Edzard -

It's difficult to comment on this without knowing exactly what'is being discussed. Does 'new pruning styles' mean a newer, easier and quicker method of achieving much the same appearance, or does it mean a radically new technique that produces a substantially different appearance?

My attitude is that if a new, quicker & easier way of getting substantially the same visual result, then I'm all for it. I've no doubt that until somebody invented the lawn mower, people used to consider sheep to be the best way to keep lawns trimmed and some of them without a doubt continued to prefer sheep.

When it comes to the niceties of Japanese gardening, I know some people like to insist on the superiority of tying bamboo fences together with some sort of tarred string with elaborate knots, but what's wrong with using black electrical ties? And I'm convinced that the use of bamboo fencing will become obsolete when people get used to using imitation bamboo made from plastic that looks just the same but lasts far longer.

I expect that the JOJG would consider this to be heresy......

Herb,.. :), my first thought was, 'you think too much'..., quoth the duck.

"to find / adopt different material and methods to function the same way"

style is over used, nor is it possible to invent new styles of pruning, since the result is not a question of style or fashion which perhaps equates more to 'shape'..
Solutions to growth are what the subject is, the shape or 'style' is incedental to the method of control, therefore technique is (my) prefered reference. The technique may provide a specific result in needed shape for that location, if it is specified what that need is - attract, block, see through,...
and presumably all the techniques have already been discovered.
However new combinations of techniques to produce differing results are possible.
perhaps that is style, yet one may use perhaps 5 different techniques to have the same use / style emerge.

eg: using a cryptomeria technique on a spruce, or a pine technique on a maple.
clarifies my quacking??
:)
edzard

Hi Edzard, Herb,

As you know I am not the most prolific writer, nor, particularly well versed in japanese gardening, but a continuing uneasiness I have felt over the symposiums inability to define a japanese garden despite the fact it was held under that auspices of adaptation and now this thread, leads me to question whether what some have tried so hard to define is not just the mechanics of gardening but the impeccable attention to detail by the hand of man. Many seem to be drawn to the finest displays of beauty and on some higher level 'feel' the grandeur of the japanese garden only when the mechanics of gardening are performed with such attention to detail as to create the whole without giving away the piece. Consider for a moment a kitchen drawer. Open lots of drawers and many will see just a drawer. Open a few more and you might find a drawer made from fine wood with dovetail joints. But alas, the joints, though strong and tight are cut but machine. Instinctively we are disappointed. But, once in a while we will open a drawer and see in it the fine craftsmanship of hand cut dovetail joints, cut into the finest woods, finished with a softness only a hand could make. The attachment one feels to such work in wood is no different than the attachment to such work in the garden. Beware the slippery slope. For removing the highest standards of workmanship as the definition will be to remove the man from the art. And the art may be no more.

Greg

Greg -

The idea of impeccable attention to detail 'by the hand of man' sounds attractive, but in virtually every case, the work is accomplished by means of tools. Your superbly made kitchen drawer, for example, was not made by hands alone - they used the most sophisticated tools available at the time. Many engineers will assure you, I think, that a machine-cut dovetail joint is - so long as the machine is itself of good quality and properly operated - finer and more accurate than one cut by hand with a handsaw, no matter how skilled the artisan.

Mass production has, it is true, often had a reputation for poorer quality than hand-made objects - e.g. a 1939 Ford was built to lower standards of accuracy than a 1939 Rolls Royce. But that reflected lower standards of quality control and was not an inevitable result of mass production. Engineers will tell you that mass production, using sufficiently accurate machine tools, properly operated, will produce a better, more precisely accurate product than one using lesser tools, no matter how skilled the tool operator.

I argue is that the description of 'done by hand' is an illusion unless the work is done, literally by hand & without tools.

From there I go on to argue that the more sophisticated the tool, the better the result can be. Note that I only say 'can' be and not 'will' be.

I'm not sure whether we should be drawing an analogy between maintaining a Japanese garden and constructing a kitchen drawer. But just to take the matter of pruning, I doubt it can be validly argued that pinching back pine tree candles using our fingernails, or even using the sort of clippers that were available 200 years ago, does a better job than using the latest, state-of-the-art, superbly sharp, hand-friendly pruners. And when it comes to shearing small-leaved shrubs, you can, with electric hedge clippers, accomplish in 30 minutes what would take an entire morning with hand shears.

I think we should be cautious of believing that the highest standards can only be achieved by using obsolete tools.

The "hand of man" implies two things to me that are relevant to the art of JG: the element of design and the workmanship of risk. Neither is necessarily lost when one uses tools; modern and sharp, antique, primitive or crude. The contribution of design can be lost when it is compromised to the tool. When the drawer maker uses a dovetail size that isn't quite right because he has only a limited choice of router bits, he is diluting his design. When the design is controlled exclusively by the tooling, you have mass production. Mass production is highly desirable for currency, computer equipment, pharmaceuticals and many things we depend upon. It is not suitable for art of course.

The second point is the contirbution of risk in workmanship. A sculptor or a woodcarver takes some risk in their actions. I would propose it is similar to that taken every time a gardener prunes a branch or places a rock. Yes, they can all be fixed to some extent, but that fundamental risk increases the perception of "the hand of man".

A corollary to the concept of risk of workmanship is the risk of materials. Natural materials are interesting because they are variable - the antithesis of mass production. That variability in plants and stones provides the dynamic of trying to express a feeling (or a more concrete image) with material that has its own spirit. That struggle becomes the key process - find the element within the material that is vital and use it, nurture it, communicate it with your design. You won't find any such struggle with injection molded bamboo. Yes it lasts a long time, but isn't that the point of using bamboo instead of stone?

If we are to keep JG a living art, it must be practiced, and new materials and techniques are vital to that progress. Does it add to the art when one places stones with tripods? I think it adds to the experience, not to the design, and if the design is compromised because the technique is slow or inefficient, than it is a selfish pursuit.

Glad to see this moribund forum awaken - perhaps it was the focus on the Seattle symposium, from which I jealously would still like to see more pictures.

Louis -

Your analysis is very interesting.

I agree that the integrity of design can be diminished if it is compromised to the tool - but I should have thought that if the router bit doesn't produce the right size of dovetail, the fault isn't in the use of a router bit as opposed to a dovetail saw - it's in the craftsman's failure to use a router bit of the appropriate size.

Your proposition that risk in workmanship contributes to the perception of the hand of man is undeniable in the sense that when we see a perfect dovetail joint that you know was made by a man using a dovetail saw, we feel a sense of awe at the man's skill. But does that mean that an identical dovetail joint, made by a man using a router bit, is in any way inferior? I doubt it. To my mind, we can think of the use of the router bit in the same way as we look at the use of a tripod to facilitate the better placing of rocks - it is the means to an end, and whether it is a kitchen drawer or a Japanese garden, it is the end that matters..

I like your point about the risk of materials. That, I think, is at the root of my discomfort (unless we had in mind things like roofed gates) with drawing an analogy between the dovetailed drawer and Japanese garden design and maintenance. There's certainly a risk of materials when we prune a shrub or tree, or when we select and position a rock or construct a nobedan path. And you have succeeded in making me feel just a bit uneasy about my impulse to use injection moulded bamboo. (But not so uneasy that I'm not going to try it - if I can find any!)

For all of you who want time to stand still in your bamboo fences, see Gardener's Supply product 34-451. Faux Bamboo, and on sale to boot.

I see by Herb's response that my comments were more succinct than clear, so I will expand. I agree that the "hand of man" diminishes the utility of many items. Uniform dovetails are probably stronger and will last longer than non-uniform. Most products are enhanced by standards and repetitive exactness. They are just not very interesting, and neither are they art. The most interesting seam to explore may be the fine lines where the hand of man isn't clear. The dovetails that are so tightly fit they appear to be machine made, but are of a shape or spacing that is suitable for the use. Or the other extreme, where the hand of man shapes nature with such a subtle touch it isn't clear. Trees trimmed to appear windblown could be natural...

I want to distinguish between two categories: tools (and new techniques) that have little or no impact on the art, and those change the process and limit the result. Sharp saws and mechanical shears don't affect the choice of what branch to prune, so they have no impact. Electric hedge trimmers however, may be a reasonable compromise to practicality but also bring some change to the product (some impact). String trimmers make it easy to cut weeds, but when used to edge and trim ground cover, they impact the result. Wooden tripods are traditional for placing stones, but bring no advantage over heavy equipment and may in fact limit designs due to slow movement and limited capacity. I know from experience that once you set the tripod, you have located the spot where the stone is going to be. Dangling a stone from the bucket of a machine brings a greater degree of freedom. Maybe this makes for a third category - tools and techniques that open up new designs and results. Another example is the widespread availability of diamond tools to cut stone. No compromises in design are necessary and a greatly reduced economic barrier to using a durable, variable, interesting material.

Materials (including plants) can be thought of in a similar fashion. Plants are adapted and created continuously, and garden designs are better for the change. I use Ipe instead of oak or cedar for exposed wood, but it is still wood and still variable. When you choose foam rubber for the Tatami mats in your tearoom, you are not going to have the same experience. If you need to use a different straw or a locally available grass to make the mats, you will have the quality of experience you are after.

Much of what is discussed here invokes tradition to justify design or technique. When tradition loses the connection with the art, it becomes history.

Louis -

Thanks for the reference to Gardener's Supply. They're an interesting start, & I'll look into it, though I've seen pictures of a more realistic-looking product that I fancy it was made in South Africa. In any event, it wasn't available here.

I note your statement -

"Most products are enhanced by standards and repetitive exactness. They are just not very interesting, and neither are they art."

I agree with the first sentence, but I'm not persuaded of the universal validity of the second one: I think it's too narrow. Just as one example, I consider Japanese woodblock prints - at least the ones I like - to be both interesting, and to be art.

In a subtle way we have moved away from the question edzard asked, perhaps, even more subtley, we have introduced the notion of craftsmanship versus perfection. Is it a Nature versus Man thing? We may even be discussing if craft is allowed a traditional and art not and if mass production can replace all that fussing about. We have certainly introduced a strange idea that 'man made' does not include the tool the man made it with, the only thing I did lately that required skill but no tool was to tie a knot in twine. This is a indeed curious idea.

Inky,

To put it another way, it's curious if the use of very simple tools can produce something that should be regarded as 'art' whereas production of it by means of complex tools should disqualify the product as 'art'.

Where do we draw the line between simple tools and complex, sophisticated ones? Is there any valid distinction? It seems to me that the differences are ones not of kind but of degree.

Hmmm. Lest we find ourselves lost in artful interpretation, might I add to my earlier post. I did not mean to side tract this tread into a good tool, better tool debate, though it has prompted fine interchanges, but rather I was attempting to simply state that we seem to place the higher value on works of art when they are made by skillful craftsmen as opposed to skillful mechanized machine operators. Edzard was bringing out his observation that much of the discussions at the symposium centered around the problem of providing the time and labor to prune a garden in the spirit of the great gardens that have forged the legend of the japanese garden. Looking at Junji Shimada's frustration at being chronically understaffed we hear his veiled lament that the garden is becoming more of a woodland garden simply because they lack the time and labor for proper care. A month or so ago I visited Nitobe gardens and to my eye I concur. Hence my feelings that what makes the garden is not just the mechanics of moving stone and planting trees, but the extraordinary care in pruning and cleanliness. This when done by any artisan, regardless of medium, will always create the finest most sought after works of art. Maybe now having said all this we should be asking not how do we take short cuts or employ bigger more powerful tools, but rather how do we excite more people into the care and maintenance of the garden while passing along the knowledge learned over time. It seems to me that gardening, japanese gardening in particular is never going to be mass produced and maintained by machine. If japanese gardening is to retain its unique style(s) and spirit, we need to bring the art and care of japanese gardens more to the house hold consciousness.

Greg

Greg,

Now I think you've identified a factor that above all, gives good Japanese gardens their extraordinary appeal - the meticulous and constant care that they receive. The JOJG constantly stresses this. I particularly like the tradition that they mention of grandma and grandpa's habit, every morning, of going round the family's garden and keeping it clean and tidy. When I contemplate this, it makes me feel guilty and neglectful.

Herb

Good points, and admirable sentiments, but how to actually improve the state of this art? I think the question divides here, with different answers for those who are seeking understanding, peace, or just enjoyment in their own gardening, and for those who must balance limited resources, budgets, weather and colleagues to build and maintain public gardens. For the former (myself included), we end up doing those things that hopefully maximize whatever we are seeking regardless of the efficiency, time or cost. For the latter, the job is much harder.

I prune my azaleas to a hemisphere a couple of times a year one snip at a time because it looks better than shearing and I value the experience. I saw the azaleas at the Portland JG being sheared, and they still looked pretty good. For me, meticulous maintenance is a pleasure, diminished only by lost opportunity to complete some other gardening task. For public gardens, it is a job that has a cost and a benefit to the audience/benefactors/visitors that must be balanced.

How to keep alive the traditions and their connections to the art ? I propose that there is a vital relationship between the two worlds. Who among us wasn't first inspired to build a JG after seeing one? But without the support, ideas, and body of knowledge in the amateur community, the public gardens would dissapear. Many crafts have experienced resurgences only by drawing on the skills and experience of talented, serious practitioners. Blacksmithing, cabinetmaking, stoneworking all rely on non-professional for customers, new ideas, better tools, and for the maintenance of traditional technique. I for one am tired of reading somebody whine about the lack of authentic Japanese trained professionals to maintain gardens. They should spend more time teaching what they know and encouraging others to share their experience.

All,...
you are about to go further afield than the question...
To clarify:
The Nitobe garden has suffered interference and is heading in the wrong direction. This has nothing to do with the maintenance, this has to do with design and the last designer that caused the departure from the gardens (Junji Shinada's) course.
by example the 'forest' area being thickened with shrubs and loosing the womblike 'safety' sense it was to reflect. Or the 'streambed lantern' which is in reality a misaki or peninsula lantern, placed in an inaccurate location.

In no way does this have to do with Junji's techniques. In no way does the lack of labor / maintenance effect the direction of the Nitobe. The direction is confused in so much that unneeded elements are placed where they ought not to be, with interpretations that are wholely inaccurate.

What I am trying to bring out is the Tradition of garden is to flex and adapt to new needs, which are the basis of the garden, design solutions. Rather than 'traditional' pruning methods. The tradition is in the ability to adapt to the new need, not the 'this way only' pruning method of that specific species.

In turn this is necessitated by the lack of labour, however the effect is an improvement over the original requirement, because it works better with the species and climate, because of the oversizing / changing of various other protions of the garden.

If, by example Junji were to apply the 'traditional' method for that species then the garden would change its appearance by some 5 to 15 degrees, however would require other maintenance to compensate for these changes, such as removal of the large trees at the entrance, creating the 'womb/safety' atmosphere.

The question then is ... if pruning spruce should one apply a spruce technique? a pine technique? or a cryptomeria technique? which is the best solution?

The lament is... that to decide on any one technique, one must understand the garden, whereas, 'most' people prune by the tree type technique, rather than understanding the garden, then adapting a method of proceeding to achieve the same result.
-yes, the azalea may be pruned by shearing or better pruned by individual cuts, yet was it supposed to be 'rounded' in the first place? or was this the design concession to the lack of time and labour/maintenance? Not all azaleas should be rounded.

This need to adapt to the garden, rather than copy the stereo-typed tree technique is a much needed solution, which is glossed over by most 'instructors' of garden lore.

Therefore: which is better? following the tree species technique allowing the garden to falter (miss-understood tradition) or following the real tradition of the garden, going for the end result, adapting ones methods by new species & available maintenance time -- to achieve the same result.

Repeated simply:
1) tradition is in adaptation to place and species.
2) adhereing to techniques is not traditional as many suggest.
3) :. place and species evolve new techical combinations, as solutions, which become techniques.
In time, I presume, these new techniques will also be misunderstood as traditional.

edzard

Slow down edzard.
We have to accept that traditional translates as the old way in whatever discipline. Sticking to the old way is certainly a discipline.
Design is not gardening.
This may seem like an odd analogy but I was just up on the back porch waiting for the birds whilst smoking a Cuban. I had a busy day during a stressful period but that damned cigar had a mind of its own and wouldn not be smoked fast. Sometimes we have to listen and experience rather than drive the whole bus with our ego. The tradition of cigar smoking and Japanese Gardens share the same seat.

hmmm,..
I am successfully confused and pleasantly reminded not to think out loud.
Thank you.

(Japanese) gardeners garden
(Japanese) designers design
:. (Japanese) gardeners do not design
?

yet it is true, that not all (Japanese) designers garden.

still confused as to how this relates, as with a few other analogies beyond those attached to tobacco.
edzard

"He was a worker whose only desire was to penetrate with all
his forces into the humble and difficult significance of his
tools. Therein lay a certain renunciation of Life, but in just
this renunciation lay his triumph, for Life entered into his
work." (Rainer Maria Rilke on Rodin)
I am not sure this will be of any more benefit than my cigar analogy but it is about tools and Herb might like it.

Inky - I like it very much - it's hilarious. We should be draw it to the attention of Private Eye - they'd probably include it in Pseuds Corner.

Now, to be serious are we not here talking about restoration or at least the same problems that those wanting to return a garden to some former glory face? Does the "Japanese Garden" edzard talks about belong to this time or some other time or is it universal if only the traditions were in place? So that when a garden is designed the guiding force takes it into the future and there is a trust that ensures future interpreters will understand the original message. If this all boils down to the correct/traditional/right way to prune a pine tree, especially when we can't all agree on what a pine tree is, we are lost.

LOL, Inky.

If we've gone from "What Is A Japanese Garden?" to "What Is A Pine Tree?", then surely we're making progress in some direction. :)

(Of course, it all depends on what your defininition of "is" is ;)

(Okay, okay, I'll stop calling you Shirley :) :) ;)

- Evelyn

We do seem to find ourselves constantly trying to re-invent the wheel. Thank god gardeners aren't charged with the duty of defining, implementing and teaching the hard sciences. :D :D

I get the feeling that what edzard is saying is that many (all) should just give up this argument over some perceived notion of a 'traditional' japanese garden because those notions are false, ill conceived and that a traditional garden simply doesn't exist. All japanese gardens are one off creations where no rules or traditions are followed or practiced. Hence the inability of gardeners to define just what it is they are trying to sell. He may just be right.

It sounds like today's mantra is that the design, construction and maintenance cost, both in monetary and labor is so great (especially over time) as to force anyone considering a japanese garden to realize that the gardens of the legends simply cannot be built today. At least not by any of us with less money than the Larry Ellisons of the world.

It seems that many have come to the conclusion that "we cannot follow this tradition.". But if this is so, and we still want to have a garden, then we must concede the gardens of the past and our false notions of them and strike out on our own to create a garden we define as japanese.

With no styles, rules and traditions to adhere to then the gardener is free to cut corners (costs) in any manner he chooses so long as the customer is somehow led to feel the new methods will someday be known as the traditions that don't exist and shouldn't be followed.

While I certainly respect the many views here it would seem to me that in many cases you simply cannot put a japanese garden any where you want. If you happen to be in a location that is not conducive to the japanese garden style then you shouldn't build one.

Greg

[My brain has been on sit-down-strike this week, so I hope you'll forgive me if I've missed some of the finer ins-and-outs of this thread.]

Perhaps the question that Shimada-san and Scott were asking can be phrased this way:

We all seek to achieve the (visual, spatial, horticultural, spiritual, etc.) effects that we find in (the best) traditional Japanese gardens. However, traditional Japanese garden care and maintenace methods are not available to those of us who do not have postulant monks, feudal peons, or cooperative grandparents* at our disposal. This gives rise to two questions:

First, what techniques or materials can we use to achieve or closely approximate the effects we are seeking, in less skilled-labor-intensive ways?

Second, but at least as important, how do we evaluate a given technique or material to determine whether it acheives the sought effect, or whether the approximation is close enough? (And, of course, how close is enough?)

For example, the boxwoods and azaleas at the Portland JG are sheared rather than trimmed twig by twig. Careful attention is still paid to shaping and plant health, and many observers would say that the result is close enough for most purposes.

As a counter-example, someone mentioned plastic imitation bamboo as needing replacement much less often than natural bamboo. In my personal experience, very few of the presently-existing plastic bamboo substitutes are aesthetically adequate, even when brand-new.
Natural bamboo ages gracefully, rustically re-integrating itself with the garden (albeit at as faster rate than we might wish :). The effects of age on plastic bamboo are, in my humble experience, a travesty. (Admittedly many of these travestial effects could be avoided through careful differentiation between the concepts "lasts 2-3 times as long" and "lasts forever":)

I think the question is how, or whether, we can make traditional Japanese gardens function in our real 21st century world. To do so badly would be to change what we are seeking into something much less worth finding. Not to do so at all would be to lose what we seek entirely.

- Evelyn

*I'll give you 3 to 2 odds that Herb *is* a grandparent, and it's still more than he can get done :)

Evelyn -

What a pleasure to read your lucid summing-up. I agree with it too.

But I'm afraid you'd lose your bet about my being a grandpa - though it's a status for which I have hope. My other hope is to find some better plastic bamboo than the poor stuff shown on the Gardeners Supply website....

wow.....
I appreciate the efforts...
this is Junji Shinada's quote, "have no choice but to break the traditional rules and construct new pruning styles that are faster and works with our conditions. I think that this type of approach may be necessary when considering maintenance and authenticity."

now, the question is, Why do we prune according to a 'traditional pruning type' when they do not work?
(is this then what makes the garden 'worth finding'? useless techniques??)

If they do not work, what will people like Scott do? not have maples? not have pines? or

will new approaches to pruning be found (self evident by Shinada's statement) and will these new approaches become traditions?

yes or no?

my observation is, while ascribing to Shinada's adaptations, seeing the results, then because of this (and other reasons) the ___tradition of the Japanese garden is in adapting, rather than in insisting on useless pruning techniques, such as those forwarded by various well known sources.

what do people think?

Is Shinada creating a new traditional pruning technique by his obvious successes or should only the 'traditional techniques' be used in Japanese gardens that have proven to fail???

edzard
(a different thread may well be 'what is the traditional garden?' Is there such a beast? ... for the moment, avoid 'traditional garden' speak, or we may well get lost in esoteric heebeejeebee's)

After struggling to make sense of the laboured and clumsy language of that quote from Rilke, I suspect it may have been clearer in the original German - and that the fault is an over-literal translation.

So, I offer what (I think) conveys the idea more clearly -

"Rodin so lived for his art that he gave up much else of Life. But his sacrifice gave him a triumphant reward, for his works themselves had Life."

Is this how we need to approach Japanese gardening if we want to succeed?

Hi Folks;

Just got an Xbox or I would have chimed in earlier. That thing is so addicting. Waiting for the pine pruning game to come out..........

The reasoning for Shinada-san's change in technique has a lot to do with the resources he has (people, money, environmental conditions). Is it "traditional"?. No. Does it keep in the spirit of the Japanese Garden with regard to adaptability to space? Yes, if you regard the reasons why he did it. Over time, will it become traditional, only again if it was in the spirit of the Japanese Garden.

Think about it......how many traditional Japanese pruning techniques are used this side of the pond? Not very many. If you choose to use a lopper versus a pruning saw are you "traditional"? On a maple, if you break twigs versus removing them with a pruner are you "traditional"?

I am always interested in seeing different pruning techniques, especially if they are in climates not like mine. Edzard has keener eye for this but they are all just a bit different to my eye. If they are different because they adapted to place then are they "traditional". Maybe not. Are they "Japanese". Most likely, yes.

This is the conundrum that we always get caught up in (especially a humble gardener such as myself). What are behind the words like "traditional" and "authentic". My take: The former implies something historical. The latter does not necessarily (it "may" though).

In my garden, I am striving for authenticity versus tradition. That does not mean that I throw tradition out the window because by definition it is behind me. I am very interested in why some techniques became traditional. The key word there is "why". I figure that out, then I can can adapt that technique to what got, right here, right now. How do I do that, by seeing every bush or tree that I can and reading every book I can.

Sidetrack. I have this Madrona in the front of my house that has never seen a pruning in it's life. It is all twisted and gnarled as it searches for the light that the conifers around it greedily hoarde. That tree is more Japanese than the stone lantern I bought down the street at a nursery. After the rhodies around it bloom next spring, then I will cut them back to better profile the Madrona. Something I saw at Kubota. Traditional? I don't think they have Madrona in Japan but I could be wrong. Authentic? With a little tweaking, yes.

Having said all that, I like Shinada-san's direction and frankness here. He is not a newbie who couldn't follow the directions on his Ortho book and then came up with something that "checked the box". He is classically trained so to speak. He saw an issue with his technique and then adapted it and is not afraid to stick up for it.

I was there when he said the above statement. He was looking into "that" corner of the room when he did it and he was a little nervous but he did it without flinching. That took courage. I'd buy the guy a beer just for doing that. I am trying to figure out when I can get up to Nitobe to see his work. Maybe I'll buy him that beer then.

Edzard, "misunderstood as traditional"????, that is really cool.

Michael

The traditional techniques used to create a Japanese garden are simply the means for acheiving a desired result. For me, the result is the message or feeling the garden evokes and how elloquently it is spoken, not the Japanese plant material, or the sanzon stone arrangement, or the Tokyo pruning style.

If technique or material conveys the message or function of the design, then it is a good technique/material, regardless of traditional or modern. The incorporation of new materials and new techniques actually is the tradition of the Japanese garden. Just look at stone lanterns, stepping stones, gravel gardens, millstones, chozubachi...all of these were modern interpretations at one point which have now become tradition by way of emulation and recognition in subsequent gardens. People try new things, like big bronze angels in the garden, and they are either embraced or rejected. Some become tradition while others become novelties.

The same applies with pruning and installation techniques. Stone arrangements have evolved over time as have pruning styles... just look at the pine trees in historic old prints of Japanes gardens. The difference I see here is that historically the techniques have evolved to require more skillful and subtle pruning, whereas now we are trying to find a less skillful, more efficient way to prune. Is this still considered an evolution?

-christian

we'll presume their response is evolving..... e

Thanks to all for the well thought out responses to a knee-jerk question (the kind you are most likely to get from me).

My place as an expert on asking questions firmly cemented, I will pose some further questions.

1) What sort of wabi/sabi does Herb's plastic bamboo possess? As wabi/sabi is a measure of individuality/temporality (as I understand it), does plastic bamboo have a place in the J-garden? It's certainly a labor saver and that seems to be a new criteria running throughout the thread...

2) I'm styling the new J-garden at the (new) house and currently am doing the stones for the basin. Do I eliminate the attendant's stone as we don't use attendant's in this day and age? The hot water stone? As many have pointed out here, the Buddha is no longer an integral part of the garden; should we stop using the Triad stone setting?

I guess the real point I'm getting at is where to draw the line. This is a gardening style that has relied on tradition for a long time, but seems in need of redefinition. JOJG has VERY specific ideas on what belongs in the garden and what DOES NOT. So does the Sakuteiki (the two are NOT in agreement!). At what point does one ignore established technique and convention and launch off on one's own?

I am currently reading Muso Soseki's Sun at Midnight. They note in the forward that his garden design work had foundations in tradition while he also added bits of innovation and whimsy in all his designs (he also developed karesansui style, which certainly illustrates this point). Can't think of a better person to emulate. I look forward to your answers (we questioners like answerers...) :p

Scott

Scott,

You ask, among other things, whether you should modify the arrangement of stones for the basin, and specifically whether you should eliminate the attendant's stone because we don't use attendants any more.

I take it a step further & ask - do we all perform the tea ceremony? And if not, why should we have a basin?

My own answer to that is that I've substituted a bird bath for it. We get pleasure from it because we can watch birds splashing in it as we sit at our kitchen table.

Does it work? Yes, it does for us. Does it still look 'Japanese'? Is it aesthetically acceptable? Is it a justifiable bit of launching off on our own? Well, we're happy with it. I don't know about other people.

Click here to see it & consider the question

Herb, it looks very Japanese and enjoyment is the end goal of a garden...

:)

Scott

Where to draw the line ? - anywhere that helps us cross it.

Herb's basin clearly works for him - I can see why. It is probably better than what he would have built years ago. It isn't on the right side of the aesthetic sensiblility boundary - it is just further down the path of his journey.
Whose garden are you building Scott ? ("the" garden at "the" house). If it is your garden, it should be your basin! Traditional forms have often evolved for a combination of symbolism, utility, and evocative attractiveness. The stories sometimes came later to explain in simple terms what was successful at a more complex level. Copying a famous stone arrangement from a coffee table book is no more art (and no more interesting) than building an arched red bridge from the Sunday gardening section of your newspaper. If we want to swim in the deep water of JG, we need to get wet. New techniques, new materials, and always new designs are the lifeblood of a living practice. I wouldn't bury plastic bamboo let alone use it in my garden, but I applaud everyone who pushes the boundaries and is brave enough to join the discussion of the results.

Herb, your basin/birdbath is very nice: I love the setting, and the lantern, and the ferns and rocks... :)

I, if it were me who owned your basin, might spend an afternoon with a hammer "rusticating" it a little further by knocking off the top and bottom ends of the flutings, and very probably would seek a a stone, about its diameter and roughly 1.6 times its height, with which to raise it up off the ground a bit, but that's MHO.

I don't personally hold out much hope for an acceptable plastic bamboo, but am interested in what might be done with wood finishes, etc, to preserve natural bamboo & make it last longer in the garden.

- Evelyn

Evelyn -

You may have set me going on trying to make a more Japanese-looking birdbath (if there is such a thing)! The flutings, by the way, aren't deliberate - they're just the result of all I had to work with at the time. I needed a cylindrical mold to pour the concrete into, and happened to have a spare roll of plastic lawn edging that did the job - but happened to be itself fluted!

But you've made me rather more uneasy about our bigger birdbath, that I bought at a garden centre about 10 years ago. I think perhaps I should fill in the outside perimeter of it with concrete or hyperfufa so that it's no longer convex, but slopes outwards rather like the slopes of a volcano? Here's a picture of the bigger birdbath - with, for more discussion, if we're thinking of wandering off on our own paths, the smallest lantern I've yet made. It's only about 7 inches high & weighs only 2lbs. .I don't usually have a lantern standing there. & I put it next to the birdbath only in order to take a photo of it: I thought it might look like a pea on a drum but the effect isn't much different from its bigger brother that's about 11 inches high & weighs about 7lbs.

But it makes me ask - are birdbaths or very small lanterns much used in Japanese style gardens? Or is there no tradition of either? What objections would there be to either? And in the case of very small lanterns, could they, or do they, help the garden to look bigger?

Herb
Click to see the birdbath & the extra small lanterrn

IMHO, we are in keeping with the direction of this thread in discussing the acceptability and desireablity of specific deviations from known examples of the Tradition.

(Having said that, Edzard, if you start to feel hijacked, would you please make some throat-clearing noises or something, to let us know? :)

To the question of whether J. gardens use birdbaths: birds seem to think so. At the Portland J. Garden, I often see sparrows drinking from the chozubachi opposite the entrance gate, and bathing in the shallow stream in front of the azumaya in the Natural Garden.

The visual effect of birdbaths like yours is similar to that of deeper basins (if you had a thin dish balanced on a narrow pole and surrounded by a bullseye circle of petunias, I'd say differently :). Since it is unlikely that tea ceremony guests will be trying to rinse their hands and mouths in them, the fact that they aren't deep enough to easily facilitate doing so dwindles in importance. A birdbath made out of stone that would be deep enough for a basin, but is cut shallow for the convenience of the birds, would carry slightly more authentic (and literal :) weight, but I sure wouldn't toss yours out on that (or any other) score.

[If you take up the tea ceremony, I expect that your functional tea garden will be set up with a functional hand basin. Otherwise, unless you take up authenticity to the point where you're importing your karesansui gravel from Kyoto, I like the basin-made-functional-birdbath.)

I think the large birdbath looks very good as it is. IMHO, I definity would *not* add cement or hypetufa to it: I like that concave curve as it comes up around the wall of the birdbath. If anything, I might get hammer-happy again :), and this time, very carefully knock off those square-ish projecting knobs: I can't tell from the photo whether I like them or not.

Seven inches is probably small for even a "mushroom"-style lantern, but I've seen lanterns of that style described by a word translated as "portable", which would imply the smaller the better :) I think whether it is "too small" depends on the context in which it is used, and I like it in that one. The wide, shallow basin might look a little flat by itself, but the v. small lantern gives it something the feel of a lake (the rushes help with that, too :).
(Sorry, but I can't resist: It's not the *size* of your lantern that matters, as much as *what you do with it* ;)

The only things I'd change about the v. small lantern would be to make its pedestal and baseplate separate pieces: they flow into each other in a way that's too streamlined for my taste. And I'd set down my hammer and take (something like a rasp? I 'm not sure which tool would be best) to soften some of the sharp edges, especially on the roof projections and the edge of the baseplate. I also might try painting it with a slurry of yogurt whey and bits of moss, not so much to make it grow moss as just to make it look not so freshly minted - or maybe immerse it in a bucket of old coffee, or of compost tea?

As always, though, a darned nice-looking garden as it is :)

- Evelyn

Evelyn - Thanks for the nice comments - but do I detect animus towards my keyboard? Your comment about size put it in danger again.

Speaking of evolution & Japanese gardens, maybe even the tea ceremony can develop too and involve a second flush, muscatel Darjeeling as we look out at the tsukubai in the afternoon....

Herb

Herb,

No, I intended no animus at all towards anyone, much less yourself. [I think of you as nothing but a gentleman, and nearly everything of that.]
The comment came from my sympathy for the opposite gender's predicament in trying to live up to a concept of "manliness" that they must simultaneously seek to define; and the amusement that I (with all affection) derive from some of the antics thus induced.
That, and my low resistance to making easy jokes :)

I'm afraid that I don't know enough about either the Japanese, or the English, tea ceremonies to comment on how they might evolve. [Am I correct in thinking that you are a British expatriate?] I am well beyond teabags, but have only recently come to understand how "Milk In First" is a great big hurkin' deal, and one best avoided :)

- Evelyn (who is not particularly likely ever to own sugar tongs)

Evelyn,

Yes, I'm an expat Brit. - & rapidly learning not to hold cups of coffee near my keyboard lest a mirth-driven accident is induced by things in your postings.

I understand that at the tea auctions, most of the very finest Darjeeling is now sold to the Japanese - how's that for new tradition? (Or is it just the old tradition of 'them as can pay the most gets the best'?)

Herb

--thems' that pays, includes square peachs the taste of which exceeds Nirvana.
as Evelyn mentioned,.. ahem, ahem...
grin,.. I don't this thread will get there or stay there... though Christian and Michael had realigned it...,
too many other issues / understandings need to be addressed before this one may be resolved.

Ie: what is traditional pruning?
is cloud pruning the traditional pruning of pine? or of maple? was that the objective when it is used?

and,.. this forum is entertainment, not educational, I often forget that when I focus, ferreting for an answer and start worrying the marrow out of the bone. Well enough, we all need something lighter in tone, and most often we write to feel communication rather than to exchange information. And that changes by season, politics and other public conditions, in which, we visit here, not to think, more to unwind.
edzard

Right, sorry about that, Edzard. And all because Herb and I (with the noted exception of Herb) couldn't stay serious on a bet :)

But, even for those who don't suffer from a humor-related malady like mine, I think this thread topic has proved to be slippery for a couple of reasons:

'The Traditon' as a topic is very abstract, and to establish a vocabulary with which to talk about it in the abstract is largely to define the Tradition, which is unlikely ever to be done to anyone's satisfaction.

A great deal of abstract discussion about J. gardening tradition has recently taken place on this forum, and I personally feel that the steam has been blown off of most of my J. garden rants, at least for the moment.

Shimada-sans modified pruning methods as the example presented for discussion pose the difficulty that pruning is largely visual and tactile, while the the forum is a largely textual medium.

However, I disagree that this forum is or should be entertaining rather than educational. If we canÂt get educated here, where can we get educated?
JOJG, as previously noted, has its drawbacks. The books published in English require some discerment as to whether they are useful information or make-another-buck reiterations of flawed information. And, even if we could all go to Kyoto to study gardens there for a year or twenty, a sudden inrush of all of us would hardly be fair to the Kyoto gardening community :)

- Evelyn

Hear Hear Evelyn!

Indeed the problem here (as everywhere else) is in the definition; exactly where I was going in my second post. Where do we draw the line? What parts of the JG remain if we begin to transmogrify every element to ones that better suit our gardens/tastes/pocketbooks/abilities(add your own noun here)? Shall we lobby Spike for a "Almost Asiany sort of Feel" forum? ;)))

As for the entertainment vs. education question, the amusement I get out of learning this stuff from you all is better than the movies; no lie! :)))

Scott

Hi all, just some thoughts I have on what tradition means to me when used to design a Japanese Garden. Through ignorance I built a garden intending it to be Japanese. Now, after learning more, I do not consider it a Japanese Garden. Why , because it does not have the traditional feel of a Japanese garden. I do have many elements found in a Japanese Garden, but this did not make it one. I assume it will be years before I have the knowledge to really design a garden that I would think of as a Japanese Garden. I still enjoy the garden but all the pleasure and relaxation it gives me does not make it Japanese. You have to know and undersand the essance of the design and the reasons the traditional elements are used before one can design a Japanese Garden. The traditions, understood may be used in a new way, but first you must understand thier meaning. Having a few elements found in Japanese Gardens may lend an Asian feel to our gardens but that is all we have.

Now I found it interesting that Edzard brought up the oringinal design and feel of Nitobe Garden is changing course and whether or not the original design of the garden should be adhered to. It seems to me when additions are made and the original intent of the garden is altered in one area the entire garden would loose its cohesivness and therefore become pieces of a garden and no longer be a whole. I guess this goes along with designing a Japanese garden too. If we stray from tradition we will end up with pieces of a Japanese Garden and it will leave one feeling incomplete. I have expieranced such gardens and never realized until now why they instilled such feelings.

I also wonder if we do away with traditional design then what have we created??????? Just some thoughts.

Cheers Jando

I haven't seen the Nitobe garden for several years (though I'm intending to visit sometime this Fall) but Edzard's gloomy prognosis of it's changing course makes me apprehensive that I'm going to find it changed in ways I don't like.

I'm not against change per se, and I don't measure change in terms of changed 'intent' (whatever that means). Indeed, there's no doubt (at least in my mind) that some Japanese gardens are (as Capability Brown might have said) "capable of great improvement". The Japanese Garden at Royal Roads in Victoria, and the 'Japanese' garden at Bucharts are examples of such, in my opinion.

But that, obviously, cannot be true of all Japanese gardens, and especially not those that were designed by any of the Great Masters of the Japanese Gardening Art

To my mind, such gardens should be preserved - so far as a garden can be - so that they continue to appear as the designers intended.

I think this should very much apply to Nitobe, since the man who designed it - Professor Mori - was clearly one of the very great Masters of Japanese Gardening; and when you have something created by a Master, it is as wrong to change it as it would be wrong to modify a work by Michaelangelo or a symphony by Beethoven.

I see no reason, on the other hand, why the foregoing should be interpreted as meaning that newer and more efficient techniques should not be used to achieve the maintenance. There have, in the past, been very great and accomplished medical surgeons who used scalpels to work their wonders. That was no reason for modern surgeons to insist on using them in preference to devices like lasers. So it should be with Japanese gardens, I should have thought.

I've come to the conclusion that this question does not work.
Apparently the words tradition, master, etc. is/are the stumbling block.

I would recommend no longer using it, and listening to what happens when the word(s) thought(s) is/are no longer available.
can this be done?
edzard

Oh edzard you are such a traditionalist but you have a masterful way with it. Herb has missed/does miss the point but he does stir it up and give us cause to re-appraise.
I met the young fella in question some years ago, a self effacing and modest character who seemed content with his place in the pecking order. I would suggest that it is the re-arrangement of who is to be respected and who disregarded that has upset this particular apple cart. "How much?" This is the tradition that has been broken. The attitude this young gardener shared with me has helped me to suffer fools (slightly) and has been my image of Japanese gardening since that brief meeting. Mr Mike has that same quality and he is a good reminder. If only I could slow down enough to be like them.
I saw a youngster setting out to lay a modular concrete block wall the other day he had a hard hat to save him from falling meteors and a laser level worth more than my truck. The man who taught me how to dry lay stone carried a flask of tea, when I put the two side by side I think the flask of tea works better.

Inky -

I think more of us would get the point if somebody would tell us what the point is.

Herb

Hi all
I missed good timing . may be too late ;);) ;)

I can understand very well what Mr.Shimada said.
I did have same problem many times. people want to prune pine tree the way they see it in Japanese garden book, want to have moss garden. They do not know how long will take to prune pine tree nor don't know how to walk on moss or pulling weeds in moss. don't know why it will cost to prune $ 1,000 to prune one large pine tree or few small pine trees every year.

Peoples from Bonsai forum or bonsai hobyist thinks pruning pine tree in Garden is same as pruning bonsai. It is very defficult to tell peoples who never worked as professional gardener and worked on those pine tree on defficult place to prune or hight of tree is much greater than boasai tree. It need to know how to tie round bambbo to other bamboo and once bamboo are tied it should not move and able to untie . know how to make temporaly scafalding with bamboo pole, ropes . and logs is required to have skill. so that the master of bonasi can not work on pine tree in the garden
unless he is traind as gardener also. It is simply different frofession.

working as Japanese gardener in USA and trained in Japan and have same skill as Japanese gardeners in Japan but we are dealing with peoples who has defferent idea of every day life and life style.

some prospect show Ortho, sun set book of Japanese garden and want to keep dog and have 3~ $4,000 budget and 4~5,000
square feet of garden , want to have pond.... I have to walk a way. If I take a job and if fellow Japanese gardener from Japan see those garden, find out some one who has Japanese name. Then I know what he is going to say or think about job I have done.

I also understand frastration edzard has. Knowing what is right and wrong and associateing with many knowlegble Japanese gardeners. we are thinking Japanese gardens to way of makeing living as professional, not hoby or just week end project. so that we put lot's of effort, money , time to understand and study our profession.
as Bonsai hobyist for 20 years or work as prosessional Bonsai shi/apprentice for 5 years are not equal. same as gardening.

If I am weekend gardener, I would not spend many days and hours to study anything relate to Japanese gardens. I want be good as I can be as professional gardener, just in case some one try to test my knowlege of Japanese garden, skills
I want to pass the test..............
Also it is nice to know that many peoples of Gw Japanese garden forum trying to exchenging own ideas and helping others..... some time we entertain
each others, some other time it is more educational,and sharing one's knowlege........

Topic of flowers and weather also bring heated debate . It is human nature and I enjoy good campany and pleasent conversations/writeing.................. mike

Hai Yama-san. Hai Herb-san.

I have studied Japanese gardening for a long time. Not formally, but I have devoured books, studied pictures and plans, and talked with many people, including all my friends here...

I have never attempted, let alone actually built anything I call a Japanese garden. Have I included Japanese elements? Yep. Stolen design concepts from "traditional" gardens? Yep.
But I have always added elements that I know are not in keeping with Japanese gardens traditionally, but that tie into American or even personal concepts that make them more intrinsically mine, or the person's I was designing for. My feelings for the rigid structure of opinion offered by JOJG are well documented, but I do agree that natural materials are part of the JG and you should get the best you can afford. The man I learned a lot of my JG basic skills from was very Irish and very cheap and he used to cut corners and use , well, trash (his chozubachi was an old drag racing slick he'd covered with cement). His gardens were still enjoyed by thousands and he loved them and tended them daily, but I never thought of them as Japanese gardens and when I said so, he agreed and said I was too Japanese, and should learn some Chinese style as well.

Long story short (for me, anyway), we are struggling with the definition again. I love my gardens, the vegetable and perennial and the bird garden right along with the "Japanese" garden. It's easiest to call it that because that's automatically what people call it when they see it; I am not going to correct them all, and I begin to wonder if we should correct anyone at all...

Mike's right, it is fun talking to you guys; I hope that no one has been discomfitted by the discussion (you ok, Edzard?) and I think we should just garden like Herb, for ourselves, and when someone asks if it's a Japanese garden, just tell them "No, it's my garden..."

8)

Scott

My journey of discouragement/confusion/joy/enlightenment over my own garden is maddening enough. It has really got to be hard if you are devoting your paycheck to what is/is not a Japanese Garden. I could see one walking away from a job if it can't be done "right" (given the budget, space, ideas, maintenance, etc.) and I can also see someone taking a job to make their mortgage payment at the end of the month.

The Japanese Garden stuff is my own personal journey. For those who have met me, it is pretty obvious why. I cannot just focus on Japanese Gardens though. I'm married and I'd be a pretty lonely guy if I could not get the roses, gardenia and wisteria to bloom all season long. My kids would not think I am some sort of gardening genius if I could not grow tomato plants upside down or fix them up a zucchini blossom quesadilla. I have such a hard life :-)

The one thing that I can pull out of this thread is: Us hobby or weekend gardeners have it pretty good. I mean if you like it and it invokes the emotions you want, then who cares what everyone else thinks???? The professional however does not have this luxury.

Michael

BTW, has anyone seen a "Japanese" bird feeder? Seriously. I like feeding the birds (except for those greedy jays) and the ones I get at Wal Mart are not cutting it

Hi Scott

I dicover many things while attending Korean temple and reading Sutras. since I have no guidance to reading sutra. I may not understand sutras fully. small portion of words in sutra is some how relate to Japanese garden.
I found why willow tree is used around pond also found why willow tree is symbol of long life in book of divination . old photo of Ginkakuji had lotus in the pond , but there is no water liliy now ,and planting of tree and shurb in peninsula are much different than today. planting of willow/ choice of willow came from sutra . silver of Ginkakuji temple and gold of Kinkaji also written in Sutra.

I thought "sama" at end of name is pure Japanese word, but now I know it was ancent Korean custom to call Monk. Samma is the way Korean write and pronanceation a little different than today's Japanese. And now I see Chinese temple has stone lanterns, according my a Japanese stone lantern book, Chinese temple's stone lanterns are not exist many. It may be true statement, may be what I saw in photo of Chinese temple could be replica of old stone lanterns since China had many domestic wars thousand years. I see different between Korean and Chinese stone lanterns . and Japanese stone lanters are different than Chinese and Korean.

Tanyou sho VS Tagyo sho : now I know which book made miss take and when. It was not Dr MIcheal Dirr. It was more 100 year ago . ( I have to save this part for my future book )

If I did not study sutras my self, I would not understand many parts of Japanese garden and it's history. It took me hundreds of hours and reading lot's more than 100 books. once I can reach to some point to understand buddhism and history, then I have to go back to designe and horticulture of Gardening again.

About edzard :
He is faceing serious wild annimal problem. Bear dameged his truck already. now trying to get his horses. wolf and coyote as well. He is spending sleep less nights quite some time.
Please give him time. I was going to make joke about
bear but seriousness of problem , It is not good time for joking.
As we get old ( I am talking to you, heheheh ) we gaind experience and read more books and contacted many knowgeble peoples and gained more information from them , and we get stone head/ stubborness ( now I am talking about my self ;)... )
Edzard is well educated, soft spoken man. much different than writting when I talk to him.
once I settele in Salem Mass , I am going invited edzard to our home . since your are not very far from Salem, we can get togather face to face, we can know each other well. If I send smell of a good Cuban ciger to INky , He may visit too.

while you give edzard time to cacth up, you will find many intresting things in the sutras. If you want to take shout cut and want to know what sutra and where in sutra
relate to Japanese garden . I will show you secretly... (I should not tell to every one whole story of Movie, right ? )
Oh ,,Well, it's about time to go to bed..... mike