Corey; I think you might find the most genuine encouragement I can humbly give not with intent to flatter, but to confirm you are accomplishing objective to help others grasping at a passion about which you share your own passion. Specifically, that a guy who tries to watch all your videos to appreciate your wisdom/vision, but doesn't normally like how-tos on topics I regret not mastering in school, re-watched your video as first choice for "how to" do something I am actually trying to do, but still may not be grasping. If you get some time and it isn't a bother, could you please provide insight on a sample I'll provide in the next comment?
Quick background, some things which should be evident by this point in a composition: Elmik is a character that developed a simulation/game which mostly takes place on a ship with wings flapping through 4D time that meets at a crest of time in the present between fantasy and science fiction (themes). As readers, we are actually involved in that game, and the author of the composition is an avatar in the game hoping to teach readers the rules for the game. So here is a passage, and I'd appreciate (if you are willing, as I said) any constructive criticism on punctuation, grammar, or higher level critique... I don't want to be too "on the nose" with allegory but am struggling with that sort of abusing etymology and common allegories . (Next comment is draft of passage)
"As an avatar that has spent far too much time playing games, I realize (but perhaps not maturely enough) that the purpose of creating a game is not to facilitate a collection of toys, but to have quality time spent with kin. Even prisoners with life sentences and that have lost all but what they have when stripped of all possessions, rights, and privileges, locked in a box, and left to the mercy of agents with often minimal accountability... they find ways to play games. They craft dice as agents of chaos able to disappoint from trash. They make games of words understood only from flawed memories. They create worlds in their minds when they have no means to write and no friends to listen. Worlds with rules meant to facilitate justice while themselves subject to injustice. And we ought to remember that Elmik could have simulated immovable rock giants to be his friends, but didn't seem to seek fellowship with stone that could not betray. Instead, he chose friendship with those similar to his kind, but prone to wander - prone to betray."
Hey Dan, took me a little longer than I thought to get around to it, but I've revised your work in a way I hope is helpful. First is the revised version, then I break it down and give some comments regarding the changes I've made and why. You wrote the original well, so don't take my "pulling it apart" as harsh criticism. It's just how I do things. And no comment is definitive (something you should definitely change), this is just my thoughts. “As an avatar who's spent far too much time playing games, I realize (though perhaps not maturely enough) that the purpose of creating a game is not to facilitate a collection of toys, but rather kinship itself. Even a prisoner, locked away for life, absent possessions, privileges or rights, who's cell is guarded by a man not much kinder than he, will find ways to play games. He'll carve dice from soap, take fate out his hands; devise games of words, rules remembered only partly; and absent means by which to write and friends around to listen, he'll manifest worlds within his private mind. Worlds where rules facilitate justice, not a sentence like his. But Elmik was not a morally simplistic man. He would not simulate his friends of stone, their fellowship a certain thing. Instead, he'd forge friendships with those prone to wander, prone to betray. For what was friendship, if not chosen? “As an avatar who's spent far too much time playing games, I realize (though perhaps not maturely enough) that the purpose of creating a game is not to facilitate a collection of toys, but rather kinship itself. The word “Who's” sounds a little better than “that has,” because you use the word “I” after the comma, which makes the reader think of this avatar as a person, not a thing. Hard to say, though. After [Comma But], I piggy-back on the verb “facilitate,” with “but rather kinship itself.” Even a prisoner, locked away for life, absent possessions, privileges or rights, who's cell is guarded by a man not much kinder than he, will find ways to play games. I changed “prisoners” to “a prisoner” to make it feel more personal (your choice though). Just wrote the same information in a different order to make it more concise. The bit about “having lost all but what they have when stripped of possessions, etc” was cool as a concept, but I wanted to be more direct, so I just mentioned what was absent, and implied that he's now left with the rest, which the reader's mind can imagine. Generally, it seemed like there was a bit too much squeezed between the beginning and end of this sentence where it picks back up on the original point, so I structured it such that the start “Even a prisoner” and end “will find ways to play games” meet back up nicely. He'll carve dice from soap, take fate out his hands; devise games of words, rules remembered only partly; and absent means by which to write and friends around to listen, he'll manifest worlds within his private mind. Worlds where rules facilitate justice, not a sentence like his. “Soap” is more specific than “trash” (always try to be as specific as you can), and I put it at the beginning, instead of the end. The “as agents of chaos” and “able to disappoint” mean a similar thing, so I just wrote it a little more definitively as “take fate out his hand.” Instead of each of these three sentences starting with “They” (now changed to “He”), I used the “triple semi-colon” technique. I find it adds a good punch to each sentence. I got rid of the word injustice in the last sentence just so there isn't that double “justice” sound. But this change also arises out of me changing “them” to “he.” In this case, it would depend if this individual, who's representing the archetype of the prisoner, in some sense, has been subjected to any particular injustice. But Elmik was not a morally simplistic man. He would not simulate his friends of stone, their fellowship a certain thing. Instead, he'd forge friendships with those prone to wander, prone to betray. For what was friendship, if not chosen? This first sentence acts as a transition sentence, which piggy-backs off the previous paragraph and sets up this last one. I often like these transitions to be to-the-point statements, then build on them after the period. You used the word betray twice in this last paragraph, so I cut out the first usage. I then added a sentence at the end (probably from reading a lot of Herman Wouk lol) and summed up Elmik's reasoning.
Good tip. Is this considered "proper" usage of this punctuation?
Yes, this is proper. It can also be used to cap-off a sentence (just one Em Dash, though, not a pair of them). Both are used quite often in novels.
Corey; I think you might find the most genuine encouragement I can humbly give not with intent to flatter, but to confirm you are accomplishing objective to help others grasping at a passion about which you share your own passion. Specifically, that a guy who tries to watch all your videos to appreciate your wisdom/vision, but doesn't normally like how-tos on topics I regret not mastering in school, re-watched your video as first choice for "how to" do something I am actually trying to do, but still may not be grasping. If you get some time and it isn't a bother, could you please provide insight on a sample I'll provide in the next comment?
Quick background, some things which should be evident by this point in a composition: Elmik is a character that developed a simulation/game which mostly takes place on a ship with wings flapping through 4D time that meets at a crest of time in the present between fantasy and science fiction (themes). As readers, we are actually involved in that game, and the author of the composition is an avatar in the game hoping to teach readers the rules for the game. So here is a passage, and I'd appreciate (if you are willing, as I said) any constructive criticism on punctuation, grammar, or higher level critique... I don't want to be too "on the nose" with allegory but am struggling with that sort of abusing etymology and common allegories . (Next comment is draft of passage)
"As an avatar that has spent far too much time playing games, I realize (but perhaps not maturely enough) that the purpose of creating a game is not to facilitate a collection of toys, but to have quality time spent with kin. Even prisoners with life sentences and that have lost all but what they have when stripped of all possessions, rights, and privileges, locked in a box, and left to the mercy of agents with often minimal accountability... they find ways to play games. They craft dice as agents of chaos able to disappoint from trash. They make games of words understood only from flawed memories. They create worlds in their minds when they have no means to write and no friends to listen. Worlds with rules meant to facilitate justice while themselves subject to injustice. And we ought to remember that Elmik could have simulated immovable rock giants to be his friends, but didn't seem to seek fellowship with stone that could not betray. Instead, he chose friendship with those similar to his kind, but prone to wander - prone to betray."
Not a bother at all, Dan! I'll review it and get back to you with any comments/tips within the next couple of days.
Hey Dan, took me a little longer than I thought to get around to it, but I've revised your work in a way I hope is helpful. First is the revised version, then I break it down and give some comments regarding the changes I've made and why. You wrote the original well, so don't take my "pulling it apart" as harsh criticism. It's just how I do things. And no comment is definitive (something you should definitely change), this is just my thoughts.
“As an avatar who's spent far too much time playing games, I realize (though perhaps not maturely enough) that the purpose of creating a game is not to facilitate a collection of toys, but rather kinship itself. Even a prisoner, locked away for life, absent possessions, privileges or rights, who's cell is guarded by a man not much kinder than he, will find ways to play games.
He'll carve dice from soap, take fate out his hands; devise games of words, rules remembered only partly; and absent means by which to write and friends around to listen, he'll manifest worlds within his private mind. Worlds where rules facilitate justice, not a sentence like his.
But Elmik was not a morally simplistic man. He would not simulate his friends of stone, their fellowship a certain thing. Instead, he'd forge friendships with those prone to wander, prone to betray. For what was friendship, if not chosen?
“As an avatar who's spent far too much time playing games, I realize (though perhaps not maturely enough) that the purpose of creating a game is not to facilitate a collection of toys, but rather kinship itself.
The word “Who's” sounds a little better than “that has,” because you use the word “I” after the comma, which makes the reader think of this avatar as a person, not a thing. Hard to say, though.
After [Comma But], I piggy-back on the verb “facilitate,” with “but rather kinship itself.”
Even a prisoner, locked away for life, absent possessions, privileges or rights, who's cell is guarded by a man not much kinder than he, will find ways to play games.
I changed “prisoners” to “a prisoner” to make it feel more personal (your choice though).
Just wrote the same information in a different order to make it more concise. The bit about “having lost all but what they have when stripped of possessions, etc” was cool as a concept, but I wanted to be more direct, so I just mentioned what was absent, and implied that he's now left with the rest, which the reader's mind can imagine.
Generally, it seemed like there was a bit too much squeezed between the beginning and end of this sentence where it picks back up on the original point, so I structured it such that the start “Even a prisoner” and end “will find ways to play games” meet back up nicely.
He'll carve dice from soap, take fate out his hands; devise games of words, rules remembered only partly; and absent means by which to write and friends around to listen, he'll manifest worlds within his private mind. Worlds where rules facilitate justice, not a sentence like his.
“Soap” is more specific than “trash” (always try to be as specific as you can), and I put it at the beginning, instead of the end.
The “as agents of chaos” and “able to disappoint” mean a similar thing, so I just wrote it a little more definitively as “take fate out his hand.”
Instead of each of these three sentences starting with “They” (now changed to “He”), I used the “triple semi-colon” technique. I find it adds a good punch to each sentence.
I got rid of the word injustice in the last sentence just so there isn't that double “justice” sound. But this change also arises out of me changing “them” to “he.” In this case, it would depend if this individual, who's representing the archetype of the prisoner, in some sense, has been subjected to any particular injustice.
But Elmik was not a morally simplistic man. He would not simulate his friends of stone, their fellowship a certain thing. Instead, he'd forge friendships with those prone to wander, prone to betray. For what was friendship, if not chosen?
This first sentence acts as a transition sentence, which piggy-backs off the previous paragraph and sets up this last one. I often like these transitions to be to-the-point statements, then build on them after the period.
You used the word betray twice in this last paragraph, so I cut out the first usage.
I then added a sentence at the end (probably from reading a lot of Herman Wouk lol) and summed up Elmik's reasoning.
@@coreyhuffman7607 thank you very much for your time. I appreciate your insight and intend to work on a revision using your suggestions. :)