The Place of Rengay in Tanka Journals
First published
in Skylark 3:2, Winter 2015.
The poetic form of rengay was first inspired by renku (and thus its
predecessor, renga), or perhaps as a reaction against it. It offers a
simplified alternative to the rules of renku that the West often perceived as
arbitrary and overly complicated. Garry Gay has said that each of the six
verses in the form he created is meant to be a haiku—or at least “haiku-like”
in the case of the two-liners. Consequently, the verses are based in haiku, not
tanka, and thus do not belong in a tanka journal. Or so it would seem. But does
this settle the question that David Terelinck raises in his support for rengay
in Skylark 3:1, Summer 2015? Not necessarily. As David notes, the relationship between the
three-line and two-line verses is indeed similar to tan-renga, and thus to
tanka. It’s therefore gratifying to see tanka poets, especially those who do
not write haiku, find an attraction to rengay—thus opening, as David says, a
new audience for the form. Because haiku grew out of renku, which itself grew
out of tanka, perhaps the attraction of tanka poets to rengay brings everything
full circle.
For a three-person rengay, it’s
easy to see that the structure resembles a set of three tan-renga and
therefore, by extension, a set of three collaborative tanka. Rengay writers
have always been free (or not, if they so choose) to write content that is more
overtly emotional or subjective than haiku, and thus closer to tanka, even if
the majority of published rengay have veered more toward the objectivity of haiku.
But still the tanka-like relationship of the three-line and two-line verses
remains. That structure is muted in the two-person rengay form, where two
three-line verses appear in the middle, but two other pairs of verses in each
rengay retain the three-line/two-line pattern, and even the third and sixth
verses, both three-liners, could be said to be part of a tan-renga structure,
but with the two-line verse coming first. So the tan-renga and tanka dynamic is
definitely there.
So is rengay in the haiku camp, or
tanka camp? How about both? Ultimately, it’s fine for rengay to embrace both
haiku and tanka, and it’s satisfying to see that rengay can grow in an
unanticipated new way by representing a set of collaborative tanka in its
verses. As Claire Everett said in Skylark
#5 (Summer 2015), “It is not disputed that rengay has its poetic foundations in
the haiku tradition, but it seems that it is a linked form that appeals to many
tanka poets, who believe, like me, that it can stake a claim in both genres”
(5). Indeed, it’s pleasing to see that rengay now has its own special section
in Skylark.
The embrace of rengay by tanka
poets would also seem to be an extension of the recent growth in writing
collaborative strings or sequences of responsive tanka, as seen in recent books
by Naomi Beth Wakan and Amelia Fielden, among others, as well as such
collaborative writing in tanka and tanka-friendly journals, including Lynx, Ribbons, and Red Lights.
Perhaps I contributed to that growth myself by writing rengay with Amelia, one
of our most prominent and influential tanka writers—a poet who does not also
write haiku. I suspect that Amelia feels, like Joy McCall (writing in Skylark 3:1, Summer 2015), that “If I was an editor
I’d be welcoming to all kinds of things that looked like tanka and calling them
tanka or sequences or sets or strings—it’s all Japanese-tradition poetry, short
songs, whatever name we give it” (140–141).
My own personal stake here is that
I’m eager to find new outlets for rengay poetry, so of course I’m inclined to
welcome Skylark’s stance towards
rengay purely for that reason. But more than that, on an aesthetic level, I also
agree that a tanka dynamic is at work in rengay verses, the same tanka dynamic
that’s been at work in adjacent renga and renku verses for centuries. The
difference, unlike renga, renku, and even tan-renga, is rengay’s development of
a theme. I would encourage rengay writers to always remember the central
importance of thematic development in all six rengay verses—and most often an
objective theme works best, with possible secondary or tertiary themes that might
be more subjective.
In any event, what I find most
interesting is the idea that rengay is evolving, and now attracts tanka poets
as well as haiku poets, and long may it do so. It may indeed be time to start
an independent rengay journal—something I myself had already thought to
publish, probably in an online format. If I were the editor, I would welcome
contributions from both haiku and tanka poets, and welcome rengay that had the flavour
of haiku and the feel of tanka. Here’s to rengay as an ongoing collaborative
celebration that embraces both worlds—haiku and tanka.
|