the complexities and beauty of haiku
Viddax said:Thank you for your response butters, as is more often than I would like I tend to end up having a side conversation within a thread.
The problem with 'simple' statement of facts in any setting is that being blunt with facts does not necessarily mean they will be responded to as facts, or that by stating facts it means the creator is immune from response or backlash. The fact is that we will all die someday, but it is a fact mostly ignored as it is counterproductive to think about all the time and that the fact does not particularly help us live.
To further confound the issue facts tend to take on a strange aspect when included in the overarching topic of Art, as Art has the capacity for change that not only ignores but defies and redefines facts and rules. It is fine to say the common use of haiku is wrong, but to state it as such assumes that the common use wilfully and intentionally uses it as wrong. Rather than a case of ignorance or mistaken inheritance or assumption or other that the case may be. Innocent until proven guilty. - It is demeaning to assume that the audience is stupid and wrong; and this then tends to cause aggressive/disruptive behaviour in response because the start comes across as provocative.
Now the last paragraph is more about general and hypothetical conveying rather than a solid dig at the start of this thread; as such parts will be more relevant than others.
Although the title is the "the complexities and beauty of haiku" the emphasise seems to be on the complexities and how it can or cannot be done, with little on beauty. There just does not seem as much joy and life-affirming as the title could suggest. The emphasis seems to be on how haikus are not done properly and what haikus are, rather than what haikus could aspire to be. I am not suggesting some daft saccharine soppy such-and-such, but the thread seems to start and continue with the tone of stating rather than promoting. There just does not seem to be much lead-by-example.
Now stating is not inherently bad, but an inspiring and leading tone appears to be better suited to the internet and DU.
"if we teach people incorrectly to start with, relearning those nuances is all that much harder. i'm not attempting to set myself up as a teacher; i know people hungry for information will learn, those lacking interest don't need me trying to teach them.
i'm more concerned with displacing the fake information with the real stuff, which is kind of important to anyone who might wish to submit their work in the future to publications outside of DUP."
- My issue here is that it seems to want to have the cake and eat it too: to have haiku known the correct, or rather the traditional, way, but without teaching/ informing about it. All the more questionable if the common use has it incorrectly already. There must be change and that change can only come from the traditional way of haiku being taught, 'taught' in the loosest sense as in conveyed and spread about. its not about setting individuals up as actual haiku teachers or experts, but of those with the knowledge spreading it. And the spread has to be active in order to affect change; if it is passive and only looking for willing interested parties then it narrows down the field of view and does impact on the common use.
This can mean that the form use to talk about haikus may well have to change dramatically: to go for the easy and widest appeal route in order to bring out the biggest change.
I hope this makes some sense.
Basically if people feel small they punch up, so it makes sense to make people feel taller by lifting up. How a thread starts affects how it is received and how it carries on.
- retrospective idea/ explanation of why this thread has had a rocky history and has not quite been so much about discussion or debate.there's a lot of sense in your post, viddax. i appreciate that.
if the mods—or ex mods—are more interested in pushing a false narrative regarding haiku (amongst other topics) then perhaps it is the place of other, long-standing poets/mods to put them right rather than a newcomer. in the case of 'traditional' japanese haiku, the OP lists the requirements. i'm not here to waste time discussing the rights and wrongs of those--it was more of a fact-check because it was clearly needed--but am willing to talk nuances and evolution of the form. perhaps i should stamp my feet and yell IT IS BECAUSE I SAY SO!? i think not. it is because the experts and publishers say so.
whilst i accept my OP provoked some form of push-back—and i do accept that, no argument, i find it surprising that the form that 'push back' took has not been as loudly condemned as the 'reasons' for it laid at my opening post. we're all adults here, not babies, and responsible for the words we type; there is no reasonable excuse for some of the behaviour exhibited towards me. the topic? certainly, anyone can tell me they think i'm wrong and why. outlandish boorishness isn't that. if i had responded in a similar manner, i don't doubt for one minute that my posts would have been roundly condemned by all and sundry and rightly so.
once more, i thank you for your considered response; does it fully address the behaviour of others posting here? no, i'm sorry to see it does not. i suppose i am to understand that certain behaviours are acceptable from certain members but not from others. their lack of accountability is the message being delivered here.
so, time for enchiladas.
The problem with 'simple' statement of facts in any setting is that being blunt with facts does not necessarily mean they will be responded to as facts, or that by stating facts it means the creator is immune from response or backlash. The fact is that we will all die someday, but it is a fact mostly ignored as it is counterproductive to think about all the time and that the fact does not particularly help us live.
To further confound the issue facts tend to take on a strange aspect when included in the overarching topic of Art, as Art has the capacity for change that not only ignores but defies and redefines facts and rules. It is fine to say the common use of haiku is wrong, but to state it as such assumes that the common use wilfully and intentionally uses it as wrong. Rather than a case of ignorance or mistaken inheritance or assumption or other that the case may be. Innocent until proven guilty. - It is demeaning to assume that the audience is stupid and wrong; and this then tends to cause aggressive/disruptive behaviour in response because the start comes across as provocative.
Now the last paragraph is more about general and hypothetical conveying rather than a solid dig at the start of this thread; as such parts will be more relevant than others.
Although the title is the "the complexities and beauty of haiku" the emphasise seems to be on the complexities and how it can or cannot be done, with little on beauty. There just does not seem as much joy and life-affirming as the title could suggest. The emphasis seems to be on how haikus are not done properly and what haikus are, rather than what haikus could aspire to be. I am not suggesting some daft saccharine soppy such-and-such, but the thread seems to start and continue with the tone of stating rather than promoting. There just does not seem to be much lead-by-example.
Now stating is not inherently bad, but an inspiring and leading tone appears to be better suited to the internet and DU.
"if we teach people incorrectly to start with, relearning those nuances is all that much harder. i'm not attempting to set myself up as a teacher; i know people hungry for information will learn, those lacking interest don't need me trying to teach them.
i'm more concerned with displacing the fake information with the real stuff, which is kind of important to anyone who might wish to submit their work in the future to publications outside of DUP."
- My issue here is that it seems to want to have the cake and eat it too: to have haiku known the correct, or rather the traditional, way, but without teaching/ informing about it. All the more questionable if the common use has it incorrectly already. There must be change and that change can only come from the traditional way of haiku being taught, 'taught' in the loosest sense as in conveyed and spread about. its not about setting individuals up as actual haiku teachers or experts, but of those with the knowledge spreading it. And the spread has to be active in order to affect change; if it is passive and only looking for willing interested parties then it narrows down the field of view and does impact on the common use.
This can mean that the form use to talk about haikus may well have to change dramatically: to go for the easy and widest appeal route in order to bring out the biggest change.
I hope this makes some sense.
Basically if people feel small they punch up, so it makes sense to make people feel taller by lifting up. How a thread starts affects how it is received and how it carries on.
- retrospective idea/ explanation of why this thread has had a rocky history and has not quite been so much about discussion or debate.there's a lot of sense in your post, viddax. i appreciate that.
if the mods—or ex mods—are more interested in pushing a false narrative regarding haiku (amongst other topics) then perhaps it is the place of other, long-standing poets/mods to put them right rather than a newcomer. in the case of 'traditional' japanese haiku, the OP lists the requirements. i'm not here to waste time discussing the rights and wrongs of those--it was more of a fact-check because it was clearly needed--but am willing to talk nuances and evolution of the form. perhaps i should stamp my feet and yell IT IS BECAUSE I SAY SO!? i think not. it is because the experts and publishers say so.
whilst i accept my OP provoked some form of push-back—and i do accept that, no argument, i find it surprising that the form that 'push back' took has not been as loudly condemned as the 'reasons' for it laid at my opening post. we're all adults here, not babies, and responsible for the words we type; there is no reasonable excuse for some of the behaviour exhibited towards me. the topic? certainly, anyone can tell me they think i'm wrong and why. outlandish boorishness isn't that. if i had responded in a similar manner, i don't doubt for one minute that my posts would have been roundly condemned by all and sundry and rightly so.
once more, i thank you for your considered response; does it fully address the behaviour of others posting here? no, i'm sorry to see it does not. i suppose i am to understand that certain behaviours are acceptable from certain members but not from others. their lack of accountability is the message being delivered here.
so, time for enchiladas.
Anonymous
butters said:there's a lot of sense in your post, viddax. i appreciate that.
if the mods—or ex mods—are more interested in pushing a false narrative regarding haiku (amongst other topics) then perhaps it is the place of other, long-standing poets/mods to put them right rather than a newcomer. in the case of 'traditional' japanese haiku, the OP lists the requirements. i'm not here to waste time discussing the rights and wrongs of those--it was more of a fact-check because it was clearly needed--but am willing to talk nuances and evolution of the form. perhaps i should stamp my feet and yell IT IS BECAUSE I SAY SO!? i think not. it is because the experts and publishers say so.
whilst i accept my OP provoked some form of push-back—and i do accept that, no argument, i find it surprising that the form that 'push back' took has not been as loudly condemned as the 'reasons' for it laid at my opening post. we're all adults here, not babies, and responsible for the words we type; there is no reasonable excuse for some of the behaviour exhibited towards me. the topic? certainly, anyone can tell me they think i'm wrong and why. outlandish boorishness isn't that. if i had responded in a similar manner, i don't doubt for one minute that my posts would have been roundly condemned by all and sundry and rightly so.
once more, i thank you for your considered response; does it fully address the behaviour of others posting here? no, i'm sorry to see it does not. i suppose i am to understand that certain behaviours are acceptable from certain members but not from others. their lack of accountability is the message being delivered here.
so, time for enchiladas.
Wow this thread went sideways, upside down, righted itself, s uh nk a little bit and then continued on lol....
As to my understanding haiku as I was taught and also as my daughter was tecently told to bring home and run through is the
5-7-5 method with zero mention of any of your points posted in the opening statement
So I believe the government "education" system has bastardised the form and forced it to be viewed in its most basic way without depth or nuance.
The ooening statemwnt and subsequent back and forths sans interruptions was informative and interesting.
By the way I've now got my 6month old daughter practicing to drive a car because rules were meant to be broken.... before they're even learned
if the mods—or ex mods—are more interested in pushing a false narrative regarding haiku (amongst other topics) then perhaps it is the place of other, long-standing poets/mods to put them right rather than a newcomer. in the case of 'traditional' japanese haiku, the OP lists the requirements. i'm not here to waste time discussing the rights and wrongs of those--it was more of a fact-check because it was clearly needed--but am willing to talk nuances and evolution of the form. perhaps i should stamp my feet and yell IT IS BECAUSE I SAY SO!? i think not. it is because the experts and publishers say so.
whilst i accept my OP provoked some form of push-back—and i do accept that, no argument, i find it surprising that the form that 'push back' took has not been as loudly condemned as the 'reasons' for it laid at my opening post. we're all adults here, not babies, and responsible for the words we type; there is no reasonable excuse for some of the behaviour exhibited towards me. the topic? certainly, anyone can tell me they think i'm wrong and why. outlandish boorishness isn't that. if i had responded in a similar manner, i don't doubt for one minute that my posts would have been roundly condemned by all and sundry and rightly so.
once more, i thank you for your considered response; does it fully address the behaviour of others posting here? no, i'm sorry to see it does not. i suppose i am to understand that certain behaviours are acceptable from certain members but not from others. their lack of accountability is the message being delivered here.
so, time for enchiladas.
Wow this thread went sideways, upside down, righted itself, s uh nk a little bit and then continued on lol....
As to my understanding haiku as I was taught and also as my daughter was tecently told to bring home and run through is the
5-7-5 method with zero mention of any of your points posted in the opening statement
So I believe the government "education" system has bastardised the form and forced it to be viewed in its most basic way without depth or nuance.
The ooening statemwnt and subsequent back and forths sans interruptions was informative and interesting.
By the way I've now got my 6month old daughter practicing to drive a car because rules were meant to be broken.... before they're even learned
butters said:
does it fully address the behaviour of others posting here? no, i'm sorry to see it does not. i suppose i am to understand that certain behaviours are acceptable from certain members but not from others. their lack of accountability is the message being delivered here.
I can assure you that behaviors have been addressed—there’s just no need to publicly announce every moderator action, hence why it may appear that we are inactive on this .
does it fully address the behaviour of others posting here? no, i'm sorry to see it does not. i suppose i am to understand that certain behaviours are acceptable from certain members but not from others. their lack of accountability is the message being delivered here.
I can assure you that behaviors have been addressed—there’s just no need to publicly announce every moderator action, hence why it may appear that we are inactive on this .
Commentonly said:
Wow this thread went sideways, upside down, righted itself, s uh nk a little bit and then continued on lol....
As to my understanding haiku as I was taught and also as my daughter was tecently told to bring home and run through is the
5-7-5 method with zero mention of any of your points posted in the opening statement
So I believe the government "education" system has bastardised the form and forced it to be viewed in its most basic way without depth or nuance.
The ooening statemwnt and subsequent back and forths sans interruptions was informative and interesting.
By the way I've now got my 6month old daughter practicing to drive a car because rules were meant to be broken.... before they're even learned
I'm not surprised.
The public education system in 'Merica 1976 - 1989 taught me Jack Shit about Poetry.
Everything I learned about it I learned online from 2004-ish onward.
And we all know when it comes to the Internet there is a fuckton of innocent ignorance and deliberate misinformation.
Wow this thread went sideways, upside down, righted itself, s uh nk a little bit and then continued on lol....
As to my understanding haiku as I was taught and also as my daughter was tecently told to bring home and run through is the
5-7-5 method with zero mention of any of your points posted in the opening statement
So I believe the government "education" system has bastardised the form and forced it to be viewed in its most basic way without depth or nuance.
The ooening statemwnt and subsequent back and forths sans interruptions was informative and interesting.
By the way I've now got my 6month old daughter practicing to drive a car because rules were meant to be broken.... before they're even learned
I'm not surprised.
The public education system in 'Merica 1976 - 1989 taught me Jack Shit about Poetry.
Everything I learned about it I learned online from 2004-ish onward.
And we all know when it comes to the Internet there is a fuckton of innocent ignorance and deliberate misinformation.
Commentonly said:
Wow this thread went sideways, upside down, righted itself, s uh nk a little bit and then continued on lol....
As to my understanding haiku as I was taught and also as my daughter was recently told to bring home and run through is the
5-7-5 method with zero mention of any of your points posted in the opening statement
So I believe the government "education" system has bastardised the form and forced it to be viewed in its most basic way without depth or nuance.
The opening statement and subsequent back and forths sans interruptions was informative and interesting.
By the way I've now got my 6month old daughter practicing to drive a car because rules were meant to be broken.... before they're even learnedthat's awful! and lazy of the teachers/system... the information is so readily available at the click of a mouse. perhaps it should be termed traditional american-non-japanese haiku, lol
i come from the uk, but only ever learned about haiku as a japanese form of delicacy and insight even if it was never treated in-depth. the school was more about the romantics and shakespeare. i was fortunate enough to come into contact with an award-winning haiku poet who showed me the basic ropes and pointed me in the right direction. i was fortunate enough to co-write some pieces with him and my interest took me down paths on the net, looking at the top publications and poets in the form. can i write like tham? newp. never claimed to. most of mine are shorts or, as i tend to term them, faux-ku. i refuse to denigrate the art form by calling those short little poems haiku when they're not.
your baby girl... aw, you might regret this when she's 5 and decides it'll be fun to take daddy's car for a drive :D
Wow this thread went sideways, upside down, righted itself, s uh nk a little bit and then continued on lol....
As to my understanding haiku as I was taught and also as my daughter was recently told to bring home and run through is the
5-7-5 method with zero mention of any of your points posted in the opening statement
So I believe the government "education" system has bastardised the form and forced it to be viewed in its most basic way without depth or nuance.
The opening statement and subsequent back and forths sans interruptions was informative and interesting.
By the way I've now got my 6month old daughter practicing to drive a car because rules were meant to be broken.... before they're even learned
that's awful! and lazy of the teachers/system... the information is so readily available at the click of a mouse. perhaps it should be termed traditional american-non-japanese haiku, lol i come from the uk, but only ever learned about haiku as a japanese form of delicacy and insight even if it was never treated in-depth. the school was more about the romantics and shakespeare. i was fortunate enough to come into contact with an award-winning haiku poet who showed me the basic ropes and pointed me in the right direction. i was fortunate enough to co-write some pieces with him and my interest took me down paths on the net, looking at the top publications and poets in the form. can i write like tham? newp. never claimed to. most of mine are shorts or, as i tend to term them, faux-ku. i refuse to denigrate the art form by calling those short little poems haiku when they're not.
your baby girl... aw, you might regret this when she's 5 and decides it'll be fun to take daddy's car for a drive :D
Ahavati and Butters
It seems that my words have come across as lectures rather than explanations. Rather ironic given the circumstance: preaching to choir about the dangers of preaching!
I will also admit that I was more in line with the 'dissenting' thoughts so was more inclined to see those posts as valid, if rather close to the edge of acceptable. - making it difficult for me to see and act as I would like to or as expected to.
It has been acted on by another Mod so will not say any more about it here, as there is no point digging it up when it has been planted over. Such talk may be best in another thread, but that thread would be nothing but a powder keg from the start with the most measured and reasonable posts coming from those who have nothing to do with any of this!
I have problems with "because the experts and publishers say so" as authority does not necessarily mean right. Plus it can mean that the facts/ ideas they have are suited to specific circumstances rather than the general. Meaning that they know exactly how a haiku should and could be, but it does not easily translate/ convey across to others. In other words they know the traditional haiku version (a) and cannot connect or reconcile it with the bastardised common version (b) so completely disregard (b) rather than looking for the seeds of (a) in the body of (b).
My knowledge of poetry forms is extremely small and limited, so I am more prone to talk around forms than actually about forms. The talk will hopefully still be relevant but not as direct and informed as others may be.
A hopefully interesting and pertinent point, is should haiku in general be written vertically rather than horizontally? This would be somewhat truer to the form, and possibly neutralise the 5-7-5 problem as the overall view of the haiku could be seen rather than reading it horizontally with semi-conscious effort to check for the 5-7-5 style and tick the mental box of it being a 'haiku'.
It seems that my words have come across as lectures rather than explanations. Rather ironic given the circumstance: preaching to choir about the dangers of preaching!
I will also admit that I was more in line with the 'dissenting' thoughts so was more inclined to see those posts as valid, if rather close to the edge of acceptable. - making it difficult for me to see and act as I would like to or as expected to.
It has been acted on by another Mod so will not say any more about it here, as there is no point digging it up when it has been planted over. Such talk may be best in another thread, but that thread would be nothing but a powder keg from the start with the most measured and reasonable posts coming from those who have nothing to do with any of this!
I have problems with "because the experts and publishers say so" as authority does not necessarily mean right. Plus it can mean that the facts/ ideas they have are suited to specific circumstances rather than the general. Meaning that they know exactly how a haiku should and could be, but it does not easily translate/ convey across to others. In other words they know the traditional haiku version (a) and cannot connect or reconcile it with the bastardised common version (b) so completely disregard (b) rather than looking for the seeds of (a) in the body of (b).
My knowledge of poetry forms is extremely small and limited, so I am more prone to talk around forms than actually about forms. The talk will hopefully still be relevant but not as direct and informed as others may be.
A hopefully interesting and pertinent point, is should haiku in general be written vertically rather than horizontally? This would be somewhat truer to the form, and possibly neutralise the 5-7-5 problem as the overall view of the haiku could be seen rather than reading it horizontally with semi-conscious effort to check for the 5-7-5 style and tick the mental box of it being a 'haiku'.
Viddax said:Ahavati and Butters
It seems that my words have come across as lectures rather than explanations. Rather ironic given the circumstance: preaching to choir about the dangers of preaching!
I will also admit that I was more in line with the 'dissenting' thoughts so was more inclined to see those posts as valid, if rather close to the edge of acceptable. - making it difficult for me to see and act as I would like to or as expected to.
It has been acted on by another Mod so will not say any more about it here, as there is no point digging it up when it has been planted over. Such talk may be best in another thread, but that thread would be nothing but a powder keg from the start with the most measured and reasonable posts coming from those who have nothing to do with any of this!
I have problems with "because the experts and publishers say so" as authority does not necessarily mean right. Plus it can mean that the facts/ ideas they have are suited to specific circumstances rather than the general. Meaning that they know exactly how a haiku should and could be, but it does not easily translate/ convey across to others. In other words they know the traditional haiku version (a) and cannot connect or reconcile it with the bastardised common version (b) so completely disregard (b) rather than looking for the seeds of (a) in the body of (b).
My knowledge of poetry forms is extremely small and limited, so I am more prone to talk around forms than actually about forms. The talk will hopefully still be relevant but not as direct and informed as others may be.
A hopefully interesting and pertinent point, is should haiku in general be written vertically rather than horizontally? This would be somewhat truer to the form, and possibly neutralise the 5-7-5 problem as the overall view of the haiku could be seen rather than reading it horizontally with semi-conscious effort to check for the 5-7-5 style and tick the mental box of it being a 'haiku'.
hiya
the layout that way is unique to ACTUAL japanese haiku due to the language being written that way; it's not a layout that ever crossed over into english-language haiku or, as far as i'm aware (so it might have) into translations of the japanese language into english.
would it do anything other than make the poem harder to read? i don't think so, personally. we're just not into reading our letters vertically, or right to left as in some other languages.
the whole 5-7-5 thing isn't even the real crux of the matter; it's the whole spirit of the haiku, how it addresses and celebrates nature, juxtaposes 2 images, and is a fleeting 'of the moment' poem, using straightforward language and avoiding metaphors, similies, titles, etc..., to best convey the impression.
regarding your other comments about 'experts': no-one yet has offered anything to counter-argue my point that this whole "preciousness" surrounding non-haiku would be seen reflected in any other form under discussion.
good poets know how to bend the forms to suit their poems—as Spenser did with the petrarch italian sonnet form; the best create new versions of the form—Shakespeare.
i honestly do not believe that if i'd have created this topic as 'my per peeve about ghazals' (or sonnets, or ANY other form) it would have kicked off such reactions.
i'm not speaking about, or to, certain individuals but, rather, the overarching 'entitlement' (if that's the right word) for people in the western world (america probably being the worst general offender) to bugger with this specific poetry form unashamedly yet still want to call it by its japanese title. personally, if i'd been writing something as a 'form poem' fully believing that was how to write one but then came across the genuine information which showed me i was in error, i'd appreciate that and try to adapt accordingly. i'd not stick out my chin and deny reality.
It seems that my words have come across as lectures rather than explanations. Rather ironic given the circumstance: preaching to choir about the dangers of preaching!
I will also admit that I was more in line with the 'dissenting' thoughts so was more inclined to see those posts as valid, if rather close to the edge of acceptable. - making it difficult for me to see and act as I would like to or as expected to.
It has been acted on by another Mod so will not say any more about it here, as there is no point digging it up when it has been planted over. Such talk may be best in another thread, but that thread would be nothing but a powder keg from the start with the most measured and reasonable posts coming from those who have nothing to do with any of this!
I have problems with "because the experts and publishers say so" as authority does not necessarily mean right. Plus it can mean that the facts/ ideas they have are suited to specific circumstances rather than the general. Meaning that they know exactly how a haiku should and could be, but it does not easily translate/ convey across to others. In other words they know the traditional haiku version (a) and cannot connect or reconcile it with the bastardised common version (b) so completely disregard (b) rather than looking for the seeds of (a) in the body of (b).
My knowledge of poetry forms is extremely small and limited, so I am more prone to talk around forms than actually about forms. The talk will hopefully still be relevant but not as direct and informed as others may be.
A hopefully interesting and pertinent point, is should haiku in general be written vertically rather than horizontally? This would be somewhat truer to the form, and possibly neutralise the 5-7-5 problem as the overall view of the haiku could be seen rather than reading it horizontally with semi-conscious effort to check for the 5-7-5 style and tick the mental box of it being a 'haiku'.
hiya
the layout that way is unique to ACTUAL japanese haiku due to the language being written that way; it's not a layout that ever crossed over into english-language haiku or, as far as i'm aware (so it might have) into translations of the japanese language into english.
would it do anything other than make the poem harder to read? i don't think so, personally. we're just not into reading our letters vertically, or right to left as in some other languages.
the whole 5-7-5 thing isn't even the real crux of the matter; it's the whole spirit of the haiku, how it addresses and celebrates nature, juxtaposes 2 images, and is a fleeting 'of the moment' poem, using straightforward language and avoiding metaphors, similies, titles, etc..., to best convey the impression.
regarding your other comments about 'experts': no-one yet has offered anything to counter-argue my point that this whole "preciousness" surrounding non-haiku would be seen reflected in any other form under discussion.
good poets know how to bend the forms to suit their poems—as Spenser did with the petrarch italian sonnet form; the best create new versions of the form—Shakespeare.
i honestly do not believe that if i'd have created this topic as 'my per peeve about ghazals' (or sonnets, or ANY other form) it would have kicked off such reactions.
i'm not speaking about, or to, certain individuals but, rather, the overarching 'entitlement' (if that's the right word) for people in the western world (america probably being the worst general offender) to bugger with this specific poetry form unashamedly yet still want to call it by its japanese title. personally, if i'd been writing something as a 'form poem' fully believing that was how to write one but then came across the genuine information which showed me i was in error, i'd appreciate that and try to adapt accordingly. i'd not stick out my chin and deny reality.
from now on, i'm just going to stick to calling the traditional japanese form 'hokku' and not become embroiled in pointless discussions about what gets termed 'haiku' today by so many (a name applicable only from the 1800's anyway) and bears little or no resemblance to the japanese form and ignores most of its ethos.
...just don't ever tell me 'this is traditional japanese haiku' when it's something entirely not. :D
...just don't ever tell me 'this is traditional japanese haiku' when it's something entirely not. :D
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
Anonymous said:<< post removed >>
It's because there is a difference in Traditional Japanese Haiku and the Western version. It's almost like reading a book that's been translated. You know there is going to be some deviation to the text, and possibly essence. But at least it's called a 'translation' vs traditional text.
Purporting that western versions are traditional Japanese Haiku is inaccurate. It also propagates misinformation regarding the true nature of the form. #fact
I don't understand the issue people have with labeling their work what it is - traditional or western. There is nothing wrong with either. Would you write a new form of poetry, label it sestina, then pass it off as a traditional sestina? Same question with sonnet, and so forth. No; you would not because it would not be accurate.
All forms can be complicated to study. Guess that's why I stick mostly to free verse! Though when I write a haiku, I do attempt to adhere to the traditional Japanese vs western equivalents.
It's because there is a difference in Traditional Japanese Haiku and the Western version. It's almost like reading a book that's been translated. You know there is going to be some deviation to the text, and possibly essence. But at least it's called a 'translation' vs traditional text.
Purporting that western versions are traditional Japanese Haiku is inaccurate. It also propagates misinformation regarding the true nature of the form. #fact
I don't understand the issue people have with labeling their work what it is - traditional or western. There is nothing wrong with either. Would you write a new form of poetry, label it sestina, then pass it off as a traditional sestina? Same question with sonnet, and so forth. No; you would not because it would not be accurate.
All forms can be complicated to study. Guess that's why I stick mostly to free verse! Though when I write a haiku, I do attempt to adhere to the traditional Japanese vs western equivalents.
