Many schools of haiku exist. The traditional school exemplified by MASAOKA Shiki believes haiku should speak only about naturally occurring things and that topics such as refridgerators and cars should not to appear in haiku. This school believes in objectivity, ie. neither the author's thoughts or feelings nor the author themselves should appear in the poem. Some of the schools under the "traditional" umbrella have lost site of what a haiku truly is. Many are content to word sketch (shasei) and often suffer from a lack of depth. Other "traditional" schools have a firm grasp if somewhat limited view of haiku. Some examples of traditional-style haiku are:
ことさらに目立つ花なし椿かな -Dhugal
kotosara-ni medatsu hana nashi tsubaki-kana
蓮池の千本の茎霧を刺す - Dhugal-Dhugal
In the decades following the haiku renaissance at the turn of the century, several other schools of haiku emerged. One of these schools was the "humanist" school, led by KATOH Shuuson and NAKAMURA Kusatao. This school believes that haiku must be intrinsically subjective as the poet selects objects, or parts of objects, from the myriad that surround them at the time a haiku moment occurs. They also believe that humans are inseparable from nature, being a part of the grand scheme, and as such are a valid topic for haiku. The humanist school searches for truths of human existence using haiku as a medium. Some examples of humanist haiku are:
白息の車窓に「誰」でもなくなりぬ -Dhugal
shiroiki-no shasou-ni (dare)demo nakunarinu
-Dhugal
大晦日卵の殻をつぶし捨つ -Dhugal
oomisoka tamago-no kara-o tsubushi sutsu
-Dhugal
Yet another school of haiku is the Santohka school which does away
with the 5,7,5 form and works in a more organic form, using no padding
words. These haiku are often extremely short with only a single idea presented
in each poem. American haiku in particular often follow this pattern. An
example is:
鉄鉢の中へも霰 -Santohka
teppatsu-no naka-e-mo arare
-Santohka
One technique often used in haiku is contrast or juxtaposition.
face-to-face before the jellyfish upon my palm... my eyeballs