彭友洲先生在《盆景造型的破格创新与审美共性》(见本刊2000年6期)的文章中,对曾宪烨先生《三干飘枝半悬崖造型探索》一文的两则造型设计提出不同意见。笔者认为,彭先生此文似有不妥之处。一、彭先生从“审美共性的角度”抛开特定的三干飘枝半悬崖造型而提出题外的设计方案,容易给人此种造型本身有背于审美共性的误导。其实,完全可以在原定造型范围内进行设计修改。二、即使按彭先生的思路探讨,文中的修改方案亦非上乘。第一例,彭先生以形散神离为理由,将原设计的三干式改为双干式(见图1),与其这样,还不如保留原有下方第三干。至于此干与上方两干结构松散、缺乏配合的问题,只需将其树头适当抬起即可解决(见 In his article “Breakthrough Innovation and Aesthetic Commonness in Bonsai Modeling” (see Journal Issue 6, 2000), Peng Youzhou put forward different opinions on the two designs of the article “Explore the Modeling of the Three Drying Branches and the Cliffs” by Zeng Xiangye. In my opinion, Mr. Peng seems to have something wrong with this article. First, from the perspective of “aesthetic commonality”, Mr Pang put aside a specific design proposal of a special topic of three dry branches and half cliffs, which easily leads to misleading such styling itself in terms of aesthetic commonality. In fact, the design changes can be done within the original shape. Second, even in accordance with Mr. Pang’s thinking, the text of the amendment program is not excellent. In the first case, Mr PANG changed his name from “dry” to “dry-dry” (see Figure 1). Instead of keeping the original third dry below it, As for the loose and uncoordinated problems of the two stems and the above two stems, they can be solved simply by lifting their tree head properly