Horse Book

Page 24 contiued.


     Look at the diagram below. Yes! You! Go on! Do as you’re told! OK. So there are two diagrams. Clever Dick(ess).



  Penalties for horse theft have always been stiff* apart from when horses and/or penalties did not exist and in the past public hanging was common, which only goes to show what a pointless expression that is. I mean it would be daft to say that it was common in the future and when you start talking about the present it’s gone before you’ve finished. Not only that but it isn’t what it only goes to show either, because it goes to show that public hanging was common. At the time of writing, (which is not “now”, because that “now”, not to mention this one, is in the past), a damn good flogging is administered, but it is a very rare occurrence because horses are such poor thieves that they’ve simply given up the idea of trying to nick anything.
  This is where the expression “flogging a dead horse” comes from, or it could be where it goes to, but either way it’s a safe bet that if your horse gets stolen it’s not another horse that’s pinched it. Come to think of it, (or go), who in their right mind wants to steal a horse? They’re antitheft items. Try giving one away and you’ll see how difficult it is, especially if you look in the mouth because this is the origin of the term “gift horse”, or to put it another way

* Lady readers, (riders) are entitled to claim that penal limpness is more common than penal stiffness, provided that they can prove it. (Time served in Holloway or similar accepted.)

Horse 8

Ordinary Radish

Horse Radish

Gift Horse


  To put it yet another way, “steal” and “horse” just don’t go together, because a steal horse would of course be magnetic, and as we all know, they’re not. Well, maybe not all of us do know, but a wooden horse is much more likely and this is the best sort to have. You don’t have to feed it, (neither does anybody else), and it won’t crap all over the place. The only problem might be that it could be full of Greeks and these need to be bewared if they’re bearing gifts, because we all know, (or not), exactly what sort of gifts they’ll be; the sort you can put another way.



  Latin for “horse” is “equus”, which with two “u”s together is a bloody silly word, but that’s not the point. Derive the adjective and we have “equal”; hence “opportunities for horses”.
  Some people would say, “Why give horses a chance?” but then they would. Having said that, which we have, they’re probably right. After all horses have been around for a lot longer than humans and if they haven’t sorted it out by now it’s about time.
  The Greek word for “horse” is “hippos”* and to be hippocritical is to take the piss out of horses, which is fair enough as long as you don’t take it all so they’ve got none left. Nobody gives a toss what the Welsh, Mexican, or Icelandic words for “horse” are. The same goes for Cherokee and Swahili, but in Egyptian it’s . How fucking obvious can you get?**

* “’ippos” in fact, if you want to be a right clever Dick. 

** This sentence ends with “?”, which coincidentally is Eskimo for “horse”.

Horse 9




  No doubt some clever sod reading this will be thinking, “Oh yes, Uncle Dobbin, Auntie Gigi, Cousin Neddy, etc.”, but let’s be serious. Nobody ever thinks, “Etc.”, do they? And to continue on a serious note, is that the same as in a serious tone, because it seems one hell of a coincidence that they’re anagrams, doesn’t it? In fact it’s a contradiction too because you can easily prove that 1=2, since a quaver and a crotchet are each a single note that can have the same tone, of which they are each the same anagram, but one is half the size of the other. So if ½=1, then 1 must equal 2.
  It’s not that way with horses however, they can prove bugger all, let alone the square root of it, and when there are two of them they only think of it as one because they don’t see themselves. So they come to the same conclusion, but for a different reason. Eventually of course, they go away from the same conclusion, i.e. the idea of unity being the fundamental article, from which is derived the word “arse” due to the fact that their bums are pointing at it when they go away.
  But what’s all this got to do with relatives of the horse? Well, it depends which horse we’re talking about, but assuming it’s the same one, the Americans mispronounced it when they saw its bum going away and called it “ass”. Lucky for them it was actually a donkey and not an “oss” and the name has stuck ever since, except that in the USA it’s stuck to the wrong thing. Not to worry though, except that you can if you want, because that brings us to the next point, even though we would have got here without it. So where is it then? Well, it’s here, or there if you happen to be somewhere else, and what it is is the mule.
  A mule, as opposed to the mule is an indefinite fundamental article, but it is also a cross breed and the reason that it’s cross is that it’s smaller than its mum, and the fact that it’s bigger than its dad doesn’t seem to make it any happier. In Newcastle the Geordies are always going around saying, “Hinny”. That’s not the only daft thing they go around saying, but “hinny” is their word for “mule”, except it’s upside down and back to front, and that’s where the word “hybrid” comes from, i.e. “high breed”, or higher than its mum.
  Some people think that a steed is a kind of horse, but they’re wrong. However that isn’t what they’re wrong about and a kind of horse is a steed indeed, although some are less kind than others. A unicorn on the other hand hurts just as much as on the non-other hand, so tell it to get off and acknowledge the fact that unicorns don’t exist, or at least most of them don’t. Who knows how many unicorns don’t exist, and who knows who knows for that matter, but the ones that do exist are related to the narwhal, which in spite of being a statement of fact still needs a question mark left over from the beginning of the sentence?


  The narwhal is a well-known sea mammal, even if it is less well known than some other narwhals, and, like all sea horses needs to breathe air and so remains on the surface. These are not the familiar white horses, though some of them are not only white, but familiar too.
  One relative of the horse that needs to be mentioned is the morse. A morse is exactly the same as a mouse except that it’s spelt incorrectly, which not only shows why it needs to be mentioned, but highlights the contrast with the house, which likewise is only one letter away from “horse” and is an incorrectly spelt louse. The louse, however is not a relative of the horse, except by marriage.




  If you think about it, or if someone else does for that matter, this creature exists neither in reality nor unreality. In fact if anyone thinks about it that’s true even if no one thinks about it and the veracity of the current statement is likewise independent of the number of people who do or don’t think about it.
  Nevertheless, or always the more, you might imagine a gun-slung, poncho-flung, cheroot-hung bronco with a rider that looks like the human equivalent of a mule, but you can’t say it’s the horse with no name. All right, yes, you can say that and so can anyone else, or at least anyone who can speak and knows the English for “It’s the horse with no name”, but the point is that it isn’t; that is it is the point, but it isn’t the horse with no name.
  So what is it then? Well, it’s nothing, or at least it would be if it weren’t something, because by pointing out what it is you’ve made it something, in contradiction to the intention, which is that it should be nothing. In other words it should have no name, but you’ve given it the name “The horse with no name”. In more other words it should be unidentifiable, but you’ve made it identifiable, and in some more other words, to say it’s anonymous is anomalous.
  It’s like saying you’ll ignore something. How can you when you have to be aware of the thing in order to say that? Well actually it’s not like saying that at all, is it? No.




  “Does it matter?” is a very good question because the fact that it exists means that the answer isn’t always the same. In other words sometimes it’s different, which is just a different way of saying the same thing. The same way of saying a different thing is of course not the same thing, because it’s different and that’s why the answer is important or not, as the case may be. It’s all relative and in relation to something else to which it may or may not be related, so a trivial thing might matter a lot to some people, (or their relatives), whereas the Universe ultimately doesn’t give a toss if, (where “if” means “when”, even though it doesn’t really), you die! Or does it? (doesn’t it?)?
  That’s the point, you see, because in another part of the Universe they ask, “Does it antimatter?” and there the answers are back to front, inside out, and upside down. More to the point, (the same one), any physicist will tell you that in that place there must be antihorses, (except those who won’t).
  Now, if horse ever meets antihorse there will be one hell of a bang and no horse at the end of it. The compensation is that there’ll be no antihorse either, just nothing, zilch, bugger all and not even the square root of it.
  There’s justice in all of this because, not only does it mean that rich horse owners and antihorse antiowners on opposite sides of the Universe worry themselves sick and antisick about annihilating their nags, (antinags) if they inadvertently turn up, (down) at the wrong, (right) racecourse, (antiraceanticourse), but that bums and antibums, to use an American expression, (antiAmerican antiexpression), lying penniless, (antipenniless) in the gutter, (antigutter) don’t have nothing, (antinothing), as might be expected, but are owners, (antiowners) of two, (antitwo) horse/antihorses, (antihorse/horses), i.e. (e.i.) they, (antithey) have, (haven’t) a horse/antihorse, (antihorse/horse) pair, (antipair). Phew, (Antiphew), what a sentence, (antisentence)!
  The problem, (antiproblem) comes, (goes) when you ask how to get them, (antithem) apart. Beats me, (antime). Guess that’s why bums are bums and antibums are antibums. Now, a good way to get rid of bums is to………..

Exclamation Mark




  It can be said that the horse helped write history. It’s not the only thing that can be said however, and on top of that, or under something else, it’s a daft thing to say and it just goes to show. What it also goes to show is that things that can be said have bugger all to do with it half the time, or possibly three quarters, and anyway horses can’t write. If horses could write they’d be far more likely to write “grass”, or “oats” than “history”, or they could be near less likely, but in any case what can be said is really about the structure of language and the mechanics of human speech, (as if creatures other than humans could speak, for heaven’s sake!)
  But the past is interesting because only the past exists (existed), as has been proved elsewhere, or to be accurate, elsewhen. The future does not yet exist and the present does not exist at all, which is why the human brain has a built in device designed to lengthen the infinitesimally small instant between past and future so that it can appear to be experienced. It’s frightening to think that that’s what life boils down to, even more so when you realise that this isn’t enough time to contemplate the futility of the present tense of the verb “to pass”. When a horse “passes” the winning post, it cannot pass it until it has passed it, (is past it), which is in the past, and if it’s last past you can tear up your betting slip. I’ll bet you wouldn’t tear it up before it was last past though and you wouldn’t bet on it if it was past it which proves my point and, since horses’ brains don’t have a built in mechanism for dealing with the present, or a memory for storing the past, they deal only with the future, (see sooner), which is why the outcome of a horse race is so heavily influenced by them.
  To be fair though, the horse has taken part in many historical events. In fact it has taken part in the same events even if we’re unfair, and these have given rise to some well known sayings, which is interesting because a saying is useless if it isn’t heard, so why aren’t they called “hearings”? In fact to stretch a point, which is impossible because a point is infinitesimal by definition, a saying could easily be a “writing” and hence a “reading”. But to get back to the unstretched point, there’s “horsing around” for example and “horse play”, both of which mean the same thing, apart from the obvious difference.
  And then there are other sayings, even though it’s not clear when “then” is (was), like “A horse! A horse! My kingdom for a horse!” Well actually it’s not like “A horse! A horse! My kingdom for a horse!”, it is “A horse! A horse! My kingdom for a horse!”, but it’s a pretty limited saying. I mean you can’t really say it if you haven’t got a kingdom. Well all right, yes you can say it, but it’s a safe bet that the bloke who said it in the first place was lying through his teeth. He’d hardly be lying through anybody else’s teeth anyhow, but (a) your horse is part of his kingdom, (b) he got his kingdom in the first place by lying through his teeth, and (c) he won’t give you his kingdom if you give him your horse anyway, because he's lying through his teeth, so you'd have lost out,


apart from getting rid of your horse.
  Another daft saying is “Wild horses wouldn’t drag me, (you) away.” Of course they wouldn’t; only tame horses are trained and fitted out for pulling things. I’ll tell you what though; wild horses would definitely hoof you, (me) away!




 Whatever you do don’t….now that’s a contradiction before we even get to the point! I mean, what you should do is not do! What sort of advice is that?
  Well, never mind what sort, how many sorts are there anyway? No, whatever you do don’t give someone a horse as a present. The reasons have something to do with not going over the same ground again, though why not is a mystery, especially if it’s good ground, but basically no one will thank you for it and even if they do they’ll be lying, possibly on the same ground. You see for people they (horses) are simply too much trouble and they (horses) like to be kept, but one of my hobbyhorses is not to go on and on about hobbyhorses, which is what that is.
  Of course not many horses have hobbies and one of the few exceptions is the clothes* horse, which is where horseshoes came in, because horses know as well as anyone, (except humans) that you’d look pretty daft walking around in really posh clobber with bare feet. One thing you could easily do in posh clobber is go into a pub and there’s a good chance it’ll be called “The Three Horse Shoes”, or some other odd number. All right, so there aren’t many pubs called “Some Other Odd Number”, but it does make you wonder how many horses aren’t even. Not only that but did luck exist before the evolution of the horseshoe and is the amount of luck in the Universe increasing or decreasing? Yes, of course, but which? The quantum of luck is the shoeon* and if entropy doesn’t enter into it you’ll be a monkey’s uncle, although which monkey isn’t certain, which casts doubt on the identity of the uncle too.
  However it isn’t totally impossible to give someone a horse as a present and if you really must the easiest way to get away with it is to give it in bits so that no one notices. This is usually referred to as “dribs and drabs” and if you’re really good you can get it right down to individual dribs as well as drabs. No one will ever notice a drab, but before long they’ll have a shed full eating them out of house and oats.
  Drabs are of course quanta of space, which is the same as saying they’re quanta of matter. Well actually it’s not the same as saying that, it’s just the same as that, because space is where matter isn’t and vice versa, inside out, and with the boot on the other foot, which hurts because it’s the wrong way round. Dribs are quanta of time and you need a lot of them to make a big clock.