Concerning English Short Poetry

[chibi575]

In the books of translated haiku that I've read by Barnhill, Ueda, and others, the typical approach is to acknowledge the haiku/hokku distinction, then move on. To make a big deal of this distinction now is contrary to standard usage and is therefore more confusing than accepting the status quo . . .

Yup, Dave, I can confirm that this is the typical contemporary approach and wholeheartedly agree with it for the reasons you give. Any other approach now is either misguided or deliberately mischievous.

Lorin,

I take it as a personal slur to accuse me of being "deliberately mischievous".  Please do not make these discussions personal, I haven't.  I concede any comment and response may be misquided, but, to imply something deliberately mischievous is a demeaning judgement.  Please stop.  Thank you.

[Lorin]

I'm in the process of getting access to the original Shiki in Japanese.  Then it may take me a long time to see with factual certainty that no haiku existed as such prior to Shiki.

o, dear... Dennis.

Granted, haiku is the term often given retrospectively to Basho's and others' hokku in the wake of Shiki, though there is some evidence that the word 'haiku' was in use in Japan before Shiki, but not to designate what has been termed 'haiku' post-Shiki. . . the single verse which has its origins and counterpart in the hokku of haikai-no-renga, when published separately from the renga.

In a scholarly work, then, perhaps, it would be more technically correct to refer to 'hokku' when writing about pre-Shiki works published in anthologies outside of the context of a complete renga, but the fact that Shiki was successful in changing the name does not change the lineage.

Shiki's name change does seem to cause confusion for some Westerners, though. Maybe this in itself is one reason why more name changing isn't advisable?

Hi Lorin,

Could you give some direct references on your assertions about Shiki?  I would enjoy reading the same, to see, if something might have been lost in translation.  I have frankly read/translated little so far.  So, by providing such references perhaps I will agree with you.

I think if Bashou would be able to read Shiki's writings on formulating "haiku", he may be completely opposed, but, then Bashou was in a change phase toward the end of his life, if I understand the history.

At any rate, it is quite a challenge untangling fact from the history's written word (and more than doubly so if translation is involved); and, I can tell from your comments that you are completely against a re-naming, but, that's fine.

Hi Dennis, I don't have time at present to find all the things I've read, in print and on the net, but they mightn't suit you anyway because everything I've read is in translation. I don't have Japanese. But why put the onus on me to find sources for you, when your interest in this issue would seem to indicate that you'd be aware of them anyway?

In case that's wrong, here is the most general source of all that's available to all, and you could begin to follow up with the references cited at the bottom, should you choose to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haiku

"
Masaoka Shiki (1867–1902) was a reformer and modernizer. A prolific writer, even though chronically ill during a significant part of his life, Shiki disliked the 'stereotype' haikai writers of the 19th century who were known by the deprecatory term tsukinami, meaning 'monthly', after the monthly or twice-monthly haikai gatherings of the end of the 18th century (in regard to this period of haikai, it came to mean 'trite' and 'hackneyed'). Shiki also criticized Bashō.[citation needed] Like the Japanese intellectual world in general at that time, Shiki was strongly influenced by Western culture. He favored the painterly style of Buson and particularly the European concept of plein-air painting, which he adapted to create a style of haiku as a kind of nature sketch in words, an approach called shasei, literally 'sketching from life'. He popularized his views by verse columns and essays in newspapers.

Hokku up to the time of Shiki, even when appearing independently, were written in the context of renku.[21] Shiki formally separated his new style of verse from the context of collaborative poetry. Being agnostic,[27] he also separated it from the influence of Buddhism. Further, he discarded the term "hokku" and proposed the term haiku as an abbreviation of the phrase "haikai no ku" meaning a verse of haikai,[28] although the term predates Shiki by some two centuries, when it was used to mean any verse of haikai.[29] Since then, "haiku" has been the term usually applied in both Japanese and English to all independent haiku, irrespective of their date of composition. Shiki's revisionism dealt a severe blow to renku and surviving haikai schools. The term "hokku" is now used chiefly in its original sense of the opening verse of a renku, and rarely to distinguish haiku written before Shiki's time.[30]."

(italics mine)

re your point that I am 'against name-changing', yes, I suppose I am, mainly because I don't see any point in it in the case of haiku.

You said earlier that the name Bombay has been changed back to Mumbai, yes, true, but the name Bombay wasn't Indian in the first place. Now we are all happy to use 'Mumbai'.  I'm not holding my breath till New York, Washington or Melbourne return to their original names in the languages of the people who originally occupied those territories, though. In the case of Uluru, when there was a return to the original name in the 80s here, the tourism industry succeeded in having the English name kept as a co-name because certain countries, on which a fair percentage of Australian tourism relies, didn't like the original name 'Uluru'.

I live in a country where, since the 1950s, it has been considered very rude and ignorant to call immigrants or tourists from other countries and ethnic groups 'foreigners'. Yet I am aware that, all these decades later, it is not considered rude in Japan to call non-Japanese people 'gaijin'. If a case could be made that the adoption of haiku into English and other languages was a cultural appropriation made without the assent of the Japanese, I might think differently about renaming, but I doubt that such a case can be made in the case of poetry. I do question the motives of those who want the term haiku reserved for Japanese haiku, especially those of non-Japanese origin.

- Lorin

[Lorin]

In the books of translated haiku that I've read by Barnhill, Ueda, and others, the typical approach is to acknowledge the haiku/hokku distinction, then move on. To make a big deal of this distinction now is contrary to standard usage and is therefore more confusing than accepting the status quo . . .

Yup, Dave, I can confirm that this is the typical contemporary approach and wholeheartedly agree with it for the reasons you give. Any other approach now is either misguided or deliberately mischievous.

Lorin,

I take it as a personal slur to accuse me of being "deliberately mischievous".  Please do not make these discussions personal, I haven't.  I concede any comment and response may be misquided, but, to imply something deliberately mischievous is a demeaning judgement.  Please stop.  Thank you.

Sorry, Dennis, my intention was not to offend you or even to imply that you, personally, are being deliberately mischievous. I don't know you and have had no contact with you. I have had contact, though, with other non-Japanese who promote this cause and in my opinion there is mischief involved.

Where does the cause originate and what are the motives behind it, do you know? I don't, and would be pleased if you would spell them out.

re your comment on 'what passes for haiku' that I've just read, I recommend Jim Kacian's sensible musings in his essay, 'The Haiku Heirarchy' (published in 'White Lies'[ Red Moon Anthology)

- Lorin

[chibi575]

Lorin,

Thank you. 

As to sources, thank you for your effort, but, I am exploring this myself, too.  I continue to explore.

Actually, all my leanings towards finding a name of the poetry written in English, specifically but not exclusively, the USA was in hopes of clearing what I consider misguided and misunderstood concepts in the transporting of Japanese haiku outside of Japan.  I think we (non-Japanese) should take ownership of the form(s) we have created (in the effort of that transportation).

[sandra]

I feel the "status quo" is simply wrong and misguided causing the deeper confusion we have today about "haiku".  If you don't believe it being deeply confusing today, just read what passes for "haiku" today: Chibi

I'd like to reply to this and had already planned to do so when I saw Chibi feeling that he had been patronised.

Now, I'm feeling patronised. Maybe.

Could you clarify what you mean by "what passes for 'haiku' today". I am writing haiku today and feel that remark is somewhat insulting. It may just be the quotation marks round haiku, but I'd still like to hear.

Any literary form has its pioneers and innovators and whether what they're doing has merit is down to the individual reader/editor. Do you want haiku contained in amber?

And, if you're so concerned about what is being written in English, I'd be very interested to hear your thoughts on gendai haiku being written in Japanese (and which I read in translation only).


I really don't feel like I've grasped the essence, or even importance, of your position, sorry.

We write what we write. (You didn't appear to want to call it a weasel though?)

[Dave Russo]

Quote from Chibi: Dave, have we met?

Yes, Dennis, we met at Haiku North America 2007, in Winston-Salem. For that reason, and because you have gone out of your way to be polite to people on this board, I'm sorry if I offended you.

Quote from Chibi: It's a bit unsettling for you giving me a blind-side "compliment" asserting the idea of misnaming/re-naming is "... Confusing, a little irritating, but fine."

Here's a more complete version of what I said:

Quote from Dave: To make a big deal of this distinction now is contrary to standard usage and is therefore more confusing than accepting the status quo . . . unless your goal is to disrupt the status quo, which I assume chibi would like to do here! That's fine. Confusing, a little irritating, but fine.

I assume you started this thread to "disrupt" or challenge the status quo. That's right, isn't it?

As for the "irritating" remark . . . you've got me there. I confess that I am irritated by your assertion that haiku in languages other than Japanese should not be called haiku, or the suggestion that that a new name for such poems would make things clearer. I've seen the "haiku/hokku" hobby horse trotted out too many times, I'm afraid.

Let's just say that I agree with most haiku poets, scholars, and translators that I've read: the use of "haiku" for haiku-like poems in whatever language is less confusing than the alternatives.

I feel the "status quo" is simply wrong and misguided causing the deeper confusion we have today about "haiku".

I feel that your cure is worse than the disease. What you are calling confusion I would call creative ferment.

I will concede that what I say may be disruptive, but, I not only said it here, but, other places to with conviction.

Please see my remarks above.

It is good to state your views with conviction. I think that is what we are all trying to do.

[Lorin]

I've toyed with the word coinage of ASP "American Short Poem" and ESP, "English Short Poem" : chibi

Oh dear, oh dear.

Thanks so much, chibi, for dispensing with all those speakers of English who don't happen to be American or English ....

Where shall I start? How about Canadians? Or Scots, Irish, Welsh? Or Australians, New Zealanders, Samoans, Fijians, Tongans, Cook Islanders? Or South Africans, Kenyans, Nigerians, Batswana, Gambians? Or Jamaicans, Barbadians, Belizians? Or Indians, Pakistanis and Sri Lankans? And the list goes on.

If I may be so forward as to speak on behalf of the people and nationalities you've disenfranchised, I wonder how serious you really are. It seems that you've taken a provocative stance but haven't done much thinking to back it up, if the best you can come up with is "American" or "English" short poems.

Humph, etc. (Sandra)

Sorry, you misunderstood, (mostly my fault); but, I was using American/English as just one example.  Of course, the rule can be applied to any nation (excluding Japan, of course because "haiku" is used in Japan).  I am just exploring, if you have a suggestion for other nations, please I would like to see them.  Yes indeed, the list goes on.  Since I am from the USA, and my native tongue is "English" or should I say "USAian", I was speaking from that perspective. (Chibi)

The term 'haiku' is now a loan word in many languages as well as in English. Dennis, am I right in thinking that in your suggestion for a name change for English-language haiku, as enlarged upon in your reply to Sandra, above, you have only American haiku in mind? Only haiku written by Americans, as Sandra observes? And the rest of the world can keep calling their haiku, haiku?

If so, I find such an insular and isolationist view highly questionable and doubt that it would gain popularity with thinking Americans, let alone English speakers outside of America and those whose languages are other than English.

But now understanding that you are addressing your fellow Americans only, I'll comment no further on this thread.

-Lorin

[chibi575]

Dave, thank you for your apology and your position has become clear.  I did not fully realize your frustration and irritation with my frustration, although, I'm not irritated to have oposing opnion if it is not accompanyed by personal jibs (you cleared that it was not personal, and I thank you for that).  I hope we can agree to disagree.  I am aware of your envolvement in the HNA and you have passion for the art.  My contentions about the status quo are for no particular individual.  From the time that haiku was transported to the USA it was fraught with misconception, I feel.  Of course, it is a complicated issue.  I feel it needs retroactive correction.  Such efforts can frustrate and irritate, I grant; and, this is no different throughout history.  Let me say this as I've said consistently in the past, "I love haiku".  That passion I hope to learn to always express with compassion.  I am truly sorry for the irritation that my possition has caused you.  Mostly, I feel I am misunderstood in my positioin.  I would have thought taking more ownership of what we write in the way of a different name of the form would finally point us in the right direction.

[chibi575]

To all:

I have tried to present a possible way to do a in course correction on the effort to widden the world wide transportation of a Japanese art form, haiku.  I have suggested (with genuine sincerety) that as we transport we take direct ownership of the resulting art by naming that art form in relation to the adopting culture/language/nation.  This has understandably caused frustration and personal irritation as expressed in the comment replies.  I apologize for causing that; but, I do not shrink from my conviction that ownership is needed for the transported art form.  If The Haiku Foundation membership would like to have discussion on this thread, I welcome it.  What I will not tollerate is bullying in any form.  Please keep your comments focused on the theme of "taking ownership".  I have cast a challenge by the statement, "If it ain't Japanese, it ain't haiku."  Perhaps this is too frank (or even rude) of a statement.  My reasoning behind such a statement was to move the membership to discussion, not, open this forum to personal attacks (for anyone of any nationality).

Thank you for your kindnesses.

[Gael Bage]

, I can appreciate both sides here. We are a part of nature and I love the zen aspect and tradition within haiku; it's in our nature as a part of nature to evolve, have a sense of humour and to be innovative - yet somehow haiku seems to have become overly serious and if humour and true innovation breaks through even in innovative haiku we feel like we are breaking the rules, disturbing something sacred. It would be a shame to divide rather than accommodate, co-operation should be possible, instead we have different factions ( like religion ) each convinced they are right, we should remember we are all a part of the same inter-related whole diverse fullness of creation, without elasticity under pressure things have a habit of falling apart. In Japan they invite contributions from other languages, first try I got an hon mention for an entry to the mainichi haiku contest, we appreciate the gift of haiku from them and it seems they appreciate our take on it. Perhaps what we need is more flexibility and to embrace all that haiku is as it evolves.

[cat]

Hello, Dennis,

Going to call you that instead of your username from now on, if you don't mind.

(I'm trying to quote you here, but can't figure out how to do it, so --)

You say, "I have suggested (with genuine sincerety) that as we transport we take direct ownership of the resulting art by naming that art form in relation to the adopting culture/language/nation."

Am I reading this right?  Are you saying that Brits, Scots, Aussies, Canadians, Indians, Ghanans Poles, Serbs, Romanians, Bulgarians, the Irish, et al. should each decide on a name for what we now call "haiku" and use that name within their respective countries?  That there be no world-wide, commonly understood, term for the (form, genre, whatever) in which we write?

IMHO, that will be a real tower-of-Babel moment.  What happens to the international haiku community then?  What happens to the bilingual journals such as Chrysanthemum?

Gael, I so agree.

Lorin, my friend, I hope you're still reading this thread, which does not seem to be US-centric any more, because I want you to know that I find your scholarship and common sense very welcome in this and every other discussion.

cat

[chibi575]

Cat, I really prefer "chibi" for that is actually my haigou, if that's ok.  But, if you're more comfortable with Dennis, then please by all means be comfortable.  I will take no offense either way.

As to the plethera of names if taken the method I've suggested, it is perhaps as you say, "a tower of Babel".  Yet, it is no more than the present names given all the different genre of literary art.  As I gave example of "phrase poetry" for English, perhaps, the approach could be refined.  I am taking my lead, actually, from the Japanese, which in admiring Chinese literature adapted their own variation and name for their forms of poetry based upon similar Chinese genres.  Did this become overwhelming to the Japanese?  Not really as is proof today of the various Japanese names adapted from Chinese verse, hokku, tanka, renku... are a few examples.  If they used the Chinese literature directly, the Chinese name was used, after all most of the Japanese kanji is based upon Chinese pictogram symbology retaining the orginal Chinese meaning.  Maybe kanji could be used as an example because the Chinese do not say "kanji" as the name of their symbology.  The Japanese were keen to point out their "ownership" of the use by the name.

There are difficulties in any change.  I am willing to concede my idea of naming may not be the best, thus, in part the reason for introducing the subject, "Concerning English Short Poetry", although, I should have originally named it, "Concerning Short Poetry" for in fact I did not mean it exclusive to English, but, because I am a native English speaker, I thought to emphasize I can not speak for other nationalities but best from my USA perspective.

Thank you for your reply.  Your point about "the tower of Babel" is definately a valid consideration and begs a solution.

[Don Baird]

Cultural exchange has been the norm.  From baseball to haiku, countries around the globe have been exchanging aspects of their being.  Japan has enjoyed baseball for over a hundred years.  "Nippon Professional Baseball started in 1920. It is called Puro Yakyū (プロ野球), which simply is a translation of professional baseball." wikipedia (and other sources).  Earlier forms (non-pro) of baseball in Japan began in the late 1800s.  They call it baseball today.

The sonnet was developed in Italy around the 1200s, or so.  Sonnets appeared in England during the 1500s (give or take).  But, what we do know is:

"Traditionally, English poets employ iambic pentameter when writing sonnets, but not all English sonnets have the same metrical structure: the first sonnet in Sir Philip Sidney's sequence Astrophel and Stella, for example, has 12 syllables: it is iambic hexameters, albeit with a turned first foot in several lines. In the Romance languages, the hendecasyllable and Alexandrine are the most widely used metres." wikipedia

Tennis, archery, music (sonata, concerto) have been shared by countries and cultures for centuries.  I don't ever remember an argument or discussion regarding, one country or another, must change the name because what they are doing isn't authentic or "a sonata isn't a sonata if written by an Englishman".  We must be careful here. 

I'm happy for Japan having baseball and call it what they want – hopefully "baseball".  I'm happy that Mozart wrote sonatas;  and followed by, Beethoven, Brahms, Poulenc, Copeland, Leonard Bernstein and a very popular Japanese composer Michio Mamiya (who writes "sonatas") and thousands of other composers from nearly every country on the planet.

Dennis, I congratulate you on your consistency of message regarding this topic. But I beg to disagree wholeheartly with its content.  Your opinion is that we do not write haiku.  Mine is that we do.  I'm more than comfortable with that.

I encourage everyone to keep on writing.  Unite together and make haiku strong without regard to language or cultural differences.  Bring haiku to the limelight and let it soar with the concertos, sonatas. sonnets, kyries and on and on.  Haiku is the most amazing gem and lets continue to cherish it and care for it in a way that we meet the standards well known in the Japanese culture.  We, all of the we, without regard to nationality are now the co-caretakers of this wonderul art form. 

This thread enthuses me to write more – to write more haiku, tanka, haibun, and haiga. And, to write it well!   

all the best to everyone,

Don

[tomtrow44]

When exactly does any poem become English poetry?  Perhaps it doesn't.  Take "The Inferno," for example.  If I could learn to write poetry in English like Dante's work, would that be English poetry?  Probably not short though.  Just asking. ;)

[tomtrow44]

Here is a good example from another page in the Foundation Blog.  Is it poetry?  Is it English poetry?  Or is it Spanish poetry in English?
Or is it English poetry trying to imitate Spanish poetry?  Is it worth arguing about?

When my students ask me "What's the difference between prose and poetry?" I suppose it's a cop-out, but I tell them, "Look at how it's arranged on the page." If the words are broken into packages and not running from margin to margin, it's a poem, I say. (I avoid the topic of "prose-poems"!) My students usually don't question this answer, but they could easily challenge this definition by visually turning any random bit of prose into "poetry":

In a village of La Mancha,
the name of which
I have no desire
to call to mind,
there lived not long since
one of those gentlemen
that keep a lance
in the lance-rack,
an old buckler,
a lean hack,
and a greyhound for coursing.

Have I justy now made Cervantes' opening for Don Quixote into a poem? Maybe! When you read it, do you find yourself lingering on the words and perhaps savoring their music a bit more than you might when you see them printed on the page as prose? I do! I think that the reader's poetic frame of mind is essential to perceiving words as poetry. I always bring that frame of mind to my reading of haiku.
[/quote