HOME | DD
Published: 2008-10-18 17:50:12 +0000 UTC; Views: 13289; Favourites: 553; Downloads: 135
Redirect to original
Description
If I recycledthe love littered at your feet
hearts would starve no more.
Related content
Comments: 278
Mollinda In reply to ??? [2008-10-30 23:40:23 +0000 UTC]
Well your message was loud and clear and is now mascara stained
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Mollinda In reply to oldest-boy [2008-10-31 00:23:27 +0000 UTC]
That was sudden but thankyou!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
oldest-boy In reply to Mollinda [2008-10-31 00:25:28 +0000 UTC]
you're welcome....
*licks your mascara from his words*
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
KnuckerDragon In reply to ??? [2008-10-30 19:07:07 +0000 UTC]
A beautiful haiku. It really makes me think. Great job!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
LesCheveux In reply to ??? [2008-10-30 18:48:22 +0000 UTC]
to whomever suggested this and the writer:
haiku are generally about nature. there is other terminology for human-related events. `MSJames may be able to help.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
fllnthblnk In reply to LesCheveux [2008-10-30 19:37:02 +0000 UTC]
A little pedantic, don't you think?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
LesCheveux In reply to fllnthblnk [2008-10-30 19:46:27 +0000 UTC]
if you're gonna classify a piece in a genre, might as well be right about it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
fllnthblnk In reply to LesCheveux [2008-10-30 20:37:58 +0000 UTC]
Additionally, if you look at the last category, it says "Haiku & Eastern" and not just "Haiku." This would include senryū, which you're talking about. If you're going to complain about ^LadyLincoln 's technicality issue in her DD description, then you should note her about it. ~oldest-boy categorized his poem correctly.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
LesCheveux In reply to fllnthblnk [2008-10-30 23:40:31 +0000 UTC]
Senryu still fall under a naturalistic and non-metaphoric category.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
fllnthblnk In reply to LesCheveux [2008-10-31 02:46:34 +0000 UTC]
If that's what you think, then it might be best just to be a little more open-minded!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
LesCheveux In reply to fllnthblnk [2008-10-31 05:49:24 +0000 UTC]
Sorry, let me resummate in the ideas of a majority of the current haiku and related eastern form publishers and scholars:
The eastern forms rely on sensory impression and limit themselves to what the speaker can readily take in - not tell a story or make extra-sensory references to abstract understandings.
I fail to see how the above fits into this.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
fllnthblnk In reply to LesCheveux [2008-10-31 15:23:14 +0000 UTC]
Well, then technically there shouldn't be any English form of Haiku, right? Since, technically, the Japanese origins of Haiku utilize morae while the English language is more syllable based (slight, but notable differences). There are too many nuances of the Japanese language that English lacks for there to be a technical form of Haiku, right?
Obviously the majority are disregarding this because it's impractical -- so why should subject be banned from the book of Haiku and Senryu? Isn't that counter-intuitive to what poetry in general is all about?
And I disagree with your definition of Senryu. Last I read, it usually dealt with the human condition, usually satirically or ironically (which "affection drive" supplies). What's the whole point of having a different "genre" of Haiku if you're defining Senryu the exact same way?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
LesCheveux In reply to fllnthblnk [2008-10-31 20:28:10 +0000 UTC]
Ask whoever coined the term.
As per the nuances, yes, a symbol-based language would be more conducive to the form, but that doesn't mean a syllable-based language doesn't carry symbolic meanings within the operators of the language, which allows English to carry a technical form of the Eastern-based originals.
To address your disagreement, haiku is itself a genre, as is senryu, creating the necessity for the distinction, albeit a minor difference (possibly equatable to the difference between the technical aspects of Elizabethan Sonnets vs. Petrarchian).
Further, I think you would get nowhere in mentioning what poetry is about - my problem is using a term that implicates and includes tradition when other readily available terms (such as "fixed") are more applicable.
This "pedantry" you mention appears to be degenerating into a pissing match anyhow - I'll rest my case and let the general public get on with praising the thing as they will.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
fllnthblnk In reply to LesCheveux [2008-10-31 22:43:58 +0000 UTC]
Ah, yes. What a way to end an argument. S-M-A-R-T.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
LesCheveux In reply to fllnthblnk [2008-11-01 01:13:28 +0000 UTC]
It's either that or relentlessly reasoning in circles. Either way makes both of us look stupid.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
fllnthblnk In reply to LesCheveux [2008-10-30 20:25:09 +0000 UTC]
Well, it's classified under "Urban" and not "Nature" so I really don't know what you're complaining about.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
oldest-boy In reply to LesCheveux [2008-10-30 18:50:31 +0000 UTC]
thanks for reading,
nonetheless.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
LesCheveux In reply to oldest-boy [2008-10-30 19:03:41 +0000 UTC]
the idea is good. miscategories just bother me. congratulations.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
childwoman In reply to ??? [2008-10-30 18:39:20 +0000 UTC]
A great haiku - simple, provocative, elegant. Great work!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
KunoichiKaoru In reply to ??? [2008-10-30 18:36:49 +0000 UTC]
Wow, for three lines, this packs a lot of punch. Nice work.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Jammys In reply to ??? [2008-10-30 18:17:20 +0000 UTC]
Wow, beautiful! I thought it was so melachony.
Good job!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
GetYourGrip In reply to ??? [2008-10-30 17:32:56 +0000 UTC]
I missed this one, it hits hard with so little words. That takes skill, which you use so nicely.
congradulations on the DD, friend!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
IzumiIchikawa In reply to ??? [2008-10-30 16:44:15 +0000 UTC]
Wow. It's amazing how just three lines can say so much.
Really beautiful, I love it
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
xStillexSchreienx In reply to ??? [2008-10-30 15:01:26 +0000 UTC]
it's amazing how large a message one can put in three small lines of text
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>