05-02-2012, 09:06 AM
05-02-2012, 09:39 AM
great try with the haiku mark.
sadly i'm struggling to understand it. usually there used as a slice of time that captures an image.
i'm presuming the first line refers to sky.
just a bit of an idea for you to use if it helps;
Opalescent blue sky
hovers over scattered ants-
Pitiless, the sky. (not sure how to rephrase this line)
sadly i'm struggling to understand it. usually there used as a slice of time that captures an image.
i'm presuming the first line refers to sky.
just a bit of an idea for you to use if it helps;
Opalescent blue sky
hovers over scattered ants-
Pitiless, the sky. (not sure how to rephrase this line)
05-02-2012, 10:25 AM
But that's too many syllables . . .
05-02-2012, 10:29 AM
05-02-2012, 06:16 PM
I like the vividness of the imagery, but have no idea if I'm interpreting it right . Is it about how we look like ants when viewed from afar?
05-02-2012, 11:19 PM
(05-02-2012, 06:16 PM)addy Wrote: [ -> ]I like the vividness of the imagery, but have no idea if I'm interpreting it right . Is it about how we look like ants when viewed from afar?
Yes in a way.
I was just at work daydreaming about how the sky just scrolls by us-- all glowing and pretty, but really doesn't care about what is going on below.
05-03-2012, 03:29 PM
haiku's don't have caring parts per say. they're mainly just an image come snapshot
05-03-2012, 05:39 PM
Well, in Japanese poetry, they would generally not personify nature in this way, but as what we call haiku has nothing to do with the Japanese form... However it is true that generally the form was meant to observe or comment on some aspect of nature, but not anthropomorphize it. Of course a syllable has little relation to an "on", nor do we generally use a kireji.
That being said, I think there is a bit of syntactical torturing going on, especially in the last line, and I don't think the clarity is where it needs to be. I don't necessarily have a problem with addressing whether nature cares or doesn't, I do have a problem if that is unclear to the reader, which it is to me. As the requirement in terms of form is about as basic as it can get, I see no excuse for a line such as
"Opalescent blue hovers tiny scattered ants."
could easily be
"Opalescent blue above tiny scattered ants."
Thus
Opalescent blue
above tiny scattered ants.
A pitiless sky.
BTW "above" also acts as the kireji
Dale
That being said, I think there is a bit of syntactical torturing going on, especially in the last line, and I don't think the clarity is where it needs to be. I don't necessarily have a problem with addressing whether nature cares or doesn't, I do have a problem if that is unclear to the reader, which it is to me. As the requirement in terms of form is about as basic as it can get, I see no excuse for a line such as
"Opalescent blue hovers tiny scattered ants."
could easily be
"Opalescent blue above tiny scattered ants."
Thus
Opalescent blue
above tiny scattered ants.
A pitiless sky.
BTW "above" also acts as the kireji
Dale
05-03-2012, 11:10 PM
Now I'm just pissed cause your version is better
05-04-2012, 12:53 AM
"Now I'm just pissed cause your version is better"
Well, at least I accomplished something (I'm of course referring to the pissing you off part)!
Just do what any good poet would do if they liked another version better that someone suggested, claim it as your own.
Dale
Well, at least I accomplished something (I'm of course referring to the pissing you off part)!
Just do what any good poet would do if they liked another version better that someone suggested, claim it as your own.
Dale
05-04-2012, 02:07 AM
That's the problem now I feel that I can't. I did learn something though.
05-04-2012, 05:51 AM
yes you can. that's what workshopping is partly about.
you put something up and people help you sort it out.
dale changed it to something you like. you now say or imply it's dales poem: there's your answer then, change a bit of his poem and make it your own. say thanks dale but i prefer it this way, your input did help though.
it's what editing is really all about.
you put something up and people help you sort it out.
dale changed it to something you like. you now say or imply it's dales poem: there's your answer then, change a bit of his poem and make it your own. say thanks dale but i prefer it this way, your input did help though.
it's what editing is really all about.
05-04-2012, 06:29 AM
Thanks, Billy. Good advice.
05-04-2012, 07:15 AM
That's a good way to put it. If the poem changes because you incorporate my suggestions, then you are the one changing it, not me.
Dale
Dale
05-04-2012, 07:43 AM
Edited. Thanks guys.
10-14-2012, 06:27 AM
ermm ok i maybe new an havent a clue wot the others wos saying BUT i think i understand this haiku
when looking into a bright blue sky its harsh on the eyes an thats when somtimes you see those black spots in front of you..or i need to get me eyes tested
when looking into a bright blue sky its harsh on the eyes an thats when somtimes you see those black spots in front of you..or i need to get me eyes tested
11-22-2012, 11:07 AM
(10-14-2012, 06:27 AM)TwistedAngel Wrote: [ -> ]when looking into a bright blue sky its harsh on the eyes an thats when somtimes you see those black spots in front of you..or i need to get me eyes tested
No, I'm sorry but that isn't what this was meant to be about at all.
11-22-2012, 11:30 AM
(05-02-2012, 09:06 AM)Mark Wrote: [ -> ]Opalescent bluewould it work better with 'over' after hovers?
hovers tiny scattered ants.
A pitiless sky.
Quote:Original:
Opalescent blue
hovers tiny scattered ants.
Pitiless, the sky.
i'll try my hand at seeing it.
the sky doesn't give a fuck about the ants?
if so that's more senryu as it's about something outside nature. the sky is not pitiless, it's just the sky. still a good effort and i'm sure i got it wring