Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (21127)	8/9/2001 9:46:10 PM
From: Dayuhan	Respond to of 82486

trying to fit art into a box of words is always limiting, but failing to do so makes it impossible to comminicate about art if we don't have any agreed terms. I've nothing against agreed terms, I just wonder if, in this case, the agreed terms in English actually reflect the terms that originally governed the art form. Of course we might consider the variant that developed under this restriction to be a form of its own. Maybe it needs a new name. The conversation I'm recalling stemmed from a competition in which young people presented haiku. The winning poem, which inspired enormous delight among the (Japanese) judges, compared fireworks to half-finished baskets hanging upside down. What inspired the delight was the use of a flawlessly accurate comparison of shapes and symmetries that few people would have ever thought to link. The poem in question was not entirely correct from the syllabic perspective, which led to some criticism of the decision and eventually the conversation I'm recalling. The response to the criticism was that the originality and aptness of the thought, the clarity with which it was expressed, and the meter in which the poem was delivered were what came close to the ideal, and that the precise syllable count was not a significant.