In my last posting, I discussed the distinction between subjective and objective hokku. We can think of it this way:
An objective hokku is a thing-event.
A subjective hokku is generally a thing-event plus the “thinking” of the writer.
Through the window of the stone lantern —
There is just the coolness, the stone lantern, the sea.
However at another time Shiki wrote:
The defeat of the Heike
In the sound of the waves.
The Heike were an ancient clan defeated in a naval battle. So what we see here is a bit of objectivity — “coolness” and “the sound of the waves” — but added to and overwhelming that is the subjectivity of Shiki’s historical allusion, his “coloring of the imagination” added when he “hears” the defeat of the Heike in the sound of the waves. But what he hears comes not from the waves, but from his own imagination. What he really hears is just the sound of waves. But he did not let that be enough. He has added “thinking” to the objective elements, and has made the verse subjective.
Now why is this distinction important, given that historically there were virtually always both subjective and objective hokku? It is important because in the kind of hokku I teach, we prefer hokku without “thinking” because they give us the pure thing-event, with nothing added.
Subjective hokku are “poetical,” meaning “fancifully depicted or embellished.” When Shiki adds the defeat of the Heike to the plain sound of the waves, he is adding his own imagination, his own fancy, and is embellishing the sound of the waves by adding that “coloring of the imagination” to them.
Subjective hokku are often very popular in the West, because as I wrote earlier, Western poetry is traditionally highly subjective. In fact the degree to which Western poetry was and is subjective is rather astonishing when one begins to look for objectivity in traditional poetry.
We can say that in subjective verse, the writer has a “poetic” intent. He cannot just give us the thing-event itself and let it be. He has to add his own thoughts, his own view, his own interpretation. Very rarely is Nature just allowed to be Nature, as Onitsura allows it to be in this objective hokku:
A cool wind;
The sky is filled
With the sound of pines.
In that verse there is no attempt to be “poetical,” no addition of the thinking of the writer. There is only the cool wind, only the sound of the pines filling the sky.
Of course our preference for objectivity in hokku can be traced to the spiritual roots of hokku. In the Bahiya Sutta we read,
“In the seen, there should be only the seen. In the heard, there should be only the heard.”
So there is a very close connection between the preference for objective hokku here and the practice of a meditative, contemplative life.