Steven_Chong

I'm not sure if this is the right forum to post this question, because posting in the aquascaping forum might bias responses (but I doubt it).

What do you guys think of your fish? Pals or paintstrokes?

Note that in the context of aquascaping, the difference might just be a difference of thinking, not acting. Most of us would definitely accept that healthy fish are more beautiful fish-- and for me, that would be the motivation for taking care of their health, as one more aspect I have to take care of alongside propper planning, trimming, dosing, etc.

Is it,

"Fish for the planted aquarium"

or

"The planted aquarium for fish"

?

I got back into the hobby of fish keeping 3 years ago since I loved corydoras and wanted to keep some. However, when I saw my first aquascape, I made the metaphysical leap--

"In the context of this art that's before me, plants, stones, and fish, are paint."

Maybe many others did not experience what I did, but after making that mental jump, I've always thought of the fish as just one more part of an aquarium-- because artistry is more important to me than enjoying fish keeping. It's been a long time since I thought of fish as a pet in one of my aquariums. While this does not lead me to sacrificing the health of the fish (this thread was triggered by a different discussion where someone mentioned keeping discus in a 10L tank which I would personally not find aesthetically appealing), it is a difference of mindset that does effect some of our decision. In my opinion, the focus of the artist should always be the art. Of course I love fish. I love plants too. However my larger goal is for the sake of grasping higher and higher artistic excellence-- the health of these living things just happens to coincide with that goal-- to a degree.

For those of you who follow my threads, you know that I tear my work down 1 every 3 months. What do you think happens to the fish? They go back to the pet store. Personally, I don't think I'm doing much good for my white cloud minnow, even if they are living in here:



What does every creature want? Reproductive success. Are they going to get that from the environment I give them? Well no. This tank is hardly set up for cyprinid breeding, and I won't change parameters/feeding to accomodate it if it takes me off my normal regimin. Otocinclus? Amanos? Neither of them are going to have reproductive success in this tank-- they won't achieve their highest desires. Is that going to deter me from my aquascaping??

Um, no. And all of you who are also keeping Amanos, otos, or any other fish or shrimp without breeding them, IMO, cannot say that the good of your fauna comes first without being hypocrites. I keep my fauna healthy really for the sake of their beauty-- and I know it.

First of all, art like that first piece really bothers me. I know that there can be "meaning in morbid things," but for me I've never found pleasure in it. I don't know, it's a difficult topic to talk about. However, I can say some things about other parts of this comment,

I don't like the use of the words "Decorations" or "artsy." For me coming from an art background, those words imply "Just putting them there to be pretty." Real art is different.

I think this difference of thinking appears in our aquascapes too Rain.

Your tank, with its wide variety of species and obvious collectoritis, and never taking a deeply designed submerged layout is-- well, it's "Artsy," it's "Decorative," and it shows your interest in these plants and animals more than your interest in the art.

My tanks are deeply thought through in regard to design. Real art, art with passion and single-minded determination. Art with the search and grasping of inspiration, and the desperate pursuit of greater artistic excellence. This is how I aquascape, and this is my mentality.

People who see my aquariums may think "Wow, what lucky fish" (though only after several minutes of simply jaw-dropped silence or excited yelps), but personally I think they'd be better off in a breeder's tank where they'd have some chance of rearing their own young. I personally believe there's things they can't get out of living with me that they would get elsewhere-- including the wild.

If I go to a fish keeping forum, I've heard many times that we planted tank keepers are people who put plants before fish, and that it's horrible to keep fish in a tank saturated with CO2. I've heard them say that we've lost our passion for fish because we only care about the little species (which, is true except for the angels, discus, and rare odd-ball planted tank). I don't know-- I can't stand going to those places. Closed-minded pet-keepers who can't see the birth of a new art form.

This sounds like an almost silly question to me (because for me the answer is obvious), but which is true?

Are aquascapers artists first?

Or are we fishkeepers first?

It goes unsaid that we are actually both, and that caring for fish is a big part of it. But-- which is first in the context of aquascaping? Which do we do for the sake of the other? Which has the higher priority?



It's also true that the answer will vary from person to person. I just want to hear opinions-- though I can guess that the art opinion is not the one that will be more common.