> Hello again Grasshopper,
                          Thanks for your comments on this one. I don´t believe I can think up a reasonable defence for `unconscionable´, which is a pity because I always like to engage in these linguistic skirmishes. Oh, what the hell, I´ll do it anyway and make a total wally of myself. `Unconscionable´, then, is the word under discussion. It can mean `excessive´, of course, as in, `bless me, but there has been an unconscionable amount of rain recently´. This would not be the way that most people would use the word, but then in your poem `The Ex-romantic´ you used the phrase `height of mind´s disdain´, I think (I may have got the phrasing a bit wrong), and couldn´t we say that technically `disdain´ is not a physical entity and cannot have physical characteristics like height? It´s not a comment that I would ever make, I think the phrase is a fine one. But how exactly do we use words in poetry? Not always, I would like to propose, in quite exactly the way they might be used in everyday speech. Whether this argument can possibly justify `unconscionable´ as I have used it is, of course, another matter, but I think I´ve done about as much for it as I´m able.
Moving on to `Deep Significance´. I would be interested to hear what Deep Significance you find here, for I know of none. I wonder if this goes back to earlier discussions about my interest in philosophy and it´s appearance in my writing. I certainly like ideas (although that doesn´t mean I consider myself an expert in philosophy) and I don´t see any need to exclude them from poetry although that does raise the question of showing and telling and discursive versus didactic and all that that entails. However, the point here is that the presence of ideas in a poem does not have to imply a proselytising purpose, nor the holding of a `philosophy of Life´, nor, indeed, a belief in any kind of Deep Significance´ mystically concealed within, and conveyed by, words. Of course, if you don´t like the word, that´s fair enough.
Exclamation marks! This is a new one to me. I guess it´s not necessary. Bob suggested a comma. I think an exclamation mark might signify a stronger pause, but really, does it matter? You´re quite right that the word `magnificent´ implies exclamation and so the mark is redundant. In the same way `Do you....´ implies a question so I guess we can dispense with the question mark. Blimey, that, I dare to flatter myself, is a rather cunning argument. 
So, Grasshopper, how have I done? Have I extricated myself from the unconscionable mess I´d made of things or have I just buried myself deeper?


Best wishes,   Mike





<[log in to unmask]>
> Date: 2003/10/19 Sun AM 10:00:49 EEST
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: New sub: Wind
> 
> Dear Mike,
>            The reason I'm familiar with the word 'unconscionable' is that it
> features in the last words (or one version of them) of Charles II who
> apologised for being 'a most unconscionable time dying', but it seems a very
> odd word to choose here as it has a very human and moral connotation, I
> think. Why should we expect the stillness to have reason, or conscience, or
> moderation or any of those human qualities suggested by the adjective?
> Because of that, I'm afraid it stopped me dead. If it had followed the line
> about the prison-house, there might have been more of a justification for
> it, but even then I  think 'prison-house' and 'unconscionable' would fall
> into a melodramatic mode, because you haven't laid any foundation for them-
> you've just plonked them in as if that alone will confer Deep Significance.
> For me, it's just not enough.
> I didn't much like the exclamation mark after wind - surely your opening use
> of Magnificent conveys the exclamation without the need of it?
> Exclamation-marks and rows of dots are things I think are best avoided in
> poems.
> Sorry to be so negative, but I think this needs a lot more work to be
> successful.
> Kind regards,
>       grasshopper
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Horwood" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 2:27 PM
> Subject: [THE-WORKS] New sub: Wind
> 
> 
> > Wind
> >
> > Magnificent, the wind! racing through
> > the branches of this brave new morning,
> > out of the unconscionable stillness,
> > headlong into the prison-house wall.
> >
> >
> > Mike
> >
>