I don’t want to throw any shade on the art you just made, that felt good to read aloud, I am wondering though if it isn’t “proper” to end sentences “early” or even that it isn’t “wrong” to continue them too long.
I’m way less educated on “proper” grammar rules than I feel like I should be to ask this question but… Isn’t that right there strictly a run-on sentence?
There are a couple places where it feels like the sentence ends and after the comma, another sentence begins. Such as:
…each paragraph the substance of a chapter. With authors like Henry James and Marcel Proust…"
or another place:
“…modes of communication and consumption. A reflection of our times where efficiency…”
Or is there no grammatical “rule” setting absolute limits on the length of a sentence?
Neither of those splits are really valid as is, if the meaning is to be retained.
The “with authors” clause as originally written is a continuation referring to what came before, but starting a new sentence that way suggests it will refer to what follows. Similarly, the “reflection of our times” clause is a restatement of what came before—an apposition. This could be done with a new sentence, but it would need a demonstrative pronoun to clarify that: “This is a reflection…”.
Better points for new sentences are where “and” joins clauses. For example:—
[…] thought and emotion, and this style, this grandiloquent mode of expression, […]
could easily become:—
[…]thought and emotion. This style, this grandiloquent mode of expression, […]
since the demonstrative back-reference is already present.
I don’t want to throw any shade on the art you just made, that felt good to read aloud, I am wondering though if it isn’t “proper” to end sentences “early” or even that it isn’t “wrong” to continue them too long.
I’m way less educated on “proper” grammar rules than I feel like I should be to ask this question but… Isn’t that right there strictly a run-on sentence?
There are a couple places where it feels like the sentence ends and after the comma, another sentence begins. Such as:
…each paragraph the substance of a chapter. With authors like Henry James and Marcel Proust…"
or another place:
“…modes of communication and consumption. A reflection of our times where efficiency…”
Or is there no grammatical “rule” setting absolute limits on the length of a sentence?
Neither of those splits are really valid as is, if the meaning is to be retained.
The “with authors” clause as originally written is a continuation referring to what came before, but starting a new sentence that way suggests it will refer to what follows. Similarly, the “reflection of our times” clause is a restatement of what came before—an apposition. This could be done with a new sentence, but it would need a demonstrative pronoun to clarify that: “This is a reflection…”.
Better points for new sentences are where “and” joins clauses. For example:—
could easily become:—
since the demonstrative back-reference is already present.
it’s from a year ago!