I was recently asked on Quora if "Non-Japanese haiku are true haiku". The following is an expansion and slight rewrite of what I posted there^†.

Are Non-Japanese haiku real haiku?

Short answer: yes. Long answer: It depends.

First we have to break down what is a Japanese haiku. In Japan today you have two types of haiku: the ones that stick to the traditional rules, that is 17 mora^‡, a cutting word (kireji) and a nature word (kigo); and the ones that are more free form and disregard mora count, kigo, kireji, or all three.

Calling the first group "traditionalists" isn't exactly right, because the requirement of kigo is a modern thing, not imposed as strictly as today until Kyoshi Takahama (1874 – 1959), a student of Shiki, took over as editor of Japan's main haiku magazine, Hototogisu. But Kyoshi was such a huge force that his vision of haiku is now thought of as the way it always was, so most people do think of this as the traditional approach.

As you might imagine the traditional group doesn’t always agree that freeform haiku are haiku, whereas that group considers them all haiku. The general public may still consider a haiku only the traditional kind, but then again this attitude may be changing. A while back the complete words of Santoka were published. Santoka was a wandering Buddhist monk who wrote free form haiku, often much shorter than 17 mora and almost never with kireji or kigo. He was a student of Ogiwara Seisensui, who might be thought of as the father of the free-verse haiku (Kyoshi didn't like him very much, by the way). The books were extremely popular and he has gone on to be very well thought of.

Anyway, so in summary, in Japan we have two types of poems, both called haiku:

1. 17 mora, kigo, kireji
2. Free-verse (but short)—with or without kigo and/or kireji

Riddle me this: are Japanese haiku real haiku? Now there's a koan for you.

Moving on.

In English, we have something of the same dynamic as in Japan but it is a little more complex. Most people are introduced to haiku in elementary school as an exercise in counting syllables, so as a result most people consider haiku a short poem of 17 syllables arranged in lines of 5/7/5. I would guess the general public is with this group. Their only exposure to haiku are these school syllable counting games so they don't know any other way.

There is another group composed of people who are more familiar with the traditional Japanese form (which is not so traditional—see above) and so they say haiku must not only be 17 syllables but must also include a reference to nature and some kind of juxtaposition of images (since we don’t have kireji in English). Ok.

Then we have a third group that is more about free-form haiku. The common thinking here is that haiku should simply be short, about the length of one breath. According to the Haiku Society of America, the trend seems to be towards this group.

In Summary, in the English speaking world we have 3 types of poems, all called haiku:

1. 17 syllables, arranged in lines of 5/7/5
2. 17 syllables, arranged in lines of 5/7/5 — must have kigo and kireji
3. Free-verse (but short)—with or without kigo and/or kireji

---

So we see in Japan there are two kinds of haiku, and in the English speaking world there are three kinds of haiku. So what do we compare when we ask if non-Japanese haiku are true haiku? Answer: it depends on you, on on which of these many groups I have mentioned you happen to agree with, and it also depends on the short poem in question.

Personally I would say if the poem is short, around one breath, it is a haiku if the author says it is. Then again Santoka is one of my favorite haiku poets and I tend to write free form haiku in both languages, so I am a little biased. I also think 17 syllables is far far too long and that around 10-12 syllables would more closely match the Japanese form. You can read more on that here

---

Your thoughts? Let me know what you think in the comments.

Footnotes

†: Which you can read here if the mood strikes you.

‡: What's a mora, you ask? See here.