tanka

[Senna Jawa]

Have you written any Tanka?
If so would you kindly post one or start a thread,
Im keenly interested to read more of your work in these forms
Thanks_Land

Yes. My "fat tanka" (oversized): t1 was treated on this forum with an underhanded, patronizing complement, something like "a small, nifty poem". On a more artistically mature forum someone would set things straight but it's ok Initially I was thinking about posting several submissions titled t1 t2 t3 ... Instead I posted all of them together, yes, including t1--it is featured in two posts , because of the composition of the total post tanka, where U can find 14 tanka, most of them not in the traditional tanka format 5-7-5-7-7 or for English roughly 3-5-3-5-5. Tanka is a relaxed, tolerant form anyway. One of these tanka is   2-3-2-2-2,   or less than two thirds of a 5-7-5 formatted haiku! (Actually 2+2+2+3+2 = 3+5+3, the suggested English language haiku total of syllables). But it is a tanka because it says a lot, more than U expect from a haiku. If I didn't tell U, U would never guess that it has so few syllables.

Let me quote the following one (it has format 3-3-3-3-6; as U see, I don't worry about the format):



&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp silver tree
&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp in the sky
&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp then thunder

&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp it takes years
&nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp &nbsp to understand einstein



Except for the syllable count, this one is quite classical. It consists of two parts (as U can see it with your naked eye). The third line is a pivot, which connects with the second part. If U remember how Einstein looked then the juxtaposition should work on U well. Of course U need to see also the scene during the short time just after a lightning and before the thunder.

U may also have a look at: chesstanka.

Hm, perhaps KarmaDog was more right about influence of Keiko on me than I realized. I wouldn't get into tanka without reading Keiko tanka first. In the case of haiku, years before shiki list, somehow I had an instant feel for haiku, it was like inborn. With the time passing I was reading and thinking and learning more. Keiko's haiku certainly was very important to my deeper appreciation of haiku. In the case of tanka, which is supposedly an easier form, I had a hard time to grasp the very notion of tanka. I am not sure I have it now. But after a while, seeing beautiful Keiko's examples, I got a knack for it, even without a clear conceptual understanding.

Regards,

 

[_Land]

Thanks SJ

saying more
using less
painting expansive picture
fewer strokes
Masterpiece unveiled



I really enjoyed t1, SJ, The imagery of being with a woman, who could make me want to forget time. is fantastic. Perhaps mine isnt exacly Tanka, but between Your post and t1, that is what i would describe as Tanka.............t1 really paints a beautiful picture
It brings back memory's of my first kiss, wanting a moment to last a lifetime, to never end. Hopefully I havnt misinterpreted your work, Or at least the intention of what you were trying to relay in writing it. Thanks for the thread, im looking forward to more discussion on the subject............

 

[WickedEve]

Yes. My "fat tanka" (oversized): t1 was treated on this forum with an underhanded, patronizing complement, something like "a small, nifty poem". On a more artistically mature forum someone would set things straight but it's ok

I thought that sounded familar. If we're talking about the same post, then it was "Senna Jawa's t1 is a quirky little piece. I like it!" Posted by Wicked Eve on 5-16
Underhanded? Patronizing? No, just my honest opinion at the time.

 

[Senna Jawa]

[...] it was "Senna Jawa's t1 is a quirky little piece. I like it!" Posted by Wicked Eve on 5-16. Underhanded? Patronizing? No, just my honest opinion at the time.

Certainly an honest, patronizing and underhanded complement, no contradiction .   Don't worry Eve, no problem.

BTW, talking about butt kissing, there was on this forum not so long ago quite a bit of "great haiku" praise for pieces which had nothing to do with haiku and very little with poetry, if at all. Is it surprising that "butt kissing" and superfical praise when one doesn't know what s/he is talking about go hm , hand in hand?

Just musing, piece, it was good that U ringed an alarm,

 

[WickedEve]

Why do you insist on saying that my comment was patronizing and underhanded? For the record, it was neither. I do NOT patronize and I am NOT underhanded.
And so what if there was praise for "great haiku." I think a lot of the praise here is offered sincerely. In my butt kissing thread, I was simply trying to get across the point that I want the truth, even when it's not praise.
I'm sure you'll see lots of praise here for poetry that you don't respect, but of course, I'm sure you understand that we all have different tastes, and different levels of appreciation for what's considered good poetry.

 

[Senna Jawa]

Re: Thanks SJ

saying more
using less
painting expansive picture
fewer strokes
Masterpiece unveiled


I really enjoyed t1, SJ, The imagery of being with a woman, who could make me want to forget time. is fantastic. Perhaps mine isnt exacly Tanka, but between Your post and t1, that is what i would describe as Tanka.

Your piece has tanka size (never mind any pedantic count of syllabes) and it's relaxed like a tanka. The two part construction is missing, where the two parts are (perhaps widely) different but harmonize or oppose each other. You have an alternating sequence of the following words in your poem:

        more-less-expansive-fewer

If U had, conceptually speaking (don't take it literally) a sequence like:

        more-expansive---less-fewer

then most likely it would be still more like a tanka. Poetically your piece has no chance to be much when it simply states some general ideas. U provide meaning but poetically your words r placebo.

       placebo kills poetry

Can U, in five short lines or so, actually convey a painting of only few strokes which would impress upon or move your reader? Instead of telling U would show. But it's not easy. Or, why not, U may write a longer piece, U may even include a viewer. Then avoid writing something like "I was moved deeply" or similar. Instead, perhaps others ate dinner and the viewer was still viewing the painting. Or had goose bumps. ... But it has to sound authentic, it has to blend with the poem. A mechanical "show" will not work too well (it may be still better than "tell"). Poetry is not easy. It is far from enough that a poem came from heart. Actually, whether or not it came from heart is irrelevant. In practice, it just so happens that when an author is moved by something profoundly then s/he has a much better chance to write a great poem than otherwise. That's all. Once a poem is out, it lives on it's own, regardless of the author's person as such.

............t1 really paints a beautiful picture. It brings back memory's of my first kiss, wanting a moment to last a lifetime, to never end. Hopefully I havnt misinterpreted your work, Or at least the intention of what you were trying to relay in writing it.

Every interpretation which goes along with the poem and does not contradict any part of it is a good interpretation. Your interpretation is certainly a good one. In particular your forgetting about time. Let me quote my poem:



                we stopped on the bridge
                what time is it she asked

                i took the watch
                off my wrist
                and let it be carried away
                by the dark water below



Often poems r like psychiatric tests. The reader's reaction depends strongly on that reader's state of mind and life experience. Different readers stress different aspects of the same poem.

A question about the goodness of a reader's interpretation brings immediately the basic issues of the relation author-reader and consequently about the author's duties versus reader's duties. The reader's duties r the mirror reflection of the author's duties:

the author is responsible for creating images for the reader. One of the reader's most fundamental duties is to follow faithfully and unquestiongly the images created by an author. This sounds simple but often readers r carried by their own agenda, they don't pay attention and respect to the images, they rather go off on their own tangent and then they congratulate themselves on being smart (how stupid ). Author's who slap images ad hoc, without making much sense, or "images" which do not hold water, r responsible for this sad state of affairs. They have created an impression that poetry is something unclear, muddy. This is very wrong. The intrellectual challenge of a poem, if any, should be real, authentic, and not superficially created by author's sloppy language or by author's (intentional or not, who cares) unnecessary complications and stupid puzzles.

The author is responsible for the meaning of each word. The reader is responsible for paying attention to the meaning of each word. No word, no meaning should be accidental in a poem. Each contributes to the poem overall.Etc.

The important part of the meaning is created by defaults. Defaults is what allows poetry be suscinct, wonderfully efficient. When only one person appears in a poem, say in a bedroom, then there is no need for the author to write that that person is alone in that room. Something like "on my bed, with no friend with me, I felt lonely" is weak.

Ambitious poems often assume even more than defaults, they assume a common cuktural background. A reader who is not a part of such a cultural environment needs help from a critic. Here we touch upon a critic's duties. Also a translator has her/his duties. The topic gets too extensive, let me stop now.

Your interpretation, _Land, addresses an essential part of the poems meaning, namely a some (not all) of the man's feelings (perhaps it was a man, that's the default here ; but in principle it could have been any friend, partner, lover) . If U pay attention to the whole text U'll get their whole relation. In particular, what about her? Now U understand him better. It is a short poem but it presents a rather complex relation in full and dramatically. (I talk now too much. U made me, _Land . Oh, well).

Once U get the whole thing U may even feel the symbolic meaning of each moment of the poem. For instance bridge carries strong connotations. But that comes to a reader at the very end, if at all (I always hope that such things work on a reader at least on a subconscious level; I often play on a reader like on a musical instrument, trying to get her/his sound-emotions. Of course a lot depends also on the instrument).

[Thanks for the thread, im looking forward to more discussion on the subject............

U'r welcome. The way it goes it does. Thank U, _L& !(of course _L& = _Land; my background kicks in again ).

Regards,

 

[_Land]

Re: Re: Thanks SJ

Your piece has tanka size (never mind any pedantic count of syllabes) and it's relaxed like a tanka. The two part construction is missing, where the two parts are (perhaps widely) different but harmonize or oppose each other. You have an alternating sequence of the following words in your poem:

        more-less-expansive-fewer

If U had, conceptually speaking (don't take it literally) a sequence like:

        more-expansive---less-fewer

then most likely it would be still more like a tanka. Poetically your piece has no chance to be much when it simply states some general ideas. U provide meaning but poetically your words r placebo.

       placebo kills poetry
___________________________________________________
First, what I wrote was nothing more then definition, in poor form. I was mearly trying to define what I presume Tanka to be.
My poor attempt at following form aside, If i understand you correctly tanka is made up of two seperate parts? Is there a specific place for that to happen? or anywhere in the form? Also, using opposites that correspond with each other is appropriate, but not alternating? Perhaps some basic do's and dont's in proper poetic form would do a newbie like myself some good. I have never studied the art. Most of what I write is based on creating an image that brings strong emotion.Either real or perceived. But I culdnt begin to tell you the reasons for any form.
I would be very Interested in hearing from the "GURUS" in here on some basic "Poetic" concepts. Thanks_Land

By the way isnt placebo the life subtanance of an unborn Child J/K (PLACEBA)

 

[Senna Jawa]

Re: Re: Re: Thanks SJ

f i understand you correctly tanka is made up of two seperate parts?

Usually. I am not confident about the formal aspects of tanka. It is perhaps not an overly fromalized form.

Is there a specific place for that to happen? or anywhere in the form?

Anywhere. But most of the time it happens around the middle, especially betwee the third and fourth line, or less often after the second line, still less often after the fourth. Actually one line, or a part of a line, while perhaps belonging to one of the parts, often serves as a pivot.

Also, using opposites that correspond with each other is appropriate, but not alternating?

It's rather logical that when you alternate several times than there are no two separate parts. Historically tanka I think predates haiku. One person would provide the 5-7-5 part, and the other would add 7-7. Also, historically, at first there were longer sequences created by several people at their social gatherings, perhaps devoted to poetry (I think people wouild alternate by each providing one stanza like this 5-7-5 7-7 5-7-5 7-7 ...). It was an honor to start such a sequence with 5-7-5. The best present poet would be chosen for that. Then on one hand people would isolate the 5-7-5 part into an art of its own, and on the other hand tanka would be produced just by one person, not two. But the historical two part construction has survived this poetic evolution.

BTW, the two parts don't have to be and usually are not opposite but rather there is a contrast. E.g. the first part may be concrete and the second an association. Etc. So, in some ways one can say that the two parts are "opposite" in their character, but they may enforce each other meaning wise, or one expands widely on the other, uses the first one as its base for taking off.

Perhaps some basic do's and dont's in proper poetic form would do a newbie like myself some good. I have never studied the art. Most of what I write is based on creating an image that brings strong emotion. Either real or perceived. But I culdnt begin to tell you the reasons for any form.

It's time to change it. Go, read, show respect to the poets of the past. Read them, study them. I see that you keep writing and "discussing" haiku without taking time to read the Masters and the critics who spent years studying haiku. You are wasting your time and not helping others on this forum. You should use your time and other's time better. It's nice to joke and to be jolly. But, come on...

I would be very Interested in hearing from the "GURUS" in here on some basic "Poetic" concepts. Thanks_Land

By the way isnt placebo the life subtanance of an unborn Child J/K (PLACEBA)

I am no guru and I am passing to you my own thoughts, like my statement about "placebo kills poetry". (I don't see "placeba" in any dictionary. Most likely you mean placenta).

Regards,

 

[_Land]

SJ

I am reading the masters thank you, I read every day, but i believe in the practice makes perfect method, or at least makes you better. So in trying to understand, I often put something down, in an attempt to feel the form out. Also it allows others who are more experience to comment on it, If i only posted poetry that i knew was good, what would the point be? I am here to learn. Perhaps my questions are annoying to you, but sometimes it is easier to take more from less....I am learning and that is what I thirst for. Thank you for your patient writing, My learning curve and style is not the same as most peoples. I tend to prefer hands on experience, to book learning.... perhaps you could help me write a tenka using one of the haiku's I have written. Explaining what would make it better, and why. I dont mind harsh critisism, and if I feel that i need to stand up for what I wrote I will, if not i quietly contemplate what has been said and work on revisions. There is no school of knowlege better then learning from your peers(USED LOOSELY). I do not claim to be a great poet SJ, just one that is thirsty for expression. I want to express my self in a way that might effect one persons life. Make them feel.



Spring summer fall winter
soul seasons


Thank you once again for replying SJ, I take a lot out of your replys. and i always read the suggested reading. The form that I see has such variance, perhaps my untrained eye or ear can not feel the true form. This is the only place i can ask questions, i would consider it a true travesty to waste such a resource as those that post in this thread, their knowledge and opinions.