I just went back through and reread it, and I can't help but think that the message is a little played-out already. War is bad, "we didn't expect for technology to kill people", and taking accountability are all ideas that have been explored in nonfiction and fiction—they have also been subverted. This doesn't make your story useless, but it does mean that something else about it should be really intriguing (my opinion). I don't really think that you have this (also my opinion). You could, but the prose feels relatively standard, and the characters are pretty standard. The environmental descriptions are similar to numerous others. This isn't to say that they story needs to be some avant-garde nightmare, but it should be more interesting.

An amendment to my first comment: It has only been two years, but I still think most of the problems where that was relevant remain.

"He closed his eyes to savor the last bite" I have never seen a real person actually do this. Yeah, stories aren't re

Lol... I forgot general impressions.
General impressions: 
There isn't anything that makes me want to read this story. Whitaker's character isn't intriguing to me. Julia doesn't really even have a character; she's a trope. The environment is not creatively described, and the resolution is too convenient. The war feels like minor environmental details in a story where its aftermath is the entire inciting incident. On reread, your prose tends to saunter about the story. It feels indirect in places. "Dr. Whitaker found himself staring" is a good example of this.

This is my first time doing this, so I'm sorry for it being disorganized. I hope to get better, and I hope this is still useful. 

As an example of my inexperience with this, I glossed over your questions in the post. 
1. Is there enough world-building to make sense of the setting?
I would say no. As I go on to explain, the creation of the hand doesn't make much sense, and the whole city no functioning thing seems inconsistent. 


# General Impression (First reading)

I felt no real connections to characters. I understand the limitations of short stories, but I've read some that made me generally care and wish for more of a character's life. In this, it felt the only person I could really feel for is Julia, but her character has no likable traits. The ending was too convenient, and there was no sense of urgency or, forewarning of them being caught. Concluding my first readthrough, it isn't a story I want more from, yet. I'll get more into what I mean by yet.

&#x200B;

# Second Reading

I want to point out a few lines that I found took me out of the story.

&#x200B;

"He’d dreamed about it, traveled all over the world to give talks about it, become famous based on it."  


This line was hard to read for me, its too loose to me. Now I'm not an english major, probably passed with minimal effort because all I cared about was camping and hunting in highschool. So I'm not good with prose or what makes a good sentenc

**QUESTIONS**

> Is there enough world-building to make sense of the setting?

I harped on this lol. With regard to making sense of the setting: Not currently. I think there's a good start to it, at Whitaker's house and later at the train station. But the cafe and the general area of the lab are almost completely undescribed and I'm mostly white-rooming it from the cafe to the end.

With regard to worldbuilding: I think you've given enough information to understand the setting and the mood of the story. This is two years post-futuristic war, the city in which this takes place and its people are still recovering. The process of recovery is going badly because the government is inept (this bit of dialogue did strike me as minorly info-dumpy and I think some of it could go without being concretely stated through a bit more setting description). 

> Does Dr. Whitaker's character progression seem believable to you? And while you're at it, do you like him as a character?

I do like him as a 

**GENERAL IMPRESSION**

I like the idea of Dr. Whitaker and the premise, but had a difficult time staying engaged in this. I think it's a combination of prose, the convenience of the resolution, and a lack of specificity in setting description. The emotional moments worked better for me than the set-dressing or high-action moments.

**READ-ALONG**

> Dr. Richard Whitaker could barely recognize the face staring back at him

I'd rewrite as "Dr. Richard Whitaker barely recognized". Immediate passive voice. This is followed by pages of "was/were" verbing: he *was* standing, he *was* sitting, she *was* coming, there *were* too many people (please forgive the fact that I cannot retain writing terms so I can't remember what this is actually called or if this is just the same thing as passive voice). But why not change some of these to be "he stood", "she ran", etc., to inject some urgency into a situation that I know is meant to be urgent but didn't feel that way while I was reading it.

> Sa

**General Thoughts**

In my opinion I do think that the story is very well written and the pace is easy to follow. Not convoluted at all. Prose is good, worldbuilding is acceptable. For what I understood: we are watching your world throught the eyes of Dr. Whitaker, the inventor of a mechanical suit aimed to help disabled people (like himself) to live better lives, and is later weaponized by the goverment. The whole country (world?) is devastated, lives were lost and things do not get better. Dr. Whitaker is hidding; he is ashamed of his mistakes and has finally resolved to confront them, beggining with his abandoned assistand Julia. I personally found it fun and engaging.

About your questions:

**Worldbuilding:** I think your worldbuilding is enough as is, I can buy it without a problem. If you want to improve it I can point at some opportunities you can use, like the chase secuense in the streets. Past the window crash it just goes on too quickly, I would suggest you extend it just 

Left a couple of comments on the beginning paragraphs in the google doc itself that I thought could make them stronger. If this was my story and I was editing this, the beginning would probably sound sth like:

\>Dr. Richard Whitaker could barely recognize himself in the bathroom mirror. Perfect. This disguise should be enough for today--it was certainly more than he did most days. 

\>In his small bedroom, his three-week-old(\*) bedsheets were still in a tangle on the bed and the floor was covered with empty take-out cartons. Problems, that's all his life was: problems. Did he want to stay here and clean up, or did he finally want to go to the city?

(\*) or whatever - 3 weeks sounded good with the cartons

This is your story not mine, and the suggestion is in my writing style not yours so ditch it if it doesn't vibe, but my point was, you're in close third pov, inside your character's head, so the thoughts should sound simple and fluent. Anything else sounds forced. When you're in yo

DOCTOR WHI-TAKER-OF-LIVES
BACK TO START ANOTHER CIVIL WAR?
GO DIE RICHARD WI-TRAITOR


I understand the importance of it now but both times i read i couldn't understand it.

Like the '-' is so badly used.

DOCTOR-WHI TAKER-OF-LIVES would make much more sense as it would give the reader immediate idea of it while

DOCTOR WHI-TAKER-OF-LIVES made me think

doctor who taker of lives because of the '-' 


Also hiding his full name doesn't seem to make sense and why don't just say

WHITAKER YOU BASTARD

BACK TO START ANOTHER WAR?

GO KINDLY UNLIVE.

Get my point? 




He coughed as the wind was knocked out of him.

Gasping for air?


turned into BattleSuits used to cripple innocent citizens, like Julia.


This is a very weak and unreal presentation maybe like turned into WarMachines would work but still very weird of it to start a war unless the BattleSuits were so damn overpowered and whatever country Whitaker tried to start a war but the citizens disagreed starting a civil war. And this is

Thank you to everyone that read my [first version of this story](https://www.reddit.com/r/DestructiveReaders/comments/uqilz8/2955_the_invention_problem/). In the fashion of this subreddit, that story has indeed been destroyed and completely rewritten. 

For my rewrite, I'd like feedback on:

1. Is there enough world-building to make sense of the setting?
2. Does Dr. Whitaker's character progression seem believable to you? And while you're at it, do you like him as a character?
3. There are two moments that are intended to be more obviously emotional. Can you identify them? Did they strike an emotional cord for you, and if not, ideas on how I could make them more powerful?

And, of course, any and all other kinds of feedback are welcome.

The story: [All These Problems](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CtSbf2SMnGX4uChJh7FX8oo4mJKeMivdaV9BZ2Ss1rY/edit?usp=sharing)

[Critique bank](https://www.notion.so/carlhonorvellotti/d556fc6f47104716beb27efaa3c8448b?v=118520cd5c014215912ca50f8a09461c)

[2817] All These Problems (rewrite of The Invention Problem)