THE definition of haiku

[Senna Jawa]

Some 12-14 years ago, and on since then, suddenly hundreds upon hundreds of superficial "experts" tell the public what supposedly haiku is. This kind of noise is actually harmful. A few years ago however I have arrived at the modern definition of haiku. It encompasses both the classical and the modern haiku.

***

In order to know what haiku is, first you need to know what poetry is. You don't, but let's pretend, for the sake of making progress, that you do. Then:

Haiku is a minimal poem

Wlodzimierz Holsztynski
​

"Minimal" means that you cannot carve out a meaningful, smaller poem. Thus if one would apply the definition strictly then version 2 of my haiku, from the "Which one?" thread, is not, strictly speaking, a haiku. Well, it (almost ) is but less so than version 1.

***

We see that haiku is universal. It was developed by Japanese poets but there is nothing specifically Japanese about haiku as a poetic genre.

***

The last haiku master, Keiko Imaoka, would be very happy with my definition. I wish she were alive when I came up with my formulation. Unfortunately, it took me too long for her. She loved plants and animals and people. She had no theoretical ambition, she didn't care about any theoretical justification of her view on haiku. She was much more preoccupied with its universality. She wanted as many authors and readers to enjoy haiku as possible. Thus her view of haiku was very tolerant, undogmatic. Keiko certainly didn't consider haiku to be an exclusively Japanese activity. In her opinion haiku was culturally universal. If that was the view of the Japanese Haiku Master, raised on the Japanese poetry and in the Japanese tradition, then who are all those idiots, with their superficial knowledge of Japan, who snobbishly claim otherwise.

***

You will get a better understanding of this haiku universality issue after reading my short note "the stable and the transient part of poetry", in a separate thread.

***

Regards,

Senna Jawa
(Wlodzimierz Holsztynski)

 

[Senna Jawa]

Haiku is a minimal poem

Wlodzimierz Holsztynski
​

"Minimal" means that you cannot carve out a meaningful, smaller poem. Thus if one would apply the definition strictly then version 2 of my haiku, from the "Which one?" thread, is not, strictly speaking, a haiku. Well, it (almost ) is but less so than version 1.

Here is another pair:

2004-02-04 -- haiku
2004-03-14 (2004-02-04)
​

Thus once again, only the shorter version is the true haiku, at least formally. In both examples certainly the shorter versions are better haiku. In my opinion, they are also better poems.

Sometimes, for various reasons, a longer, non-haiku version of a haiku can be better as a poem, it is possible.

Regards,

Senna Jawa

 

[Decayed Angel]

Some 12-14 years ago, and on since then, suddenly hundreds upon hundreds of superficial "experts" tell the public what supposedly haiku is. This kind of noise is actually harmful. A few years ago however I have arrived at the modern definition of haiku. It encompasses both the classical and the modern haiku.

***

In order to know what haiku is, first you need to know what poetry is. You don't, but let's pretend, for the sake of making progress, that you do. Then:

Haiku is a minimal poem

Wlodzimierz Holsztynski
​

"Minimal" means that you cannot carve out a meaningful, smaller poem. Thus if one would apply the definition strictly then version 2 of my haiku, from the "Which one?" thread, is not, strictly speaking, a haiku. Well, it (almost ) is but less so than version 1.

***

We see that haiku is universal. It was developed by Japanese poets but there is nothing specifically Japanese about haiku as a poetic genre.

***

The last haiku master, Keiko Imaoka, would be very happy with my definition. I wish she were alive when I came up with my formulation. Unfortunately, it took me too long for her. She loved plants and animals and people. She had no theoretical ambition, she didn't care about any theoretical justification of her view on haiku. She was much more preoccupied with its universality. She wanted as many authors and readers to enjoy haiku as possible. Thus her view of haiku was very tolerant, undogmatic. Keiko certainly didn't consider haiku to be an exclusively Japanese activity. In her opinion haiku was culturally universal. If that was the view of the Japanese Haiku Master, raised on the Japanese poetry and in the Japanese tradition, then who are all those idiots, with their superficial knowledge of Japan, who snobbishly claim otherwise.

***

You will get a better understanding of this haiku universality issue after reading my short note "the stable and the transient part of poetry", in a separate thread.

***

Regards,

Senna Jawa
(Wlodzimierz Holsztynski)

In reading the definition of haiku above, the first question that came to my mind was: "Are all minimal poems haiku?"

I ask, not to argue you on anything, but to better understand your definition.


DA : )
jim

 

[Senna Jawa]

In reading the definition of haiku above, the first question that came to my mind was: "Are all minimal poems haiku?"

Yes. Jim, remember that this definition rests on the definition of poetry. In a contrast to experts on oriental poetry, I had the courage to say that the same rules apply to the entire poetry, and not just to the oriental poetry.

We may end up, marginally, with pieces which in the past we would not accept as haiku. It's still ok. It is important for the definition (for the notions) to be simple. The Occam's Razor principle (a variation)--of the two about equally good notions, the simpler one is preferable. Indeed, the simpler notion is more profound and offers a better understanding.

Regards,

Senna Jawa

 

[Cub4ucme]

Your obvious penchant for trying to make yourself appear knowledgeable by insinuating others don't possess obtained knowledge on the subject of poetry is both foolish and dangerous in regard to proving your points.

Yes, Haiku is a minimal form of poetry, but your contention that it is not a short poem is ridiculous. It is pricisely that.

The reason the word minimul is often used is to emphasize the fact that every word should have siginificant influence. If one were to remove a single word from a Haiku poem it should not read correctly.

Thus,the idea of finger counting just to achieve the mark is not the way to
write Haiku.

Strange how you stand on thin glass attempting to defend two bad poems by
starting a thread with misleading information.

In order to insure readers have a more dignified and critical assesment of Haiku I've decided (yes, the guy who you insinuate doesn't know much about poetry after eighteen years) to take time out of my day to offer anyone
who is interested a better assessment than your twisted version.

I will start with the history of Haiku, then as the thread progressess add
information that details the evolution of the poetic form.


Pronunciation: 'hI-(")kü
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural haiku
Etymology: Japanese
: an unrhymed verse form of Japanese origin having three lines containing usually five, seven, and five syllables respectively; also : a poem in this form usually having a seasonal reference


http://www.big.or.jp/~loupe/links/ehisto/eavant.shtml

Chapter 1
Before Basho
In Japan in the 15th century, a poetic form named "renga" blossomed.
Renga is a poem several poets create cooperatively. Members alternately add verses of 17 syllables (5, 7, and 5 syllables) and those of 14 syllables (7 and 7 syllables), until they complete a poem generally composed of 100 verses.
Renga was an dignified academic poem. Members were traditionally demanded to present their verses following the medieval aesthetics and quoting the classics.
In the 16th century, instead of renga, it was haikai - humorous poem - that became popular. Haikai (haikai-renga) is a poem made of verses of 17 and 14 syllables like renga, but it parodies renga introducing modern vulgar laughter. Haikai poets used plays on words and treated preferably things of daily life renga hadn't found interesting.
The first verse of renga and haikai is called "hokku". Haikai poets sometimes presented their hokkus as independent poems. These were the origin of haiku.
It was traditionally demanded to adopt a kigo (season word: word reffering to a season) in the first verse of renga and haikai. Therefore, they demand to introduce a kigo in a hokku (and in a haiku) too.



Written by
Ryu Yotsuya


Basho Matsuo is known as the first great poet in the history of haikai (and haiku).
He too, wrote poems using jokes and plays upon words in his early stages, as they were in fashion, but began to attach importance to the role of thought in haikai (especially in hokku) from around 1680.
The thought of Tchouang-tseu, philosopher in the 4th century B.C., influenced greatly Basho, and he often quoted the texts of "The Book of master Tchouang" in his hokkus.
The thinker Tchouang-tseu denied the artificiality and the utilitarianism, seeing value of intellect low. He asserted that things seemingly useless had the real value, and that it was the right way of life not to go against the natural law.
To a leg of a heron
Adding a long shank
Of a pheasant.
Basho
This poem parodied the following text in "The Book of master Tchouang": "When you see a long object, you don't have to think that it is too long if being long is the property given by the nature. It is proved by the fact that a duckling, having short legs, will cry if you try to draw them out by force, and that a crane, having long legs, will protest you with tears if you try to cut them with a knife."
By playing on purpose in this haiku an act "jointing legs of birds by force" which Tchouang denied, he showed the absurdity of this act and emphasized the powerlessness of the human being's intelligence humorously.
Basho's haikus are dramatic, and they exaggerate humor or depression, ecstasy or confusion. These dramatic expressions have a paradoxical nature. The humor and the despair which he expressed are not implements to believe in the possibility of the human being and to glorify it. If anything, the literature of Basho has a character that the more he described men's deeds, the more human existence's smallness stood out in relief, and it makes us conscious of the greatness of nature's power.


The wind from Mt. Fuji
I put it on the fan.
Here, the souvenir from Edo.
*Edo: the old name of Tokyo..

Sleep on horseback,
The far moon in a continuing dream,
Steam of roasting tea.


Spring departs.
Birds cry
Fishes' eyes are filled with tears


Summer zashiki
Make move and enter
The mountain and the garden.
*zashiki: Japanese-style room covered with tatamis and open to the garden.


What luck!
The southern valley
Make snow fragrant.


A autumn wind
More white
Than the rocks in the rocky mountain.


From all directions
Winds bring petals of cherry
Into the grebe lake.


Even a wild boar
With all other things
Blew in this storm.


The crescent lights
The misty ground.
Buckwheat flowers.


Bush clover in blossom waves
Without spilling
A drop of dew.


Note:
Originally, Basho didn't write the poem "To a leg of a heron..." as a hokku, but as one of verses in a haikai-renga.
This verse suggests the intention to laugh at himself: "What a stupid deed like drawing out a heron's leg it is to product one more series of haikai! Because it is produced so often."


Written by
Ryu Yotsuya

 

[Cub4ucme]

The Occam's Razor principle (a variation)--of the two about equally good notions, the simpler one is preferable. Indeed, the simpler notion is more profound and offers a better understanding.

Regards,

Senna Jawa


I have to tell you I sit here smiling. To insinuate that simple leads to profound
is entirely false and once again misleading.

What you are after is to take an ancient form of POETRY and bend it to your liking so you can write simple short poems counting syllables on your fingers.


Then have the capacity to defend those same bad poems with posts that are as frail as the poems themselves.

It's a humorous journey you've embraked on.

andy

 

[Decayed Angel]

Yes. Jim, remember that this definition rests on the definition of poetry. In a contrast to experts on oriental poetry, I had the courage to say that the same rules apply to the entire poetry, and not just to the oriental poetry.

We may end up, marginally, with pieces which in the past we would not accept as haiku. It's still ok. It is important for the definition (for the notions) to be simple. The Occam's Razor principle (a variation)--of the two about equally good notions, the simpler one is preferable. Indeed, the simpler notion is more profound and offers a better understanding.

Regards,

Senna Jawa

Do you then distinguish between two minimal poems as to the quality of the poem? If both poems have been reduced to an absolute minimum or they equally as good or are their other qualities that you would then consider in reading the haiku?

Again, I want to better understand your outlook here. I have not formulated my own definition of haiku, I have pretty much based most of mine off of Cor Van den Huevel's definition (for English Language haiku). With respect to the minimalism, his definition is similar to yours, but he does go beyond the minimalism in his.

I remember Jack Kerouac had a simple definition of haiku, I'll have to find that quote. If I remember correctly it is similar to yours.


DA : )
jim

 

[Senna Jawa]

Do you then distinguish between two minimal poems as to the quality of the poem? If both poems have been reduced to an absolute minimum or <are, sj> they equally as good or are their <there> other qualities that you would then consider in reading the haiku?

Jim, don't be silly -- of course I consider the quality too. Here I was preoccupied just with the very definition of haiku.

Again, I want to better understand your outlook here. I have not formulated my own definition of haiku, I have pretty much based most of mine off of Cor Van den Huevel's definition (for English Language haiku). With respect to the minimalism, his definition is similar to yours, but he does go beyond the minimalism in his.

I remember Jack Kerouac had a simple definition of haiku, I'll have to find that quote. If I remember correctly it is similar to yours.

It'd be great if you quoted those other definitions too. Also, if you provided the dates of their writing.

The missing component, in this thread, is the definition of poetry. This would take a treatise. I have started it a few times, both in Polish and in English. There are some of my posts here on Literotica too. But for those who more or less know haiku, I can make it easy (if somewhat tautological and circular with respect to the definition of haiku):

Poetry is non-minimal haiku.
​

It's a bit of a joke but quite useful to those truly familiar with haiku.

I don't claim much originality, not at all. I have extracted, refined, pushed to their logical conclusion and generalization, and have put together many classical, well-known notions, some of them over twenty centuries old, some of them a few centuries old. I have managed to get a harmonious total, which can guide poets. Some poets were natural, born geniuses, like Kamil Baczynski or Wlodzimierz Szymanowicz (they too did work on their art intensively during their all tragically too short life). Majority of us, regular mortals, need more time and prolonged effort to mature artistically. My description of poetry certainly can help many authors. Fragments of it did to some in the past, as I was fortunate to affect and assist a few talented poets in their development. I have offered to do it here. It'd be enough that about half a dozen authors would be willing to write their every third poem with an eye on the program, and to discuss just elements (not even whole poems, it's not necessary) of some poems withing the given framework, according to the provided notions. There are here at least half a dozen of such Literotians, who are after poetry more than after asserting themselves high () on the Literotica ladder , e.g. Liar, Sweet, Maria..., but some of them are apathetic on this board, say, the old-timers like Eve, Angeline, Rybka or even Anna... -- their mind has drifted toward greener (more attractive, on seemingly higher level) poetry boards, which impress them more. Thus most likely my unique offer will pass without making any dent on the poems written by Literoticians.

Just in case let me provide again the broad outline:


INTRODUCTION

prose: author -- 90%, reader -- 10%;
poetry: author -- 50%, reader -- 50%.

The poetry author's 50% is sensual, the reader's half is transcendental, intellectual, ... (but first, it is the reader's FIRST duty to absorb the sensual half provided by the author: the images, the smells, the movement, the sounds, the melody and texture...).

END of INTRODUCTION

POETRY:

1. poetry is the art of words; (the internal, atomic description of poetry).

2. poetry as art (globally) is described by the three principles:

a. foundation: man is but a particle of Nature;
b. ethics: each element of a poem has to serve poetry;
c. goal: poem should go far beyond its text.
​

It'd take a lot of writing to fill in, but we could illustrate the special points and instances on concrete poems, which is the best way to learn anyway. One cannot grasp these otherwise simple notions without testing it on poems.

Regards,

Senna Jawa

PS. After years of making similar propositions I am not really expecting that anything constructive is going to happen now. At least I am doing my part. One can bring a horse to the river but one cannot make it drink.

 

[Cub4ucme]

Definition of Poetry

Jim, don't be silly -- of course I consider the quality too. Here I was preoccupied just with the very definition of haiku.


It'd be great if you quoted those other definitions too. Also, if you provided the dates of their writing.

The missing component, in this thread, is the definition of poetry. This would take a treatise. I have started it a few times, both in Polish and in English. There are some of my posts here on Literotica too. But for those who more or less know haiku, I can make it easy (if somewhat tautological and circular with respect to the definition of haiku):

Poetry is non-minimal haiku.
​

It's a bit of a joke but quite useful to those truly familiar with haiku.

I don't claim much originality, not at all. I have extracted, refined, pushed to their logical conclusion and generalization, and have put together many classical, well-known notions, some of them over twenty centuries old, some of them a few centuries old. I have managed to get a harmonious total, which can guide poets. Some poets were natural, born geniuses, like Kamil Baczynski or Wlodzimierz Szymanowicz (they too did work on their art intensively during their all tragically too short life). Majority of us, regular mortals, need more time and prolonged effort to mature artistically. My description of poetry certainly can help many authors. Fragments of it did to some in the past, as I was fortunate to affect and assist a few talented poets in their development. I have offered to do it here. It'd be enough that about half a dozen authors would be willing to write their every third poem with an eye on the program, and to discuss just elements (not even whole poems, it's not necessary) of some poems withing the given framework, according to the provided notions. There are here at least half a dozen of such Literotians, who are after poetry more than after asserting themselves high () on the Literotica ladder , e.g. Liar, Sweet, Maria..., but some of them are apathetic on this board, say, the old-timers like Eve, Angeline, Rybka or even Anna... -- their mind has drifted toward greener (more attractive, on seemingly higher level) poetry boards, which impress them more. Thus most likely my unique offer will pass without making any dent on the poems written by Literoticians.

Just in case let me provide again the broad outline:


INTRODUCTION

prose: author -- 90%, reader -- 10%;
poetry: author -- 50%, reader -- 50%.

The poetry author's 50% is sensual, the reader's half is transcendental, intellectual, ... (but first, it is the reader's FIRST duty to absorb the sensual half provided by the author: the images, the smells, the movement, the sounds, the melody and texture...).

END of INTRODUCTION

POETRY:

1. poetry is the art of words; (the internal, atomic description of poetry).

2. poetry as art (globally) is described by the three principles:

a. foundation: man is but a particle of Nature;
b. ethics: each element of a poem has to serve poetry;
c. goal: poem should go far beyond its text.
​

It'd take a lot of writing to fill in, but we could illustrate the special points and instances on concrete poems, which is the best way to learn anyway. One cannot grasp these otherwise simple notions without testing it on poems.

Regards,

Senna Jawa

PS. After years of making similar propositions I am not really expecting that anything constructive is going to happen now. At least I am doing my part. One can bring a horse to the river but one cannot make it drink.

Poetry is not JUST non-minimul Haiku. You can't take some broad brush and paint it as such.

While Basho was perfecting the Japanese (onji) Haiku, Shakespearre was writing sonnets.

A sonnet does not have anything to do (even if you were to stretch it to its furthest point) with Haiku.

Furthermore, the free verse poetry,
that you seem to enjoy writing ,
is not derived or associated
in any way with Haiku.

Except to say they are both forms of poetry.
Which does not imply that FREE VERSE POETRY
is non-minimul Haiku.


There is no chicken before the egg here.

Poetry, as far as we know, has existed for as long as language has existed.

Haiku is simply one form of poetry that has evolved
as it was translated into different languages.

You can write anything you want and calll it Haiku
and attempt to defend it as such but, in the end,
there are still critical parameters that define
the form and demand certain qualities to
be able to reach a level of integrity.

Your definiton dressed in blue font is nothing more
than an edited copy. The problem is it's as messed
up as the rest of your post.

There is no true definition of poetry. It's an abstract
art with little or no defined parameters. The closest
you can come to defining it is to say it's an art form
which uses language as it's medium.

It's much easier to define what ISN'T poetry.

WE can all do that. Admitedly it's ironic how
you started the thread implying we don't know
what the definition of poetry is and here I am
somewhat agreeing with you. The bad news
is you are using the pulpit to imply that your
definition is correct.

It isn't! In fact it's far from it.

Just for the record; it's not wise to pray to Google as your God!



best,
andy

 

[Liar]

There is no true definition of poetry.

Poetry: Semantic art.
Fiction prose: Narrative art.
Fact prose: Narrative craft.

And all we write has got more or less, but always some, of each.

That's all the definition my tiny brain is prepared to handle.

Definition of Haiku? I'm not touching that one with a ten foot pole.

 

[Cub4ucme]

Simplicity in Haiku

Jack Kerouac’s theory on simplicity was not meant to be
twisted into what you are suggesting.

His point was Haiku should not be written
in such a way as to trick a reader.

There is nothing in Kerouc's library that
suggests Haiku should not maintain
the original intent of the Japanese
masters to bring on a great sense
of enligtenment.

His whole point was to infer that
a Haiku should read easy and
not look to confuse.


There is a big difference in interpreting
his point in such a way as to claim
simple leads to profound on its own.

From writing sharp, clear, and precise
poetry that reads easy without
confusion while reamaining profound.


This is the problem I find when established
poets leave vague comments on their
opinions of poetry.

It allows people like Senna the liberty
of using such comments as a foundation
for which they were never intended.

It should be clear to anyone who has
read Jack Kerouac’s work that he
was never a man guided by simplicity
in regards to his poetry.


Thus, Haiku when sucessfull
does not confuse, does not
attempt to trick, is easy to
read, while still delivering a
sense of enlightenment.


That's what Jack Kerouac
was getting at when he
used the word simple.

Implying your poem --------(here known as number 1)
is more sucessfull than
your second one because----(here known as number 2)
it is simpler and thus
automatically more
profound is ludicrous.

Both poems are throw-away poems.

Not necessarily the idea the poems
were after. In fact, I think the
subject matter is worthy.

It was how the subject matter
was handled and displayed
in the poem that lead
me to my conclusions.

I challenge you to allow me to post
them in critical environments
and let the poems rise or fall
on their own merit.


best,
andy

 

[GuiltyPleasure]

Aren't you hampsters wearing out the wheel?

 

[Cub4ucme]

Aren't you hampsters wearing out the wheel?

Is that the most intelligent thing you could come up with?

If not why post it at all?

andy

 

[champagne1982]

Is that the most intelligent thing you could come up with?

If not why post it at all?

andy

This, I presume, is a rhetorical question?

 

[WickedEve]

Is that the most intelligent thing you could come up with?

If not why post it at all?

andy

Why post this, andy? It has nothing to do with haiku, which I'm trying to learn more about on this thread.

 

[Cub4ucme]

Why post this, andy? It has nothing to do with haiku, which I'm trying to learn more about on this thread.

WEll, that was precisely my point.

If you view the post above my post you will find the person you
should have directed your question to.

Referring to people who are debating something that is topic
related to as hamsters is what you should be questioning.

That's my take anyway.

best,
andy

 

[GuiltyPleasure]

Is that the most intelligent thing you could come up with?

If not why post it at all?

andy

It just seems to me that you're going round in circles. Could it be you and Senna are both wrong/right? I consider jim to be the beat authority in here since he can state his case without resorting to insults.

 

[TheRainMan]

. . . It has nothing to do with haiku, which I'm trying to learn more about on this thread . . .

if you are trying to learn haiku from anyone in this joint, sweet cakes . . . (sorry, couldn't resist ). . . you should be reading jim thompson (jthserra/decayed angel/kaishaku).

here's an excellent one, sunrise . . . but really, he has so many.

and his essays as well. informative, without the slightest stink of deific arrogance.

 

[Cub4ucme]

Disruptive Posting

It just seems to me that you're going round in circles. Could it be you and Senna are both wrong/right? I consider jim to be the beat authority in here since he can state his case without resorting to insults.

This tells me all I need to know about your reasons for being here.

And I suppose calling someone a hampster is not insulting?

Futhermore, what you consider running around in cirlces is the result
of your own inability to think critically.

There is no circle. There is a debate that has grown as the thread has
moved on.

Whatever your feelings about Senna's knowledge of poetry
are no concern of mine. What you feel about Haiku or poetry
in general might be interesting to me.

You are the one disrupting the thread.

Stick to the topic, stop referring to people
as hampsters, or don't.

It's your choice to be disruptive
and insulting if you so choose.


Claiming someone's ego is in the way of thinking clearly
and not being realistic is not insulting.

It is a conclusion based on carefull reading of the posts.

Now, I'd prefer to stick to the topic of poetry
instead of responding to someone who feels it's quite
alright to jump in with insults and then responds
to that behviour by telling us all how she feels
about Senna in general.

How do you feel about his Haiku,
specifically the two we are discussing here?

Do you have anything to add to the discussion
that would shed some kind
of light on the subject?

Or, are you here just to disrupt and defend?



best,
andy

 

[Decayed Angel]

Aren't you hampsters wearing out the wheel?

.before dawn
wearing out the wheel
...............hamsters




Your haiku in a three line version...

DA : )

 

[Decayed Angel]

My memory of Kerouac's definition of haiku was off a bit. "Say a lot in three short lines" is quite different from minimal poem.

"A 'Western Haiku' need not concern itself with seventeen syllables since Western Languages cannot adapt themselves to the fluid syllabillic Japanese. I propose that the 'Western Haiku' simply say a lot in three short lines in any Western Language." - Jack Kerouac

Here is Cor Van den Huevel's definition:

"... a short poem recording the essence of a moment keenly perceived in which nature is linked to human nature."

He goes on to say

"A haiku can be anywhere from a few to 17 syllables, rarely more."

- This from the preface to his The haiku Anthology

Here the "...essence of a moment..." perhaps addresses the minimal, but he does go on from there.

"... a short poem recording the essence of a moment keenly perceived in which nature is linked to human nature."

- is what I try to keep in mind when I write haiku.

DA : )

 

[Decayed Angel]

Jim, don't be silly -- of course I consider the quality too. Here I was preoccupied just with the very definition of haiku.

In judging the quality of the haiku do you just consider the minimalism or do you then look to other qualities in the haiku? I guess what I am really asking, is once a haiku has achieved and effective minimalism, do you then look for some of the other qualities often mentioned as being needed in haiku?

For instance, is a minimal poem that also has the cut (Kireji) that many speak of when talking of haiku, considered higher quality than a minimal poem that does not? Or are there different qualities you look for in a minimal poem in determining quality?


DA : )

 

[Tzara]

My apologies to DA and SJ, who are having an interesting and civil discussion. You guys can just ignore this.

<metacomment>

This tells me all I need to know about your reasons for being here.

And I suppose calling someone a hampster is not insulting?

Futhermore, what you consider running around in cirlces is the result
of your own inability to think critically.

There is no circle. There is a debate that has grown as the thread has
moved on.

Whatever your feelings about Senna's knowledge of poetry
are no concern of mine. What you feel about Haiku or poetry
in general might be interesting to me.

You are the one disrupting the thread.

Stick to the topic, stop referring to people
as hampsters, or don't.

It's your choice to be disruptive
and insulting if you so choose.


Claiming someone's ego is in the way of thinking clearly
and not being realistic is not insulting.

It is a conclusion based on carefull reading of the posts.

Now, I'd prefer to stick to the topic of poetry
instead of responding to someone who feels it's quite
alright to jump in with insults and then responds
to that behviour by telling us all how she feels
about Senna in general.

How do you feel about his Haiku,
specifically the two we are discussing here?

Do you have anything to add to the discussion
that would shed some kind
of light on the subject?

Or, are you here just to disrupt and defend?



best,
andy

Geez, Andy, one would think your Xanax prescription has run out. Go drink a beer or something, dude.

I've just re-read this thread. It, for the most part, seems to me to be a civilized discussion between DA and SJ, with some periodic (and as far as I can tell, ignored) interjections from you. I think of Tess's comment as a metacomment—this is territory that has been surveyed and surveyed again. But I guess the USGS needs to remap the territory periodically. Statutorial requirement, perhaps.

Anyway, let me quote your statement You are the one disrupting the thread.

Wrong, bud, at least in my interpretation. You (and, unfortuately with this post, me) are the one(s) disrupting this thread.

Tess, unless I misinterpreted what she said, did not call you a "hampster". You know the concept of metaphor? She was using a metaphor for the discussion in general.

But you know this. You are a poet.

Sorry. I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.
</metacomment>

 

[Cub4ucme]

Not a Chance

My apologies to DA and SJ, who are having an interesting and civil discussion. You guys can just ignore this.

<metacomment>Geez, Andy, one would think your Xanax prescription has run out. Go drink a beer or something, dude.

I've just re-read this thread. It, for the most part, seems to me to be a civilized discussion between DA and SJ, with some periodic (and as far as I can tell, ignored) interjections from you. I think of Tess's comment as a metacomment—this is territory that has been surveyed and surveyed again. But I guess the USGS needs to remap the territory periodically. Statutorial requirement, perhaps.

Anyway, let me quote your statement You are the one disrupting the thread.

Wrong, bud, at least in my interpretation. You (and, unfortuately with this post, me) are the one(s) disrupting this thread.

Tess, unless I misinterpreted what she said, did not call you a "hampster". You know the concept of metaphor? She was using a metaphor for the discussion in general.

But you know this. You are a poet.

Sorry. I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.
</metacomment>

I happen to disagree. I am on topic. You are not.

This is not a two way discussion. It is a public forum.

You asked for rude, you get rude.

You're now part of the problem. You can play politics
all you want. The fact is Senna is full of shit and people
read what he writes. If I feel like defending the art of poetry,
I will sit here all day and night and do so.

There is an option to ignore.

My recommendation to you asshole is use it.

andy

 

[Tzara]

I happen to disagree. I am on topic. You are not.

This is not a two way discussion. It is a public forum.

You asked for rude, you get rude.

You're now part of the problem. You can play politics
all you want. The fact is Senna is full of shit and people
read what he writes. If I feel like defending the art of poetry.
I will sit here all day and night and do so.

There is an option to ignore.

My recommendation to you asshole is use it.

andy

Ah, but you are so entertaining.

Sorry about the Xanax comment. I'm now thinking Haldol, maybe. Or Chlorpromazine?

Best,

tz

P.S.: "If I feel like defending the art of poetry." is not a sentence.

Just tweakin' you dude! Don't you have any sense of humor?