[900] A Bleak Existence

It was easy enough to read and I thank you for that. That said, I would not read more. On the small scale, there are way too many adjectives and adverbs. This could be easily cleaned up and you do have some nice descriptions in the middle of this piece. But my bigger gripe is that I’ve gotten three pages in and I’ve been given nothing about your character or plot except that he’s depressed and he goes to work. There was also some backstory stitched in at the end, but it was delivered in a dry way and I didn’t find it memorable or revealing of the character. I’m not left with much reason to stick around except the vague promise that Chris will do something drastic and possibly violent to alter his life, and this comes only from a passing fantasy near the end of the excerpt. I think you need to get to your story faster and spend less time showing me how mopey Chris is because that can be accomplished in one or two paragraphs.

Descriptions

I’m going to hammer your first few sentences pretty hard here.

The torturous, blistering, shrill beeping of Chris’s alarm clock ejected him from his deep slumber.

Listing qualifiers like "torturous, blistering, shrill" is a weak way to describe something. Stuffing sentences with this many adverbs and/or adjectives waters down your prose, it lessens its impact. The fact that you are describing alarm-clock beeping makes it seem even more unnecessary. Everyone knows that sound is annoying, it doesn’t need all these extra words to make that point. Evocative nouns and verbs are your power-words, those are the words that put an image in someone’s head and will hopefully get a reaction. Consider the following sentences:

Her death was gruesome, horrible, excruciating.

He shoved the blade in her throat and blood sprayed all over his cheeseburger.

Look, I’m having fun and I’m not saying that either sentence is an example of great literature, but doesn’t one sentence have a greater impact as you read it? That’s mostly because of the use of specific nouns and verbs over listing qualifiers. Of course qualifiers have their place. A qualifier or two might enhance that second sentence, but if you rely on them too much you end up sounding vague, and it makes me want to tune out.

Aside from the issue of overuse, certain qualifiers can be problematic on their own. Consider “deep slumber.” Isn’t “slumber” already “deep?” You don’t take a quick slumber on the couch. Consider:

He clumsily flailed.

reminiscing fondly

Do you flail with precision? Do you angrily reminisce? If pitfall #1 with qualifiers is that they can be weak, then pitfall #2 is that they can be redundant. They can be redundant with their verbs, like “clumsily flailed,” or they can be redundant with one-another, like “torturous, blistering,” Now you could make the argument that those aren’t exactly the same things, but given that you’re being figurative with them already (I mean, the alarm clock isn’t actually torturing or blistering anyone), I would call them redundant. By that same principle, I would say that “shrill” covers the meaning of both “torturous” and “blistering” because it already makes the essential point—the alarm clock is annoying.

And pitfall #3 is something you see here:

pattered heavily

… and it comes from your qualifier contradicting its verb. Pattering is by definition light. The result is it just muddies your message.

He clumsily flailed an arm out from his curled-up body and smashed the largest button on top of the alarm clock, putting a stop to the deafening beep.

This description also feels overdone, like it’s cranked up to 11 just for the sake of being cranked up to 11. I know alarm clocks are annoying, but why choose that, of all things, to dramatize in paragraph one of your story? Isn’t there a better detail you could choose that is more relevant to your character or setting or plot? And as much as I understand how grating that sound can be, describing it as “torturous” and “defeaning” and “blistering,” then later like “strident needles”—this just feels like overkill, unless you are trying to show this character being overdramatic or a bad morning person or something—but even if so, I think you could accomplish that better by showing me his actual reactions instead of hammering on how much he hates the beeping.

I’ve had the same problem, believe me. For me at least it came from the false belief that descriptions were supposed to be at 11 at all times. I was struggling forever to describe a setting that was cold and it took me forever to realize that not every description had to make the characters sound like they were on the verge of death. Sometimes places are just chilly, eyes are just brown, and alarm clocks are really annoying but definitely not torturing anybody.

he lay in his stiff, urine stained mattress below a thin, crinkled, musty sheet, his body damp in sweat. This was always the best part of the day

So many qualifiers. Still, this feels like a much better intro to me, it shows me the details of your story as opposed to just someone who could be just about anyone.

when he first woke up, still halfway between consciousness and unconsciousness and without awareness of who he was and what his life was all about.

You say essentially “he woke up” like five times. First sentence, he wakes up. Sentence 3, “half asleep”, and now we’re in sentence 4 and it’s when “he first woke up,” and “halfway between consciousness and unconsciousness.” I do not need all these reminders.

As he drifted back into slumber, the alarm clock exploded again, this time the beeping seeming even louder and more maddening than before. He had grown to abhor that sound, the sort of mechanical shrieking that engulfed the room and penetrated violently through his ear drums like strident needles. It was a painful reminder of his own miserable existence. Another day of gloom.

Ehh, I already knew he hates the sound, I already knew he was miserable for some reason. I think you could get to the details of your story faster. Instead, what I’m about to read is…

Edit: clarity

I read Chicago and go “home,” so I did a quick read. I am not considering this in terms of critique banks or points, but want to address #2:

Another day of traffic, monotonous work for shit pay, and coming home to an empty, mucky, claustrophobic apartment in the urban hell of southern Chicago.

This reads to me entirely unchicago-like so not my city that it made go WTF. Are you from or living in Chicago? Southern Chicago? I have never heard anyone say that and if they did it would be to probably differentiate it from the Southside and therefore Southern would be rich nicer neighborhoods like Flossmoor or Beverly or something.

Problem. Replacing Southern with Southside will almost exclusively read Englewood. You have your main character riding on the DAN RYAN or the STEVIE or LSD (not the highway) up into the loop, but what you describe isn’t the Loop—it is what is going on in the West Loop or South Loop from 90/94 etc. LSD would be Loop or Viagra Triangle...yada yada.

There are plenty of details there, but it reads decidedly like someone not from Chicago and the city itself does not sound like Chicago, but generic city X.

I mean given this character and they are probably a Monterrey Security employee (at least that is the company that seems to be everywhere) and your guy, he would be most likely taking the red line or CTA if coming from the Southside. I would actually say given certain elements for absolute bleakness go West Side and Garfield Park or Homan Square.

So I have to ask:

1. where is this vision of Chicago coming from and are you a local? Cause the word choices descriptions are really disparate from my perspective?

2. If not from Chicago, why choose Chicago?

I know this is probably not helpful in terms of this particular pieces style...etc, but I hope this is helpful as a response to your question number 2 and Chicago.

Disclaimer: This is my first ever critique here
*Not sure if you're supposed to give advice here, thus covering it up to make sure I don't end up creating a bias in your head.

To answer your questions,

1. Did it do a good job of conveying the misery and internal struggle that Chris is going through?
   Yes, the prose did a good job at conveying the misery & struggles of Chris. But, it didn't do a good job in making me feel them with the same intensity. I could read the misery but could not see it hit me where it should have. There seemed to be a distance between me and the character throughout the story (not literally). And I believe that would be the reason for me not having any empathy towards him.
   As the story progressed I knew more about his room than about him as a person. Yes, the room tells a lot about the person but it still isn't enough to pull out my empathy.
   *What I would advice is: >!the character into about his backstory could be stitched together in the character and setting description at the start.!<
2. I want to paint a vivid picture of the city and give the setting a life of its own. Are the descriptions of the settings adequate? Is there too much detail? Not enough detail?
   Yes, you were able to paint a vivid picture of the city. I could see myself in the city and feel the aura around it. But, if your ultimate goal is to give the setting a life of its own, then you couldn't quite nail it. The reason behind that would be because we don't see the city as a separate entity enough to separate it from Chris. We see the city from what Chis only though Chris's eyes (eg: in para 5 where Chris is driving through the city and we are told about what might be happening inside). To have the city a separate life, you need to give it a personality of its own and not a personality that "Chris" see's in the city.
   The first time I read the story was without knowing your intentions. And not even once could I feel the emphasis on the city as a crucial part of the story.
3. Would you be interested in reading more?
   Yes, I would be interested in reading more. But that is because the story felt incomplete. In the end, I was left with the question of what would happen if he went forward with the robbery, but that felt deliberate and not organic.
   From what I could see this might be because; throughout the story, there was no reason for Chris to actually do the robbery. And thus, there is no suspense built of what would happen when he does.

Other than that, this felt more like a characterization rather than a story or a concept.

I took a look at the other comments here, so I'll be avoiding the issue of adverbs, adjectives, and general redundancy. However, I completely agree with those points! I just don't want to give feedback where I'll regurgitating what others say, which is in essence, "stop using purple prose". So, most of my 'review' will be specific line notes.

The torturous, blistering, shrill beeping of Chris’s alarm clock ejected him from his deep slumber.

ejected is a strange verb to use here.

As he drifted back into slumber, the alarm clock exploded again, this time the beeping seeming even louder and more maddening than before.

seem is the keyword here. Often, it's just a filler word, and can be deleted without affecting the sentence meaning. This is one such example.

He had grown to abhor that sound, the sort of mechanical shrieking that engulfed the room and penetrated violently through his ear drums like strident needles.

-insert 'still not a good enough reason to use the word penetrate' meme here-

In all honestly, this sort of description is very indirect, which makes it all the more unrealistic. I really enjoyed 'mechanical shrieking', but too much of this kind leads to purple prose.

Another issue I have with this prose is due to the character voice you're attempting: on a first read, all I knew was from your synopsis stating this was a depressed vet. The character voice here is still unfinished, but I see it come out most through the most "plain" sentences here. I'd really like to see a version of this where the voice comes bleeding out instead of flowery language.

Another day of traffic, monotonous work for shit pay, and coming home to an empty, mucky, claustrophobic apartment in the urban hell of southern Chicago.

I admit to liking "urban hell of southern Chicago", but this entire sentence was a hell in itself to read.

He had become numb, unable to derive joy from anything.

Okay. You've just spent an entire paragraph driving me into this excruciating pain, both physically and mentally, only to finish it with the word numb. Avoiding the pretty obvious oxymoron here, this last sentence tells me a lot instead of showing me anything.

The stench of mold and body odor had permeated the bedroom (...) Or perhaps it was six days.

This is what I mean by showing and not telling! While this description was long, it did a good job of actually showing us what depression leads to. I especially enjoyed "three days, or maybe six", which makes the next sentence all the more disappointing:

The days, weeks, months, and years had begun to blend together.

More telling, no showing. You have a tendency to show us everything in this epic paragraph, and we learn a lot from what we piece together, only to drag it all down by telling us directly what you're trying to convey. In some of these paragraphs, getting rid of a single sentence would make it so much smoother.

The feeling of being stuck, unable to progress in life financially, emotionally, socially, or otherwise. The feeling of boredom, dissatisfaction, pointlessness, inability to experience any positive thoughts or feelings.

My personal rule (and feel free to disagree with this) is that fragments work best when they function as fragments. That means short. In fact, that means as short as humanely possible. While these two lines definitely convey something, they don't convey it smoothly, and that's partially due to it being such a long fragment.

Rain clattered against the car faster than the windshield wipers could manage.

I like this line. This probably does the best of showing what you want in that entire paragraph, and it drew me in. I'm making a point of saying this so you know how much a single line can do.

He imagined the people within them and what their lives were like.

Show, show, show, please show me this. I'm going to stop pulling out examples of "you're telling and not showing" after this line, so I can move on to other points.

This always got Chris’s imagination running wild. Only a couple guards. How easy it must be to rob them.

Here, I can feel a character voice come through! Also, although this comment might be redundant, since you're introducing this bank so early on I'm definitely expecting it to be a central point. Chekov's gun is incredible and it should be used. Also, Chris's? Isn't it Chris'? Grammar geeks, correct me!

If only he knew… The only thing awaiting him here was anguish.

This line probably rubbed me the wrong way the most overall. Ellipses are easy to overuse, but the overall tone is completely unrealistic.

Overall, I don't have any attachment to your character in these 3 pages. The only idea of dramatic action I have is this paragraph about the bank, which I do admit might be quite an interesting direction to take this story. However, even if I take away the language issues, the character's voice is underdeveloped and I don't know anything about Chris.

You had some questions in your post, so I'll do my best to answer them now in more detail, since I admittedly didn't have a lot of line edits.

1. Did it do a good job of conveying the misery and internal struggle that Chris is going through?
   Quite honestly? No, it didn't. I think the best part of this story in this regard is during the description of the bedroom. That was the biggest key towards showing depression which I could see. Everything else basically told me directly how sad or how numb or how bloodthirsty he was. Given that your question uses the word 'convey' specifically, I feel as if most of the information in this story is directly told, not conveyed.
2. I want to paint a vivid picture of the city and give the setting a life of its own. Are the descriptions of the settings adequate? Is there too much detail? Not enough detail?
   Way too much detail. I decided not to comment on the prose, given that it would be an issue for YOU to read comments that repeat each other. However, this story crosses over 'vivid' and goes to 'problematic'. You say you wanted the setting to have a life of its own, but I have to wonder how much better that is instead of creating the voice you want to convey and describing the setting the way a real person in Chris' situation would see it.
3. Would you be interested in reading more?
   No, I wouldn't. I mean this with the absolute best intentions, but even ignoring the prose, it took me three pages of description to get the barest hint of conflict. I don't know what the premise is, and that's crucial for me to keep reading something. As is, you could shorten these three pages by 50% (and if I read this correctly, make this bank more obvious), and then I might be interested. But if you posted part 2 of this without any changes? No, I wouldn't.

I really do mean all of this with best interests in heart, so I hope you can find something helpful! Best of luck!

So I was gonna post yesterday but didn’t finish, and there are alot more replies today so I apologize if I am repeating what someone else has already said. Also please don’t take anything I say personally.

1.Did it do a good job of conveying the misery and internal struggle that Chris is going through?

You did a great job giving me a report on how miserable his life is but you didn’t make me feel his life. You are writing in third person but it doesn’t have to be neutral. Try to still write in perspective and use words that your character would use writing this. He is a war vet so think about how he would describe things. Short and to the point? Harsh? Descriptive to the finer details that only a soldier would notice? I should be able to pick up that he is a war vet through your writing and descriptions. I would have no idea on the background of this guy if you wouldn’t have mentioned it in your post and at the end.

2.I want to paint a vivid picture of the city and give the setting a life of its own. Are the descriptions of the settings adequate? Is there too much detail? Not enough detail?

I got a pretty good feel for the setting but you can do so much more with it. This is a great opportunity to mirror the setting with the character and you have clearly tried to do that with the congestion simile that you explained too much. Its less of a question of should there be less or more, but the right details in the right spots, using the right words. In short some spots could be cut down and some spots can be expanded on. When revising a draft try to cut down on the word count instead of expanding on it

3.Would you be interested in reading more?

Difficult question, in a sense yes since there is potential in the concept and the idea of the story is cool, but the writing didn’t keep me interested.

Aight lets get into the meat of it.

“The torturous, blistering, shrill beeping” You don’t need 3 words to describe the beeping, find the right word. Most people know how annoying alarms are and what they do. Use a word that characterizes your character. ‘Hoarse, grinding, jarring’ or just one of the one you used. Hell this might be a good opportunity to show that he has a military background. Like showing how it sounds like a base alarm waking the platoon to an impending attack and it might be slight ptsd for him every morning. “putting a stop to the deafening beep” everyone knows what happens when you press the big button, no need to repeat yourself. “Still half asleep... damp in sweat” consider revising, people have 5 senses, use them to say how your character feels about his surroundings. Also him liking morning seems unlikely considering his situation. I don’t know anyone who actively loves waking up. Perhaps describing how he loves the drifting off in the half sleep and how that feels. How he feels has no responsibility until the second alarm hits. When the alarm hits again just shorten it to like “it felt more urgent and pleading than the last time” or something like that. “He had grown to abhor that sound” we know, show don’t tell us. “strident needles” put this when the alarm first hits. “It was a painful reminder of his own miserable existence.” thanks chief, I would love to see how its a painful reminder instead of you just telling me. The rest of the paragraph could be rephrased as the thoughts of the character going through the bs he has to deal with in the upcoming day.

Remove “As” its passive voice and adds nothing. Two issues with the rest of the paragraph. “one sensation overtook Chris’s body and mind: pain.” ‘intro’ sentence and then you follow with the ‘body’. This isn’t an essay, get into the meat right away put more details in how his joints ached, how his back and head felt. How the hopelessness settles over him as he gains his senses. Instead of telling me how the pain got better and why, show me. As an example you can have him looking back on last week when he ran out of meds and the paycheck didn’t come in yet so he couldn’t get more.

“The stench of… spilled drinks” You are telling us what is in the room but not setting the atmosphere of how this guy lives. Be more deliberate i your word choice that do more for your buck. Example: “The dilapidated apartment was soaked with mold and sweat.” “The sudden light from a single bulb loosely hanging by exposed wires scatters cockroaches into the piles of food scraps clothes, and displays of medals.” You should always try to make your words say more with less of them, if that makes any sense. The rest of the paragraph is fine but I would condense your three rain sentences into one more powerful one. “The bartering of rain so prevalent through the room, he forgot what the blue sky looked like”. Also adding a detail about his uniform to say something about his character, does he take really good care of them and they are always ironed or are they ketchup stained?

Again try to show more then telling, use active verbs. “He slammed the horn to vent his frustrations at the endless sea of traffic” as an example. Also don’t explain the metaphor of how this is alot like his life. Readers are usually smart enough to pick it up. If you want to hint at it do it in character and do it subtly.

First sentence is great, second sentence could use less describing words, just use one that would fit the best. Synonym dictionaries are great for that. “The pavement… the downpour” cut down, ‘city and its inhabitants bearing the wrath of the gale’. Use a better word than glanced, gazed should work better since he is pondering the sight. Maybe even add some colorful language in there to really sell the his feeling on the towers. The amber lights were a great touch. Don’t put “he imagined” you are already writing in his perspective. Rest of the paragraph is more of show don’t tell. Show me how he is lonely. Show me how every time he tried to reach out he has been buried and shunned by society.

This paragraph is really passive in the beginning. Just have him drive by it right now and be specific. ‘He crawled along the freeway following two barely visible red lights. On the right emerged a tower ‘International Bank of Chicago’. Only two guards out front. Oh how easy it would be. He brushed his hand along the center console where he kept his afgan service pistol he smuggled out of the milatery. Oh how easy it would be.’ Something like this.
The last paragraph seems a bit jarring, consider flowing into it better. And repeated advice given above still applies.
I hope this was useful in some way and you don’t get discouraged, practice makes perfect.

Immediate first impression:
I think you need to be more economical. Right now, you seem to be focusing on translating the images and sounds in your head into words. The end product is at once verbose, and... insubstantial? Example:

He flailed an arm out from his curled-up body and smashed the largest button on top of the alarm clock, putting a stop to the deafening beep.

The largest button and on top of and putting a stop to aren't necessarily... necessary. Neither is are a lot of the words in the first part. You could make that a really short sentence. And you could use the spare verbs and nouns you've given yourself to give more specific description. Look how you load adjectives (stiff, musty, urine-stained, crinkled, musty) into the next sentence.

The next paragraph also loads description. I see this a lot with new writers so, deep breath, it's fine. But use description IN TANDEM with action. Description and action aren't alternating things. Have him DO STUFF, and then allow that description to be revealed by him DOING STUFF. Avoid the impulse to have Action Sentences and Description Sentences. THESE SHOULD BE THE SAME SENTENCES. (Ps don't interpret my All Caps as Yelling. To me, caps are interchangeable with italics and both mean "I'm looking directly into your eyes right now, but not in a mean way"). (Sometimes they are yelling, but nowhere in this review).

Voice:
It's not that this isn't a legitimate or realistic voice, it's just not very compelling yet. We have "encompassed" (not evocative, boring, fancy) paired with "glanced around" (not evocative, boring, basic). Ultimately, and of course, this is not A THING TO TAKE PERSONALLY. It's just a writing thing. And again, it comes back to using words to make feeling, but not thinking of words as these discrete commodities. Certainly the guy who wakes up in the piss soaked bed can be smart and know middle-grade vocab words, that's not the issue. The issue is that "encompassed" and "glanced around" are both boring. And yes, we as people might actually think in these words (I do, and you clearly do, since you wrote it). But writing is meant to be interesting.

Simple words, specifically deployed, are the most powerful.

And always be cautious of "word packages" -- combinations we're all used to hearing. Highly skilled. Reminiscing fondly. What about instead of "highly skilled with firearms" it was "surgical with a firearm," and instead of "He found himself reminiscing fondly [...]" it was "He found himself retreating into memories of" (because "retreat" already suggests somewhere safer, especially for a vet) -- like not saying those are great sentences, but they are different and I suggest them because I find it useful yank me out of my snow-blindness to hear radically different interpretations. So, there ya go.

(And while I don't ascribe to the N00B "All adverbs are bad" school of thought [anymore] I do think it's true that if you're using a basic ass adverb and a basic ass verb, probably neither are good).

Character:
Don't bury the lead. I had to get to the second page before I get reflection or interiority. Things could come earlier. It's not "revealing," it's "BUILDING." I had a creative writer teacher who said, "Don't say, oh it all makes sense at the end. Hook people from the beginning." And people read because they care about other PEOPLE. Make us care about Chris. Give us a chance to know him. We don't even have to like him -- someone doesn't have to be "likable" for you to be invested in them -- but if you're **SPeCIFiC** probably a lot of us will at least be invested, if not empathetic, if not directly relate.

Also, if being a vet is important, which it seems to be, then really specifically deploy that language. There is a lot of language you can use, which people use regularly. (Notice I used "deploy" twice. TWAS A HINT.)

Setting:
Would like to see more specificity in the setting. Even if people haven't BEEN places, reading is enjoyable for HEARING about places. Being vague is the opposite of being relatable, because it's too vague to relate to.

Yes, you might put in a specificity that a given reader doesn't have personal experience with. But... the whole point of reading. Right? I've never committed, been victim of, or investigated a murder, it's not like murder is a plot point and I'm all :spongebob getting off his couch: about.

Final Thoughts:
Thank you for dealing with my EXTREMELY HARSH (but I hope constructive?) review. Tone is hard to read in writing, so I hope you read it as though a curly-haired girl who looks about 22 but is actually 30 and had very big eyes and was upspeaking the whole time and saying everything in a very friendly and jokey and nice way. Because that's exactly what just happened. If it helps, imagine every sentence with a questionmark at the end. Because fuck, idk.

1. Did it do a good job of conveying the misery and internal struggle that Chris is going through?
   Not yet. For this to be effective, I think you need more specificity, and economical consideration of language. But the raw material is there.

2. I want to paint a vivid picture of the city and give the setting a life of its own. Are the descriptions of the settings adequate? Is there too much detail? Not enough detail?
   I didn't feel like I got a vivid description of the city. It sounded like kind of any city. To be vivid, it has to be specific. (I know I sound one-note, but specificity is king).

3. Would you be interested in reading more?
   I'm interested in reading the next draft of this! As written, I'm still not sure I got enough to invest in.

BUT. Writing is hard, it takes time. The more you write, the better you get. So KEEP WRITING!!!!!

I don't have much if anything in the way of line-by-line revisions because I think most of the issues in the writing can be traced back to just a couple specific problems.

Skimming through other peoples' critiques, it's already been pointed out that you're going overboard with the adjectives. It might be a good idea to expand on what adjectives are really for, and when you should limit or avoid them. Adjectives can describe objective qualities (for instance, describing the color or shape of an object) but in this kind of writing lean heavily toward describing how your character feels about them instead (torturous, shrill.) The risk you run with using adjectives the second way is that you can simultaneously say too much and too little. In dropping the whole point you're trying to make on the reader right off the bat, everything after that feels redundant and unnecessary.

By the time we read the first two sentences, we already know Chris is miserable (this feels almost like telling instead of showing,) but we haven't actually seen how he externalizes these feelings, or how he copes with them. Both of these things are going to matter more to the reader, for two reasons. One, it's easiest to get to know a character by seeing external hints, since we get to know people in real life by things like posture, affectations, dialogue, etc. Adjectives which describe internal thoughts abstracts that in a way that is more foreign to how we interact in real life. Two, the way a character copes with their feelings not only tells you what they're feeling, but indicates something about their character. Anyone can feel sad, or annoyed, or angry. However, whether someone deals with anger by isolating themselves, blaming other people, shutting down their emotions and becoming robotic, etc. tells you a GREAT deal about who they are.

There is one exception to all of this. What you might notice if you read kids books is that they often forego this kind of deeper dive into showing characters' reactions to things in favor of giving you adjectives right off the bat. This isn't lousy writing, but rather knowing your audience: Little kids are less likely to pick up on nuances of behavior and tie those behaviors to their feelings. Even obvious tells, such as lighting up a cigarette when stressed, will go right over a kid's head, so an adjective works better in this case.

Going straight from the apartment to a traffic jam feels a bit like overkill (almost Stressed Eric levels of overkill.) We already get that Chris is unhappy, it's time to see how he responds to these feelings. Put him in miserable situations where he has enough agency for us to see more about him as a person, rather than making him a passive victim to everything happening around him. Even if he IS a passive victim, it's important that what we're reading simultaneously expresses something about him as a person in addition to the experiences he's going through.

Isolated for so many years, so little social interaction. Could he even connect with people if he tried? Dating sites never worked and meeting people or making friends in a big city was a challenge. Everyone everywhere minded their own business, and it seemed that every attempt to strike up conversation with strangers was awkward and went nowhere.

This passage comes in mid-paragraph and nothing seems to build up to it save for Chris' internal dialogue. There should be an external cue for this kind of thing. Instead of him driving to work, it could happen while he's sitting alone in a cafe looking over at a couple talking or something.

The last couple paragraphs feel very stream of consciousness, mostly because they don't seem to be pushing the plot forward and it's not clear what their relevance is. I do want to see more of Chris' backstory but it would be better to have a more direct connection between his backstory and something happening to him in the present (thinking about robbing some strangers seems like a very tenuous jumping off point for going into these kinds of details.)