Leviathan

[RiverNotch]

A creek in spring
sweeping everything away,
in summer dries out.

--

Flowing slower in
fall, the winter river soon
completely stops

[cidermaid]

Hi, sorry not getting much from this one beyond it's a river!  It there was an under image or metaphor that was intended, than i have to report that for me, it is not coming through and the images, as supplied, of a river do not excite or add anything new to common knowledge / ideas.

I did like the "S" sounds you ran through this one but thought that there were too many "ing" word in there.

A creek in spring
sweeping everything away,
in summer dries out.

--

Flowing slower in
fall, the winter river soon
completely stops

[Southern Scarab]

A creek in spring
sweeping everything away,
in summer dries out.

--

Flowing slower in
fall, the winter river soon
completely stops

The symbolism feels like a true haiku, or a Buddhist koan. The meaning is very axiomatic and I like that. No mental ladders to climb, just a clear observation of change.
It's very human to become completely wrapped in ecstatic ideas when our experiences are new, or when we're young, (spring) and then lose motivation with maturity. (summer) At least those were my first thoughts reading through.

My only critique is the repetition of the word 'in'. Including it in the first line does something to the third one that I'm not crazy about, although I can't explain why. How do you feel about 'A spring creek' ?

Also, I'm curious about the syllables in each line. Right now you have 4-7-5, which is so close to the standard 5-7-5 that I couldn't help but wonder if it was intentional.

Loved it, thanks for the read.

[Erthona]

A creek in spring
sweeping everything away,
in summer dries out.

--

Flowing slower in
fall, the winter river soon
completely stops

At first glance it looks like the writer is trying to adhere to the 5-7-5 rule of the so-called America Haiku. This is especially evident in the second section as he splits the "in fall" between two lines, whereas there is no other explanation to do so, yet S1L1 and S2L3 are both only four syllables. As it does not help what rhythmic quality there is, this can also not be the reason. So the lineation seems ad hoc. The title "Leviathan" does not seem to really work with "creek", Leviathan would be overpowering, a word that creek does not connote. River would be a more functional word.
Except for S1L2 nothing else in the poem speaks to Leviathan. In general the rest of the poem speak of mildness and rhythmically is of low energy, also not what one would expect from the title.
On the whole, disregarding the title the descriptions are weak and generally uninteresting.

Another point, it feels as though the poem was forced to follow the cyclic nature of nature; certainly an oft used theme. This poem does not seem to bring anything new or fresh to this ground.
I have often written similar poems myself and they could easily be judged just as harshly as this critique does. I don't know what this writers reasons were, but mine are usually that I think I have more of an idea than I actually do. It is very frustrating to say the least. I am always left wondering did I not really have an idea, or did it somehow just slip away from me.

Best,


dale

[RiverNotch]

I used Leviathan as the title with the intent of tying this to an earlier piece, it seems I'm obsessed with connecting everything I write: http://www.pigpenpoetry.com/thread-17860.html A sort of reversal, this being a toned down, *objective* view on the same deluge -- to further clarify, that Hobbes refers to his beloved despot as a "mortal god" at one point. I'm not sure if that context will make this any better, though -- I wholly agree that this is quite pedestrian.

I'd read a book on haiku (don't remember the title, but it was real nice) that generally prescribed the 5-7-5 thing (as well as rhyming the first and last lines, but good grief that's almost impossible -- how his translations of Basho and whatever did so still bewilders me), so my attempt to follow that (with the 4-syllable lines being constructed to start-end the piece).

If the renewed context rectifies the piece, then I'll return to it with your more technical suggestions in mind -- the "in" of the second section, the removal of all those "ing"s (which I think is a problem in most all my writ-------pieces), and possibly a change in sonics for the second section, make those S's of the first flow to an actual halt. Thanks for all the feedback, and sorry for the late reply!