take a haik(u), please. But, why?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lately there has been considerable mention of a poetic structure called
haiku. My short answer to this is "kaikU?" But you deserve a longer answer
(read, I am itching to post what I thnk).
dwipada unDagA
japAneesu haikU
manaku kaikU?
or, in dwipada, (11 to 15 syllables per line)
mana dESi vRttamu dwipada yunDaganu (14)
jApAnu vAri haiku manaku kaiku? (12)
or in mutyAla sarAlu, (total 26 to 36 syllables)
manaku kala muttiyapu saramula (13)
maraci pOyi japAnu vAridi (11)
padiyu nEDaksharAl kaligina (11)
haiku kaikanedan! (or, haiku endukuTA!) ( 6)
(31)
or in kUnalamma padAllO, (total of 23 to 29 syllables)
telugu chandAlalO (7)
pOvu panthAlalO (6)
kalavu andAlulE (for, kalavulE andAlu) (7)
hai-kUnalammA! (5)
(25)
What is the rationale of a 17-syllable rule? You say what is the rationale
for a dwipada? The meter for dwipada is 3-indra+1-sUrya. yati between the
first syllable and the first syllable of the third gaNa. Didn't happen
above, but that's my inability, as was acknowledged before. Let me try
again.
manakunna dwipadanu maraci pOyedaro!
poruginTi haikanna pulla kUra gani
I would even change the first line to
maraturO telugulO nunna dwipadanu,
to keep prAsa, in case that is a requirement. Is it?
But that violates the yati requirement. Back to the db.
maraturO manakunna manci dwipadanu
I picked three of the shorter dESi styles; dwipada, mutyAla sarAlu,
kUnalamma padAlu, just to illustrate that we do not have to resort to a
long 4-lined, 20-syllabled GOF to be able to express an idea in short.
Each line of a dwipada can stand on its own, and in that sense, it is
shorter than even the haiku, which is 17-long.
What is the rationale for the above structures? Well, when you read it, it
would be self-evident. I have noticed it many times, that these chando-
cuffs are not what they are advertised to be. The rules are not formed for
a certain meter to be written. It is that a certain "flow" is found, and
the rules are formed by analysis of it, for further writing in the same
style. Take a GOF vRtta, an utpala mAla. Its structure is "bha ra na bha
bha ra va". If I write it as a sequence of guruvu and laghuvus, it is
(using a la and lA)
lA la la lA la lA la la la lA la la lA la la lA la lA la lA
U I I U I U I I I U I I U I I U I U I U
or take a SArdUlam (the common meter for many a SlOka that we know)
lA lA lA la la lA la lA la la la lA lA lA la lA lA la lA
U U U I I U I U I I I U U U I U U I U
I had my daughter remember these sequences (lA-la-la-lA-...) some ten years
ago, and once every few years, I ask her if she still remebers it. She
does. Without any further "aids" than her memory of a few years ago. Why is
that? My theory is that there is "something" in that sequence of
guruvus and laghuvus, that makes it easy to remember. There are easier
meters to remember, simple ones such as, sragviNi (4 ra-gaNas in each
line), tOTakamu (4 sa-gaNas in each line), mAnini (7 bha-gaNas and 1 guruvu
in each line). But why this (seemingly) odd sequence? It is because there
is some property here that makes it "memorizable". Perhaps also "singable".
I have been toying with the idea of formulating/quantifying this property.
No clue yet, as to how to formulate this "criterion" function. I'll
entertain any ideas about such formulation.
Ramakrishna