Which one?

[annaswirls]

Thank you Senna, I apologize for responding so quickly through my emotions, and without fully reading your post. I think this place would be so much better if we all waited 10 minutes before responding. Or a day.

More soon,

Anna

Dear Anna,

my comment was based on your comments and writings (on Literotica only).

I respect you as a person and as a poet. Thus I am sad now.

Warmest regards,


Senna Jawa

 

[Liar]

Liar, but of course!

Not everything which I write is written equally seriously. I just wanted to share Jonathan's and my own observations, which are of a statistical nature only.

Point taken.

Anyway, I just wanted to add that I didn't find the extra words in the second poem very redundant, had they been separated. It's only in comparison that one feels more wordy than the other. They're both kinda on the slim side. But the main reason that I preferred the first version was not for the economy of words but for the prosody of the lines. In terms of rhytm and audibility, the first version wins hands down. Some say that's not a factor to consider for a poem, but for me it's paramount both when writing and reading.

 

[Senna Jawa]

First of all, MNS, I don't care at all about your white blackmail at the bottom of your post (do whatever you please, who cares). It's low & ridiculous.

First 1201 has mentioned and then MNS has quoted a famous poem by Ezra Pound, which unfortunately has a title too (provided in this thread by 1201):

In a Station of the Metro
​

The apparition of these faces in the crowd;
Petals on a wet, black bough.
​

It takes a poet to make this kind of a comparison, where the compared objects (the faces and the petals) are so distant conceptually. Such distance is one of the main features correlated with the strength of a simile or metaphor or juxtaposition or kenning.

I am not an historian, so I am not sure to what extent this non-western in its character comparison is original (certainly Chinese poets were sometimes saying "petals" or "fallen petals" when they meant prostitutes or girls in the context of male entertainment). The originality of Pound's comparison is not important to us in this thread though.

Before I get to the main point, let me address some technical details.

Critics are impressed with the usage of the word "apparition". I am not.

The phrase "these faces" is bad, very poor. It's amazing that Pound wasn't sensitive and alert to such an obvious defect in his art of words. He was not sensitive about the poetical ethics either. It's a detail, it's easy to fix, but it spoils his poem in a big way.

Pound's simile is nice, and the rest of my critique of his poem is given with the understanding that we are talking about a strong poem.

The simile fits the context but not quite, I think. If we had a row or two of girls or children, who were sitting, being more or less immobile, the simile would work. But in a metro station these people were moving. In that respect, you may compare Pound's poem with my emigration.

I am assuming that "these" )) people were moving because otherwise the bough would not work; otherwise you'd have a cluster of people rather than something vaguely aligned like along a bough.

By giving the title and then the text, just as he did, Pound said too much, he took away too much of the fresh vegies from the reader; instead, he gave the reader the stuff which was chewed by him too much. Once again, you may compare this situation with my poem (BTW, I was not familiar with Pound's poem at the time of writing mine; even later, Pound existed in my mind more as a critic than as a poet).

Finally the main point and the reason why my haiku from this thread is in a higher league than the Pound's poem: Pound, more or less, said it all; he didn't leave any 50% for the reader. On one hand you have the classical haiku by the great masters, and the one from this thread, where reader can find poetry within her/himself, while on the other hand, in the case of Pound, Pound did all the poeting, so to speak. So, sure, you may still admire it, and no more. Pound was one of the pioneers who had promoted the Oriental poetry in the West. But you may see from his critical writings that his understanding of poetry was way more primitive than the old Chinese understanding. Ironically, it is the Pound's stage which is taught at the poetry classes in the US. Well, it's still not too bad

Regards,

Senna Jawa

 

[Cub4ucme]

Reading this thread is like watching some little kid banging
his head against the wall trying to convince the crowd
that it doesn't hurt and isn't doing any damage because
he knows how to hit the wall just right.


It's utterly ridiculous and very humorous at times.

Senna,

If you would like me to volunteer ten sites where you can
post your Haiku to receive validated and professional
critical analysis by way of critique I 'd be more than
happy to oblige.

One thing I learned a long time ago about presenting
poetry to an audience is:

Once you write the poem, you have to let it go
and see whether it stands up on its own or not.

Trying to defend poetry that obviously missed the mark
to a point where it falls dead on a page is a senseless
attempt at validation. You will never be sucessfull
in convincing one reader that your poem is better
than it is.

The poetry speaks for itself.


Your Haiku isn't very good.

Your free verse poetry isn't much better.

Your ego is flying far above your capacity
to write sucessfull poetry.

If you love the art then invest in your poems
the same amount of time you invest in defending
them and you might find down the road
you won't have to defend them any longer.

At some point they just might speak for themselves.

Just my take.

I still realize poetry is very subjective, but I'd wager
these Haiku would fall on their face in ANY critical
environment.

They really don't live up to the even the minimul expectations
of enlightenment and containment.

best,
andy






.

 

[Cub4ucme]

Stunning

Finally the main point and the reason why my haiku from this thread is in a higher league than the Pound's poem: Pound, more or less, said it all; he didn't leave any 50% for the reader. Regards,

Senna Jawa

Stunning that you take the liberty to suggest your Haiku
is better than the writing of Ezra Pound.



You also suggest that Pound left nothing up to the reader.


Once again you are sadly mistaken. It is you who left nothing
up to the reader. Your mirror for poetry is flawed to the
point that it conjures up its own image based on the
needs of your ego. This is clearly evident in your posts.


Pound's poem creates a paradox of sorts.


My take on it is one finds it very difficult to look
at a group of people without looking harder at
one for some undefined reason.

I further sense Pound's point was to choose a color
in this process of selection.


I might choose blue, you green, someone else red.


Furthermore the use of the word "apparition"
seems to me to be the way Pound viewed the
selected subjects, how they might have appeared
through his eyes.


All of these conclusions are mine based on the reading
of the poem. They come from a two line poem
that might speak differently to me the next time
I read it.


As a reader I view his poem as extemely thought
provoking and respect the fact that it allows
for interpretation.


Quite the contrary to what you have suggested
so boldly above.

Your Haiku resides in a box that traps the
reader in the poem.

There is little or no sense of enlightenment
when the read is done.

It amazes me that you continue on this foolish journey.

There is a humorous side to your posts, though.


It appears you have yourself convinced
that you are connected to chord-strings of poetic
integrity when it is blantanly obvious you are
swimming in a sea of your own blindness.


It's humorous to me to witness the clear and evident
irony of a lost sheep with an ego expanded to the point
where it's almost interesting to witness.


As far as the poster who feels it might be better
to wait to respond to posts. There is some creedence
to that. However, when one is certain of the points
they wish to make and they require no further
contemplation waiting would only require him
to go back and refresh his mind by rereading
the prior posts.

That's not something I'm interested in doing here.


best,
andy

 

[Senna Jawa]

Why do you post your work at literotica if you have so little respect in general for our opinions and poetry?

It's not that simple, Anna. Let me try to answer your question on "Lit blog" (or was it rhetoric?).

I appreciate your metaphor of eating fatty, sugary foods and so on. Perhaps you have a point here, but still, I have read many "good" poems, Literotica is about 5% of what I read. Don't make such presumptions. I have read many classical haiku, and shorter poems here there and everywhere and have often left with a response.. A feeling. An Ah-ha reaction. I know how to appreciate subtlety.

Angeline has posted at one time a classical English poem. I have succeeded in convincing her that that highly respected poem was actually way weaker than an older by many centuries Chinese poem. Nevertheless she still liked that British poem. Angeline's education is her strength, but her intensive contact with the respected but poor poetry has somewhat conditioned her. You know, you hear for years: THIS is a classical POEM, and THIS is another classical POEM, ... when a lot of it is junk. Then reading good poetry cannot automatically undo that conditioning. As you see, things are not simple.

Now a digression (it's only fractionally related to this issue of your exposure to poetry).

***

Anna, you made an excellent first step in reading my haiku, when you mentioned the surprise. Let me, as a grateful gesture, explain explicitly where that surprise comes from.

High level poetry is possible thanks to all kinds of defaults. The easiest and the simplest defaults are situational (poets should have this default principle in their bones):

For instance, if you mention a person sitting in a room, then it means that that person is alone (since you didn't mention any other people in the room). Youngsters love to write "I am sitting lonely in my room" or even worse "I am sitting in my room, all by myself". That's poor. They do not take advantage of the default. Such writing is boring, and it feels cliched too.

Back to my haiku. The first part does not mention any snow. Thus, by default, there is no snow. By default, the lyrical subject knows nothing about snow.

Theoretically, s/he could know about snow from radio or from yahoo news. But there is nothing about it in the poem, hence snow does not exist for the lyrical subject. That's the poetry efficient way of communication.

Now you see where the surprise came from. From default.

This was just a digression.

*****

So, you did (you felt) what my 3-4 critics in this thread have failed to do. You made that first step--surprise (by snow). Now, if you were immersed in poetry, you'd continue!!! (One step is nice but here you need to go on). You feel that my poem is unfinished. But I did my part. It's unfinished because you, the reader, failed to do your part. It's you who has to finish it. I have provided the sensual (material) part. You are the one to provide what is going beyond the scene, or in the larger time frame, in the more general, total dimensions of life, of experience and finally of emotions.

If you were immersed in poetry then you'd continue, you'd have it by now in your bones to continue, it'd be an unavoidable reflex. That's what is expected from the readers of profound haiku or else the whole haiku idea would be nothing. And now I have news for you. The same is true about the whole poetry (in my view):

prose: author -- 90%, reader -- 10%;

poetry: author -- 50%, reader -- 50%

Now, Anna, be frank, when you're about to read a poem, are you really ready for providing your reader's 50% of the poetry?

The unfortunate answer is, that you & everybody do not have a good reason to be ready, because most of the poems are not worthy of such an anticipation, of that reader's readiness for providing her/his 50%. Most of the poems/authors are not written/writing like this.

Worse than that. There is a certain additional complication to this. I'll explain in a moment.

First, when you write, what is your subconscious plan/expectation. Do you more or less have your total poem in your mind, then you put it in the words, and that's what you are offering to the reader? Or are you in the default state (without any conscious effort) of leaving half of the poetry for the reader to do?

Now about that ugly, bad taste complication. Many authors actually know, in a messy way (void of understanding) that in a poem you should not state everything explicitly, that you should leave certain things for the reader. On the top of it the authors want to look intelligent and even brilliant. So, instead of stating things in a way which is the easiest to understand, they create lousy puzzles (which would never be accepted by the "games & puzzles" magazines). You take that trickery away, and nothing is left from their poems. (The other idiotic attempts at originality and brilliancy involve all kind of unnatural phrases, language wise, or logic wise, or image wise).

Such authors don't understand that to leave something to the reader means truly to leave it to the reader. Instead, they do write it down but in a stupidly convoluted way, which they consider oh-so poetic).

Such authors don't understand that if a good poem is difficult to understand, it is not because it has tricky puzzles but because the reader has to be mature as a poetry reader (has to have a thing like life experience, intelligence, imagination, ...) to understand the meaning of the poem. A great poem may be (and most likely is) very straightforward but it may take a reader months and years to understand it properly for profound reasons, not because of trickery.

***

Anna, you seem to say, that since Literotica is but 5% of your poetic experience/activity, I should not judge the degree to which you are immersed in good poetry. I'll use another culinary metaphor.

In all-you-can-eat buffet there are large caldrons with soup. You pour into your small bowl but two large spoons. Nevertheless, like everybody else, you judge the soup. Why, even a teaspoon may give an excellent idea about the taste and about the skill of the cook (if not a whole info about the soup).

Your single comment about my haiku, and the variation at the end of it, was such a spoon. Your suggestion of having BOTH the windowless office AND the eyes showed clearly that the cook had some wrong ideas. And that was not the only problem, there were more. That one tea spoon of your poetry (the variation) would make me hesitant to try more of that soup. It's just practically impossible for you not to go wrong in your poems when you did go wrong in your variation with such a conviction. Your poems can be, and are!, still of interest, and they are much better than so many other recognized and respected poems, but they are bound to have flaws. Thus you may be satisfied with this state of affairs (since you are going to be published, praised, respected as a poet) or you may decide that such flaws and lack of good taste disqualifies a poem as an accomplished artistic achievement.

Now you see that haiku, besides being a valuable chapter of poetry, can serve also as a poetic kindergarten (or a lab), where one may learn poetry under simpler circumstances (some issues either do not occur or on a miniature scale only).

You can tell me I am wrong a hundred times, but it will just get you frustrated and I doubt that you telling me why I should think your poems are perfect will make it so.

How about continuing your journey? There is no trickery. It's all natural. Just continue. Move it, Anna!

Or should I run run run from literotica as fast as I can?

What would be the point? It's the attitude which is essential, not the place. You'll have the same problems anywhere. You have here Eve, Angeline, Rybka, Liar, ... You need a change inside you, not outside. No environment will help you if you act in that environment superficially. Don't believe in "better poetry forums" (fora?). First of all believe in shaking the guy who gives you an opinion, and see if the opinion stays or disappear (I mean, shake it in your mind ). Pay an attention only to the objective remarks, to the remarks which you may verify. If you have to rely on an opinion then stay with your own.

I apologize for manipulating your poem. It was a mistake.

Not at all!!!

Variations, translations, ... are priceless as a learning tool. They help you to see where exactly the poetry resides. Look at the differences between the texts. That's where poetry hides.

Observe that from your exercise (variation) you got certain things back from me black in white, no shambo-mambo: 1.the butter-margarine issue 2. the impotent usage of "that".

I better stop now. This post is awfully looooooong.

Best regards,

Senna Jawa

 

[Senna Jawa]

It's not that simple, Anna. Let me try to answer your question on "Lit blog" (or was it rhetoric?).

Anna, please, let me know (I am still not promising that I will give an answer, but I intend to ).

 

[Cub4ucme]

***



Back to my haiku. The first part does not mention any snow. Thus, by default, there is no snow. By default, the lyrical subject knows nothing about snow.

Theoretically, s/he could know about snow from radio or from yahoo news. But there is nothing about it in the poem, hence snow does not exist for the lyrical subject. That's the poetry efficient way of communication.

Now you see where the surprise came from. From default.

This was just a digression.

*****


Senna Jawa

The first person I ever really listened to when it came to the subject
of poetics was a man named Richard Carter. There were so many
profound things he left with me, to this day I hear them
in my head when I am reading comments such as Senna's.

I clearly remember him telling me, any time you have to
explain why your poetry is valid, or what you meant to someone
who didn't get it you are swimming upstream.

Not an exact quote.

I am now sitting here thinking, This guy
will go down fighting before he listens to anyone, or even takes
a second look at his poems based on reader response. The end
result is two bad poems with a ton of explanations from the
author as to why they are valid, or better than Ezra Pound, all written
by the same man who authored the poem.

Poetry doesn't work like that.

You write a poem and you give it up and let it go when it hits
the airways.

It works, or it doesn't.
It's not rocket science.

That said, there are different audiences who prefer different types
of poets and poems. As a result a poem that works here might
not in another forum, mag., ezine, etc..

My point with these two haiku, is they won't work in any reputable
poetic environment. They aren't publishable.

They simply fall on their face dead.

Nothing Senna ever writes or does will change that.
The only thing that would change it is to rewrite the
poems until they bring the reader to a point of
greater appreciation for his points.

Of course, he won't ever do that.

He's too caught up in some weird space that has
him convinced they should already be doing that
even though they aren't.

I don't get it.

I never will.

best,
andy

 

[MyNecroticSnail]

But they are. You need to immerse yourself more into good poetry. (You CAN'T do it when you praise junk on Literotica. You pay the price). Both my versions are excellent haiku/poems. If they were signed Basho and Buson then my critics: 1201+andy+MNS, would have only goooood words for them.

This statement demolishes itself, because of the fact that you are relying on that effect yourself, don't question because I am Senna Jawa. This is nothing more than a cheap shot against people that least deserve it.

Now Senna, I have respect for you, as one of the few who writes intelligently about the Art of poety. I would like to avoid these shots.

 

[MyNecroticSnail]

First of all, MNS, I don't care at all about your white blackmail at the bottom of your post (do whatever you please, who cares). It's low & ridiculous.

First 1201 has mentioned and then MNS has quoted a famous poem by Ezra Pound, which unfortunately has a title too (provided in this thread by 1201):

In a Station of the Metro
​

It takes a poet to make this kind of a comparison, where the compared objects (the faces and the petals) are so distant conceptually. Such distance is one of the main features correlated with the strength of a simile or metaphor or juxtaposition or kenning.

I am not an historian, so I am not sure to what extent this non-western in its character comparison is original (certainly Chinese poets were sometimes saying "petals" or "fallen petals" when they meant prostitutes or girls in the context of male entertainment). The originality of Pound's comparison is not important to us in this thread though.

Before I get to the main point, let me address some technical details.

Critics are impressed with the usage of the word "apparition". I am not.

The phrase "these faces" is bad, very poor. It's amazing that Pound wasn't sensitive and alert to such an obvious defect in his art of words. He was not sensitive about the poetical ethics either. It's a detail, it's easy to fix, but it spoils his poem in a big way.

Pound's simile is nice, and the rest of my critique of his poem is given with the understanding that we are talking about a strong poem.

The simile fits the context but not quite, I think. If we had a row or two of girls or children, who were sitting, being more or less immobile, the simile would work. But in a metro station these people were moving. In that respect, you may compare Pound's poem with my emigration.

I am assuming that "these" )) people were moving because otherwise the bough would not work; otherwise you'd have a cluster of people rather than something vaguely aligned like along a bough.

By giving the title and then the text, just as he did, Pound said too much, he took away too much of the fresh vegies from the reader; instead, he gave the reader the stuff which was chewed by him too much. Once again, you may compare this situation with my poem (BTW, I was not familiar with Pound's poem at the time of writing mine; even later, Pound existed in my mind more as a critic than as a poet).

Finally the main point and the reason why my haiku from this thread is in a higher league than the Pound's poem: Pound, more or less, said it all; he didn't leave any 50% for the reader. On one hand you have the classical haiku by the great masters, and the one from this thread, where reader can find poetry within her/himself, while on the other hand, in the case of Pound, Pound did all the poeting, so to speak. So, sure, you may still admire it, and no more. Pound was one of the pioneers who had promoted the Oriental poetry in the West. But you may see from his critical writings that his understanding of poetry was way more primitive than the old Chinese understanding. Ironically, it is the Pound's stage which is taught at the poetry classes in the US. Well, it's still not too bad

Regards,

Senna Jawa

Thank you. What I was looking for. This 50% for the reader. Distance. When does it become too much, too little? The word "fuck" is one point of departure, leaving alot to the reader, a blank page, no point, leaving all to the reader. They have no boundaries.

You need three points to define a boundary of operations for the imagination. Or it must proceed in a straight line. Some sort of realization must take place. Your critique of Pound's Metro illustrates one of the problems with Pound, he makes the realizations for you. But he often makes it enjoyable, the joy of discovery of what he doing with the craft.




"But you may see from his critical writings that his understanding of poetry was way more primitive than the old Chinese understanding." This I would like to hear more about.

 

[MyNecroticSnail]

-Stanley Fish
How to Recognize a Poem When You See One
"Do readers make meanings?"
Poem in Question.

Jacobs-Rosenbaum
Levin
Thorne
Hayes
Ohman (?)

Interesting....your thoughts, Senna?
Your poem as I see it has two points (three really, but one of them is off the page) and requires the reader to make a leap between them, with no direction and little to offer as the reward.

An example:

A black car rolls down the alleyway. (point A)

I write, I write, I write. (point B)

Leaves much to the imagination doesn't it, but it just lays there dead.

Fish's example, because it is in a classroom and interactive sets up both extra points furnished by the students, and it has the joy of discovery going for it.
What I see in yours, reduced to simplest terms with the two points illustrated in the text is little more than

klickety-klick
Oh!

Again, what am I missing? A boundaryless effect, that I have to furnish myself? I am trying to see what you are seeing because it may have value. That is respect. Show some in return.
Thank you
MNS

 

[MyNecroticSnail]

I

For instance, if you mention a person sitting in a room, then it means that that person is alone (since you didn't mention any other people in the room). Youngsters love to write "I am sitting lonely in my room" or even worse "I am sitting in my room, all by myself". That's poor. They do not take advantage of the default. Such writing is boring, and it feels cliched too.

Back to my haiku. The first part does not mention any snow. Thus, by default, there is no snow. By default, the lyrical subject knows nothing about snow.

Theoretically, s/he could know about snow from radio or from yahoo news. But there is nothing about it in the poem, hence snow does not exist for the lyrical subject. That's the poetry efficient way of communication.

Now you see where the surprise came from. From default.

This was just a digression.

*****

Surprise!

An alternate reading of this would be you were snorting coke and you sneezed - but that is just a digression. But I see no means of transport, no spoon, no rolled up bills.

 

[Senna Jawa]

An alternate reading of this would be you were snorting coke and you sneezed - but that is just a digression. But I see no means of transport, no spoon, no rolled up bills.

Alternate? Have you provided any reading earlier? Did anybody? Except for the initial step by Anna, I have not seen any.

======

I've introduced for the purpose of such discussions three kinds of readings:

• Interpretation
• Association
• Provocation

Interpretation takes into account the entire poem. Association takes into account a portion of the text, without contradicting any part of the poem. Provocation is like association but it is not free from contradictions with the rest of the poem.

Your reading is not an interpretation, nor association, but only a provocation. It is still interesting but it has only a limited value.

Regards,

Senna Jawa

PS. here are my 2 variations of my haiku:

****************************

all night
windowless office
in the morning
snow outdoors


​

***


eyes hovered over the keyboard all night
blinked at the snow outdoors in the morning


***

​

wlodzimierz holsztynski
1996-02-28


***

 

[MyNecroticSnail]

Alternate? Have you provided any reading earlier? Did anybody? Except for the initial step by Anna, I have not seen any.

======

I've introduced for the purpose of such discussions three kinds of readings:

• Interpretation
• Association
• Provocation

Interpretation takes into account the entire poem. Association takes into account a portion of the text, without contradicting any part of the poem. Provocation is like association but it is not free from contradictions with the rest of the poem.

Your reading is not an interpretation, nor association, but only a provocation. It is still interesting but it has only a limited value.

Regards,

Senna Jawa

PS. here are my 2 variations of my haiku:

****************************

all night
windowless office
in the morning
snow outdoors


​

***


eyes hovered over the keyboard all night
blinked at the snow outdoors in the morning


***

​

wlodzimierz holsztynski
1996-02-28


***

you are right, I apologise. The interpretation I have of this relies on the third point, which is off the text. I am not sure if it is valid, or if would be viewed as a Provocation.

Your "petals" comment bears further investagation, since I was under the impression that Pound really didn't know any Chinese until he was imprisioned. i.e. I'm not sure at the point of writing Station he was aware of that extra meaning. Somewhere I think I remember reading him saying all you needed was the understanding of the words of the poem to translate it.

I thank you, it is always worth reading you, most of your points have been well taken; this one still escapes me.

 

[Zhuk]

Hope you are well, Guru ji

office night
to morning snow
yawns


stretch
office night
to morning snow

 

[Senna Jawa]

office night
to morning snow
yawns

stretch
office night
to morning snow

​

Hey, it took Zhuk, to bring here the haiku spirit! But of course.

Hi Zhuk. Very nice. The first one may pass for senryu too. No, for a full blown senryu, you may have snores or snoring! The double meaning of stretch is excellent in the second one.

I am fine, I guess .

You may write for us some bits about yourself in the "Lit blog", if you feel like it. Some guys here don't even know about you, things are changing, moving. Not really, not much has changed around here.

Warm regards,

Wlodek (guru ji, senna jawa)

 

[MyNecroticSnail]

I
***

Anna, you made an excellent first step in reading my haiku, when you mentioned the surprise. Let me, as a grateful gesture, explain explicitly where that surprise comes from.

High level poetry is possible thanks to all kinds of defaults. The easiest and the simplest defaults are situational (poets should have this default principle in their bones):

For instance, if you mention a person sitting in a room, then it means that that person is alone (since you didn't mention any other people in the room). Youngsters love to write "I am sitting lonely in my room" or even worse "I am sitting in my room, all by myself". That's poor. They do not take advantage of the default. Such writing is boring, and it feels cliched too.

Back to my haiku. The first part does not mention any snow. Thus, by default, there is no snow. By default, the lyrical subject knows nothing about snow.

Theoretically, s/he could know about snow from radio or from yahoo news. But there is nothing about it in the poem, hence snow does not exist for the lyrical subject. That's the poetry efficient way of communication.

Now you see where the surprise came from. From default.

***************************




all night
windowless office
<surprise>
in the morning
snow outdoors


***


eyes hovered over the keyboard all night
<surprise>
blinked at the snow outdoors in the morning


***

back to this Senna, it looks like all further possibility of meaning is lost 30 seconds after reading.

Unlike Zhuk's which does have some stretch.

I would think what makes great poetry, is not only the initial discovery, but more importantly the added discovery in either the craft or layers of meaning.

How is yours different from:

I write, I write, I write.

<surprise>

A black car rolls down the alleyway.

just a question, Senna.

 

[Senna Jawa]

just a question, Senna.

Stop asking the same question again and again. Ask yourself. And have some respect for poetry. It's not nice what you are doing in this thread. You could do the same to every classical, wonderful haiku. Read and do what a reader is supposed to do, especially a reader of haiku. If you insist on keeping your mind closed and just arguing for the sake of arguing then do it alone. My poem speaks by itself. It's up to you to listen to it and do your reader's thing (or your reader's "think", sounds good too ).

 

[MyNecroticSnail]

Stop asking the same question again and again. Ask yourself. And have some respect for poetry. It's not nice what you are doing in this thread. You could do the same to every classical, wonderful haiku. Read and do what a reader is supposed to do, especially a reader of haiku. If you insist on keeping your mind closed and just arguing for the sake of arguing then do it alone. My poem speaks by itself. It's up to you to listen to it and do your reader's thing (or your reader's "think", sounds good too ).

I keep asking, because I don't see an answer. Contrary to what you believe, I respect you, and my mind is open for the answer. What I have seen in another thread is a demolishment of the Metro. Here I suggest that Pound may have abandoned the haiku as not suiting his purposes, partly because it is unworkable to translate that effect in English.
Here is what I think regarding yours, short version:
eyes hovered over the keyboard all night (section A)

blinked at the snow outdoors in the morning (section B)
They are roughly equal in size, somehow A has a relationship with B. This type of form is ofter used to illustrate contrast or similarity, you appear to be using it to illustrate surprise. That is OK, but in most invitations to be surprised, section A would be much larger, B would be the misdirection, the audience is walked along and something changed. You chose to go a different route, this becomes a mere excersise for your surprise. I assume you are attemping to do it by some form of parrelism, I offer to you there is not enough of it for it to work. I think it fails for that that. It is overcrystallized, but with no refraction, no luminous moments. (unlike Metro)
I like your work, your writing, this one fails. And you are the one that mentioned in another thread "Poetic Practices" good or bad. I am not going to reward you, or be intimidated by you into a blind accolade.

Ordinarily I would defer to your judgement, as recognition of your knowledge, and being the better poet. Not here.
I've read enough haiku, and Chinese poetry to realize how difficult to translate the shorthand that goes with it. A half page explanation.
Regarding Tu Fu, since his time China has been invaded twice, the Mongols, and the Manchus, and what is now known as Chinese (mandarin) has been greatly simplified (spoken). (Not to mention the bastardization the communists are doing (written)) The sonics of Tu Fu are gone.
Further more, I pass this along for your amusement; I wonder if something similar to kenning in the formulation of compound written charters in Chinese.
whale road = sea (Norse?)
pine rat = squirrel (Chinese. or so I'm told)


The link for the Fish article is above in this thread.
Thank You,
MNS

 

[Cub4ucme]

Stop asking the same question again and again. Ask yourself. And have some respect for poetry. It's not nice what you are doing in this thread. You could do the same to every classical, wonderful haiku. Read and do what a reader is supposed to do, especially a reader of haiku. If you insist on keeping your mind closed and just arguing for the sake of arguing then do it alone. My poem speaks by itself. It's up to you to listen to it and do your reader's thing (or your reader's "think", sounds good too ).

Yes, nothing could be more true.

Your poem, at very best, is quickly forgotten and poorly written.

It seems strange to me that you post a poem here and then
defend it with inadaquate responses, designed to make it appear
as if you are THE AUTHORITY.

Let the responders------ respond.

I had the same reaction to both of your haiku. They have
no sense of enlightenment and I could have written either
one of them in less than ten seconds.

All the doubletalk and obvious comments meant for intimidation
(like the ones above) will not make bad poetry, good.

There's a bottom line here that you just refuse to acknowledge.

There is not a single response by anyone other than yourself
that critically attempts to validate your claim that the poems
are very good.

It's both sad and humorous to watch the process evolve.

I'd recommend letting the poetry live or die fast on its own.
Your insistance only leads to quck recognition that you
don't have the ability, or authority, to critique haiku.

You may be well read on the subject but, your conclusions
are both atrocious and extremely innacurate.


best,
andy

 

[Senna Jawa]

Where is the anodyne, copacetic Anna?! Hey, Anna, get your your your get your purse over here and help.

and my mind is open for the answer.

Then go ahead. I refuse to provide the reflection, especially under the circumstances. It's the reader's duty to do it. Go for it. Put a reader's hat on your head instead of a critic hat. First things first. First you have to truly read the poem, including dwelling on it.

BTW, Zhuk's variations would be and are nice and interesting as stand alone haiku. In the presence of mine they are, by comparisons, just a fooling around, playing... that's what we do in the haiku environ. This should not obscure the fact that my haiku are classical-like, they have the grand scale and weight of the classical haiku.

This whole nonsensical critique of my haiku can be applied word for word to several famous haiku of the past, which shows how empty is this kind of commenting.

Here are some superfamous by Basho in Robert Hass translation:

A crow
has settled on a bare branch --
autumn evening
​

The old pond --
the frog jumps in,
sound of water.
​

or a bit less famous:

A snowy morning --
by myself,
chewing on dried salmon
​

​

You may take dozens upon dozens of the best haiku, and your and other idiotic comments will apply to them as much, or rather as little, as to my haiku.

I suggest that Pound may have abandoned the haiku as not suiting his purposes, partly because it is unworkable to translate that effect in English.

It is. But never mind. The speculations about Pound's thinking are just that, and they cannot impact the analysis of his poem. All these historical observations are interesting but irrelevant in the context of the value of Pound's poem. He was excited with his exercise but his poem was not organic. He had a nice association of faces and petals, but it didn't form a whole. The comparison was fine, while one part (the petal part) was superficial to the poem, was just a decoration, as in similes. His syntactical juxtaposition was not a true (semantical) juxtaposition, it was a semantical simile. It's all interesting but by making circles around it it gets boring. Enough.

you appear to be using it to illustrate surprise.

Yes, Anna has helped you that much. That's a good start, and not more. Now get going for real. Stop being a critic. First be a reader. Stop superficial "too short", "too long", etc nonsense. Read. Think. Identify yourself with the lyrical subject instead of playing a critic, counting the number of syllables, etc. And stop second guessing me (I am still alive, I can answer quetions, not like dear Pound), stop judging like "OK" or not "OK". It's arrogant. Read. Read the poem. Think instead of going through the motion of superficiality (avoid the premature, superficial thinking on the meta level).

I wonder if something similar to kenning in the formulation of compound written characters in Chinese.

By its very nature, Chinese has a lot of dead metaphors (dead kennings). It had to. But I am not aware of actual scaldic kennings in Chinese poetry. I am sure that one can find some isolated ones here or there but somehow they were not a regular part of Chinese poetry or of any poetry outside the scaldic poetry. I tried to revive them (as witnessed by some of my poems) but I have too little energy and my circumstances were not helping me. At one time I had initiated a very promising group poem thread at rec.arts.poems, based on kennings. It was going quite well for a while. Unfortunately, I moved at the time from California to Texas, have lost my access to Internet, and that was end of it. Too bad. Here at Literotica, we had and still have enough of talent to do things except for the stupid attitude which prevents Literoticians from making dramatic progress and an impact on the poetry scene. Some of us are here already over four years!!! Others not much less. I can bring the horse to the river. But sometimes I wonder if it is a donkey. Yes, there was more talent, and stronger, at r.a.p. in the old days (the flower of the English language poetry; r.a.p. had virtually a monopoly in those days!), but there is enough here too, and it's up to everybody to grow up. Well, this will not happen. This world is but chaos, which means irrationality and waste.

 

[Cub4ucme]

Here are some superfamous by Basho in Robert Hass translation:

A crow
has settled on a bare branch --
autumn evening
​

The old pond --
the frog jumps in,
sound of water.
​

or a bit less famous:

A snowy morning --
by myself,
chewing on dried salmon
​

​

You may take dozens upon dozens of the best haiku, and your and other idiotic comments will apply to them as much, or rather as little, as to my haiku.

.

It is critical that a reader experiences some form of enlightenment in haiku.
Let's take your examples:
A crow
has settled on a bare branch --
autumn evening


Here the poet leaves the reader with a vision of a crow on a bare branch.

We can assume the leaves have fallen to the ground so it is apparent the crow is very visible. Furthermore we can assume the crow has a purpose for being there. What is that purpose? Until it is defined we cannot reach a sense of enlightenment. Once you figure out the crow is on the bare branch
because he can see his surroundings as clear as you can see him you begin to GET the haiku. Now, from there you can guess the crow is searching for prey on the ground before dusk from an advantaged position. Knowing full well his enemies aren't likely to attack him there yet he has an advantage
with the clear sight afforded him.

It is not the same as coming out of a windowless office after working all night and finding snow on the ground. It's fruitless this path you've chosen. First,
you imply that your haiku is better than Pounds. Now, you are trying to inform us that your poetry compares to Basho. It's not offensive; it's humorous.


________________________________________________________________


The old pond --
the frog jumps in,
sound of water.


Here we find a simple act. A frog jumping into a pond. Instead of depicting the sight (which is the natural response) the poet chooses to acknowledge SOUND which addressess the sense of hearing.

Where the enlightenment comes in is the sound that water makes isn't something we think about much. A frog jumping into water makes one sound.

Rain falling on a pond another and on and on ad-infinitum.

How you can continue to miss the point of enlightenment while you claim your haiku is equivelent to your own examples escapes me.

I am not claiming you don't write valid haiku. I am claiming the two poems you continue to defend I could have written in ten seconds. They are bad poems that don't compare with your examples or Pounds Metro poem.

This can (and unfortunately might) go on forever but, in the end your two poems will still be bad poems but any standards of critique offering critical judgement based on experience and knowledge.

Yes, I did intend to leave your judgement out with what I expressed above.

I have never in all my years witnessed someone defending their own bad poetry in such a way as to compare it to the Masters while the obvious is so apparent it's almost borderline frightening.

best,
andy

P.S. The rest of your post would be a waste of time to comment on. It's filled with more bad assumptions, rhetoric, and double-talk.

 

[bogusbrig]

Great haiku but what if you have no image of an old pond to bring to the haiku, what if you have never heard the plop of a frog jumping into water and I know many people that haven't. I asked in the bar. The poet makes assumptions that the reader will be culturally aware and to have experienced the images he asks the reader to picture. If the reader doesn't have those images or sounds or whatever, the poem has nothing to offer. Certainly from having visited Japan on many occasions and having several close Japanese friends, what they think of as an old pond is very different to what I think of as an old pond furnished with rusty old bike frames and prams. (I can't help it, it was where I was dragged up). Haiku do nothing for me and while I find all the writing about them interesting, I'm still waiting for a revelation. They still seem no more enlightening than newspaper headlines to me and less interesting. The reader brings everything and the poet offers next to nothing. It all seems a little like the emperor's new clothes to me. At least haiku written in Japanese have the poetry of wonderful calligraphy to make them visually arresting.

A crow
unfolds into flight
night falls​

 

[Senna Jawa]

A crow
unfolds into flight
night falls​

Bogu, this version is disquieting. Where did you get it from? Superficially, it is similar to the classical Basho' haiku, while in reality it's a completely different poem. It's a good one, just a good one, but nowhere near as great as the Basho' haiku. I dislike it, when a good poem does a damage to a great poem.

Bogu, have you just stated your disregard for (non-japanese ) haiku, and that's it, or are you interested in getting into it, in giving haiku a chance? I understand that bunches of bullshitters have at least partially affected your judgment, and that's a pity, because haiku is as real as poetry. Moreover, as a rule, haiku authors are better poets then regular poets, at least when they stick to haiku (some of the haiku specialits do not apply their haiku background when they write a longer poem, in which case they are no different from the rest of the poets).

Regards,

Senna Jawa

 

[Senna Jawa]

Certainly from having visited Japan on many occasions and having several close Japanese friends, what they think of as an old pond is very different to what I think of as an old pond furnished with rusty old bike frames and prams.

Bogu, here's what I have written in 1995:

a pond...
​

Regards,