Haiku or not,
"Pond. Frog jumps in. Plop." is purely zenish. --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > > Or I like this version better.... > > > An ancient pond here ... > > Suddenly a frog jumps in > > The sound of water ... > > > Edgar > > > > On Jun 9, 2012, at 8:06 AM, Edgar Owen wrote: > > > Bassho's poem in Japanese is > > > > Furu ike ya > > Kawazu tobikomo > > Mizu no oto > > > > which is literally pretty close to > > > > Ancient pond here > > Frog jumps in > > Sound of water > > > > If you want 5-7-5 close to orginal > > > > An ancient pond here.. > > Then a frog jumps into it > > The sound of water.. > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > On Jun 8, 2012, at 10:02 PM, Bill! wrote: > > > >> Mike and Joe, > >> > >> I agree with Joe that Haikus written in English should comply with the historical 5-7-5 format. If they don't, then why call them Haikus? Of course the one other 'requirement' or characteristic is that the haiku is written to communicate sensual impressions only without subject/object or valuations. This is meant to emulate or communicate the non-dualistic state of Buddha Mind. > >> > >> I also agree with Mike that translations shouldn't have to force the poem into a 5-7-5. The example given of Bassho's Frog/Pond haiku is a good example. The last line is translated as 'Plop'. Bassho's haiku had to have used 5 syllables for that and not just 'plop'. In fact Bassho's actual poem's last line is more literally translated as 'makes loud water sound' or something like that. That's more literal but less poetic in English and I approve of Ginsburg's translation. > >> > >> ...Bill! > >> > >> --- In [email protected], "Joe" desert_woodworker@ wrote: > >> > > >> > Howdy, Mike, > >> > > >> > Well, the art-form has a "form" to it, and I suppose if we write from scratch in English -- our own poem -- it can be good to honor the form and be guided as well as constrained by it. > >> > > >> > But for translations, some translators stick to the form, while others don't feel compelled to do so. I think there's a bit of vanity shown by a translator who casts someone else's poem in that form, when I think the form does not help a translation much. I think it's enough for a reader to read the translation to understand the words, and then to read the Japanese again and again, for the sound and the music. > >> > > >> > By the way, Aitken Roshi's first published book (essentially his Master's thesis done at University of Hawai'i in 1950), is great on this score. The original is given; his translations are literal and word-for-word; and his own more idiomatic English translations follow. I don't believe he adheres to the numerical syllable count form. The books is BASHO'S HAIKU AND ZEN. A great book, for the poetry, for insight on Bassho's life and practice, and for practical insights on zen practice, by a master (recently deceased). > >> > > >> > I think the American lyric poet Allen Ginsburg translated Bassho's most famous poem without regard to syllable-count in the translation, "Old Pond": > >> > > >> > Old pond; > >> > frog jumps in. > >> > Plop! > >> > > >> > (I count just six syllables in all). > >> > > >> > But don't miss the original! Maybe see Robert Aitken's book for that, if you have it. > >> > > >> > --Joe > >> > > >> > > mike brown <uerusuboyo@> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Yes, you're quite correct - Haiku doesn't have to strictly follow the 5-7-5 rule to be regarded as haiku anymore. > >> > > >> > >> > > >
