"phenomenology" of Haiku . . . (?)

[Malcolm]

Please:

(1) I'm interested in how choice of literary structure actually affects the experience of a Haiku.

(2) In other words:  how does one structure make the experience different than another structure (?)

(3) Here is an example.

(4)  In prose, I could say:

went . . . store . . . bought . . . food

(5) Or I could say:

I went to the store and bought food.

(6) In a Haiku I could say:

faded paper plate
pinned to roadside tree
"picnic" with arrow

(7) Or I could say:

on faded paper plate
pinned to the roadside tree
"picnic" with an arrow

(8.) What is the specific experiential ("phenomenological') difference (?)

Thanks, Malcolm.

[AlanSummers]

Malcolm said:
I'm interested in how choice of literary structure actually affects the experience of a Haiku.

Alan:
An intriguing question in various ways.  The word 'haiku' if used for a Japanese poem is not a proper noun, so it does not require to be capitalised unless like any word that starts a sentence of course.

A choice of literary structure affecting the experience of a poem, haiku in particular? Do you mean that if a person, whether regular poet or not, decides to write poetry, and decides upon an idea of haiku poetry, it affects them in a specific manner?



Malcolm:
(2) In other words:  how does one structure make the experience different than another structure (?)


Alan:
I'm sure if someone only attempts to write limericks then they will look for different subject matter than someone who wishes to write sonnets. Could you expand?


Malcolm:
(3) Here is an example.

(4)  In prose, I could say:

went . . . store . . . bought . . . food

(5) Or I could say:

I went to the store and bought food.


Alan:
I can understand that (4) is a useful shorthand for a note stuck to a fridge. And (5) might be on a leaf of paper from a notebook left on a table?


Malcolm:
(6) In a Haiku I could say:

faded paper plate
pinned to roadside tree
"picnic" with arrow


Alan:
I feel this grouping of words gives an entirely different type of information. All three are in past tense, whereas a haiku verse is invariably in the present tense. The three line note suggests an observation of a note about a picnic that was relevant for an hour perhaps, but is now something of mild curiosity for non-involved people perhaps parking up for another type of rest stop?

As an attempt at haiku, but grammatically written in the past tense, but perhaps written as if a person has spotted a note about a past event, it's interesting. The past event which has been and gone has a person from the present day notice a sign of a picnic from the past.

Grammatically I would add an indefinite article [a] to the second line.

e.g.

pinned to a roadside tree

or

the faded paper plate
pinned to a roadside tree
"picnic" with arrow

It's actually a senryu, so grammatically it could eschew the haiku cut [kire] and be:


the faded paper plate
pinned to a roadside tree
is "picnic" with arrow

or

the faded paper plate
pinned to a roadside tree
is "picnic" with an arrow


Malcolm:
(7) Or I could say:

on faded paper plate
pinned to the roadside tree
"picnic" with an arrow


Alan:
I guess you could add 'on' but why not

on a faded paper plate
pinned to the roadside tree
"picnic" with an arrow

or

on the faded paper plate
pinned to a roadside tree
"picnic" with an arrow

?


Malcolm:
(8.) What is the specific experiential ("phenomenological') difference (?)


Alan:
So one definition or description of "phenomenological" is:
"the science of phenomena as distinct from that of the nature of being."

So is a message about food a phenomena? I guess in its simplest level it is. We think and act about food every day, whether once, twice, three or four times or even more including non-nutritional or nutritional "snacks". It's a regular phenomena that we wish to have food, whether allowed or denied. Western or non-Japanese haiku do focus on direct experience (experiential) poetry and almost exclusively written in the present tense even if the event occurred weeks, months or even years previously.


I feel that this is more to do about the most effective method of communication in general. Or are you exploring haiku as a potential means of communication?

Thanks, Malcolm.

What is the most effective mode of communication now. It used to be the meme, didn't it. Right now it's QAnon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QAnon


As we know, haiku and tanka were used as propaganda immediately after the Pearl Harbour attack just before Japan entered the WWII arena. Now we have a political Pearl Harbour but now it's a single nation pitting its own people against each other.

Which kind or type of communication are you interested about, and is it propaganda, conspiracy theory, past events, current or future ones, or what currently passes as normal or actually attempting to unearth "the normal"?

Intrigued by your responses.

warm regards,
Alan

Please:

(1) I'm interested in how choice of literary structure actually affects the experience of a Haiku.

(2) In other words:  how does one structure make the experience different than another structure (?)

(3) Here is an example.

(4)  In prose, I could say:

went . . . store . . . bought . . . food

(5) Or I could say:

I went to the store and bought food.

(6) In a Haiku I could say:

faded paper plate
pinned to roadside tree
"picnic" with arrow

(7) Or I could say:

on faded paper plate
pinned to the roadside tree
"picnic" with an arrow

(8.) What is the specific experiential ("phenomenological') difference (?)

Thanks, Malcolm.

EDIT REASON:
Correction. Mistakenly said (6) instead (5)

re:

I can understand that (4) is a useful shorthand for a note stuck to a fridge. And (5) might be on a leaf of paper from a notebook left on a table?

.