[Matt Q]

Hi Susan,

I like "succeeding" (over the suggested change to "success") because I can read it as an ongoing process / an intermittent thing, instead of (and as well as) as a final state. We are succeeding at this (doing it properly, well) when the stated conditions hold. At other times we might not be succeeding: such times as we forget that we're writing our names in water or planting our seeds in snow.

So, I like the title change in the light of the above, since the original one had seemed (to me) to tie "succeeding" down to its sense of achieving a final state rather than a process. I also quite like it on its own terms too, for the word-play: the capacity to grasp these negatives. Though I wonder if it's "straight" meaning works as well for the poem.

I dislike the capitalisations of L6. It seems at odds with the rest of the poem, as if the poem shifts era for a line. I think the line works as well without them for sense, and the poem works better.

I did wonder if there was another modifier than the somewhat well-worn "mere" that could go before "oblivion" -- "bare" maybe, for sense and for alliteration? But maybe you're intended to reference Shakespeare here?

best,

Matt

[Hilary Biehl]

Originally Posted by Matt Q

I dislike the capitalisations of L6. It seems at odds with the rest of the poem, as if the poem shifts era for a line. I think the line works as well without them for sense, and the poem works better.

I'm with Matt on this.

[Susan McLean]

Matt, yes, I did mean "succeeding" to suggest that it is an ongoing process. I am glad you think the new title works. I will think about other options for "mere" but "bare" seems to suggest a presence, while I am implying an absence. I have removed the capitalizations I had added.

Hilary, see my note to Matt. Thanks for mentioning how you felt about it.

Susan

[Joe Crocker]

Hi Susan

I'm with Matt on "mere oblivion". If it's there to echo Shakespeare then fair enough. It's just that "oblivion" is a scary word for me and calling it "mere" seems wrong. How about "blank oblivion"? It conveys the absence you said you were after. And I like the alliteration. But you may not.

Cheers

Joe

[Susan McLean]

Matt and Joe, I wasn't intentionally echoing Shakespeare, though his language permeates my mind in a way that seeps out occasionally. For me, "mere" does not diminish "oblivion," but implies "nothing less than oblivion."

Susan