NONE
Rhythm and flow are not necessary for 'good' writing.
Rather than waste time debating the definition of 'good', I will show why your 'flow' writing is torturous to read.
I've long attempted to learn how to write rhythmic, flowing prose,
before having mastered clarity and content, because I like the way
that the KJV Bible sounds and have long wished to emulate it.
This sentence is meandering. It buries the lede. It misdirects the subject. It tells us that you are failing to write rhythmically rather than the actual problem you want to address.
There is no 'flow' to this writing. It is a series of false starts, cul-de-sac asides, and juxtaposed prepositional phrases. The reader does not know what information is important to hold on to, therefore all of it washes past before any meaning can be communicated.
Subject, does not connect to verb, does not connect to purpose.
"I've long attempted to learn how to ... before having mastered ... because I like the way that... and have long wished to..."
You are repeating yourself within the same sentence.
attempt
learn
before mastered
wished
- We don't need FOUR phrases in the same sentence to tell us you want to learn.
- FOUR TIMES you are telling us in the same sentence that you are not yet adept..
- Once we have this information that you are a learner, not a master, we don't need it FOUR TIMES in the same sentence.
- To make this point painfully clear, I will tell you a fourth time that telling us FOUR TIMES in the same sentence is obnoxious.
Phrases are not boxcars
I am trying to find the single most useful thing to help you see the bigger picture.
Your 'editing frame' – the number of words that you are including to create your flowing phrases, is smaller than your ability to complete a sentence, or a single thought.
You are editing approximately 5-8 words at a time for 'rhythm', but your sentence is 35 words long. It's so long that you are forgetting what you've already communicated, so you write it again, and again. You are wasting the reader's time.
Phrases are not boxcars that endlessly string together on a long winding sentence that never ends stretching in both directions from horizon to horizon while we sit at the crossroads waiting with uncertainty if the end will ever come or must we sit here until eternity because the train is just a metaphor and we can just keep adding more boxcars so it might never actually get to the point at all.
Write the sentence DIRECTLY in 5 words or less. If you can't, you need another sentence. I'm not saying every sentence you write must be short and direct, but you must learn this skill, or you will never be able to communicate clearly. No one has time to wait on your train.
Un-learn this terrible influence
Rhythmic lyrics is intentionally hypnotic and stupefying – probably why it's necessary for religion to tslk this way.
This wall of repetition is the opposite of communication. It is dogma or mantra repeated endlessly to block reason and critical thinking.
Imitating outdated language is not the problem, but your words are hardly rising to the level of a religious text. An unflattering word is 'pretentiousness' – you want the FEELING of importance and gravitas from 'high' language, but you are not writing anything that earns that reverence.
Your 'style' is completely at odds with your content. This is another mis-communication, bordering on bait-and-switch. You are 'promising' something highly crafted and monumental, but you are delivering a windowdressing weddingcake made of decorative frosting on a slap-hazard cardboard box.
We are now in an era of llm and ai that can make any text 'talk like a pirate'. Your KJB cosplay is not reading as profound, it is just surface. It is pretense at best, confusing at worst. An ai can do this trick better and faster.
Meaning and purposeful content is not something an AI can do. That purpose is the foundation of communication, before you decorate the cake.
Writing IS Editing
To recap:
You must RE-WRITE and EDIT FOR CLARITY in your SECOND DRAFT.
That means pulling out all the repetitions and cul-de-sacs. If there are ANY meanderings or repetitions, I know you have not bothered even basic editing for clarity.
I'm saying this rhetorically: if an author can't be bothered to re-read to clear up their meaning, why should I (a reader) be forced to re-read all of their sentences for clarity? Where was the editor? This work is un-finished....
Please take the personal time to edit your opening sentence (not for here, for yourself) as an exercise. Every idea you are trying to communicate must fit within your context window of 5-8 words maximum. This will be uncomfortable for you, but it is a skill that comes with practice.
Do not edit individual words for rhythm (or any other reason) until the THIRD OR FINAL DRAFT – after you have edited for clarity.
I think many of us suffer from verboseness, it's generally worse when we're young and in our 'imitation phase' of creativity. But to get to the next level, you must practice communicating in plain direct language, and you must EDIT YOUR TEXT for clarity.
