(08-06-2013, 12:35 AM)fogglethorpe Wrote: Ekphrastic poetry is a legitimate genre..I like having the photo included with the verse.
While there's no way for the reader to tell (and it would uselessly
detract from the damn thing if it was pointed out in some fashion);
I do think it would be fun to think about classification:
Since the poem was written first and the image was selected to go
with it; this would mean that the image is commenting on the poem
and not conversely. Thus the image would be classified as an illustration
to the poem and not the object commented on by the poem. And this
would rule out the poem as being an ekphrastic one. (Again, this is just
for fun.)
And, by extension, if the image substantially modified the meaning of
the poem, then it would cease to be an illustration. The text and
the image would then constitute a single work which would probably
be classified as "multimedia art". 
(08-06-2013, 12:35 AM)fogglethorpe Wrote: I agree with Heslopian..it does have a haiku kind of vibe. My only concern is
economy..this elegant little poem could be trimmed and say the same thing
better. Ex..L3 and L4 feel awkward, and wouldn't be missed if they were cut.
Same with L8 and L9.
Your comment shows I need to revise the poem as it isn't getting across
its main 'meaning'. (This is secondary, BTW, to it's main purpose which is
to be an attractive ornamental poem that describes an attractive ornamental
wet berry).
The 'meaning' is the sense that this one berry, and this one observer
who's commenting on this one berry, are just single elements of a vast
whole. In one case it's the thousands of other berries that surround this
particular one; and in the other, the millions of people that 'surround' this
one observer. Taken farther, both the berries and the people around them
are part of the greatest whole which is the universe. This is reflected
(excuse me) in the fact that the image on every berry is an image of
ALL the other berries as well as the observer and everything else
around them.
This 'meaning' is also intended to be an 'inside joke' for anyone who's
acquainted with 'Indra's Jeweled Net*' which is what the berries reminded
me of when I saw them (on a wet morning) while walking my dog along
a path that followed the boundary of a field and a forest (both of them
immense and humbling).
* A description of 'Indra's Jeweled Net' that I've copied from various sites on the web:
"In the Heaven of Indra, there is said to be a network of pearls, so arranged that if you look at one you see all the others reflected in it. In the same way each object in the world is not merely itself but involves every other object and in fact IS everything else.
Another description including a bit of history:
The metaphor of Indra's Jeweled Net is attributed to an ancient Buddhist named Tu-Shun (557-640 B.C.E.) who asks us to envision a vast net that:
1. At each juncture there lies a jewel.
2. Each jewel reflects all the other jewels in the net.
3. Every jewel represents an individual life form, atom, cell or unit of consciousness.
4. Each jewel, in turn, is intrinsically and intimately connected to all the jewels.
5. Thus, a change in one jewel is reflected in all the others.
This last aspect of the jeweled net is explored in a question/answer dialog of teacher and student in the Avatamsaka Sutra. In answer to the question: "how can all these jewels be considered one jewel?" it is replied: "If you don't believe that one jewel...is all the jewels...just put a dot on the jewel [in question]. When one jewel is dotted, there are dots on all the jewels...Since there are dots on all the jewels...We know that all the jewels are one jewel"
The moral of Indra's net is that the compassionate and the constructive interventions a person makes or does can produce a ripple effect of beneficial action that will reverberate throughout the universe or until it plays out. By the same token you cannot damage one strand of the web without damaging the others or setting off a cascade effect of destruction.