[TPJ06]

Hey all,
Ever since starting bonsai I've been enveloped in the habit of looking at trees growing naturally as I travel. One thing that I have been seeing is that on many old deciduous trees there is actually more than one "leader" or thick upward growing branch. Many of the branches coming off these are sloping downward due the age with the young branches toward the top angled upward. That said, its made me wonder why the rule of one leader was established (particularly for those who follow a more naturalistic style)? Is it for artistic purposes and a way to minimize distraction in the tree or something else.
Anyone have any knowledge or thoughts on this? Or am I missing something when I am sightseeing?
Thanks

Ted

[MrYamadori]

Is it not a case of these ''rules'' are ''basic guidelines '' in todays world, many bonsai break many rules ? If you choose to replicate full size trees,as i presume you are, then surely your own rules would apply. A more natural form? With your own set of adapted rules you are free for inspiration ? I feel many people see the ''RULE'' as a bonsai that is to be in the form of a ''textbook style bonsai'' ?

IMO rules are to be broken ! Go for the free form , natural perspective, Just as you described. What advancements do we gain in bonsai from limiting our creativity ?

Ted.. .. TPJ06.. .. i think you should be free, to create whatever you see !

[Heisei]

It does seem that a single trunk style dominates the bonsai landscape. I have a feeling it is just because it is harder to develop a believable multi-trunk/main branch tree. It doesn't mean there aren't good examples out there, though. This is probably my favorite bonsai I have ever laid eyes on. This to me is what an old maple tree should look like. This tree was trained by Walter Pall. The photo is also courtesy of Mr. Pall.



Aaron

[MrYamadori]

Haha the tree is very beautiful indeed. However i have trouble not letting that sexy trunk distract me from the foilage ? Anyone else get that feeling. Just look at the roots Hmmm My eyes just stop there. Thanks heisei for sharing the pic.. .. .

[lennard]

There is no rule that states that a tree must have only one trunk/leader. The double trunk, triple trunk styles are recognized styles. The sidebranches are as if the trunks are one- the lowest branch on the biggest trunk, the next branch and the smaller trunk and so on. A tree with more than 3 trunks sprouting from the base is called a sprout broom style.

[Brent]

Ted

Excellent question. Wish we had more threads that discussed things like this because this is the essence of bonsai.

I'll speculate. Traditionally, the Japanese art focused more on conifers than on deciduous trees. Most deciduous bonsai were flowering bonsai and the consensus was, the form wasn't as important as the flowers (I never bought into that one). Most conifers, but not all, exhibit the single leader 'pine tree' outline. Since 'rules' reflect was is 'best' in bonsai, twin apexes were frowned upon. Twin trees had to divide at the base. This pine tree form was adapted to vertical deciduous trees as well, even if they didn't grow like that naturally. The visual reason for this is that the eye cannot follow a single strong line of flow if the crown is divided in two. It doesn't know where to finish.

We have moved away from the conifer dominance in bonsai, and particularly in the West, deciduous trees play a major role. Not only that, but Western species are sometimes very different from Eastern ones, giving rise to whole new forms. The two most common examples are the mature bald cypress form and the oak form. The mature bald cypress will have all its branches in the top of the tree. Having been topped by hurricane winds, the upper branches form a vase or cup at the top of the tree. The lower branches are missing entirely, having been crowded and shaded out when the forest was young and dense. This can be a very beautiful and graceful image, but it is nothing like any traditional Eastern form.

Similarly, the oak form is as you describe, is a massive trunk seemingly made up of a collection of large upward and arching 'subtrunks' (to use a term popularized by Walter Pall). Again, these are beautiful and majestic trees, but have no Eastern counterpart.

So, the classic 'rules' don't fit. You might think that these trees break the rules. But I think that's not the proper way to look at it. These are some of the forms of the new style(s) developing in the West. Rather than thinking of breaking rules, we need to develop a new set of rules that can satisfactorily reproduce what 'works' so well in nature on this side of the ocean. Walter has done an immense amount of work in this area, but the new 'rules' are still not really codified, and certainly not in the popular bonsai lexicon. Developing the new rules will take a great amount of observation and insight. Like you, I have been looking at, and studying natural trees (oaks mostly) for years, trying to develop a system for explaining why this form works and a way of communicating it. Not there yet.

Brent
EvergreenGardenworks.com
see our blog at http://BonsaiNurseryman.typepad.com

[TPJ06]

Sorry i need to clarify that I don't wish this to be a discussion about whether follow rules or not, or the wording "rules". I wish to discuss the use of this particular rule.

There is no rule that states that a tree must have only one trunk/leader. The double trunk, triple trunk styles are recognized styles. The sidebranches are as if the trunks are one- the lowest branch on the biggest trunk, the next branch and the smaller trunk and so on. A tree with more than 3 trunks sprouting from the base is called a sprout broom style.

I have to disagree, this rule does exist even in the twin or triple trunks. From what I have seen in the traditional twin and triple trunk, there is one trunk that is the primary trunk and thus the leader. I see in Walter Palls tree a single leader that is higher than all the other trunks.

Ted

[Heisei]

Sorry i need to clarify that I don't wish this to be a discussion about whether follow rules or not, or the wording "rules". I wish to discuss the use of this particular rule.




I have to disagree, this rule does exist even in the twin or triple trunks. From what I have seen in the traditional twin and triple trunk, there is one trunk that is the primary trunk and thus the leader. I see in Walter Palls tree a single leader that is higher than all the other trunks.

Ted

Well there will ALWAYS be a branch that will grow taller or more vigorously than others. Unless you want the top of the tree to be a perfect horizontal line there has to be some branches that are taller than others. However, when I think of a single leader I think of one absolutely main trunk with all other branches originating from it. Palls tree has many trunks with branches coming out from them. Yes the center one is more vigorous, but that happens on all trees.

MrYamadori: Honestly, when I first looked at that tree I was drawn to the tremendous canopy that so reminded me of old maples or oaks that have been growing in a field with room to spread out. Yeah the roots are nice, but they are not what I am drawn to (not that it would be wrong if your eye was drawn there, they are some great roots).

Aaron

[lennard]

Sorry i need to clarify that I don't wish this to be a discussion about whether follow rules or not, or the wording "rules". I wish to discuss the use of this particular rule.




I have to disagree, this rule does exist even in the twin or triple trunks. From what I have seen in the traditional twin and triple trunk, there is one trunk that is the primary trunk and thus the leader. I see in Walter Palls tree a single leader that is higher than all the other trunks.

Ted

When there is no leader and there are more than 3 trunks/branches then it is called a broom style.

When the branches are bend it is called a informal broomstyle.

When 3 or five branches/trunks arise low down and higher up split again into many branches it is called a broomstyle with a short interrupted trunkline.

When the branches/trunks arise from different positions interrupting the trunk line and the branches/trunk are drooping it is a informal broomstyle with interrupted trunk line with drooping branches.

..........and so on.


But is this realy neccesary- whatever tree you find in nature you can place it in a traditional style........and yes, every style has been done!

The style of the trees you have seen are not breaking any rules/styles!

[TPJ06]

Ted

Excellent question. Wish we had more threads that discussed things like this because this is the essence of bonsai.

I'll speculate. Traditionally, the Japanese art focused more on conifers than on deciduous trees. Most deciduous bonsai were flowering bonsai and the consensus was, the form wasn't as important as the flowers (I never bought into that one). Most conifers, but not all, exhibit the single leader 'pine tree' outline. Since 'rules' reflect was is 'best' in bonsai, twin apexes were frowned upon. Twin trees had to divide at the base. This pine tree form was adapted to vertical deciduous trees as well, even if they didn't grow like that naturally. The visual reason for this is that the eye cannot follow a single strong line of flow if the crown is divided in two. It doesn't know where to finish.

We have moved away from the conifer dominance in bonsai, and particularly in the West, deciduous trees play a major role. Not only that, but Western species are sometimes very different from Eastern ones, giving rise to whole new forms. The two most common examples are the mature bald cypress form and the oak form. The mature bald cypress will have all its branches in the top of the tree. Having been topped by hurricane winds, the upper branches form a vase or cup at the top of the tree. The lower branches are missing entirely, having been crowded and shaded out when the forest was young and dense. This can be a very beautiful and graceful image, but it is nothing like any traditional Eastern form.

Similarly, the oak form is as you describe, is a massive trunk seemingly made up of a collection of large upward and arching 'subtrunks' (to use a term popularized by Walter Pall). Again, these are beautiful and majestic trees, but have no Eastern counterpart.

So, the classic 'rules' don't fit. You might think that these trees break the rules. But I think that's not the proper way to look at it. These are some of the forms of the new style(s) developing in the West. Rather than thinking of breaking rules, we need to develop a new set of rules that can satisfactorily reproduce what 'works' so well in nature on this side of the ocean. Walter has done an immense amount of work in this area, but the new 'rules' are still not really codified, and certainly not in the popular bonsai lexicon. Developing the new rules will take a great amount of observation and insight. Like you, I have been looking at, and studying natural trees (oaks mostly) for years, trying to develop a system for explaining why this form works and a way of communicating it. Not there yet.

Brent
EvergreenGardenworks.com
see our blog at http://BonsaiNurseryman.typepad.com

Thanks a lot Brent,
I have noticed that the rule applies well to pines but did not consider that the rule was imposed upon deciduous trees due to the growth habits of pines. Its an interesting issue. When I try to imagine the tree as a bonsai (focusing on branch structure) it does not work without cutting everything. But when I take it in as a whole, many times I find myself happy with the tree as it is bc it has a pleasing shape (which is never scalene). While I understand the idea that the eye follows better when there is one apex, the full image of these natural trees is majestic and easy to take in when I let my eyes rest on the entire image.
Is there any reading material that you have seen that has attempted to codify these rules.

Thanks

Ted

[TPJ06]

When there is no leader and there are more than 3 trunks/branches then it is called a broom style.

When the branches are bend it is called a informal broomstyle.

When 3 or five branches/trunks arise low down and higher up split again into many branches it is called a broomstyle with a short interrupted trunkline.

When the branches/trunks arise from different positions interrupting the trunk line and the branches/trunk are drooping it is a informal broomstyle with interrupted trunk line with drooping branches.

..........and so on.


But is this realy neccesary- whatever tree you find in nature you can place it in a traditional style........and yes, every style has been done!

The style of the trees you have seen are not breaking any rules/styles!

Lennard,
I think we are having a misunderstanding. I am not talking about broom style or any variation of it. I am questioning exactly what Brent described more clearly than I.

Ted

[Bonsai128371]

If we want to talk about discrepancies between real nature and bonsai "rules", I've seen plenty 100+ year old deciduous and evergreens in my time, all of them breaking the sumo or thick trunk rule, in something that is either 1-6 to 1-10 ratio of width to height, quite unlike the "bigger is better" hard-on-for-sumo-trunk types.

When there is no leader and there are more than 3 trunks/branches then it is called a broom style.

When the branches are bend it is called a informal broomstyle.

When 3 or five branches/trunks arise low down and higher up split again into many branches it is called a broomstyle with a short interrupted trunkline.

When the branches/trunks arise from different positions interrupting the trunk line and the branches/trunk are drooping it is a informal broomstyle with interrupted trunk line with drooping branches.

..........and so on.

..Uh....huh....

its called broom style because it looks like a broom head. like the ones in nature that grow that way. Informal style takes all its rules about branch placement from formal style, but has curvature in the trunk. its not called Formal Broom style to describe a straight pine. How exactly does formal style morph into informal broom? should the actual broom style then be called formal broom?

[lennard]

If we want to talk about discrepancies between real nature and bonsai "rules", I've seen plenty 100+ year old deciduous and evergreens in my time, all of them breaking the sumo or thick trunk rule, in something that is either 1-6 to 1-10 ratio of width to height, quite unlike the "bigger is better" hard-on-for-sumo-trunk types.



..Uh....huh....

its called broom style because it looks like a broom head. like the ones in nature that grow that way. Informal style takes all its rules about branch placement from formal style, but has curvature in the trunk. its not called Formal Broom style to describe a straight pine. How exactly does formal style morph into informal broom? should the actual broom style then be called formal broom?

OK. Lets call the classic broomstyle - the one with one trunk and straight branches(with no leaders) radiating outwards and upwards from almost the same hight a formal broom style.

Lets call variations on this like a two/three/more trunk/s and straight/bent/drooping branches(with no leaders) radiating outwards and upwards from almost the same hight/or at different hights(where lastly named on the same level split into three or many branches on the same hight) an informal broom style.

Now Im tired!

[MrYamadori]

What is all this about ? Its all very confusing .. . Surely there can be no resolution to determine an answer to these many contradictory, personal perceptions of the aesthetics of what these rules actually try to achieve. I wonder zzZZ I'm bored.. . I will work by my own set of rules thankyou very much ! And as for these new ''codified'' The plot just thickens..

[subnet_rx]

I have a tough time trying to find non-conifer trees that adhere to these rules in nature. And to be honest, since starting this, I've spent more time looking at trees in nature than with any bonsai tree. I look at Walter Pall's tree and see a beautiful old bonsai tree. I would not ever expect to find anything like that in nature though, unless it to had been groomed by someone since youth. I think the rules are there as a simplistic way to explain to beginners what they are doing wrong. If we're going to call this art, then we have to be more so about evoking emotion in the viewer, than adhering to some set of rules.