Fa-So-La-La
I have been ruminating lately on how haiku is such a postmodern form of poetry. Think about it-- the object of haiku is to make you feel the emotions of the moment, just a single, fragmented moment. It has nothing to do with perspective, reason, or deep meditation, but with impression of an ephemeral moment on the feelings.
What could be more postmodern than this? It is the glorification of emotion, of fragmented and worthless moments, often preserved in purposefully obscure language. What do they expect us to gain from this? Are we supposed to fall at the poet's feet for emparting to us great wisdom such as--
another day of snow--
the statue's fingers
broken off.
(Gary Hotham)
Fans of haiku say that there is beauty in the preservation of these moments, and that one must enjoy little things like this in life. And I agree. But I think it can be done in ways much more edifying and enlightening to the reader. Consider this Fernando Ortega poem (I am using this to show that this can be done very effectively in modern poetry; Fernando Ortega is really just a poet who sings)...
Storm
Sometimes it takes a storm
To really know the light.
The scent of rain, the weight of clouds
Pulling down the sky.
Sometimes it takes a storm
To know how you feel.
To understand indigo,
And the varnished sun
Lighting up the fields.
It takes the rain between the lines
To know what sorrow finds,
The way a cloud divides sometimes
The clearing and the blue.
I love you.
I was just passing through
And taken by surprise.
Between the black sky and the blue
I love you.
This poem/song captures the beauty of a moment (the beautiful and simple description of a field before before a storm), but there is much more going on here. This song has the feel of haiku, combined with reflection on how trials mature us. Perfect.
*****
[Queen Shenaynay interjects that although haiku is, as Fa-So-La-La well knows, an ancient poetic form of the East, it is yet not a contradiction to say that something of ancient origin can prove postmodern in spirit. For illustration of this idea, one need merely re-read the first chapters of Genesis. 'Postmodern' is, in some respects, an ironic phrase for defining a spirit that is pre-historic. As Dadaw Sonny says, "All worthwhile truth lies in a paradox."]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
12 comments:
Such a beautiful song. I like to pretend I wrote it. His song "This Time Next Year" also. Yeah, I wrote that. Yeah, yeah. ;-)
As you know from being a Beehive road warrior, haiku's highest and best use is being read aloud in a mock hippy-fied deadpan during the 9th hour of a 10 hour car trip, when every one is getting really simple and ripe for an inexplicable case of gasping hysterics.
late in the day sunlight ---
the dentist changes
the shape of my tooth
(Gary Hotham yet again)
Seriously now.
I think Haiku loses considerably when translated into English, and I don't think most English Haiku writers are really very good at it.
In Japanese, Western style poetry doesn't work very well, because the syllabic alphabet makes just about everything rhyme. Rhyming poetry sounds silly in a language where _every_ word ends in one of five vowel sounds, and, of course, it takes no talent in such circumstances.
I agree that Haiku and post-modernism share similar philosophical roots (Haiku was heavily influenced by Buddhism, for instance), but in Japanese I think it has a little more depth.
Mr. Shafer says
Forget Haiku, get some of Kiplings poetry.
Its awsome.
I have serious issues with Kipling, we don't get along very well. But I will try again. :-)
As to the question of whether something very, VERY old can be categorized as postmodern: If it can, doesn't that make you wonder about the value of the term "postmodern"? If the category is more or less all-encompassing or infinitely flexible, then does it have any utility?
Put differently, the description of haiku in this post, while elegant in its own way, seems to be about not any embodiment of postmodernism in haiku, but rather of some other quality that ought to have been the focus here.
I chose to use the word 'postmodern' because it conveys to the minds of most people the ideology I was writing about. I know that it is an unfortunately broad term, but the purpose of language is to communicate, and I tried to do this by using that word. :-)
With regard to whether or not haiku is 'postmodern,' it is humanistic, subjective, and elevates emotions and feelings above rational, meditative, creative thought. These are also earmarks of postmodernism.
Please don't let me scare you away-- I really would love to know what quality you think I should have expressed better. This kind of exchange of ideas and critisism is, after all, what makes blogging so cool. :-)
Hey, Fa-so-la-la, perchance I see rumblings of Credenda Agenda in your choice of names?
Shieldmaiden, what ARE you talking about? Establish a context for your question and then maybe I'll be able to answer!
I mean that "to understand indigo" sounds like something they would say in Credenda Agenda.
Hi again -- not scared away at all. Very much appreciate your response; regret my long absence. And I certainly agree that this is what makes blogging (and user-created content more generally) the future of the Web.
Your idea about choosing a word based on the potential for communication is a valid one, to be sure. For me, though, the best communication happens when one uses words that aren't so loaded with meaning. And you do this, separately: the paragraph beginning "What could be more postmodern…" is a wonderful one, save, perhaps, that opening sentence.
(As an aside, doesn't postmodernism challenge the very idea that the purpose of language is communication? First, isn't the purpose of language performance, as with haiku, drama, painting, or any other form of expression? Second, isn't true communication -- "the dream at the heart of philosophy," in Derrida's words -- impossible? I'm not taking a position either way here; I've been unable to resolve these questions myself. Still, have you, in the end, conjured postmodernism in the service of an agenda that the movement considers to be dead?)
As to the earmarks of postmodernism, I couldn't agree more with those elements you name. Still, for me your list is missing a key element, historical specificity. Postmodernism is a movement grounded in history, like the civil rights movement in the United States, like surrealism, or, more to the point, like modernism. If a movement in art today emerged that sought to replicate exactly all the characteristics of the renaissance, let's say, we wouldn't identify its proponents as renaissance painters.
Essentially, for me the problem isn't the comparison to postmodernism. In fact, the second comment points to a question that it would be interesting to explore: what philosophical roots might haiku and postmodernism have in common? What historical circumstances led to those common roots?
For me, the problem is the categorization of haiku AS postmodern. The opening sentences of your post's first and second paragraphs are the greatest offenders in that respect. It's a question of historical comparison (which may well be appropriate) versus bloating the jargon even further by broadening an already exploded category (which, as you know, I question).
Don't know how I became so infatuated with the expression "for me" all of a sudden. I apologize in advance. Too much American Idol, perhaps. Think of Randy Jackson, "For me, dude, it was…"
Thank you so much for returning to the Beehive! Fortunatly The Queen informed me of your post so I didn't miss it!
I agree, the use of the term 'Postmodern' is regretable, but unfortunaly it was also nessecary, as I have noted in my other comment. It does indeed only tell half the story, but at least it tells the half of the story that I am most interested in-- how haiku is relevant to the postmodern age and ideology.
For me :-) the most fascinating line of study is seeing how cultures and ideas and worldveiws flow in and out of each other. In many respects I think the world is circling back to the Ancient worldview, but calling it new names. Thus the confusion of language that has caused this discussion.
As to your aside about communication being thought void by the postmodernists, this is also something that interests me.
The Postmodernists say that there is no meaning, no purpose to anything. They deny that language can be used to express ideas with clarity and truth-- to them, there is no clarity or truth. It's a sad, strange worldview isn't it? I really don't understand why anybody in good health and spirits would take to it. But anyway, they prove the fallacy and inconsistency of their ideaology by the fact they that cannot get away from language! They have to use it to express their disdain of. Ironic, hmmm? You might check back later on this-- I think I might post on it instead of just commenting.
Post a Comment