Sumo style/form bonsai.

I think the true spirit/meaning of the sumo trunk tree has been lost over time. In general natural trees do not grow trunks so fat with such drastic taper.

Here is an example of a bonsai classified as a sumo style:

Credit to

http://www.royalbonsaigarden.com/pictures/AfterPhoto1069015819.gif

Here is the style broken down in virt:

Here is the style described by Andy Rudledge:

[b]"The hugely tapered trunk communicates these qualities. This kind of design is popularly referred to as sumo style bonsai. Aside from the size and taper of the trunk, which indicates power, this configuration is also indicative of a very close perspective. It evokes a sense of standing right at the foot of a great tree with the powerful structure towering over us."[/b]

(http://andyrutledge.com/book/content/bonsaesthetics.html )

Andy also noted that this style is not natural:

[b]" This kind of design is also indicative of fantasy. More than just exemplifying power and size, this sort of design is often a foray into a fairytale story or image.
Fantasy is a powerful and common motivation for the styling work of bonsai artists. Many of us took up the bonsai endeavor because through bonsai we could realize some of the things that appeal to our sense of fantasy. Fantasy inspired creativity often involves caricature and the trees shown in the images above certainly are caricatures of powerful trees. In these cases, the naturalness, even the treeness of their character is secondary to emphasis and fantasy. "[/b]

To me this is the spirit/meaning of the style:

[b]" this configuration is also indicative of a very close perspective. It evokes a sense of standing right at the foot of a great tree with the powerful structure towering over us."[/b]

I took this picture of a tree in the Knysna forest of a real tree portraying the feeling of what he describes:

A sumo trunk:

?

The first virt show the typical branch placement on our trees.

But are we doing it correctly?

Here is another virt showing alternative branch placement to try and portray the feeling of a tree towering over the viewer:

and

Am I interpreting the style correctly......and can it be done on bonsai scale?

Would appreciate your thoughts on this.

Some responses from friends:

Andrew:
" This is a style I've never really understood for the exact same reasons Lennard. Create a trunk with the correct perspective and then grow pine tree branches taken from a different perspective. If you follow the mantra of it being a perspective thing, then the branches should also be done to reflect this and the tree should be viewed from below to impart the same feeling. The other way of looking at the style would be potentially to consider trees that can grow naturally like this like the very old olives and some others. Here they are still not pine trees, but the perspective thing is addressed in that the trunk to branch perspective is constant from all round the tree, so you don't have the problem of growing a trunk from one perspective and branches from another. Ho hum. I guess it all lends credence to the saying that one should make bonsai that look like trees, and not bonsai that look like bonsai. Of course, if the interpretation is purely an artistic one, then as you point out, why mix differing perspectives. It makes no sense. I loved Walter's story about the bonsai practitioners in a cave. That made me think a heck of a lot about it all. It really make me think about the relevance of styles as anything more than a descriptor as opposed to a blindly (or not so blindly) followed formula/form. Styles are fine to box things into for our own comfort, but more than that they simply stifle creativity. . . . . or maybe they don't . . . . So, coming back to the issue of the Sumo Style . . . I guess your interpretation will depend on whether you are growing your tree to the style, or whether your trees form (be it artistic, contrived or naturalistic) happens through your creation to look like Danny de Vito!"

Gerhard:
 " I'm struggling to express myself, but basically your last image, even though correct in perspective, would look funny in real life (bonsai).
Understand what I mean?
So basically IMHO Sumo trees like the first example you posted is a combination of a tree viewed from that base perspective......with formal upright branches added as per the "rules"
.....Maybe for the simple reason that a Sumo broom wouldn't work.....?"

Stefan:

" personally I don't like it...the style...I like a bonsai that looks like a tree you would find in nature...
but that is my personal take on it...
I understand the perspective thing.....looking at the tree form the base upwards..or standing infront of a very very old..massive tree...and looking up to it....but don't see the practical reason for it...
as a layman...when I visit a bonsai show ...I naturally look at the trees from the front....if you get photographs of the style...you get the photo from the front...not taken from the bottom...SO why style a tree with a perspective from below...and then display it or take photos of it from the front...
maybe display the tree then higher up...so that you can view it correctly..or take the photo from the bottom up....or a different angle...
otherwise its just another tree with a fat...sharp tapering stem...massive spreading roots and thin branches...and its just don't look natural on the other hand ...artistically speaking....I have seen sumo style trees with a very fat trunk....but with a more gradual/natural taper and thicker branches..

 Ok.... viewed from the front but with the illusion/perspective that you view the tree from very close by and/or is underneath it and looking up into it...
wide but sharply tapering stem...triangle shape...got that..
looking up into a tree you will see the first branches...they will be thicker and larger than the ones above it....also with more detail...because I am standing closer to them
also they will be more detailed...heavier...more defined......eg have more growth on them...they will also have growth on either side ???? ...above and below the main branch (because as I understand usually all growth below is pruned off)...so this might be a big NONO ???
the branches above the first ones.....becomes thinner and have less growth because as I look up into the tree those branches are further away...so less detail = less growth...
the branches right at the top of the tree will be the smallest because they are the farthest away.."

Frojo:
 Nice thread Lennard. Most people seem not to like them too much because they don't look like real trees. I'm not particularly fond of them either, but I do admire the skill in creating such an extremely tapered trunk. To really admire them though you have to use your imagination.
Interesting point about the branch structure. I think your perspective in the second virt is a bit extreme and looks just about straight up. It makes branches on the closer side appear to grow up, and ones on the further, down.
I recon you have to strike a balance between the subjective and the objective, something between what it really looks like and how perspective distorts.
What would a sumo broom look like?

as a layman...when I visit a bonsai show ...I naturally look at the trees from the front....if you get photographs of the style...you get the photo from the front...not taken from the bottom...SO why style a tree with a perspective from below...and then display it or take photos of it from the front...

The tree is always viewed from the front, not from below. The tree is styled so that the front view is similar in perspective to what you would see looking up into a big tree. It is styled to give the impression of looking up even though you are not.
The tree Lennard posted is actually very, very good. The picture is taken from the front, but as you look at it, it is (for me anyway ), pretty easy to mentally flip between the two perspectives. In other words, seeing it as it is, or as a big pine growing up and away from me as I look into it from close by.
If you can see it in the second way, it is actually a really realistic looking tree, one that you could easily find growing in nature.
If you just look at it as it really is, you are missing the point of the design, or at least the original reason for the sumo style.
I think a lot of the sumo trees you see on the web are grown to have a short, thick, tapered trunk as a goal in itself, and not as a way to achieve that 'perspective distortion', looking up feeling."

My response to all the input:

" Thanks for all the thoughts on this.

This started at the convention when Walter Pall critiqued a Buxus. (The guy does make one think!) From where he was sitting/standing, next to the tree, the pads were well defined - too well defined for him because from a very close view the pads did not look natural.

From where I was sitting, not so close to the tree, the pads of the Buxus were flowing into each other, not showing much negative space. The tree looked natural to me!

I am sitting here:




To me the tree was styled perfectly from the distance I viewed it and also from the angle I viewed it. Standing upright the tree still looked good - the pads were flowing into each other showing one canopy again.

When I went up to the tree viewing it very closely, I could also see that the pads were defined.

We know that bonsai should be styled to be viewed at eye level, and because we are "trained" to appreciate a tree from a very close distance, that is dissecting a tree with an Eagle's eye, not much is said about the correct viewing distance. I did ask at the convention and the, not very much interested response, was that about 2 meters away from the tree was the correct viewing distance.

To get back to the Sumo form - the intent must be that if the tree portrays a tree viewed from close to the tree, looking down at the nebari, the trunk on eye level and then upwards into the rest of the trunk and crown, then, at eye level and from 2 meters away, the tree must portray this.

It would then not be necessary to go up to the tree, bend down and look upwards into the crown.

I agree that the Sumo trunks is :

"I think a lot of the sumo trees you see on the web are grown to have a short, thick, tapered trunk as a goal in itself, and not as a way to achieve that 'perspective distortion', looking up feeling."

But can the perspective viewing be done?

I think it can.

And will it be natural?

Yes, a natural tree viewed from below close to the trunk - even if you are viewing the tree from 2 meters away on eye level, if it is done correctly, the tree will pull you in.....if you have experienced this perspective view in nature, your mind will perceive it as natural.

Okay, I think a lot of people will think I am ....... nuts?

(And you think you were alone!)

If I am not nuts, what will I have to keep in mind?

Thanks again for all the thoughts thus far - keep the new ones coming!"

10 Novemeber 2012:

Still thinking on this: