July 23, 2020
HUNGER
If you happen to be reading this text, then I’m pretty sure you have no idea who or what Knut Hamsun is. Just to give you a hint I'll say that it's the name of a writer, one who is no longer in people’s radar nowadays, but one who was vastly known in the first part of the 20th century. However, something happened back then that severely smeared Knut’s reputation, to the point of erasing his name from people’s memory forever.
I’ll get to that breaking point soon, but first, let’s start with the bright side of the story. Knut, a Norwegian writer, reached fame with his first book “Hunger”, a short book quite innovative for its time, published in the second half of the 19th century. The book revolves around an impoverished wanna-be writer, who in his hardest times with nothing to eat or where to live begins to hallucinate his reality through monologues, which make the book an amalgam between social critic and psychological thriller. In this aspect, Knut admitted his admiration towards authors such as Dostoievsky as one of the pioneer authors of psychological fiction. After his successful debut, and always true to his style, Knut kept on writing, and without much delay, a bunch of well-known best-sellers ensued his first hit. It didn’t take long for Knut to reach the top of the literature ladder, crowning his career with “Growth of the Soil” his major work, the one that made him win the Nobel prize.
Knut had fame, reputation, and admiration, being world-wide famous he had it all. However, his backing to the Germans during the war didn’t do any good to his name. In fact, to make matters worse, once the war was over and the trials came, Knut was prosecuted and only got away due to his advanced age. Unfortunately, this episode of his life was detrimental to his legacy and obliterated his name from literature forever. Now, his name is hardly known for a few, and his books are barely read. Is this fair? Should the author’s work be condemned together with their creator? I don’t think so. In fact, if we follow that thread of thought, then many pivotal artistic works should be banned. Regrettably, Knut’s choices are unforgivable for many, to the point of making him a pariah for his peers.
Correction Settings
HUNGER
If you happen to be reading this text, then I’m pretty sure you have no idea who or what Knut Hamsun is.
Just to give you a hint I'll say that it's the name of a writer, one who is no longer in people’s radar nowadays,; but one who was vastly known in the first part of the 20th century.
Just to give you a hint I'll say that it's the name of a writer, one who is no longer in people’s radar nowadays; but one who was vastly known in the first part of the 20th century.
Knut, a Norwegian writer, reached fame with his first book “Hunger”,.” This was a short book quite innovative for its time, published in the second half of the 19th century.
Knut, a Norwegian writer, reached fame with his first book “Hunger.” This was a short book quite innovative for its time, published in the second half of the 19th century.
your sentence is correct, however the comma makes it quite long. Separating the sentence with a full stop instead can make it easier to read.
The book revolves around an impoverished wanna-be writer, who in his hardesmost difficult times w. With nothing to eat or and nowhere to live, he begins to hallucinate his reality through monologues, which makes the book an amalgam between a social critic and psychological thriller.
The book revolves around an impoverished wanna-be writer in his most difficult time. With nothing to eat and nowhere to live, he begins to hallucinate his reality through monologues, which makes the book an amalgam between a social critic and psychological thriller.
"nothing to eat or where to live" -> "where to live" sounds confusing.
"hardest times" is correct, but you can use "most difficult". More grammatically correct to be used with "time" as "time" is singular when used to describe a period of a person's life.
In this aspect, Knut admitted his admiration towards authors such as Dostoievsky as one of the pioneer authors of psychological fiction.
After his successful debut, and always true to his style, Knut kept on writing, and without much delay, a bunch of well-known best-sellers ensued his first hit.
It didn’t take long for Knut to reach the top of the literature ladder, crowning his career with “Growth of the Soil”; his major work, the one that made him win the Nobel prize. It didn’t take long for Knut to reach the top of the literature ladder, crowning his career with “Growth of the Soil”; his major work, the one that made him win the Nobel prize.
Knut had fame, reputation, and admiration, being world-wide famous he had it all.
However, his backing to the Germans during the war didn’t do any good to his name.
In fact, to make matters worse, once the war was over and the trials came, Knut was prosecuted and only got away due to his advanceold age.
In fact, to make matters worse, once the war was over and the trials came, Knut was prosecuted and only got away due to his old age.
'advanced' means developed or far-ahead. It is a weird word to use if you are describing age.
Unfortunately, this episode of his life was detrimental to his legacy and obliteratsed his name from literature forever.
Unfortunately, this episode of his life was detrimental to his legacy and erased his name from literature forever.
"obliterated" - good word, but very dramatic / serious. Not sure if you are intending for it to sound like this.
"erased" is another option here.
Now, his name is hardly known for a fewunknown to many, and his books are barely read.
Now, his name is unknown to many, and his books are barely read.
"hardly known for a few" is literally correct but it is awkward here.
Is this fair?
Should the author’s work be condemned together with their creator?
I don’t think so.
In fact, if we follow that thread of thought, then many pivotal artistic works should be banned.
Regrettab(Unfortunately), Knut’s choices are unforgivable for many, to the point of making him a pariah for his peers.
(Unfortunately), Knut’s choices are unforgivable for many, to the point of making him a pariah for his peers.
"Regrettably" is correct. Unfortunately can be used as another option.
Feedback
your writing overall is very good. There are only a few errors such as odd word grammatical that choices which cause sentences to become awkward/choppy/clunky. To improve in the future, try to shorten your sentences and use less commas as they can cause sentences to feel too long and difficult to read.
July 23, 2020
Thanks so much for your time =D
|
I don’t think so. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
HUNGER This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
If you happen to be reading this text, then I’m pretty sure you have no idea who or what Knut Hamsun is. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
Just to give you a hint I'll say that it's the name of a writer, one who is no longer in people’s radar nowadays, but one who was vastly known in the first part of the 20th century.
Just to give you a hint I'll say that it's the name of a writer, one who is no longer in people’s radar nowadays |
|
However, something happened back then that severely smeared Knut’s reputation, to the point of erasing his name from people’s memory forever. |
|
I’ll get to that breaking point soon, but first, let’s start with the bright side of the story. |
|
Knut, a Norwegian writer, reached fame with his first book “Hunger”, a short book quite innovative for its time, published in the second half of the 19th century.
Knut, a Norwegian writer, reached fame with his first book “Hunger your sentence is correct, however the comma makes it quite long. Separating the sentence with a full stop instead can make it easier to read. |
|
The book revolves around an impoverished wanna-be writer, who in his hardest times with nothing to eat or where to live begins to hallucinate his reality through monologues, which make the book an amalgam between social critic and psychological thriller.
The book revolves around an impoverished wanna-be writer "nothing to eat or where to live" -> "where to live" sounds confusing. "hardest times" is correct, but you can use "most difficult". More grammatically correct to be used with "time" as "time" is singular when used to describe a period of a person's life. |
|
In this aspect, Knut admitted his admiration towards authors such as Dostoievsky as one of the pioneer authors of psychological fiction. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
After his successful debut, and always true to his style, Knut kept on writing, and without much delay, a bunch of well-known best-sellers ensued his first hit. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
It didn’t take long for Knut to reach the top of the literature ladder, crowning his career with “Growth of the Soil” his major work, the one that made him win the Nobel prize. It didn’t take long for Knut to reach the top of the literature ladder, crowning his career with “Growth of the Soil”; his major work, the one that made him win the Nobel prize. It didn’t take long for Knut to reach the top of the literature ladder, crowning his career with “Growth of the Soil”; his major work, the one that made him win the Nobel prize. |
|
Knut had fame, reputation, and admiration, being world-wide famous he had it all. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
However, his backing to the Germans during the war didn’t do any good to his name. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
In fact, to make matters worse, once the war was over and the trials came, Knut was prosecuted and only got away due to his advanced age.
In fact, to make matters worse, once the war was over and the trials came, Knut was prosecuted and only got away due to his 'advanced' means developed or far-ahead. It is a weird word to use if you are describing age. |
|
Unfortunately, this episode of his life was detrimental to his legacy and obliterated his name from literature forever.
Unfortunately, this episode of his life was detrimental to his legacy and "obliterated" - good word, but very dramatic / serious. Not sure if you are intending for it to sound like this. "erased" is another option here. |
|
Now, his name is hardly known for a few, and his books are barely read.
Now, his name is "hardly known for a few" is literally correct but it is awkward here. |
|
Is this fair? This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
Should the author’s work be condemned together with their creator? This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
In fact, if we follow that thread of thought, then many pivotal artistic works should be banned. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
Regrettably, Knut’s choices are unforgivable for many, to the point of making him a pariah for his peers.
"Regrettably" is correct. Unfortunately can be used as another option. |
You need LangCorrect Premium to access this feature.
Go Premium