Re: Punctuation

vern wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

A semicolon can be used to separate a series of items that are already separated by commas, or it can be used between parts of equal rank.  A woman without is a phrase; her man is nothing is a complete sentence.  A woman without; her man is nothing was composed by an inept author.


in the Oxford English Dictionary, without as an adverb listed as archaic


A woman without; her man is nothing was composed by an inept author offering no artistic merit.

Quote Post 76

Re: Punctuation

Memphis Trace wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

A semicolon can be used to separate a series of items that are already separated by commas, or it can be used between parts of equal rank.  A woman without is a phrase; her man is nothing is a complete sentence.  A woman without; her man is nothing was composed by an inept author.


in the Oxford English Dictionary, without as an adverb listed as archaic


Literary is one place where creative writers use the language for all it offers.

There is no informative or artistic merit in jumbling words together without context, whether provided by standards or intelligibly by an author's talent, likely both, to ascertain meaning.

A written work containing a single word:

what

must be in your opinion worthy of the Nobel Prize in literature because the author does no more than coordinate four letters.

Quote Post 77

78 Reply by Memphis Trace (edited by Memphis Trace 2015-10-28 09:36:22)

Re: Punctuation

Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Memphis Trace wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

A semicolon can be used to separate a series of items that are already separated by commas, or it can be used between parts of equal rank.  A woman without is a phrase; her man is nothing is a complete sentence.  A woman without; her man is nothing was composed by an inept author.


in the Oxford English Dictionary, without as an adverb listed as archaic


Literary is one place where creative writers use the language for all it offers.

There is no informative or artistic merit in jumbling words together without context, whether provided by standards or intelligibly by an author's talent, likely both, to ascertain meaning.

A written work containing a single word:

what

must be in your opinion worthy of the Nobel Prize in literature because the author does no more than coordinate four letters.

Ah, but there's the rub. Elegance and efficiency arise from the ashes of context.

My first contribution to this discussion was to provide context wherein I met the challenge of showing the example— A woman without; her man is nothing.—was elegant, artistic, fraught with meaning, and powerfully punctuated. The context: If without is an adverb meaning outside, then using the semicolon is power punctuation and the sentence is wonderfully efficient. Within the context I'm thinking, it means: Minnie went somewhere with her girlfriends for a night out; Riley stayed home and can't even find the fixins for a sammich.

As I've said before, "You seem bent on limiting your word usage to situations not requiring context. Pick any word and you can make it ambiguous without context."

As far as a written work containing the single word what being worthy of a Nobel Prize, nothing in my argument remotely suggests that A woman without; her man is nothing. is noteworthy absent context.

Write a novel with the proper context for what to render it's appearance on the page as a denouement. a fully realized thought and not an ambiguity, and it could indeed be worthy of a Nobel Prize. Even if the letters were arranged to spell thaw.

Memphis Trace

Quote Post 78

Re: Punctuation

Charles_F_Bell wrote:
vern wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

A semicolon can be used to separate a series of items that are already separated by commas, or it can be used between parts of equal rank.  A woman without is a phrase; her man is nothing is a complete sentence.  A woman without; her man is nothing was composed by an inept author.


in the Oxford English Dictionary, without as an adverb listed as archaic


A woman without; her man is nothing was composed by an inept author offering no artistic merit.

Please broaden my horizons and explain how arbitrarily adding "offering no artistic merit" to your statement changes anything. Art as most things dwells in the eye or heart of the beholder. If people -- other than you, that is -- can understand the meaning of the words offered, then how is that inept? For ancient mankind it was a giant leap forward to understand the meaning of those early sounds which became words.

Merely because I don't appreciate an artist such as Picasso doesn't banish him from the ranks of great artists. I may be blind to what is represented, but that doesn't make the world blind also. After all the discussion within this thread, are you still blind to any meaning, humorous or otherwise, conveyed in the "sentence" under consideration? If so, I reckon my last hope for reason on your part is down the punctuated-drain. Take care. Vern

Quote Post 79

Re: Punctuation

Mother of God but you guys have a lot of time on your hands.

Quote Post 80

Re: Punctuation

ronald quark wrote:

Mother of God but you guys have a lot of time on your hands.

Who is this Mother of God person you speak of anyway? Never seen a post from them, but maybe they sneak in during the wee hours when I'm mostly sleeping. Oh well, as far as time, I work five days a week 9 to 5 just like the song says. Try to step into the forums to check things out and respond to things of interest for about 20 minutes or so (not always in one sitting) in the morning and again at night. Maybe get a bit more time if there's nothing newsworthy or entertaining elsewhere. Maybe that's a lot, dunno; but where else can you have this much fun and education at the same time for no cost beyond what is already paid for? Hmm... if I cut a shower or eating one day a week or so, maybe I can spend more time in here. Does BO come through the internet? Take care. Vern

Quote Post 81

Re: Punctuation

vern wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

A woman without; her man is nothing was composed by an inept author offering no artistic merit.

Please broaden my horizons and explain how arbitrarily adding "offering no artistic merit" to your statement changes anything.

You are sounding like the middle schooler of your picture in pleading against your D  for your little story because you tried really, really hard.

Quote Post 82

83 Reply by Memphis Trace (edited by Memphis Trace 2015-10-29 04:28:54)

Re: Punctuation

ronald quark wrote:

Mother of God but you guys have a lot of time on your hands.

With apologies to Oscar Wilde, "I'm exhausted; I spent all morning taking a comma out and all afternoon putting it back in."

Memphis Trace

Quote Post 83

Re: Punctuation

Memphis Trace wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Memphis Trace wrote:

Literary is one place where creative writers use the language for all it offers.

There is no informative or artistic merit in jumbling words together without context, whether provided by standards or intelligibly by an author's talent, likely both, to ascertain meaning.

A written work containing a single word:

what

must be in your opinion worthy of the Nobel Prize in literature because the author does no more than coordinate four letters.

Ah, but there's the rub. Elegance and efficiency arise from the ashes of context.

My first contribution to this discussion was to provide context wherein I met the challenge of showing the example— A woman without; her man is nothing.—was elegant, artistic, fraught with meaning, and powerfully punctuated. The context: If without is an adverb meaning outside, then using the semicolon is power punctuation and the sentence is wonderfully efficient. Within the context I'm thinking, it means: Minnie went somewhere with her girlfriends for a night out; Riley stayed home and can't even find the fixins for a sammich.

As I've said before, "You seem bent on limiting your word usage to situations not requiring context. Pick any word and you can make it ambiguous without context."

As far as a written work containing the single word what being worthy of a Nobel Prize, nothing in my argument remotely suggests that A woman without; her man is nothing. is noteworthy absent context.

Write a novel with the proper context for what to render it's appearance on the page as a denouement. a fully realized thought and not an ambiguity, and it could indeed be worthy of a Nobel Prize. Even if the letters were arranged to spell thaw.

The writer must provide that context, not someone else. The writer will obstruct the way for any context by poor grammatical structure and archaic word choice in the language he writes. A woman without doth return anon signals to the reader an archaic word choice immediately by a clearly choosing archaic words in all. There is no context to A woman without written as a complete sentence which the use of semicolon or full stop requires except that the writer is incompetent. A writer presenting a single word without punctuation, for example, may deliberately create his "work" with no context to be had can call it "artistic," but it is really just junk. A defender of such junk, presumably knowing better, is a cultural nihilist which is worse than being a dumbass hick.

Quote Post 84

85 Reply by Memphis Trace (edited by Memphis Trace 2015-10-29 05:56:48)

Re: Punctuation

Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Memphis Trace wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

There is no informative or artistic merit in jumbling words together without context, whether provided by standards or intelligibly by an author's talent, likely both, to ascertain meaning.

A written work containing a single word:

what

must be in your opinion worthy of the Nobel Prize in literature because the author does no more than coordinate four letters.

Ah, but there's the rub. Elegance and efficiency arise from the ashes of context.

My first contribution to this discussion was to provide context wherein I met the challenge of showing the example— A woman without; her man is nothing.—was elegant, artistic, fraught with meaning, and powerfully punctuated. The context: If without is an adverb meaning outside, then using the semicolon is power punctuation and the sentence is wonderfully efficient. Within the context I'm thinking, it means: Minnie went somewhere with her girlfriends for a night out; Riley stayed home and can't even find the fixins for a sammich.

As I've said before, "You seem bent on limiting your word usage to situations not requiring context. Pick any word and you can make it ambiguous without context."

As far as a written work containing the single word what being worthy of a Nobel Prize, nothing in my argument remotely suggests that A woman without; her man is nothing. is noteworthy absent context.

Write a novel with the proper context for what to render it's appearance on the page as a denouement. a fully realized thought and not an ambiguity, and it could indeed be worthy of a Nobel Prize. Even if the letters were arranged to spell thaw.

The writer must provide that context, not someone else. The writer will obstruct the way for any context by poor grammatical structure and archaic word choice in the language he writes. A woman without doth return anon signals to the reader an archaic word choice immediately by a clearly choosing archaic words in all. There is no context to A woman without written as a complete sentence which the use of semicolon or full stop requires except that the writer is incompetent. A writer presenting a single word without punctuation, for example, may deliberately create his "work" with no context to be had can call it "artistic," but it is really just junk. A defender of such junk, presumably knowing better, is a cultural nihilist which is worse than being a dumbass hick.

The sentence Vern posted—A woman without; her man is nothing.—was an efficient and elegant summation of the context I imagined. Vern's sentence was meant to show the power of punctuation and ask the question, "In what context is this powerful?"

I agree that context must be provided in order for the average wino on the street to clearly see the elegance, power, and efficiency of the sentence. One expects clearer thinking of a lingweenie, who aspires to the role of a writing-site scold.

That context has been provided in this thread at least twice to show you that the word without is exactly the right word, literary or not, and that the punctuation is not only not poor but efficient, creative, and elegant.

My initial sortie into this thread was this: If without is an adverb meaning outside, then using the semicolon is power punctuation and the sentence is wonderfully efficient. Within the context I'm thinking, it means: Minnie went somewhere with her girlfriends for a night out; Riley stayed home and can't even find the fixins for a sammich.

You have since ignored the context I provided and continued with your misinformation about the word without in this usage being archaic. If you would step out of your lingweenie's cubbyhole to try to counsel purveyors of the language, at least you ought to know what you have in your archives.

Memphis Trace

PS In many civilized societies, readers provide context in things they read. It's how book learning is spread.

Quote Post 85

86 Reply by vern (edited by vern 2015-10-29 12:22:48)

Re: Punctuation

Charles_F_Bell wrote:
vern wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

A woman without; her man is nothing was composed by an inept author offering no artistic merit.

Please broaden my horizons and explain how arbitrarily adding "offering no artistic merit" to your statement changes anything.

You are sounding like the middle schooler of your picture in pleading against your D  for your little story because you tried really, really hard.

LOL, don't judge a book by the cover. You, my good man, are simply ignoring the plea because you can't offer any reasonable explanation since there is none. Your addition, in some futile attempt to make your argument more acceptable, is sounding more like an old man who has seen the error of his ways, but has no idea how to change them and save face. Take care. Vern

Edited for PS: The avatar btw is a picture of the protagonist of my novel Root Hog or Die.

Quote Post 86

Re: Punctuation

Memphis Trace wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Memphis Trace wrote:

Ah, but there's the rub. Elegance and efficiency arise from the ashes of context.

My first contribution to this discussion was to provide context wherein I met the challenge of showing the example— A woman without; her man is nothing.—was elegant, artistic, fraught with meaning, and powerfully punctuated. The context: If without is an adverb meaning outside, then using the semicolon is power punctuation and the sentence is wonderfully efficient. Within the context I'm thinking, it means: Minnie went somewhere with her girlfriends for a night out; Riley stayed home and can't even find the fixins for a sammich.

As I've said before, "You seem bent on limiting your word usage to situations not requiring context. Pick any word and you can make it ambiguous without context."

As far as a written work containing the single word what being worthy of a Nobel Prize, nothing in my argument remotely suggests that A woman without; her man is nothing. is noteworthy absent context.

Write a novel with the proper context for what to render it's appearance on the page as a denouement. a fully realized thought and not an ambiguity, and it could indeed be worthy of a Nobel Prize. Even if the letters were arranged to spell thaw.

The writer must provide that context, not someone else. The writer will obstruct the way for any context by poor grammatical structure and archaic word choice in the language he writes. A woman without doth return anon signals to the reader an archaic word choice immediately by a clearly choosing archaic words in all. There is no context to A woman without written as a complete sentence which the use of semicolon or full stop requires except that the writer is incompetent. A writer presenting a single word without punctuation, for example, may deliberately create his "work" with no context to be had can call it "artistic," but it is really just junk. A defender of such junk, presumably knowing better, is a cultural nihilist which is worse than being a dumbass hick.

The sentence Vern posted—A woman without; her man is nothing.—was an efficient and elegant summation of the context

It was unacceptably, that is to say: beyond any "artistic" license, against English grammar. "Artistic" does not mean throwing sh*t against a wall and laying claim to originality and heretofore undiscovered prepossessing "elegance."

Quote Post 87

Re: Punctuation

Charles_F_Bell wrote:

You are sounding like th;e middle schooler of your picture in pleading against you;;r D  for your little story because you tried really, really hard.

Charles_F_Bell wrote:

A defender of su;ch junk, presumably knowing better, is a;;;; cultural nihilist which is worse than being a dum;bass hick.

I am entirely on board with everything you say, because your strange insults about teachers, middle; schoolers (I know a middle schooler who could tie you; up intellectually without breaking a sweat), coll;ege; students; Southerners, etc. are not AT ALL; distracting, and; don't undermine your reliability in this ;conversation even slightly. I actually; kind of liked you a few posts ago,; because I found your remarks on James Joyce mighty intriguing. The "YES" as punctuation? Inter;esting! I hadn't thought of that! But sir, you've really; become a bit of a cartoon; here. ;;;;;;;;;-)

;;;
;
;
;

;
;    ;


;;;

; ;;
;


Steady there, semi-colons! They're out of the box!!

Quote Post 88

89 Reply by njc (edited by njc 2015-10-29 20:57:42)

Re: Punctuation

Wordplay may be within the reach of one person, but beyond the reach of another.  Horses for courses and licenses for audiences.
Joyce is a troublesome example, not because of his vocabulacrobatics, but because of his politics and the JackHenryAbbot excuses that the literary community made for him.  Before I knew of that, I had marked my copy of The Portable James Joyce (Humanities 101) as "The Unpotable James Joyce."  But if that's your mead, drink freely.

Quote Post 89

90 Reply by corra (edited by corra 2015-10-29 21:05:54)

Re: Punctuation

I love the idea of playing with the language to create effects. I don't know how to do it, but I can appreciate it when I see it. I tend to write the straightforward tale which follows the "rules," and contain my experiments to free verse which no one ever understands. smile I read that passage I quoted above by Woolf, and I sigh. She makes a summer morning out of a sentence. I wish I could do it. It's like learning the piano, I guess: one has to keep practicing.

Language is not enough. It's an inadequate vehicle for what the human heart wants to express. I know I'm not the only one in this thread who has felt a story swell in her, or a poem, and goes to put it into words only to find,  in the end, that the product is inadequate. Words cannot finish what we have to say.

Charles wrote:

A writer presenting a single word without punctuation, for example, may deliberately create his "work" with no context to be had can call it "artistic," but it is really just junk.

I hear what you're saying here, Charles. There's a lot of absolute junk out there which people claim is artistic, but it's actually just inept and self-indulgent. How do we know? It just doesn't work. It doesn't inspire, it doesn't surprise, it doesn't sizzle.

Does some writing fail? ABSOLUTELY! A lot of it does! (Which is why we have this site.) It's clumsy, pondering, filled with purple prose and sloppy semi-colons whose only achievement is to create irritation where appreciation was anticipated. If the writer cannot control his or her language, it's obvious. But that's not because the writer fails to follow the rule book. It's because the writer fails to understand what each instrument within the tool box achieves. If I fill up my manuscript with errant ellipses, these are going to stick out. The question isn't whether or not that works according to page 30 of the Chicago Manual of Style. The question is whether or not I know why I used them, and whether or not I know what my reader is going to expect out of the ellipsis. (That's when you look at the style book. Not to find out what to obey, but to find out what the ellipsis can accomplish.)

If I'm reading along and see a semi-colon, I assume what follows will be the standard. If it isn't, a sense of discomfort is created. That can be a purposeful misuse of the semi-colon -- a clash inserted into the text by the author. It's a subtle effect intended to stimulate a response. Without context, you don't actually know.

Style manuals have to be republished all the time, because the "rules" for standard writing change constantly. They adapt to the moment. You probably don't want to go rogue as a new writer. Learn the medium, because a daring use of a semi-colon is (silly as it is) going to vex a lot of people. (That makes me chuckle. But it would!) Learn the language, and then make music of it, if you have the courage. Strum the semi-colons as one strums a guitar.

If you're reading a book/manuscript and come upon a wayward semi-colon, ask what the semi-colon accomplishes. It's a musical note. That's not cultural nihilism: it's imagination.

Charles wrote:
corra wrote:

What I get out of this conversation is that you don't like Woolf because she uses commas correctly

You got that wrong.

Perhaps you should have explained yourself more "efficiently." smile

Quote Post 90

Re: Punctuation

corra wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:

You are sounding like th;e middle schooler of your picture in pleading against you;;r D  for your little story because you tried really, really hard.

I am entirely on board with everything you say, because your strange insults about teachers, middle; schoolers (I know a middle schooler who could tie you; up intellectually without breaking a sweat), coll;ege; students; Southerners, etc. are not AT ALL; distracting, and; don't undermine your reliability in this ;conversation even slightly. I actually; kind of liked you a few posts ago,; because I found your remarks on James Joyce mighty intriguing. The "YES" as punctuation? Inter;esting! I hadn't thought of that! But sir, you've really; become a bit of a cartoon; here. ;;;;;;;;;-)

There's a certain fraction of message content which is mere ad-hom reached when the discussion is over. I said what I said above because there is nothing more to say to someone insisting through contortions of truth to excuse his bad behavior.

You have more than enough of that fraction here with 0% interesting and 85% ad-hom and 15% babbling.

Quote Post 91

Re: Punctuation

Memphis Trace wrote:
Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Memphis Trace wrote:

Literary is one place where creative writers use the language for all it offers.

There is no informative or artistic merit in jumbling words together without context, whether provided by standards or intelligibly by an author's talent, likely both, to ascertain meaning.

A written work containing a single word:

what

must be in your opinion worthy of the Nobel Prize in literature because the author does no more than coordinate four letters.

Ah, but there's the rub. Elegance and efficiency arise from the ashes of context.

My first contribution to this discussion was to provide context wherein I met the challenge of showing the example— A woman without; her man is nothing.—was elegant, artistic, fraught with meaning, and powerfully punctuated. The context: If without is an adverb meaning outside, then using the semicolon is power punctuation and the sentence is wonderfully efficient. Within the context I'm thinking, it means: Minnie went somewhere with her girlfriends for a night out; Riley stayed home and can't even find the fixins for a sammich.

As I've said before, "You seem bent on limiting your word usage to situations not requiring context. Pick any word and you can make it ambiguous without context."

As far as a written work containing the single word what being worthy of a Nobel Prize, nothing in my argument remotely suggests that A woman without; her man is nothing. is noteworthy absent context.

Write a novel with the proper context for what to render it's appearance on the page as a denouement. a fully realized thought and not an ambiguity, and it could indeed be worthy of a Nobel Prize. Even if the letters were arranged to spell thaw.

Memphis Trace

Memphis! I so interpreted your "punctuated" sentence to be about someone who might be transgender. A woman on the outside--Alas, her man is nothing.

Quote Post 92

Re: Punctuation

njc wrote:

Wordplay may be within the reach of one person, but beyond the reach of another.  Horses for courses and licenses for audiences.
Joyce is a troublesome example, not because of his vocabulacrobatics, but because of his politics and the JackHenryAbbot excuses that the literary community made for him.  Before I knew of that, I had marked my copy of The Portable James Joyce (Humanities 101) as "The Unpotable James Joyce."  But if that's your mead, drink freely.

I was not recommending anyone read Joyce but understanding that there is much to Joyce's writing, and all such experimenters, that can be appreciated.  A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man ought to be in academic literature curriculum only for English-language literature historical context and not at all for content, as one must suffer through Grapes of Wrath by Some Guy about something.

Quote Post 93

Re: Punctuation

Chuck wrote:

You have more than enough of that fraction here with 0% interesting and 85% ad-hom and 15% babbling.

A fine close, sir. I, too, shall say ad-hom in a superior fashion. And ad-nauseum. And imply that people who wear sneakers are dumb. And so are dogs. And semi-colons. I believe my case has been sufficiently made. And so, with a bittersweet smile, we part, to battle more semi-colons. Perhaps next time, we will meet on the same side.

;

Quote Post 94

Re: Punctuation

corra wrote:
Chuck wrote:

You have more than enough of that fraction here with 0% interesting and 85% ad-hom and 15% babbling.

I believe my case has been sufficiently made.

Blech!

Quote Post 95

Re: Punctuation

Janet Taylor-Perry wrote:

Memphis! I so interpreted your "punctuated" sentence to be about someone who might be transgender. A woman on the outside--Alas, her man is nothing.

Be that as it may, is A woman without; her man is nothing punctuated properly? Imagine away and interpret A dog between; samurais to them were whose bottoms .

Quote Post 96

Re: Punctuation

Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Janet Taylor-Perry wrote:

Memphis! I so interpreted your "punctuated" sentence to be about someone who might be transgender. A woman on the outside--Alas, her man is nothing.

Be that as it may, is A woman without; her man is nothing punctuated properly? Imagine away and interpret A dog between; samurais to them were whose bottoms .

For that matter, explain how either punctuated sentence of your original post is punctuated properly. They are not.

Quote Post 97

98 Reply by ronald quark (edited by ronald quark 2015-10-30 00:56:25)

Re: Punctuation

vern wrote:
ronald quark wrote:

Mother of God but you guys have a lot of time on your hands.

Who is this Mother of God person you speak of anyway?

The wife of the Father of God. The sister of God's uncle. A very nice lady.

Quote Post 98

Re: Punctuation

ronald quark wrote:
vern wrote:
ronald quark wrote:

Mother of God but you guys have a lot of time on your hands.

Who is this Mother of God person you speak of anyway?

The wife of the Father of God. The sister of God's uncle. A very nice lady.

Sounds like a nice literary family. Perhaps you can persuade them to join the forum discussions. Take care. Vern

Quote Post 99

100 Reply by vern

Re: Punctuation

Charles_F_Bell wrote:
Janet Taylor-Perry wrote:

Memphis! I so interpreted your "punctuated" sentence to be about someone who might be transgender. A woman on the outside--Alas, her man is nothing.

Be that as it may, is A woman without; her man is nothing punctuated properly? Imagine away and interpret A dog between; samurais to them were whose bottoms .

So, everyone is inept except Charles F Bell. There is no creative use of punctuation; it's all set in concrete according to Bell. Well, hells bells, I freely admit I'm no expert and I think most everyone who has responded has agreed the sentence in question does not follow concrete standard Bell fare, but it is creative. To that creative argument, I offer the following article by Mark Allen, an editor for over thirty years. He seems to disagree with your expertise. But then we don't know what your expertise is other than what you spout here. Does the world abide by your declarations of correctness with no room for creativity in an evolving language. Who knows. Nonetheless, if you can show us your punctuation-god credentials to dispute what is offered, then I will concede there is no such thing as valid creative punctuation. Take care. Vern

***
Submitted by Mark Allen on Mon, 02/24/2014 - 11:03am
Share This:     

Creative Punctuation Can Be Key to the Narrative


Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that's no matter — tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms further... And one fine morning —

So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.

So, how would you edit that? Of course, you had better not edit it. But a copyeditor hungrily wielding a red pen eager for blood might seize on those stops and starts and odd punctuation. And the literary world would be a bit worse off for the loss of that disjointed ending to The Great Gatsby.

Great writing takes us out of the familiar and forces us to look at the written word and the written world in a different light. This is true for us as readers and as copyeditors. Frankly, it can be difficult to decide when an author is being brilliant and when an author is being goofy.

I expected to see Fitzgerald's final paragraphs to The Great Gatsby in a wonderful collection of the five best punctuation marks in literature. Fitzgerald’s dashes and beautifully placed ellipsis didn’t make the list, compiled by Kathryn Schulz for New York Magazine’s entertainment site, Vulture. Fitzgerald’s ellipsis lost out to T.S. Eliot’s The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock, though I am unconvinced on that choice. Schulz suggests that the ellipsis at the end of the introduction to the original Star Wars really should take the honor.

I don’t disagree with her choice for the em dash, the slap in the face provided at the start of chapter 29 of Middlemarch:


One morning, some weeks after her arrival at Lowick, Dorothea — but why always Dorthea?

Schulz, book critic for New York Magazine, says “Good writing involves obsessing over punctuation marks.” Good editing does, too, and really good editing involves knowing when creative use of punctuation adds to the narrative in ways that the words alone cannot.
.- See more at: http://www.copyediting.com/creative-pun … dAnTv.dpuf

Quote Post 100