|
How closely should bonsai imitate nature?
Branch structure in
coniferous and deciduous species
One of the local clubs I visited back in England was run by an ex-military type: straight back, UN beret,
constant clipboard. Everything by the book! He exhibited a large privet with a thick, well-tapered trunk and nicely placed
branches. But.... Every branch, every secondary and tertiary branch, every shoot... was wired perfectly horizontally, and
every upward or downward shoot or bud was mercilessly shaved. If you looked at this tree at eye level, you would hardly notice
the branches, were it not for the copious amounts of cheap Korean wire.
"Why?" I asked. "Because it says so here," he replied pulling out his one and only bonsai book from beneath
his government issue clipboard. It was not one of mine!
No matter how much we crave an easy formula, there is always the need for creative thought and design
discretion. Formulae in books are there because books need formulae, not because formulae can ever teach art.
The simplistic principle is: wire the branches to the horizontal or just below, then wire the laterals
sideways. Remove downward growing shoots and shorten the upper ones. This principle is important to ensure that all foliage
receives good light but that is only the bones of it. If you look at the way full-size trees present their branches, you will
instantly see that they are all different. There are broad differences between conifers and deciduous trees that are unmistakable.
And there are many more subtle differences between species within these groups.
In bonsai we must simplify the structure of trees to fit a smaller space, but it is important to try to
retain as many of the species' characteristics as possible - not only for the sake of authenticity, or noble purpose, but
also for the well-being of the tree.
This article gives some thought-provoking observations on the subtler differences between coniferous species,
but first I want to recap and expand on our discussions of the broad differences between the branch structure of coniferous
and deciduous trees. This is a very important concept that is essential to understand.
Growth patterns
A young conifer grows
straight up with tiers of branches radiating at regular intervals along the trunk. At first, the branches generally grow upward,
but soon become horizontal and later pendulous. Conifer branches are flexible (right?) so they bend under the weight of wet
foliage or layers of snow. If they stay bent for long enough, they remain that way (right?). Conifers put most of their energy
into terminal buds, sometimes all, so branches extend in straight lines. Upper shoots are stunted to render them less vulnerable
to snow damage.
As a conifer ages, lower branches are shed, extension slows and density is built up in the stunted
inner and upper shoots, creating wide, flat (or sometimes pendulous) pads, exposed to the most possible light.
In a deciduous tree, the opposite is true.
A young deciduous tree may fork into two or more trunks not far above the ground. The branches are not borne in radiating
clusters at regular intervals, they grow more randomly, usually not more than two at any one point. Deciduous branches are
not so flexible - they do not need to be, because, being leafless in winter, they do not have to cope with the weight of the
snow. Deciduous trees put equal energy into growth on all parts, and do not retain stunted inner and upper growth for future
use - no point, they bud back on old wood that that bears no foliage, whereas conifers don't.
As a deciduous tree ages, the upper portions of the lower branches become shaded and die, allowing the next level down
to become more dominant. Time passes and the same happens again. Branches develop with many forks and angles, and they grow
in all directions, even sometimes toward the trunk before kicking back to the light. The light - that's the key again. Deciduous
trees maximize their leaves' exposure to light not by presenting them in flat pads, but by thrusting growth into any space
that is not already occupied and carrying foliage only on the outer sections of the branches - the current shoots. (Fig. 1)
But you knew all this anyway....
| Figure 1 |
|
Conifer branches
Let's use the model of
a fairly standard pine branch. Bent slightly below horizontal and fairly straight, perhaps a bit of movement. All the secondary
branches are wired slightly down, to harmonize with the main limb, with the ends all at a similar level. lateral growth from
all parts is wired down to an appropriate level. Shoot tips are distributed evenly over the area of the branch and the buds
are wired upward (see Fig. 2).
| Figure 2 |
|
The necessary height is given to the branch by the foliage that sits on top of this framework.
This type of structure, or variations thereof, are suitable for almost all conifers, certainly
pine, larch, western (mountain) hemlock. Spruce, fir, yew, eastern hemlock would not need their shoot tips to be bent upward,
since they are denser and produce their own elevated shoots.
Junipers need more height built into the structure, yet still need to adhere to the "foliage pad"
concept. You can be more flexible and imaginative (in fact, as often as not you have to!) with junipers than other conifers.
branches can bend wildly and irrationally before the foliage begins. One branch will normally support several foliage pads.
Nevertheless, each pad is structured as an individual branch. (see Fig. 3)
| Figure 3 |
|
All other conifers can present similar design opportunities, where one cascading
branch supports several pads which, again are each structured as if they were individual branches.
Conifer apices
Just like the branches,
the apex of an old conifer is compressed, flattened by the impossibility to grow taller. In bonsai design we do this artificially
by using small branches, bending them down and twisting them around until they form a shallow dome with an even distribution
of buds. As with the branches, we are looking for the wide, dense, compressed appearance. (see Fig. 4) (Incidentally,
this is true regardless of whether the tree is a low stumpy design or a literati.)
| Figure 4 |
|
Deciduous branches
On deciduous trees
the pressure to bend branches down is largely absent in nature (see above) so the branches may grow upward for some distance
before beginning their angular journey downward. In bonsai we control this by pruning and wiring, although less wiring than
with conifers. In trying to duplicate a natural branch structure, it is necessary for us to build in such things as spread,
elevation, ramification, diversity of direction, taper, etc. (see Fig. 5)
| Figure 5 |
|
By pruning and wire guiding shoots, we channel all new growth into or towards a space until we
have grown a more three-dimensional branch mass that is shaped rather like the toe cap of a boot! We do not leave significant
spaces between branches because we do not have foliage sitting on their upper surfaces. The base of each successive branch
will be almost touching the top parts of the branch below. But because upper branches are shorter, and because the foliage
on the branches below is only at the tips of the shoots, all foliage receives good light.
Deciduous apices
The apices of all bonsai
require some compression to combat the tree's natural urge to grow taller. But unlike conifers, we do not want our deciduous apex to look compressed. We want it
to seem as if all the branches are searching outward and upward for light, invading every space and becoming sharply bent
and ramified as the go. (see Fig. 6)
| Figure 6 |
|
The easiest way to describe the apical structure of a deciduous bonsai is that is should be exactly like
a branch, except that it covers 360 degrees, and that the supporting limb or limbs are positioned somewhere beneath rather
than to the side.
Important note
Regardless
of species, there is one principle - formula even - that is paramount: harmony of branch and trunk. If your trunk is straight,
then branches should be straight; if your trunk is angular, branches should be angular; and if your trunk has subtle curves,
so should the branches. Other characteristics such as deadwood, ruggedness, elegance, thickness, etc, should all be echoed
in the way you design your branches. It takes more thought, it takes more time, but it makes the difference between the mediocre
and a masterpiece. |
Size and proportion in bonsai design
During the last decade or so, particularly in some circles in Japan and Europe, there has been
a trend towards shorter, thicker trunks and low, tightly domed crowns. Sure, these are images of old trees, but only of old
conifers, and only old conifers growing in high altitude but with reasonable nutrition and little or no wind. Yes, they look
stunning and yes, there are many occasions when this type of image is appropriate, but not always.
This trend was started by M Kimura and has been promulgated by his students and followers ever
since. I have seen wonderful plants being forced into this short, fat formula when they would (in my mind should) have become
spectacular individual trees. Aha! that's the word: trees! Eureka! - We are growing trees; we are expressing what trees mean to us, not to someone else who just happens
to have made a name for himself in a far off land.
To most of us, an old tree is not a low, dense, hunch-backed specimen that appears to be crouched
in fear, or withdrawn like a snail into its shell. An old tree is a gigantic, majestic, towering glory. It is overpowering,
dominating and awe-inspiring. One can hardly feel the same about a stunted old tree as one does about a tall old tree. Certainly
one can be moved by stunted old trees. One can feel their imposing presence and see their beauty, but it is not the same emotion
or statement as a tall tree, neither is it any better or worse in bonsai
design.
I will not be drawn further into comparing the two because they both have their places in bonsai
design, but they are certainly different. The problem is, that as we pursue the so-called "ideal bonsai image" we are in danger
of chasing someone else's ideal. We are in danger of becoming too influenced by the work of other artists than by our own
environment, emotions and aspirations and artistic juices. Certainly admire their work and learn from their expertise, but
please follow your own ideals when you think of design.
Nobody said this better than John Naka: "Don't try to make your tree look like a bonsai,
make your bonsai look like a tree". To which I would add: " ...and not all trees look alike!"
To help illustrate this point I have done some quick sketches of the different patterns made by
tall old conifers growing in open spaces. Yes, even within conifers there is a very wide variety of shapes and characteristics
dependent on species, all of which are lost when all species are forced into the "stumpy-green-traffic-cone" style.
|
| Discuss This Article |
Contact Colin Lewis about this article
|
