Richard GilbertA Muse Meant on Poetic Thinking
In contemplating the nature of thought itself, how does one arrive at novel conceptions which rewrite, re-conceive, reframe the pre-existent? Experience of unconditionality seems intrinsic to novel conception. To create new templates, worlds, what exists must be penetrated, dissolved, gone beyond. Discussing this process, Paz quoted Mallarme: “the poet does violence to language in order to purify the words of the tribe.” There are many levels to this topic, from psycho-physical energy to the mind/body relationship, economic stability, sense of meaning in life, occupation, preoccupations, personality and character. I would like to offer the following sense of thinking as a prequel to the poetic.
In this métier of thought we are all poets, more or less I feel. Cognitively it may be argued that while getting there takes effort and dedication, devotion, the more challenging aspect to the viability of novel thinking is the creation of memory bridges between more unconditional states or levels of consciousness (altered states) and the pragmatic normative aspects of consciousness — via which we must ply the craft of writing.
This is very much in my experience — a “step-down transformer” type of experience, involving loss of signal strength, and information. Communication is always sacrificial — isn’t “that” truth, pure, fairly speaking, inarticulate? Perhaps the Zen Buddhist tradition addresses this quandary most directly.
Added to the quixotic and fleeting (mercurial, ephemeral) wing of thought are those dislocations involved in divining its depths — for there is no bottom, no origin of first principles. Rather, the frustrations of archaic projection; not the root: reflection. Hillman and Jung have discussed this experience in their phenomenological approaches to mind when they indicate that the main difference between human and other animals has to do with the ability to reflect upon thought — to cognate and cogitate upon reflections (what we see as having seen, having arisen in reflection) of self and world — yet as Jung posits in his conception of anima, the origin of the illumination which allows for this humanizing process remains unperceivable. We scan the reflection not its origin; the projection not the projector. Human being in
medias res.
The deeper into the origin of projection (you journey), the more form and the known destabilizes, the more those normative arguments of symbol systems, linked notions via which reality is determined shimmer and shape-shift with doubt and self-doubt: the doubt of things being things, the world being a world, self being a self. From this doubt springs resistance. To paraphrase Bruce Lee, things fight back. The world has a voice: into which notional drawers shall the world be shelved, and, with what degrees of arrogance?
It’s a David and Goliath story, an
agon — Bloom’s tales of strong poets willfully, belatedly misinterpreting influential antecedents. The utility of Bloom's conception lies in his elucidation of those necessities involved in the achievement of imaginative power: strong thinking exercises. Beauty, bliss, forgetting, and struggle erasing the world, reforming the world, renewing the world. This activity represents an apotheosis of humankind and something holy. With each return, the phoenix; out of violence and destruction, the rendings of Dionysus. Heal thyself, yes? To re-knit the world, to return bearing offerings (cultural) gifts.
A series of step-up and step-down transformations: at any point it is possible to get lost, become broken. Among the Articles of poetic thought is one which reads, “you will become dispossessed,” and another, “there is risk.” For this reason, sensitive thinking honors the abandoned, the crippled, the destitute, the forgotten, the homeless — those lands and landscapes of thinking eminent to its sociality.
April 13, 2011
Michael Dylan WelchI suspect that any writer could learn something from any other successful writer, regardless of genre. I've been a board member of the Washington Poets Association for nearly ten years, and have edited its journal
Cascade, for longer poetry (available on Amazon). I'm currently editing another anthology for longer poetry, for the Redmond Association of Spokenword (for which I serve as reading series curator, and for whom I directed the Poets in the Park conferences). I also curate the monthly SoulFood Poetry Night, which has featured leading Seattle-area poets for more than seven years. And after I edited the haiku journal
Woodnotes, I edited
Tundra: The Journal of the Short Poem, which sought to integrate haiku with other short poetry. In all these experiences, and my own extensive writing of longer poetry, I've found that I tend to prefer longer poems that share haiku sensibilities. So maybe haiku is limiting me in that regard! But more importantly, I find that haiku has greatly improved my longer poetry. I believe that haiku can do this for others, too, and I teach workshops to elucidate why. There's a lot that haiku strategies can teach anyone seeking to improve their writing, whether fiction, poetry, or even nonfiction.
I've also written an essay about this subject, titled "Ten Ways to Improve Your Poetry with Haiku," available online at
https://sites.google.com/site/graceguts/essays/ten-ways-to-improve-your-poetry-with-haiku. It was first published in
Poet's Market 2005 and reprinted in
The Craft & Business of Poetry (Writer’s Digest Books, 2008). I'll summarize it briefly here, followed by a few additional thoughts.
1. Focus on concrete images (one of haiku's strengths; it's surprising, though, that some people don't really understand what this means, so it's helpful to show examples, and to contrast them with conceptual statements or intellectualisms).
2. Rely on your five senses (tactile experience improves any kind of creative writing; the potential of the future "enters" our bodies through the portals of our five senses, and "now" is that moment when future potential becomes our past/history -- haiku celebrates that moment of transition).
3. Control objectivity and subjectivity (I used to teach that one should avoid subjectivity in haiku, but really it's more important to know how to control it; this is similar to knowing when to show and when to tell, because some "telling" can be appropriate in haiku, in moderation, if you know how to do it well).
4. Distinguish between description and inference (the point of haiku is to use careful description, but not as an end in itself; rather the goal is for description to infer something, usually emotional -- likewise, writers of fiction or "mainstream" poetry can do the same, and can learn how to do it well with haiku).
5. Seek immediacy and accessibility (this doesn't mean to avoid being challenging or at least a little beyond the depth of some of your readers, but it helps to give readers some kind of access point, some sort of grounding, whether it's common images or everyday experiences).
6. Control formal devices (this is really about craft, and knowing when and how to use metaphor, simile, rhyme, metrics/scansion/rhythm, allusion, sound, and other poetic devices -- lack of control of these devices can be glaring in haiku, so if you can master them in haiku, you can use them effectively elsewhere).
7. Find the right form (another craft issue, about realizing disconnections between what you're trying to say vs. the way you're trying to say it -- this has to do not only with issues of organic vs. free vs. metrical form, but also about whether a triolet or sonnet or epic form is best suited for your idea or experience or narrative).
8. Follow seasonal rhythms (this is about being aware not just of nature but the rhythms of nature, which also includes humans; seasonal details will enrich any writing, and can tap into archetypal symbolism just as such references do in haiku).
9. Trust juxtaposition (another cornerstone of haiku, where disjunction can create energy and space, or a create a vacuum as a result of what is left out -- and without a vacuum, what is there to suck the reader in?).
10. Discover more about haiku (the idea here is promotional rather than informational, but I think the idea still has merit, in that by exploring haiku more deeply one can move beyond pseudo-haiku misinformation and also explore farther than the nine previous items I mentioned -- a lot of people aren't aware of the Haiku Foundation, the Haiku Society of America, Haiku Canada, the British Haiku Society, the various journals for haiku, the Haiku North America conference, and more, and by knowing about this activity, perhaps more people will increase their respect for haiku, and perhaps be more open to what they can learn from haiku).
What I've just written summarizes ways that "mainstream" poets can learn from haiku, but what about the opposite? What can haiku poets learn from those who write longer poetry? An initial thought is range, and to think about tackling big subjects, or aspects of complex ideas, and to incorporate both light and dark subjects and tones in one's writing -- and to find the best ways to do so. A second thought is variety. Just as a poet or fiction writer will vary his or her grammar, syntax, and sentence length, a haiku poet can do the same. Short sentences? They'll add energy. And then you can contrast that rhythm with longer phrases, whether the contrast is between haiku or within a single haiku. A third thought is allusions. They're rampant in good poetry. We all know what Haruo Shirane wrote about the vertical and horizontal axes of haiku. In "Beyond the Haiku Moment: Bashō, Buson, and Modern Haiku Myths" (Modern Haiku XXX:1, Winter-Spring 2000), he observes that the horizontal axis of haiku (a focus on the present, contemporary world ) is abundant in North American haiku, but that the vertical axis (a movement across time, including geographical, historical, and literary references) is largely missing. I'm not sure I agree that it's largely missing, but I do think we could make better use of the vertical axis in haiku -- something we can definitely learn from those who write longer poetry. We need not quote Greek or Latin like Pound or Eliot, but we could do better to trust the full breadth of our own culture and our own experiences and avoid trying (as some poets repeatedly do with their haiku) to merely imitate Japan.
I'm sure there's much more we who write haiku can learn from those who write other poetry, or even fiction. Openness might be one such thing. Haiku is essentially a ghetto in the city of poetry, but it's not other poets who have put haiku in that ghetto. Rather, it's haiku poets who have put themselves in the haiku ghetto by siloing their work, or by complaining so much that haiku is misunderstood -- I'm guilty of this myself. This doesn't mean that we should suddenly recognize spam-ku as literary art, or let our guard down in other ways (some poems, even so-called gendai haiku, are good short poems and not necessarily haiku). But it does mean we could share our best haiku in venues (journals, conferences, and the like) that don't traditionally focus on haiku. This is already happening of course, and this activity is increasing, which is good to see (Haiku Society of America panels at American Literature Association conferences are but one example), but there's much more to be done. And perhaps "mainstream" poets (especially its editors) could be more open to haiku, too.
I'd like to conclude by citing an example poem that, to me, masterfully employs the haiku trait of juxtaposition. I've seldom been affected in a longer poem as deeply as by the sad and dramatic twist in the last line of James Wright's "Lying in a Hammock at William Duffy’s Farm in Pine Island, Minnesota." You can read it at
https://sites.google.com/site/graceguts/poems-by-others/lying-in-a-hammock. Those who write longer poetry hardly need haiku to come up with good techniques for writing their poetry, but perhaps they can sharpen their craft by paying closer attention to key aspects of haiku, including compression, that make them shimmer.
John StevensonI know that this question was framed as a composite version of many other questions relating generally to a similar topic. Since it’s not how I would put it, I just have to dispose of some of my quibbles before attempting any further reply.
While some poetry may be essentially didactic, the poetry that interests me most, both within and without haiku, consists of those poems that deal with what is mysterious and beyond the power of words to express with the exactitude of even the best prose. If the poetry that I care about is not primarily motivated by a desire to teach, what I learn from it is necessarily idiosyncratic and entirely personal. Clearly, however, the question asks for projection and generalization. I’ll play along.
I think it must be a rare event that anyone’s first idea of poetry has been formed by their knowledge of English-language haiku. If all ELH poets were not already aware of more contemporary English-language poetry before coming to haiku, they most certainly were exposed to some Shakespeare, Pope, or Yeats. Or nursery rhymes, or song lyrics, or limericks, or advertising jingles. So the answer to what haiku poets can learn from “mainstream” poetry is “whatever we HAVE learned.” I was writing and publishing other poetry for over thirty years before I read or wrote my first haiku. I would suspect that most writers of English-language haiku had plenty of influential exposure to other poetry in English and that, before they were haiku poets, they learned whatever it is that they do know about poetry from that exposure.
(One could look upon this as a question about what haiku poets can learn from the mainstream “business” of poetry. As someone who immediately discards the business section of a newspaper, I feel unqualified to answer that question.)
The other half of the question seems more reasonable in scope. As an example of what “mainstream” poets can learn from haiku, I will tell you what I think I have learned from it.
I now see “mainstream” poetry, in a way I hadn’t before my involvement with haiku, as “displays of brilliance.” In fact I see this now as a feature of most Western art. Individualism and originality are prized and the reaction one is hoping for in one’s audience is something like, “My God, how does he do that? I could never do that!” The first reaction to English-language haiku, on the other hand, is often something like, “That’s cool. I bet I could do that.” And the fact is that many people can do it from the start, often producing some of the best haiku they will ever write out of a “beginner’s mind.”
I’m not saying we do not want brilliance. I enjoy displays of brilliance as much as the next guy. But we are very well supplied in this area. An aesthetic of modesty is what is truly new and refreshing about haiku within the arena of English-language poetry and art.