Essays, May 2008

World Haiku Review Volume 6 Issue 3 - May 2008

ESSAYS

My Experiment in Haiku

By

Tara Keogh

Maybe it’s best to begin by stating that I believe everything contains within itself its opposite, and is subject to the dictate of its inherent contradictions. In other words, everything is dialectic – thesis, antithesis and synthesis, ad infinitum and always at varying stages of the process, even though any of the process may sometimes appears static for a while.

To my belief, this is an unavoidable state of life and thought and everything they comprise. And so, it’s not too surprising to me that my experience began with gargantuan misunderstandings and resulted in some things of curiosity like haiku. Some of my poems hang on some contradiction. It could be a moment of lexical cognitive dissonance, slippage of meaning, or an observation of some contradiction in life.

I got hooked on composing poems by using this 5-7-5 metre of traditional haiku. The more of them I wrote, the more I began to feel that there is something special about 5-7-5. There is, for instance, a definite, compact, complete rhythm in 17 syllables. It seems to me that they are somehow perfectly suited to bear single reflections of any nature. 17 syllables are just enough to convey the essence of a situation or thought, while providing enough sound to allow the language to be pleasing and dynamic. Through writing 5-7-5s I’ve grown to feel that it is an ideal form for complete little utterances, a new type of poetry. I know 5-7-5s are largely abandoned in the Western haiku, but to me it is the most fascinating element of haiku poetry.

In relation to the meanings of individual 5-7-5s, the best I can do is to suggest that each one could mean one different thing to each reader. I accept, and am in fact pleased; that there are both times and places for literal words that must necessarily anchor meanings. However, in my opinion 5-7-5s are fortunately exempt from those anchors. Of course, some of the 5-7-5s do seem quite literal with a single most prominent meaning. This, however, is not necessarily the case for every other reader.

I do believe that audience reception and perception are quite legitimate, which is precisely what makes words for pleasure so wonderful. Meanings are protean and fluid. If words are relevant and resonate with readers’ lives and experiences then so much the better.

The result of my experiment in haiku was a body of 5-7-5 poems, some of which appear in this issue of World Haiku Review. I am not so much interested in the polemic of what is or what is not haiku as in the possibility for a poet to make the most of some of the characteristics of its form or content. 5-7-5 form may be inappropriate for English haiku grammatically, but it certainly provides me with an interesting opportunity to explore new poetic possibilities. So I call these little poems I write using 5-7-5s haiku, but as may be evident by now, whatever it is called is really of secondary importance. Let me explain what I am trying to achieve by examples. These are poems which appear in the ‘Vanguard’ section of the current issue of World Haiku Review. By way of explanation, I have written my thoughts behind each poem so that the reader can have a better idea about my experiment. Haiku for me is an accidental trespass, but what a nice incursion it has turned out to be!

we’re on a rolling

thunderclap cloud riding the

crest of our maelstrom

For me, this suggests a moment at the height of any electrical, stormy, exciting and probably doomed relationship, most likely guided by Eros, in which both subjects are utterly blinded and swept up in their maelstrom. These unions are often tumultuous and volatile and noisy like thunderstorms, but both can be beautiful displays (of life and light respectively). Thunderstorms are nourishing for the environment while passion is enriching for a person and a relationship, and of course both are potentially destructive. Riding high on the crest of emotion is thrilling, but also a time of blindness or impaired perception, induced simply by the first intense wave of love or the whirl and mess of the relationship or both. Hence the crest or height of either of these is the most dangerous time, threatening the most damage if the storm is powerful enough or the relationship too weak. Love and storms are forces of nature, the strength and wildness of which can be cathartic, invigorating, messy, seminal and destructive. So...we’re blinded by stormy passion, but it can be an enriching ride nonetheless, especially with the right person.

i wait for the words

to come marching along and

stomp on all meaning

This is my lament for unreason in a moment that awaits the heavy fall of reason that will necessarily alter a situation. We can reason things to death, we can think ourselves out of (emotional and other) involvements by negating what our hearts say when we listen to our heads (not to mention the nonsense that can be reasoned or 'logical' that sounds good but one knows is drivel nonetheless). However, personally, I believe knowing in many situations comes from feeling something is right/wrong or important/unimportant , and words can work against that. Hence, the potential loss of meaning (or significance) once one begins to think (in words) about something or someone.

we believe what we

want to believe when the truth

will tear things apart

I think this simply speaks to the human capacity or tendency for self-delusion. Sometimes we create our own realities in accordance with our desires despite whatever evidence may be in front of us, particularly if it allows us to maintain the status quo, i.e. not change anything. It's often quite difficult to see when a person or situation we want is bad for us or untenable, and the result is personal deception in order to hold onto something that maybe we shouldn't hold on to. Even for an individual this could be denial of a terminal illness for example, i.e. one's inability to accept one's own mortality could cause one to refuse to accept the truth because it will tear their reality apart and force a change if it’s acknowledged and accepted as such, although in this particular case the change would indeed be a beneficial thing it seems to me. In relationship terms this one makes me think primarily of a person with a cheating or abusive partner who refuses to accept the partner's behaviour for what it is in order to preserve the (detrimental/negative) relationship because that's (believed to be) easier to negotiate than a split. And of course, it's a little tip of my cap to Joy Division and the song 'Love Will Tear Us Apart'.

the insanity

of my love for you was whole

and left me naked

My first love was an insane deal that nearly destroyed me, but through it I learned much, and most importantly, selflessness. So, my intention here is for ‘insane’, ‘naked’ and ‘whole’ each to be understood as both good and bad. It is potentially beneficial or insane to expose oneself entirely to another, but it should be what happens bilaterally in authentic (true?) love relationships. It can also be, for numerous reasons, dangerous, especially as the relationship and emotions change – improving or deteriorating. Though unity or wholeness is often viewed as a virtue in itself and the state of unity is probably necessary for an authentic relationship, being wholly, selflessly, blindly, committed to someone can ultimately leave one wholly disempowered and exposed. Additionally, out of particularly insane (one-sided) selflessness can emerge the naked (catastrophically fragmented/broken) individual.

i lost myself when

i burned for your passions and

dripped into nothing

This is an observation about an effect of my first love on me. I was consumed by every and all detail of this boy and his life and became disastrously boring, a complete drip (which I think is a terrible thing to think of someone – sort of endowing non-entity status). All I talked about was him and stuff that interested him. I ridiculously adopted his passions as my own, and as a result I lost my own passions/self, on top of being a drip! So here I really like the term 'drip' and was comparing myself, the drip, to a candle burning. When it was over there was nothing left of the candle/me, it (the wax/my self) all dripped away into nothing because I was not 'burning' for myself, i.e. creating something for or of myself, but rather more like burning out for someone else. And of course when that happens one is simply left with an amorphous glob of wax, i.e. nothing (no form, no reason, no meaning, etc.), so better to burn for one's own passions is the idea of this one.

me me me me me

me me me me me me me

me me me not you

The idea of this poem amused me greatly. I love the many meanings that can be attached to the three words, and all the ones I can think of resonate with me. On a high note, I’d like it to be a reminder that too many mes is a ridiculous thing, i.e. that it’s important to have some yous in the mix full stop, and ideally they should be granted the respect, understanding, empathy, compassion and sympathy demanded by Justice. But it was likely composed with only me in mind which is, again, either good or bad depending on the circumstances, etc.

[End]