Thanks Joyce! So glad you enjoyed it. If you're a fan of Bashō's ku and senryū, those are definitely topics I will be covering in later issues. :-) I am very glad I stopped by Spawn yesterday - nice to connect!
Dick, this is the most informative discussion of haikai. Just recently on Substack, I have found myself writing and liking Haikai, partly because the form lends itself so well to notes. But I’ll be honest, it has taken me years to appreciate the form, in large part I think because I realised that I didn’t understand it. You have helped me with that - thank you! Incidentally, I wonder if you think there are any parallels between the idea that the haiku points to wider truths (as one of the theorists you cite suggests) and the Platonic forms ... both seem to imply that beauty lies beyond the immediate thing perceived, rather than in it ...?
Thanks Thomas! Yeah, there's been a big resurgence of interest in haiku due to social media, and especially places like Twitter - perfect form for the micro-reader :-) Great questions!! And one's I think about a lot. Firstly, haiku is a poetic form, and can be used for any kind of subject matter, from simple jokes and funny observations, ala English epigrams, to parables, proverbs, and sayings, all the way through to the "high" (hate that word but can't think of a better one right now lol) art of poets like Bashō, Chiyo, Buson, etc. Furthermore, from around the 1600s when it became really popular almost everyone in Japan knew how to write one -- adults, children, women, men, etc. -- so the kinds/styles/approaches to haikai were extremely varied. and defy any singular "goal" or "intended" outcome. So I can only really speak to my own style and approach, rather than haikai in general. :-)
Among those who practiced it as an "art" (again hate that term but it will do for now), they all had their own styles and approaches. So yeah, I think the idea of a poem pointing to "broader truths" etc. is an aspect of certain styles of haikai, rather than an aim or goal of haikai/haiku in-itself, if you know what I mean. I think all poetries and poetic forms can be used to investigate "truths" (always plural, never singular) in this way. Someone who might interest you in this regard is Onitsura, who's style was specifically concerned with "makoto" (truth, sincerity). However, rather than pointing to "wider truths" (i.e. in the "objective" sense of Plato's essential forms), his is the path humble truths. These are not necessarily entirely subjective either, however (as this simply re-established the Western ob/sub binary). Rather, the truth of soil wet against your feet (inter-subjective). But differently from Bakusui who also had that other element of the "exaggerated and wild, even harsh... showing a free attitude toward the form." You can see it in the kind of surreal elements of Bakusui I reckon, i.e. in which a dragonfly can "paint" itself with autumn colours.
Interesting - yeah, I see what you're saying. I'm glad you pointed out that final quote. I think reflecting on it, "beyond" is a slightly problematic concept here, and more reflects the Western translation, rather than the essence of Bakusui's thought. In dominant Western philosophy knowledge and "truth" are often framed in terms of the "transcendent" (i.e. beyond, above, over, etc.). However, I don't think this is what Bakusui is getting at here.
As a practical example: God in Western traditions tends to be transcendental - above us, beyond us, and so on. And singular: The Truth. This then became the dominant Western model of "knowledge" (long after God had left the building). In Japanese traditions Kami (divinities, gods, spirits, etc.) are multiple: Kami flows through everything, animating it, in cyclic relationships of growth and decay (as in the seasons). Hence, Kami are not neither 'singular' (Whitman, "I contain multitudes") nor "transcendental" (beyond) -- rather they are "immanent" (within - but not "in"; a flat- or even negative-dimensional depth which is metaphysical, rather than physical/psychical). So for Bakusui I think the "shapeless feelings" are probably highly relational and specific, rather than essential and general, ala Plato.
And I think back to Bashō, who famously said, “To learn about pine trees, go to the pine tree; to learn of the bamboo, ask the bamboo.” Here, the "truths" (makoto) are not found "beyond" the things themselves, but within the immediacy of sensation and relation (i.e. immanent). So, yeah, maybe neither "beyond" nor "in" (either/or), but instead: "becoming and belonging, within and without simultaneously" (both/and).
Which brings us to beauty. Another hard concept. I think, again, in the West, there tends to be a transcendental understanding of beauty in binary relationship to the "ugly" (etc.). So for me, I guess, a "non-binary" beauty is sort of like a "praise of the world for its sheer beingness, becomingness, and belongingness". It's like in Bakusui's 'spring moon' poem - he is moving away from the "one" beauty (i.e. the moon in autumn is the most beautiful, i.e. the Platonic form of the full moon: it's "essential beautifulness") and saying that every moon is worth praising for its sheer existence? Maybe haha.
As I said, I can only speak for my way of thinking around this, and only right now haha. My thoughts change around these ideas constantly, and are always in flux. But yeah, hope that helps? Makes me really curious about your own poetic practice. What do you make of all this? What are your own approaches to truth and truths, beauty and existence? How does this inform your poetry? Etc. Etc.
Hi Dick, yes, that helps a lot - again, very informative: a lot for me to think about (or perhaps I should say ruminate on - I tend to digest ideas, slowly, even over years...) Incidentally, I wonder if you know Beth Kempton's Substack? Beth is a Japanologist with a recent book out (one of many, I believe) on the subject - you might enjoy being in touch - and she also teaches writing classes. In truth, I don't really know her personally (though I follow her) but my wife took one of her writing courses and Beth is therefore (inadvertently) one of the reasons I'm now on Substack. As to my own practice, well, I'm not sure I can really articulate a coherent theory. Many, many years ago I was obsessed with reviving traditional (western) forms, but no longer (as you'll have noticed), though I respect the art. I've followed some of the recent discussions on Substack around why people write poetry, but they tend to amount to something like 'I like it' and (between you and me) while I absolutely understand that approach (I like it too!) I don't feel it's enough. (If you scroll back a few weeks through my Substack poems, you'll find a series called 'Prompt Poems' - one of the poems there is about the (fairly obvious) dangers of creativity, alongside the good stuff.) More recently, lecturing on Milton, I found myself thinking that the best justification for creativity is (very old fashioned this, sorry) that humans are made in the image of God the creator - in other words, creativity's an essential part of our nature. It was a very popular view (probably exaggerated) among Renaissance theorists like Ficino and Pico della Mirandolla. That, at least, makes the process feel justified. But I'm not sure if I've got much further - as I say, I tend to digest ideas (and literary techniques) over years... I trust that all doesn't sound too crazy or off-putting! All my best, Thomas.
Cheers Thomas, not at all crazy or off-putting. Really nice to read about your own thoughts and experiences with poetry! Thanks for the rec of Beth Kempton - will definitely check her page out. :-) That's so cool that both you and your wife are writers! Must be super nice to have that in common.
Yeah - I am with you, for me personally just liking it is not enough (and like you - that's just for me). Of course I like it! But I want more form myself haha. I also dig where you're coming from in terms of creation and humans, in relation to "spirit" or "god" - and I don't find it so old-fashioned personally. I have always loved writing poetry, but used to find it a real struggle often. I would end up battling the words, and never quite being happy. Then when I did write a poem I loved I could never quite figure out how I achieved it, or how to keep it up. Then a few years back something changed (it was during Covid and lockdowns - here in NZ everything shit down for like 3 months). This was the poem I remember writing which shifted it for me;
wind
bending a tree,
god-like
It was at this time I realised that my poems were "prayers" - not traditional prayers, and not Christian prayers (not that I have a problem with Christians - it's just not my particular faith), but prayers all the same. At that time the word Vespers popped into my head, and I used it as a title for these new poems. Weirdly I had no idea what it meant - it just popped into my head, and I liked it. And then I looked it up, and it turned out to mean 'evening prayers' which was a cool bit of synchronicity. :-) And yeah, since then I have not really struggled with writing poems. Doesn't mean I always write a good one, or that I don't struggle with other things around poetry. of course I do. But the poems themselves were no longer problems to be solved, and I no longer found the words a battle. Instead, they were prayers to be intoned (again, only for for me - for others reading my work, I am sure they're just poems haha, and that's totally fine!).
Oh wow - you lecture on Milton! Amazing. I have never read Milton, but have always meant to, and the bits I have read, I have really loved. It seems... well, epic! Last night after I read your comment I looked up Paradise Lost and read out-loud to myself about a third of the first book, and wow - it was so good. The blank verse rhythms are so lovely (I only recently got the hang of meter - I still find it difficult, but getting there). Any insights if I am planning to read more Milton? What kinds of lectures do you do on his work? Fascinated - its not my area of expertise, so I would love to know more.
Thanks so much for the detailed and deep answer. Lots to consider and think about for me too. I also take a long time digesting things, and tend to ruminate on single ideas for years, so I really relate to that approach. Lovely chatting! Hope you're having a good Saturday. :-)
This is such a great post, Dick! Thanks for the background and information about the haiku form. I’ve been reading them on Substack, but haven’t written one since grade school. I may try my hand now!
Aw thanks for the lovely comment! Been studying it for 20 years or so, and am really excited to finally share some of my thoughts, so it's really meaningful that you enjoyed it, and even more so, that it made you wanna write some :-) Yay for that!!!! Please feel welcome to drop by and leave some haiku in the comments if ya ever get the hankering.
Love these haiku, especially Bashō, and senryu.
So pleased I found you on SPAWN yesterday.
Thanks Joyce! So glad you enjoyed it. If you're a fan of Bashō's ku and senryū, those are definitely topics I will be covering in later issues. :-) I am very glad I stopped by Spawn yesterday - nice to connect!
Dick, this is the most informative discussion of haikai. Just recently on Substack, I have found myself writing and liking Haikai, partly because the form lends itself so well to notes. But I’ll be honest, it has taken me years to appreciate the form, in large part I think because I realised that I didn’t understand it. You have helped me with that - thank you! Incidentally, I wonder if you think there are any parallels between the idea that the haiku points to wider truths (as one of the theorists you cite suggests) and the Platonic forms ... both seem to imply that beauty lies beyond the immediate thing perceived, rather than in it ...?
Thanks Thomas! Yeah, there's been a big resurgence of interest in haiku due to social media, and especially places like Twitter - perfect form for the micro-reader :-) Great questions!! And one's I think about a lot. Firstly, haiku is a poetic form, and can be used for any kind of subject matter, from simple jokes and funny observations, ala English epigrams, to parables, proverbs, and sayings, all the way through to the "high" (hate that word but can't think of a better one right now lol) art of poets like Bashō, Chiyo, Buson, etc. Furthermore, from around the 1600s when it became really popular almost everyone in Japan knew how to write one -- adults, children, women, men, etc. -- so the kinds/styles/approaches to haikai were extremely varied. and defy any singular "goal" or "intended" outcome. So I can only really speak to my own style and approach, rather than haikai in general. :-)
Among those who practiced it as an "art" (again hate that term but it will do for now), they all had their own styles and approaches. So yeah, I think the idea of a poem pointing to "broader truths" etc. is an aspect of certain styles of haikai, rather than an aim or goal of haikai/haiku in-itself, if you know what I mean. I think all poetries and poetic forms can be used to investigate "truths" (always plural, never singular) in this way. Someone who might interest you in this regard is Onitsura, who's style was specifically concerned with "makoto" (truth, sincerity). However, rather than pointing to "wider truths" (i.e. in the "objective" sense of Plato's essential forms), his is the path humble truths. These are not necessarily entirely subjective either, however (as this simply re-established the Western ob/sub binary). Rather, the truth of soil wet against your feet (inter-subjective). But differently from Bakusui who also had that other element of the "exaggerated and wild, even harsh... showing a free attitude toward the form." You can see it in the kind of surreal elements of Bakusui I reckon, i.e. in which a dragonfly can "paint" itself with autumn colours.
Interesting - yeah, I see what you're saying. I'm glad you pointed out that final quote. I think reflecting on it, "beyond" is a slightly problematic concept here, and more reflects the Western translation, rather than the essence of Bakusui's thought. In dominant Western philosophy knowledge and "truth" are often framed in terms of the "transcendent" (i.e. beyond, above, over, etc.). However, I don't think this is what Bakusui is getting at here.
As a practical example: God in Western traditions tends to be transcendental - above us, beyond us, and so on. And singular: The Truth. This then became the dominant Western model of "knowledge" (long after God had left the building). In Japanese traditions Kami (divinities, gods, spirits, etc.) are multiple: Kami flows through everything, animating it, in cyclic relationships of growth and decay (as in the seasons). Hence, Kami are not neither 'singular' (Whitman, "I contain multitudes") nor "transcendental" (beyond) -- rather they are "immanent" (within - but not "in"; a flat- or even negative-dimensional depth which is metaphysical, rather than physical/psychical). So for Bakusui I think the "shapeless feelings" are probably highly relational and specific, rather than essential and general, ala Plato.
And I think back to Bashō, who famously said, “To learn about pine trees, go to the pine tree; to learn of the bamboo, ask the bamboo.” Here, the "truths" (makoto) are not found "beyond" the things themselves, but within the immediacy of sensation and relation (i.e. immanent). So, yeah, maybe neither "beyond" nor "in" (either/or), but instead: "becoming and belonging, within and without simultaneously" (both/and).
Which brings us to beauty. Another hard concept. I think, again, in the West, there tends to be a transcendental understanding of beauty in binary relationship to the "ugly" (etc.). So for me, I guess, a "non-binary" beauty is sort of like a "praise of the world for its sheer beingness, becomingness, and belongingness". It's like in Bakusui's 'spring moon' poem - he is moving away from the "one" beauty (i.e. the moon in autumn is the most beautiful, i.e. the Platonic form of the full moon: it's "essential beautifulness") and saying that every moon is worth praising for its sheer existence? Maybe haha.
As I said, I can only speak for my way of thinking around this, and only right now haha. My thoughts change around these ideas constantly, and are always in flux. But yeah, hope that helps? Makes me really curious about your own poetic practice. What do you make of all this? What are your own approaches to truth and truths, beauty and existence? How does this inform your poetry? Etc. Etc.
Hi Dick, yes, that helps a lot - again, very informative: a lot for me to think about (or perhaps I should say ruminate on - I tend to digest ideas, slowly, even over years...) Incidentally, I wonder if you know Beth Kempton's Substack? Beth is a Japanologist with a recent book out (one of many, I believe) on the subject - you might enjoy being in touch - and she also teaches writing classes. In truth, I don't really know her personally (though I follow her) but my wife took one of her writing courses and Beth is therefore (inadvertently) one of the reasons I'm now on Substack. As to my own practice, well, I'm not sure I can really articulate a coherent theory. Many, many years ago I was obsessed with reviving traditional (western) forms, but no longer (as you'll have noticed), though I respect the art. I've followed some of the recent discussions on Substack around why people write poetry, but they tend to amount to something like 'I like it' and (between you and me) while I absolutely understand that approach (I like it too!) I don't feel it's enough. (If you scroll back a few weeks through my Substack poems, you'll find a series called 'Prompt Poems' - one of the poems there is about the (fairly obvious) dangers of creativity, alongside the good stuff.) More recently, lecturing on Milton, I found myself thinking that the best justification for creativity is (very old fashioned this, sorry) that humans are made in the image of God the creator - in other words, creativity's an essential part of our nature. It was a very popular view (probably exaggerated) among Renaissance theorists like Ficino and Pico della Mirandolla. That, at least, makes the process feel justified. But I'm not sure if I've got much further - as I say, I tend to digest ideas (and literary techniques) over years... I trust that all doesn't sound too crazy or off-putting! All my best, Thomas.
Cheers Thomas, not at all crazy or off-putting. Really nice to read about your own thoughts and experiences with poetry! Thanks for the rec of Beth Kempton - will definitely check her page out. :-) That's so cool that both you and your wife are writers! Must be super nice to have that in common.
Yeah - I am with you, for me personally just liking it is not enough (and like you - that's just for me). Of course I like it! But I want more form myself haha. I also dig where you're coming from in terms of creation and humans, in relation to "spirit" or "god" - and I don't find it so old-fashioned personally. I have always loved writing poetry, but used to find it a real struggle often. I would end up battling the words, and never quite being happy. Then when I did write a poem I loved I could never quite figure out how I achieved it, or how to keep it up. Then a few years back something changed (it was during Covid and lockdowns - here in NZ everything shit down for like 3 months). This was the poem I remember writing which shifted it for me;
wind
bending a tree,
god-like
It was at this time I realised that my poems were "prayers" - not traditional prayers, and not Christian prayers (not that I have a problem with Christians - it's just not my particular faith), but prayers all the same. At that time the word Vespers popped into my head, and I used it as a title for these new poems. Weirdly I had no idea what it meant - it just popped into my head, and I liked it. And then I looked it up, and it turned out to mean 'evening prayers' which was a cool bit of synchronicity. :-) And yeah, since then I have not really struggled with writing poems. Doesn't mean I always write a good one, or that I don't struggle with other things around poetry. of course I do. But the poems themselves were no longer problems to be solved, and I no longer found the words a battle. Instead, they were prayers to be intoned (again, only for for me - for others reading my work, I am sure they're just poems haha, and that's totally fine!).
Oh wow - you lecture on Milton! Amazing. I have never read Milton, but have always meant to, and the bits I have read, I have really loved. It seems... well, epic! Last night after I read your comment I looked up Paradise Lost and read out-loud to myself about a third of the first book, and wow - it was so good. The blank verse rhythms are so lovely (I only recently got the hang of meter - I still find it difficult, but getting there). Any insights if I am planning to read more Milton? What kinds of lectures do you do on his work? Fascinated - its not my area of expertise, so I would love to know more.
Thanks so much for the detailed and deep answer. Lots to consider and think about for me too. I also take a long time digesting things, and tend to ruminate on single ideas for years, so I really relate to that approach. Lovely chatting! Hope you're having a good Saturday. :-)
This is such a great post, Dick! Thanks for the background and information about the haiku form. I’ve been reading them on Substack, but haven’t written one since grade school. I may try my hand now!
Aw thanks for the lovely comment! Been studying it for 20 years or so, and am really excited to finally share some of my thoughts, so it's really meaningful that you enjoyed it, and even more so, that it made you wanna write some :-) Yay for that!!!! Please feel welcome to drop by and leave some haiku in the comments if ya ever get the hankering.
I sure will!
Yay! :-)
Here is my beginner's try:
Open windows.
Honeysuckle brushes a screen.
Tired.
Nice!
Thanks! I’ll keep working on these.
The simplicity is overwhelming~
dyeing
its body with autumn . . .
dragonfly
Ikr - that particular poem is just... damn! :-) So glad it resonated.