No problem, I really did enjoy it. And I would probably keep Missy Unknown, because of how well the exposition worked out. What to do with her exactly... that's what creative licence is for.

Thank you so much, I'm really glad you liked it! I'm especially glad my exposition and plot worked for you since I think they've been weak points in my writing before and I was aiming to improve them specifically with this piece. I agree about the footage resolution, the raking lines of red on his leg and such was pushing it at best. I meant he slid the Tv onto the boulder, but you are right that this is wrongly constructed. It's something I just noticed myself doing recently and it was pointed out by others in my original submission, I have a habit of using pronouns that don't necessarily refer to their preceding noun. I'll keep a closer eye on this in the future.

Your point about the usage of "Mike" was well-taken. This was one piece of advice I was given recently that I just now realize I didn't think to correct. Thank you for spelling it out to me in a way I won't ignore again!

I'll rethink the monster name. Truth be told, I probably haven't changed it because it sounds cool, whi

This was excellent. I rarely enjoy monster stories, but this was great. I didn't read the first version, so I can't say how they compare.

**Setting**

I have a good impression of Mike's holdout. My first impression was that he worked at a military compound, but it's quickly apparent that he's in a kind of doomsday compound. I like the descriptions overall, but I found it weird how central the blank TV was. Just as well he placed in on the lure.

**Character**

Mike is an interesting chap. He's surprisingly casual about the end of the world. I like how he's planning to catch a live one, and at the same time, he's happy to just keep on killing beasts for as long as he can. There was one thing that I found strangely inconsistent. He's quite congenial when he invites the unnamed woman in, but quite a beast when she asks to stay - especially considering that he has 25 years' worth of food stashed away. I don't really think it's a flaw, really; he comes across as a real hard-ass.

The only 

Oh, I reuse and recycle ideas constantly. 

So does Stephen King (by the by).

Anyway, you are welcome. You are a strong writer and an awesome critic. I enjoy reading your critiques a lot.

Thank you so much! Your critique about the satire actually inspired a lot of the Daniel Harper scene--the bag stuffed with loot and the coffee maker. I'd love to take a swing at a real satirical angle with this premise, but I wasn't quite ready for a full re-write. The characters stripping thing I'm still unsure about. I was thinking I could exclude clothes somehow and just make it about metals and plastics and such, but for now I'm just running with it. If anything, I don't see why I can't reuse the premise for a satirical purpose in a different story. Is that cheap? It's a different take on the same universe, right? Probably not? Whatever. 

Thank you for giving it another read and for the compliments. It's definitely nice to know when the editing is working and not just creating more problems in its wake.

This isn’t a real critique, but I was curious to know how the editing was going, so I gave your new version a read. 

I like it a lot more than the first draft. 

To be perfectly honest, I still would have loved to have seen this lean in the direction of the inherent absurdity of the premise. 

Considering you chose to play it straight however, this is a marked improvement on the previous version.

The creatures are more frightening this time. The narrative build to their “on-screen” appearance definitely helped raise the tension. 

And the punchline at the end works better this time around. The line of logic tracks more smoothly than it did last time. 

Anyway, just wanted to drop by to say good job. I dig the changes.

> I did struggle to keep an image in my head of a Vapid, particularly during the attack on Daniel.

Hmm, this is a good point. I think a number of criticisms are a result of me having moved the story around from where it originally started. The vapid that attacks while Mike is placing the Tv, which you rightly pointed out doesn’t serve any real purpose, was originally the beginning of the story and my excuse for some description before they appear anywhere else. I’ll definitely take a look at smoothing these transitions out.

> The last scene where the Vapids go for Mike's tooth is just fantastic. I didn't want Mike to die at the end, so you did your job as a writer :)

Woo!

You also made me realize there was a lot about Mike that existed in my head that I didn’t necessarily get down on paper. For example, that he’s a bit of hermit, that he has no interest in the outside world, and that this was true before Vapids came, etc… I’ll see if I can work in his anti-social attitudes a bit ea


# Dialogue:

The dialogue in the first scene, where girl meets Mike, felt a little too packed with direction, character action, monologue, and gave it a slightly jerky feel. I think it would be largely improved by trimming it down some. You could cut 'and trembled', which is in contrast with her dulled senses. You could also move up 'She staggered into the light', to replace 'She stepped forward', etc.

This next one is kind of a question for you, really.

> Mike turned his chair back to his dinner, its metal legs scratching across the floor. He huddled on his knees and looked at the TV.

> Her reflection stared his way. “I could cook.”

Shouldn't 'Her reflection stared his way.' be moved to the previous paragraph? I think it reads okay as is, but better when moved since it's still in Mike's PoV. My understanding is that a new paragraph should start with a new speaker.


# Other

The nitpicks of the nitpicks:

> His toaster was missing. A crafty Vapid had gotten away with it in the ni

**As a reader:**

Enjoyed this a lot. I love reading about how a character interacts with a post-apocalyptic world, and your story did a great job of making me feel like both the world and character were real. I had an image in my head for what felt like the entire time that I was reading, although on first read I did struggle to keep an image in my head of a Vapid, particularly during the attack on Daniel.

The last scene where the Vapids go for Mike's tooth is just fantastic. I didn't want Mike to die at the end, so you did your job as a writer :)

Moving on.

There are a few places where I think motivation could be improved/intensified, and cause->effect (or the character's actions) made clearer. That said, cause->effect in general was outstanding and a highlight for me; it's much better than my own writing for sure, but I think I can still be helpful. I also noticed one or two instances where the internal consistency slipped, or where the verisimilitude was challenged.

# Flow / Na

Hey, thanks for reading! You might have a point about the woman not serving much purpose in the overall narrative. Another critique mentioned that she exists basically as an excuse for exposition. Truth be told, my original intent was to have her become the MC in the next chapter, before I decided to make this a standalone piece. I've also considered keeping her until the end. This way she could be chased down into the cellar with Mike to discover his stockpile of food that he was going to withhold, causing personal conflict to ensue alongside the horde rush. Not sure if there's room for that, but maybe I'll try it out. 

> Why not end with him deciding to go off with the woman to find a safer place to live? Or search for a community?

Something cheesy about Mike being like the Vapids, valuing things above human life or interaction. Mike's not a guy who wants a community. I tried to enforce this idea with the Daniel Harper story, but I doubt I made it appropriately clear. I enjoyed wri

Hello there. I must admit, I rarely visit this sub these days because most of what I've read here has been a waste of time. I'm not sure why, but I decided to take a look at your piece, just for fun, expecting it to not be very good. I was surprised. You're a good writer with potential, so I wanted to offer some words of encouragement.

On the doc itself, I disagreed with many of the comments left. The words and phrases you choose are part of your writing style. If you want to call the monsters vapids, call them vapids. It's your story. Do what makes you happy with it. In the end, these things are less important than what really matters: the story.

That's where I had some issues. I'm not sure what purpose the woman served in the overall narrative. She didn't make an impact on the ending, and she disappeared halfway through. What happened to her? Did she die when the vapids attacked? If you explained this, I missed it. This needs to be addressed, and there needs to be a reason why she 

No problem! I actually have a really interesting resource on the subject if you want to read it? It's George Saunders talking about Chekhov and he talks a lot about how we, as writers, should formulate theme.

Chekhov approaches this from the standpoint of a question, one that he provides multiple, even contradictory answers to. The job of the writer is not to answer difficult questions, but to formulate the correct question.

And yeah, I know, it's a fucking monster story. Don't stress too much, it was fun to read.

> It's clear, though, that you have something to say and the story as it is seems unclear as to whether that's on purpose. I think as long as the theme is there you should run with it.

This is a really excellent point and it might point to the biggest flaw in the writing itself. In fact, I feel like it's pointing at the biggest flaw in my writing in general. I wish I had an easy "aha!" here to tell me how to fix this, but I think I'll have to turn this critique over in my head for a while as you did my story. I can't help but feel like you are zeroing in on my limitations as a writer because this applies to probably everything I've written. I've gotten at least a bit better at entertaining the reader, and I try to circle a theme, but I never get around to actually making a point with that theme. And you're totally right, I felt like I had something to say, I probably made it *seem* like I had something to say, but did I actually say something? Nah. Greed is bad, I guess. In order to l

I've been sitting on this critique for a few days, turning this story over. It's not a complicated story, I'm sure you'll agree. It's a really cool slasher with some unique monsters, so that's what I'm going to respond to.

First, the prose. It's serviceable but could be better. I won't go into great detail since other people have given you line notes but my overall observation would be that it just needs some cleaning up and punching up.

Now on to my major critique. Generally, fantasy/horror stories are not just about the idea of the monster or the world. Otherwise they'd just be a description. You have written a story that touches on thematic elements without, I think, really engaging with them. Or maybe that's not fair. You engage with them, but the story could be more conscious of the theme.

The Vapids desire material things, particularly those things that are complicated and man made. Mike, our main character, turns a woman away because he ostensibly doesn't have enough stuff to

This is a revision of a short story I posted a week ago. It's a standalone piece. I tried to incorporate as much of the feedback I got as I possibly could. The content is mostly the same, but it’s been cleaned up, moved around to hopefully create a better flow of information and suspense, and I even added a touch of satire with some new content in the middle of the story. Hopefully the monster descriptions are a touch less cheesy. All feedback welcome. Let me know what can be improved, and please don’t hesitate to tell me if the premise doesn’t work!

Warning: gratuitous violence.

**Critiques**

https://www.reddit.com/r/DestructiveReaders/comments/l6ad9u/1197_give_it_up_part_one/gl1rq2k/

https://www.reddit.com/r/DestructiveReaders/comments/l5497q/1556_ludd_chapter_1/gkwl66c/

https://www.reddit.com/r/DestructiveReaders/comments/l5toxc/1586_charlie_in_the_house/gkx7fz9/

**Submission**

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mMt1daKiXgZ0EsalfUBsEDxBA83MgA1f/edit

[2864] The Lure (Revised)