Finding
a Place for Formal Haiku: Part 3
In no
particular order, I’m going to close this series with a few random observations
that came to me while interacting with Watkins' 2007 article.
1. My basic view is that syllabic haiku and
free verse haiku have become two separate forms of poetry. This happened gradually. Both free verse and syllabic haiku have the
same origin – Japanese haiku. But they
have responded to different aspects of the form. At first this didn’t seem to be a significant
difference. Over time, however, the
differences have become clearer and the separation between them has become
sharper.
2. I don’t think there is anything to be
gained on the part of syllabic haijin in trying to gain access to official
haiku organizations. Official haiku is
committed to the free verse approach and that’s fine. They do a good job advocating for free verse
haiku, publishing it, holding workshops on how to go about writing it,
etc. Official haiku is what it is and is
doing a good job advocating for its view.
3. What I suggest is that syllabic haijin go
their own way and not worry about official haiku. In a sense this has already happened. A syllabic haijin like Priscilla Lignori has
set up her own haiku group that teaches a syllabic approach. And there is at least one journal which is
explicitly devoted to syllabic haiku, ‘The Haiku Journal’. At this time it seems that organizations
advocating for syllabic haiku are just emerging. I’m not sure what form they will take. Syllabic haijin might begin parallel
organizations and journals: there might be something like The Syllabic Haiku
Society of America. But I’m not
sure. I mean I’m not sure that syllabic
haijin need the same kinds of organizations that free verse haijin have. There is no American Villanelle Society, but
that does not stop poets from composing excellent villanelles. In the same way there does not exist any
syllabic haiku society, but that has not interfered with people composing
excellent syllabic haiku.
4. Yet the hostility of official haiku
towards syllabic haiku is something that needs to be dealt with. The critiques of syllabic haiku on the part
official haiku are entirely without merit. The linguistic arguments are vacuous, the
poetic critiques of syllabic haiku are uninformed. This hostility does need to be countered in
an informed way. The response needs to
be without hostility itself. The point
is to take an apologetic position rather than an antagonistic one.
5. On the other hand, these critiques of
syllabic haiku should not be given a free pass.
For example, I think that Watkins is too accommodating in his essay
when, in several places, he acquiesces to the idea that the English form of
5-7-5 may have been an erroneous application of the Japanese onji (sic) to an English language
context. This kind of argument is
widespread in official haiku. But it is
all smoke and mirrors. In other words, I
think syllabic haijin have been too generous towards official haiku and
official haiku’s arguments in support of free verse haiku. Syllabic haijin need to take back some of
this territory; not to argue that composing free verse haiku is wrong, but to
affirm that the counting procedure for syllabic haiku is legitimate and that it
is not based on a misunderstanding of the Japanese language. On the contrary, such an approach sees the
Japanese language as one language among many rather than something weird
and bizarre.
6. The esthetic differences between syllabic
and free verse haiku, I think, need to be highlighted. Think of the word ‘haiku’ as resembling the
word ‘dog’. ‘Dog’ is a general concept;
there are many different breeds of dog.
For example, there are springer spaniels and corgis. We use different standards for these two
breeds; we evaluate them differently.
In a
similar way, syllabic haiku and free verse haiku are two different breeds and
they use different standards when writing their poetry. On the rare occasion when free verse haijin
evaluate syllabic haiku, they do so using the standards of free verse haiku. It is not surprising, therefore, that their
evaluation will be negative. If I use
the standards of a corgi to evaluate a springer spaniel my conclusion will also
be negative. And irrelevant. In a similar way, official haiku critiques of
syllabic haiku are, almost always, simply irrelevant to what syllabic haijin
are doing.
7. I have found it helpful to remember that
the overt hostility towards syllabic haiku on the part of free verse haiku is
not representative of all, or even most, free verse haijin. I suspect that most free verse haijin are
simply writing haiku and are not really concerned with these issues. I know free verse haijin who are completely comfortable
with those who choose to write syllabically.
I refer to free verse haijin who are publicly hostile to syllabic haiku
as ‘evangelical’. They go around the
world wide web looking for places to express their dislike of, which at times
becomes indignation towards, syllabic haiku.
Their efforts leave an impression of a kind of poetic pugilism. I am thinking of facebook entries which
graphically express their distaste of syllabic haiku, or those who write online
screeds denouncing a syllabic approach.
I don’t want to be misunderstood: critique is good. Discussion of these different approaches is
good. I am referring to a tone wherein
the advocate for free verse haiku considers their cause to be a settled issue;
they aren’t really interested in having a discussion. And we need to be honest here; this hostility
can, at times, be extreme, which is weird, but there it is.
8. My feeling is that syllabic haijin need
to build a more secure foundation for their approach. First, I think syllabic haijin would benefit
by developing a semi-official canon of syllabic haiku poets. These would be syllabic haiku poets that
would be considered as good to excellent representatives of a syllabic
approach. This would include Richard
Wright, Edith Shiffert, James Hackett, and others. The function of such an informal canon would
be to serve as a resource for teaching others about a syllabic approach and as
a kind of well to refresh one’s own efforts.
Such an informal canon is found in other fixed forms such as the sonnet
(Shakespeare, Wyatt, Browning, etc.). An
informal canon like this is found in Japanese haiku; it is why Basho, Buson,
and Issa are so frequently mentioned.
The purpose of an informal canon like this is to assist in stabilizing
the form and to act as a kind of entryway into the artistic realm of that
particular form.
Second,
I think it would be good to generate an anthology devoted exclusively to
syllabic haiku. Such an anthology might
include about 100 poets with representative samples of their work. I would include in such an anthology examples
from popular haiku such as Haikus for
Jews or Redneck Haiku as they are
part of this heritage. In other words I
would not confine such an anthology to only ‘literary haiku’.
Third,
perhaps a saijiki of syllabic haiku could be created. This would be a big project and would need
the participation of more than one person.
I don’t know if there is enough interest in such a project at this time,
but it is something to think about. With
devices like skype it would be possible for distant editors to regularly
consult with each other on such a project.
It would be time consuming and perhaps it is somewhat premature at this
time; but I think it is worth putting out the idea.
Finally,
I would like to see syllabic haijin put some effort into reprinting some of the
earlier works of syllabic haiku that have gone out of print. An early anthology like Borrowed Water has some really good syllabic haiku in it. And the haiku of specific authors needs to be
brought back into the present. With the
development of print-on-demand services this is much easier to do than it was
even a few years ago.
9. The creation of alternative spaces for
syllabic haiku will encourage others to follow this kind of approach. Because I have a concern with syllabic forms
in general, I also think that such alternative spaces could assist in
introducing English language poets to how syllabics works in the English
language. Syllabic haiku is the most
successful syllabic form in English. It
has already developed a large literature of high quality. Syllabic haiku is a demonstration of the
efficacy of a syllabic approach to English language poetry. I think that is quite an accomplishment.
10. Again, I think syllabic haijin need to cut
the cord with official haiku. Not out of
anger or resentment. Rather it is a
recognition that what official haiku is doing isn’t going to change; it is not
going to alter its course in order to accommodate syllabic haiku. And that is not a bad thing.
Instead
of trying to convince official haiku organizations that they should modify
their program or approach, I suggest that syllabic haijin go further down the
path they have already started on. When
we do so I think we will find many friends walking on the same road.
No comments:
Post a Comment