Massey Comment: This is definitely a “Death or Glory” poem and you could call it “brilliant” or “a piece of crap” with almost equal reason. The haiku has two distinct parts. The first is purely descriptive but I think the descriptions are evocative, particularly the “plumpness” — that moment when the force of a rising tide pushing water upstream and the force of the river’s downstream flow are holding each other in balance. The second part talks about the essential mystery of all things. Why is this river — these geese — anything — here? The twist is, of course, that we are confronted with the clear answers and the questions are the mystery. Well. If you are a pure materialist, very popular in science these days, you would reject the whole poem because the geese are not “answers” to anything. There is no meaning. Only matter. No consciousness either, just interactions of matter so complex they “feel” like more than they are. I tend to be of a more cheerful if not more fanciful disposition. As for my final grade, most of the time I think A+ but sometimes I think C- and because I can’t quite make up my mind, I think the poem is the better for it.
Peter -you didn’t mention in your commentary, although I would guess that you chose the word plump as it is also a synonym, albeit a less common one, for wedge or skein of geese. I think you should give yourself the A-.
Hi Michael, thanks for the note! I love the fact that you focused on the word “plump” because I’ve always thought that word was correct but problematic. Correct because the moment that inspired the poem was the moment of slack water on a very cold day. The water was motionless and it look sluggish because it was getting close to freezing. Problematic because that image is obvious to exactly 0.00% of readers. When you limit yourself to seventeen syllables, certain compromises need to be made.
Massey Grade: A+ or C-
Massey Comment: This is definitely a “Death or Glory” poem and you could call it “brilliant” or “a piece of crap” with almost equal reason. The haiku has two distinct parts. The first is purely descriptive but I think the descriptions are evocative, particularly the “plumpness” — that moment when the force of a rising tide pushing water upstream and the force of the river’s downstream flow are holding each other in balance. The second part talks about the essential mystery of all things. Why is this river — these geese — anything — here? The twist is, of course, that we are confronted with the clear answers and the questions are the mystery. Well. If you are a pure materialist, very popular in science these days, you would reject the whole poem because the geese are not “answers” to anything. There is no meaning. Only matter. No consciousness either, just interactions of matter so complex they “feel” like more than they are. I tend to be of a more cheerful if not more fanciful disposition. As for my final grade, most of the time I think A+ but sometimes I think C- and because I can’t quite make up my mind, I think the poem is the better for it.
Peter -you didn’t mention in your commentary, although I would guess that you chose the word plump as it is also a synonym, albeit a less common one, for wedge or skein of geese. I think you should give yourself the A-.
best, Michael Arbuckle
Hi Michael, thanks for the note! I love the fact that you focused on the word “plump” because I’ve always thought that word was correct but problematic. Correct because the moment that inspired the poem was the moment of slack water on a very cold day. The water was motionless and it look sluggish because it was getting close to freezing. Problematic because that image is obvious to exactly 0.00% of readers. When you limit yourself to seventeen syllables, certain compromises need to be made.