Nature aquariums and statuary

I have two conflicting opinions: One is that I don't like to see trinkets, such as pirate chests, castles, frogs, etc. in an aquarium, because they look far to artificial to me. And, they are a real bear to keep clean.
But, I also think people should "decorate" their aquarium so it looks good to them. If someone likes a mix of plastic plants and real plants plus ceramic castles, that is a good way to go. At least it keeps them enjoying their aquarium. And, I was there many years ago!

 

I agree with VaughnH... I don't really like to see all the trinkets in the tank either, many are poorly made and look like a fake environment, I do on the other hand appreciate like sunken stones and wood in tanks as these are commonly found in nature

 

I sometimes wonder if the number of western aquariums using ornamentations would decrease if your regular Joe Aquarium Guy had access to good stone and wood and if every local shop had copies of Nature Aquarium sitting out to be viewed.

IMO, lack of exposure to nature styles and limited access to scaping materials are as much to blame as cultural bias. Some shops you can't walk out with anything to go in the tank that isn't a ship, chest, diver, or hot pink rock: the exposure and availability just aren't always there.

That's where the internet forums and local clubs play a role.

 

I think it would be a great idea to create some type of topiary with aquatic plants, it would be really tough though like you said... espcially in smaller tanks with leaf plants, with finer plants such as microswords i think it could be done though

 

** WARNING ** Strong opinions ** May offend some readers **

Though marketing does play a role, it is clearly not the cause of bad taste. (... Marketing is my profession )

I put my vote in on the side of utter disdain for artificial aquarium ornaments (including colored gravel). I find them to be one of the most blatant expressions of poor taste. Other adjectives that come to mind: tacky, gaudy, obnoxious, childish...

Of course I have the same opinion on how most people decorate there homes, yards, how they dress, etc.

I was at a LFS this last weekend and was sickened to see a very excited bunch of people clamoring about which mollies they wanted in a tank of artificially colored white mollies!!! They had different neon colors in various combinations and shapes (spots, stripes, etc)... IMO, at this point it becomes more than a question of bad taste...

This same store is like a visit to Sea World, more toys and JUNK to put in your tank than fish or real aquarium supplies. They have a whole isle of different skeletons for your tank, including a tennis playing skeleton (I can give you the address if you have been looking for one of those... lol). And some of these things are NOT cheap!

Here is my guess at how the FW buyer demographics break out:

40% - Buy for the ornaments as much as the tank... love their blue gravel and would not continue the hobby if the couldn't have that treasure chest in there with the air bubbles. These people love Walmart!
30% - May have some ornaments, colored gravel, etc, but are certainly interested in natural setups, live plants, etc. The upper crust of this group may dabble in real FW setups.
20% - Prefer natural setups, live plants, etc. Many of these people will also go SW Reef as local representation of FW is typically pretty poor.
10% - Purists, like many on this board. Will spend the $$$ and time to learn how to do it right. Some SW Reef hobbyist may dabble at this level in FW.

So, if I was running a fish store, and looking to increase my revenues, I would take a serious look at the 70% of people who will buy ornaments, etc. Way easier to stock and sell than fish or plants....

To an earlier point though, I think that many of the folks that spend $$$ on high-end SW setups could be attracted to the FW hobby if it had better local representation, which could work out to be a nice niche, if you got the $$$ and guss to give it a go.

 

I would have to disagree with the statement that japanese gardens do not include statuary. They commonly include stone lanterns, pagodas, bamboo deer chaser fountains and bridges. Why not include representations of these objects in a tank, if done tastefully?

 

Sorry for the tangent there...

On the topic of the original post about Japanese Statuary, we have a Japanese garden here in Phoenix (believe it or not) and they do use many different dragon and fish statues throughout their landscape... But then if drive through Sun City, you will see many people have gravel yards that are spray-painted some unnatural color, with plastic and ceramic ornaments...

I think it is a stylistic issue in the end, and subjective. If you were trying to scape NW Phoenix (aka Sun City) colored gravel and garden gnomes would not be out of the question... So I would say that a dragon in a japanese scape could be appropriate depending on the purpose of the display. I would hate it, but I don't think that it is completely out of bounds...

 

I would have to say I would be willing to use statuary in an aquarium, at least in theory. I have not actually seen any I would use, but the concept itself might be valid.

I don't see why the option shouldn't exist. I don't think I could support a plastic skeleton wearing a superman outfit, but I could understand a tastefully carved rock sculpture that fit with the rest of the tank. Even if I wouldn't do it, I can understand why someone might.

 

IME, taste in aquascape is like taste in any other art form. You like what you like.
The fact that I prefer Monet over Picasso doesn't make me unappreciative of the other's art. I can like a Picasso, appreciate it for what it is, yet like the Monet better.
Who defines Amano's work as the acme of what is to be achieved? Certainly it's beautiful and I can appreciate it, but to me it's not the end all and be all of the aquascape world. I see other aquascapes people have done and think they are also beautiful.
The other comparison I would make is to landscaping your yard. There are many styles...formal gardens, naturalized landscape...or pink flamingos and garden gnomes. I think that most of us can agree that the flamingo/gnome yard is tasteless, but that’s just our opinion, the owners of such delights may well be the Andy Warhols of landscaping. Formal garden with tasteful statuary vs naturalized landscape? Not my call to say which is better.
To a 10 yr old....neon gravel and the latest Pirates of the Carribean shipwreck is the best. Tastes change and mature, and hopefully that 10 yr old's tastes will change too. People's tanks should be an expression of their own taste and for their own pleasure. I realize that’s not the view held by the competitive aquascaping community, but that is just one niche….IMO

 

Very true. It's a shame that Amano has become the benchmark for what makes a tank acceptable. Amano changes from black backgrounds to white, suddenly it's the standard. Amano adds white beaches to his scapes, suddenly everyone is doing it. Amano decides to shun stem plants because of their high maintenance, and we should all shun them.

And to perpetuate the problem, most of the aquascaping contests out there follow his lead and judge all entries by his standards. There's no room for originality. Have you seen the winner of this years ADA contest? I thinks it's immensely uninspiring and dull. It's a nice layout, but nothing special.

 

If it's an imitation...it's nothing special...again...IMO.
I would think that originality should count for something, not how like someone else you can be.

 

Joe - Which ADA Contest are you talking about?

This one: ¢ŠE…‘ƒŒƒCƒAƒEƒgƒRƒ“ƒeƒXƒg2006

Or this one: ADA All Rights reserved. Vendita Prodotti per Acquari d'acqua dolce - Takashi Amano NATURAQUARIUM

I haven't seen any results for 2006 yet... Do you have a link?

If you meant AGA 2005, then I think I agree with you, but some of those ADA winners are incredible.

Is this the tank Tom is talking about: 2005 AGA Aquascaping Contest

When dealing with the superficial / artificial, yesterday's beautiful is today's dull... True in fashion, true in architecture, etc... Some how nature has a way of alluding this problem of personal taste, and I think that is what many FW aquascapes are trying to capture... timeless beauty. Not do-able with that dragon, but probably isn't the goal of the artist in that case either...

 

Wow, that dragon is just ridiculous.

Statues like that should not have a place in a well designed aquascape, but other non natural elements could be argued for, if done the right way. I always wanted to do a tank using small stone replicas of ancient Mayan buildings. I'd make it look like the jungle had swallowed up an ancient city, with moss growing on the buildings, just bits of the stonework showing through the greenery, only fine leafed plants to preserve the scale, etc.

As for the contest, I was referring to ADA 2006. You can see the top 7 here: Akwarium.org - profesjonalne urz±dzanie akwariów

The first place tank is nicely laid out, well balanced, harmonious, yadda yadda yadda - but it's just plain boring.

 

Joe - Thanks for the link. I agree the Grand Prix doesn't seem like a 1st place tank... Still I see more gorgeous tanks in the ADA competition than I have seen elsewhere, IMO.

Interesting idea with the Mayan ruins... I must say that it is not my cup of tea, but hey, if it gets you excited about building a scape, go for it... You might be able to stack some natural stones to the same effect.

That dragon isn't that horrible, but would be better maybe outside of the tank.. You could even put one on each side, like some Chinese restaurants have those lions with the balls in their mouths.