You said you like novels with a lot of suspense in them and I wanted to read a novel like that, nothing more nothing less.

But since it seems to annoy you that much, don't bother answering my question. Really, I'm not interested in your opinion anymore.

Things that stay on critiqued for a long time tend to have major flaws. They tend to be very hard to read without quitting.

There are lots of ways to introduce negative tension that are not threats to the main characters life. I can’t think of a romance novel where death is the outcome if the characters don’t get together, but pride and prejudice doesn’t lack tension at all.

Consider setting earlier that hole is closing? Could be a source of tension.

Character comes from interactions between the character and internal or external obstacles. Narrative voice is developed through a close point of view. Here neither of those things really apply.

As far as your point of you question, I’m not sure if what I said before took. I think it’s a really bad idea to have the historian narrate. 

How do you go about describing where things are around the goblin? I would start by describing the setting more closely and vividly? And I will describe the things that are relevant to the carbon as they

Thanks for your time. I really appreciate it. Your critique feels really informative, and there's a few points I want you to expand on (more than a few I guess.)

You said things that stay uncritiqued for a while have something in common, could you expand on that?

When it comes to narrative tension and wether or not the goblin gets out of the hole, I feel like its a dilemma. If he falls, he dies, and the story ends there, but there's many more pages to the book(metaphorically speaking) and you can deduce that he'll survive.  How do I go about creating narrative tension despite this? Should I reduce the stakes so that him falling is reasonable?

I tried to show characther through the thoughts. What other ways are there of showing characther in this position?

You said that the story was told in omniscient POV. How should I go about making it completely told through the eyes of a historian?

I'm not really familiar with the concept of staging. I like the idea of putting some sort of mar

Part 2

The  use of imagery here is at odds with such a unique circumstance. I felt like there should be a more extensive use of imagery to really drive home how bizarre the hole is.

I also felt like the generic use of dirt and rock was probably at odds with the complex experience living below ground. Again this backs up into the historian as narrator circumstances so all things with a grain of salt. 

I would love to have some more highfalutin imagery where we really get to see the character in the setting a little more.

Staging:

I found the staging of this piece kinda lacking. Despite being on the wall the whole time I had trouble visualizing where the goblin was in comparison to the things around the hole.

I would hope in future drafts that there is some marker or metric for how he is progressing. I don’t really understand what he can and cannot see.

Mechanics:
I don’t I actually think that your mechanics are pretty good. No real complaints.

Overall

Obviously not my cup of te

Preface part 1.

I try to make sure everything gets at least one crit of the quality I provide. Things that stay un reviewed for a long time tend to have something in common. I should choose a different task, probably.

Part 2: I’ll use voice to text dictation for para of this. If a typo slips through, ask and I’ll clarify.

Intro:

I don’t think I’m going to be saying very many kind things.

When we write, we choose goals. Your stated goal is immersion.

When we write,  we choose tools. the tools can take lots of different forms, plot, point of view, narrative voice, character voice, authorial voice, etc. the list is long. The tools are many.

One of your chosen tools is meta-narrative/active narrator/ narrator as character. Your stated goal is immersion.

In my opinion, those two things will never work. You’ve chosen oil and water. They don’t mix.

Literally every time the narrator enters the story, it has the direct effect of reminding me I am reading a story. This breaks the immers

Hello, 

I defiantly feel that looking at your work without any real sense of its context probably isn’t as helpful to you as it could be. At this moment, I can only really view it and make a suggestion based on what I can see from this sample. 

That said, I feel like your chosen narration style is an extreme miss-match with the story being told. However, I’m saying this as a reader viewing this as a story about a goblin climbing out of a hole. Currently, everything to do with the historian narrator feels like it’s from a completely different story. However, I’m guessing that the historian is probably a more important character to your overall story than I can see from this sample. 

Now, if I was going to advise you on how to make this the better story about the goblin, I’d have the following observation. This story seems like it wants to be a first-person exploration of the goblin’s experience. But is trapped in a third-person description of an action escape/action scene. You may or

Hey, this is a piece of a novel I'm writing. It's about a goblin climbing out of a hole in the ground. It's told from the perspective of a magical historian. 

What I'm aiming for with this is immersion, and I'd like to hear your thoughts on how I could make it more immersive. Also, if you think my style of writing is in someway similiar to an author you've read please tell me. Thank you. 

Critique: https://old.reddit.com/r/DestructiveReaders/comments/rjcg6v/1265_moonsneeze_chapter_1/hpvaa5n/ 

Text: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Dxo17J1AhccuG9pNJIeEA2clffNbbsPWAYGm6ya7hDc/edit?usp=sharing

[1118] The Climb