they are shaped to look like traditional japanese trees.

but does that mean all aussie trees should have their own set of styles? nah i dont think so. maybe the aussie style is we dont have set styles!

just my two cents worth

Pup, my take on Australian style is:

At it's best, Australian Style is an Australian Native tree or shrub species that has been selected for it's suitability for bonsai culture and has been styled in the image of a mature example of the species in nature. Some examples are many of your own Melaleucas, most of the better large Banksias and also figs that exhibit prominent nebari, good basal flare and aerial roots.

At it's worst, Australian Style is a pooly executed poodle-pruned or leggy, sparsely branched, unramified Native tree or shrub of a difficult or wholly unsuitable species for bonsai cultivation. Examples of these are widespread, if I had my way, they would be on the endangered list.


In regard to the "rules":

A bonsai that is styled over time, bending and breaking a few or many rules along the way, yet remaining visually balanced and pleasurable to look at for both the experienced and novice is a work of art.

A bonsai that is styled over time with little or no attention paid to traditional bonsai aesthetics whatsoever, yet remaining visually balanced and pleasurable to look at for both the experienced and novice is a fluke.

"Rules", "Guidelines", or whatever you like to call them, they are there to help us.

Cheers,
Mojo

Hi from South Africa, so I don't know to much about your indigenous trees. Just reading the post I would say Aussie trees fall in a Naturalistic style, not Japanese. You can still call your bonsai what ever it resembles. If its a slanting tree its a slanting tree. If its a upright tree with curves it still a informal upright.

Here in SA we have established our own style. We have baobab style which is naturally a tree with a oversize trunk. We have a pierneef style which is inspired by acacia thorn trees with a flat top. We also have a bushveld style which is a tall slender with clouded pads similar to a gum I think. There is also the wonderboom style which is a tree where the branches has touched the ground and sprouted roots.
This styles have been written about in plenty of bonsai books about SA bonsai.

I reckon it about time you guys get down and settle some unique Aussie styles and put it on paper to make it official.
Why try to match your trees with Japanese styles and rules if its not what it is. They would most probably not use your local trees, cause it wont suite there style. So why should you try suite your trees to there styles.

Hope this is in context with the post

i agree. i don t think anyoen can afford to not follow any of the rules at all. the simple act of not following any wouldnt leave u with much of a tree. but trying to painstakingly stick to every rule with every tree no matter what species it is isnt always feasible. and as i said earlier, some of the best trees i have seen have broken a rule or two!

at the end of the day i believe bonsai is an artform and like all artforms they are open to interetation. how the bonsai-ist chooses to bonsai the tree and how others view it. surelt bonsai is an evolving artform liek all others. the chinese started it and the japanese took it and fine tuned it as they say. so why can another culture take it and change it yet agaian and again...

To bend or break a rule (guide line), you must 1st understand the rule. A rule is in place for a reason, if you ignore that reason you will end up with a potted plant, not a bonsai. Eg: a thick tapering trunk is to impart power and age in a bonsai, however, power and age can be created through branch placement, deadwood/ carving or just in height and strength in the trunk.

chris

I can't help but play your game tonight Pup
I don't think Australian styling is any different to the variety of styling around the world at the moment. Sure there may be some difference in the way the branches move but the basic styling is no different to any normal styling. I think anyone that thinks them self able to design bonsai should be able to impersonate the movement in Australian trees.
Then I believe there are many variations in preference of style.
Just in bonsai generally. I believe there is always some degree of our display of our superiority over nature, I know that is a certain appeal to bonsai.I like to explore all facets of those preferences. I don't treat natives any different.
A manicured tree that shows dominance over nature like a freshly cut lawn. To the impression that bonsai was never touched by human hands. Or at least, large hands
I don't have any isue if people want to catagorise styles or form but he most important thing to me is always. Does it work

I reckon it about time you guys get down and settle some unique Aussie styles and put it on paper to make it official.
Why try to match your trees with Japanese styles and rules if its not what it is. They would most probably not use your local trees, cause it wont suite there style. So why should you try suite your trees to there styles.

Hope this is in context with the post [/quote]


I have seen Australian trees, that were put in Kokufu and Taikan ten exhibition books.

So the Japanese do use other tree's than northern hemisphere tree's. The Casuarina is used extensively, throughout the world as well in traditional styles.

Or as one very astute practitioner of the art once said to me, conservative Japanese Bonsai. When we were talking about Bonsai and Penjing.

Cheers Pup

PS, Ninja your post is in the right form, for this thread.

chrisatrocky wrote:To bend or break a rule (guide line), you must 1st understand the rule. A rule is in place for a reason, if you ignore that reason you will end up with a potted plant, not a bonsai. Eg: a thick tapering trunk is to impart power and age in a bonsai, however, power and age can be created through branch placement, deadwood/ carving or just in height and strength in the trunk.

chris

Chris what you have written is the golden rule. Very simple and utterly true.

Technical bonsai geniuses like Kimura and "out there" bonsai expressionists like Nick Lenz could design, build and grow rules driven, traditional bonsai that are every bit as good as anything produced by more conventionally influenced bonsai professionals.

Cheers,
Mojo

Not sure why we need to start another topic on the same subject? perhaps merge this into one of the other threads on the same topic?

Regarding "Aussie styling", would they not just be a varient of one of the main styles? I mean the "baobab style" is an informal upright variant, "pierneef style" to me is just a Broom variant and the "wonderboom style" is just a raft variant. I dont mean disrespect by this, but why rename things that are already named? why do we even need to name things at all? lets just get back to making visually pleasing forms?

I thought I might as well throw my opinion out there and see what happens.
Being new to bonsai I've been reading as much as I can and looking for inspiration wherever I can find it.
I'm not even going to go into the nuances of all of the elements that go into creating a successful bonsai, many others have done that already.
What I am going to sat is one word. Fire.
The thing that I feel sets the australian landscape and its trees of all species, shapes and sizes apart from the rest of the world, by and large, is the predominance of bushfires.
It has been demonstrated that a fireswept style can look amazing and I have yet to see it replicated in any other country to quite the same degree of success.
You can shape a tree however you like using or breaking all the rules you desire, because australian trees come in such a vast number of different shapes sizes and species.
But the one thing that links them all to my image of the outback is that they are all affected in much the same way by the destructive yet life bringing influence of one of our country's most devastating natural forces.
Like many things in our culture I think that an Australian style is an adaptation and reinterpretation of many different styles with our own unique slightly charred character.

Just my humble opinion.
Daniel.