Do we know what we mean when we ku?

[haikurambler]

Basho's frog haiku.

Here's my own translation, from years ago, which I subsequently diiscovered was coefficient with Jane's (and, for the same reason - do you know what that reason is, incidentally?). . . .


old pond
a frog jumps in
the sound of water


Now. I've been returning to this astonishing non-rhyming tercet by the great man regularly for years. Every so often somethng new is realised. When it was first read, back in the day, it seemed so straight forward, you know, a child's picture story. However, as time marched irrevocably onwards, my understanding of THE KU IN ITSELF and one's PERSONAL REACTION TO THE KU MATERIAL deepened (as I continued the dive).

Thus is the basis of my question. It not only applies to other's ku, you see, but also, in my own experience, our own ku. The question might have been: Can we ever fathom a ku? So, maybe that can pad quietly in the background, also. . . .


jp

[Adelaide]

Can we ever fathom a ku?  By fathom I assume you mean: to penetrate to the truth of; to comprehend; to understand: (all meanings found in any dictionary)

When a poet writes a haiku we assume he knows and understands what he means; he is aware of the experience he wants to express and tries to express it in words following the haiku format.  The difficulty is in finding just the exact words which will give the reader the same experience. That in itself is an impossibility, since no two people are exactly alike.  The same experience will be filtered differently through different people. So then the poet hopes his words will give the reader a similar experience, an experience to which he can relate. If a reader does not fathom a haiku, the fault could be in either the reader or the poet: the poet is not clear enough in his choice of words or the reader is too removed from the time and place or has never had an experience remotely similar.

That being said, what if the poet himself doesn't quite know what he has experienced in regards to his emotions? Often, from personal experience, an incident, an image, a sensation occurs which I feel I must capture, but I'm not sure of what it is I want to capture. The feeling is so elusive that it defies words.  However, words are all I have, so I try to find the right ones.  The resulting haiku may or not be clear, even to myself. The shortness of haiku creates this challenge.

Scraping old paint–
through the open window,
spring dampness

A few years ago the above haiku of mine was published in MAYFLY. To this day I'm not sure what I wanted to capture–the ordinariness of the activity, the sound of the scrapper, the sounds from outside muffled by the fog (which I didn't mention but perhaps should have) the old paint chipped away, the new green just appearing on the trees, the energy I felt (it was early and I wasn't tired of the job as of yet) all of that and more. I don't know what Randy and Shirley Brooks saw in this haiku when they accepted it.  They must have seen and understood something, perhaps not exactly what I saw, but something that, for them, made it a haiku worthy enough to be published.

To get back to your question:  Can we ever fathom a haiku?  My answer is yes, to a certain degree. Only the poet can really understand what he means; the reader can only make a stab at it.


Adelaide

[haikurambler]

Can we ever fathom a ku?  By fathom I assume you mean: to penetrate to the truth of; to comprehend; to understand: (all meanings found in any dictionary)

When a poet writes a haiku we assume he knows and understands what he means; he is aware of the experience he wants to express and tries to express it in words following the haiku format.  The difficulty is in finding just the exact words which will give the reader the same experience. That in itself is an impossibility, since no two people are exactly alike.  The same experience will be filtered differently through different people. So then the poet hopes his words will give the reader a similar experience, an experience to which he can relate. If a reader does not fathom a haiku, the fault could be in either the reader or the poet: the poet is not clear enough in his choice of words or the reader is too removed from the time and place or has never had an experience remotely similar.

That being said, what if the poet himself doesn't quite know what he has experienced in regards to his emotions? Often, from personal experience, an incident, an image, a sensation occurs which I feel I must capture, but I'm not sure of what it is I want to capture. The feeling is so elusive that it defies words.  However, words are all I have, so I try to find the right ones.  The resulting haiku may or not be clear, even to myself. The shortness of haiku creates this challenge.

Scraping old paint–
through the open window,
spring dampness

A few years ago the above haiku of mine was published in MAYFLY. To this day I'm not sure what I wanted to capture–the ordinariness of the activity, the sound of the scrapper, the sounds from outside muffled by the fog (which I didn't mention but perhaps should have) the old paint chipped away, the new green just appearing on the trees, the energy I felt (it was early and I wasn't tired of the job as of yet) all of that and more. I don't know what Randy and Shirley Brooks saw in this haiku when they accepted it.  They must have seen and understood something, perhaps not exactly what I saw, but something that, for them, made it a haiku worthy enough to be published.

To get back to your question:  Can we ever fathom a haiku?  My answer is yes, to a certain degree. Only the poet can really understand what he means; the reader can only make a stab at it.


Adelaide

Hi Adelaide

Yes, to get to the bottom of the pond, so to say. Plumb its depths to the heart and soul of the matter at hand. I think it's  possible to approach this ideal. Certainly worth going for. But, needs practice like anything else, I guess.

You make some very good points. This notion that we know what we have written is a curious one. I find that, years later, I'm still riddling the meanings of haiku that, on the surface I know well enough, but, deeper down, are still unfolding their information.

Your own ku is interesting. At first I was getting you scraping paint off the view outside your window! :O) Obviously it was a hit with the people over at Mayfly Haiku Mag. Did you ever think to ask how they'd 'read' it?

When I write haiku it's usually from a real life experience. I try to resolve the whole experience as it happens. If I cannot, then as soon as I'm back from my haiku wanderings, it gets addressed. Tonight, for example, I caught a few owls hooting across the valley. Linking up the dimensions of the landscape. So, later I will join up the dots on my mental notes. This is a crude outline:


under Orion's orbit
a loose matrix of owl hoots
measures the world


I'm not at all happy with it. However, it's a start and places the event in a holding pattern. (Orion can be seen here in rainy England, during the dark half of the year. It's an old friend.)


Point is, I know what's to be expressed, it's how to do it, in this instance. On other occasions the thing is birthed complete and often the better for it. When it comes complete, that's probably due to undistracted contemplation? If I get it right, any reader should experience what I did?


John

[isafakir]

every time you read a poem, you are different, looking from a different place. with basho's frog, every time i read it, i have read more about it somewhere. or i have tried to rewrite into english the poem he must have written. i don't really like any of the translations i've ever read. they don't hold up for me.

the mystery of great literature is that wherever i go in life, it holds up, remains fresh, and my deeper experience of things just deepen my understanding of it.

a truly great work of art includes the unsaid unseen the liminal, the uncategorizable, so that we complete it with our own unconscious, it sets up reality in a way that we flow into it. so as we change, it changes. deepens, widens, gets more complex richer more multivalent. IMHO.

[haikurambler]

Yes, many target radii from the centre. We need a comprehensive map of the haiku universe. I propose a spherical model (based on a seasonal calander in 3D, in movement through time). What do you think?

[threebirds]

The question might have been: Can we ever fathom a ku?

One answer could be can one ever purposefully question what is life? Haiku is a breath; a moment; the wind; the sound of the wind; its movement through branches; the shadow cast at dawn; hoar frost pressed against a footprint. It takes being away to step back from something to gain perspective but how does one step back and assess something which is already ten paces behind the viewer at any given moment?

[haikurambler]

The question might have been: Can we ever fathom a ku?

One answer could be can one ever purposefully question what is life? Haiku is a breath; a moment; the wind; the sound of the wind; its movement through branches; the shadow cast at dawn; hoar frost pressed against a footprint. It takes being away to step back from something to gain perspective but how does one step back and assess something which is already ten paces behind the viewer at any given moment?

No. The question is as stated. There is a difference. The key idea, here, is 'what do we mean?'. Clearly this can be applied to anything. However, in this post of mine it refers to a ku (small Nippon 'poem'). Only this and nothing more.

[threebirds]

The question might have been: Can we ever fathom a ku?

One answer could be can one ever purposefully question what is life? Haiku is a breath; a moment; the wind; the sound of the wind; its movement through branches; the shadow cast at dawn; hoar frost pressed against a footprint. It takes being away to step back from something to gain perspective but how does one step back and assess something which is already ten paces behind the viewer at any given moment?

No. The question is as stated. There is a difference. The key idea, here, is 'what do we mean?'. Clearly this can be applied to anything. However, in this post of mine it refers to a ku (small Nippon 'poem'). Only this and nothing more.

The question might have been: Can we ever fathom a ku?

One answer could be can one ever purposefully question what is life? Haiku is a breath; a moment; the wind; the sound of the wind; its movement through branches; the shadow cast at dawn; hoar frost pressed against a footprint. It takes being away to step back from something to gain perspective but how does one step back and assess something which is already ten paces behind the viewer at any given moment?

No. The question is as stated. There is a difference. The key idea, here, is 'what do we mean?'. Clearly this can be applied to anything. However, in this post of mine it refers to a ku (small Nippon 'poem'). Only this and nothing more.

"ku", is a suffix relating to or describing the context of a "verse", not a "small Nippon poem"- which would mean "a small Japan poem" (which is grammatically obscure). The question, as applied to haiku, which took its meaning from hokku original; which stemmed from an division of orthodoxies and social class systems from an older system of haikai.

The question as stated is addressing a wave as if it were the entire ocean. To address the definitive nature of Japanese verse, one must understand its derivative state and from what it came from.

This very question, in application, is what lead to the shinkô haiku undô. If you are interested in a summary of the historical meaning, here is a nice essay on the subject:

http://simplyhaiku.com/SHv5n4/features/Ito.html

:)

[haikurambler]

I'm finding it increasingly difficult to understand what you're talking about. Please speak plainly (avoid metaphorical obfuscation if you can). We're addressing ku. Small Nippon songs or poems. The reason for this distinction is that hokku and/or haiku, also senryu and zappai, are contentious terms, especially outside of Japanese culture. We can call the entire tercet (et al) micropoetic genre (which deems itself haiku) something more universally acceptable for the purposes of this post's question. Thus, ku. If you like (and, if you know the difference sufficiently to present your response clearly and in plain language), speak of haiku or hokku and so on (and I will assume ku...to avoid off-topic meanderings into dreamland's contentious, anything goes, jazz). I also request that you speak in your own words, succinctly and to the point. You know, rather than links to slabs of other people's opinion (which are well enough known in any case). Thanks.