>The formatting is a mistake probably from when I moved this over to google docs. So that that doesn't mean anything.

That was my assumption; weird stuff tends to happen when you move documents. I get it. Obviously once it's fixed feel free to ignore that particular point of feedback, then.

>I use the em dashes stylistically. I usually envision them as a hard break in a statement as opposed to the soft one of the comma, the definitive one of the period, and the long pause of ellipses. Even those sentences are grammatically correct without em dashes, they're supposed to represent the characters growing inability to connect an even seamless thought together. This process descends further and further until he's just dealing with primitive senses. That's where the staccato begin. So even though the "dizzy" doesn't really need to be separated with em dashes, the protagonist views that portion of his thought as somehow different than the previous, even though it isn't, like it suddenly pop

The formatting is a mistake probably from when I moved this over to google docs. So that that doesn't mean anything. 

I use the em dashes stylistically. I usually envision them as a hard break in a statement as opposed to the soft one of the comma, the definitive one of the period, and the long pause of ellipses. Even those sentences are grammatically correct without em dashes, they're supposed to represent the characters growing inability to connect an even seamless thought together. This process descends further and further until he's just dealing with primitive senses. That's where the staccato begin. So even though the "dizzy" doesn't really need to be separated with em dashes, the protagonist views that portion of his thought as somehow different than the previous, even though it isn't, like it suddenly popped into his head out of nothing or something.

I've taken note of the repetitive word choice and will probably cut down their use. My intent with the repetition was mostly tha

I'm going do my best to critique this independent of Part 1.

**GENERAL REMARKS**

One of the first things that jumps out to me is that there are some odd formatting choices, and I don't know if they're intentional. Starting on page 5 you switch between indenting and not indenting the beginning of paragraphs. If this is intentional I'm not quite following how it ties into the overall story you're trying to tell.

The constant repetition of "warbling" to me makes it feel a bit tiresome to get through. It's such an unnatural word that it snaps me out of the story when I see it used so often.

I do enjoy the overall tone and place setting, especially in the first half of this part. It reads like a descent into madness.

**HOOK**

I've touched on the "warbling" thing in my general remarks.

I like use of harsh, short phrases for the more animalistic or paranoid thoughts the main character uses. It sounds stacatto when I read it aloud, which takes me to a place like *Psycho*.

Spiral comes 

Hmm okay interesting. I appreciate the ideas here for sure. I interpreted it a bit differently I think.

I only say low brow because I'm more inclined to read/watch/listen to media for entertainment's sake and less inclined to dissect something in a moral or cosmic capacity, so I wanted you to be aware that I am probably not the intended audience. Essentially I think whether or not I "like" it should have no bearing on the critique, but I won't be able to remove that bias fully.

That said I certainly applaud the idea of it. I think it is kind of unique to explore a sort of lovecraftian horror from the perspective of the monster. Hard though of course, since it requires pinning down the sense of otherness in the very concrete non-other medium of language. I can see how you do that and I think it comes through pretty well. To me though, the societal transformations you mentioned with cosmetics and such isn't what comes across, instead this piece felt more like the acceptance of the alie

Your opinion, whether low or high brow, (or whether those things even exist) is helpful insight. And I get not wanting to read this thing or finding it pretty repulsive, but for me, our repulsion tells us something about us and feels like unexplored potential territory. I was inspired mostly by true crime and cosmic horror, so it's bound to be depressing, especially if we're talking about the revulsion from one species to another. 

I was trying to have the narrative match the theme of transformation. The thoughts, style, etc. move in the direction of the protagonist's own exorcism of his humanity. I always thought there was something disturbing about this kind of hidden societal idea of transformation. It's hard to put in words, and I know the narrative doesn't touch on it, but something like "unnecessary" cosmetic surgery or some drag aesthetic or eating disorders, or um, cat eared anime girls. The outward fixation on image seems to be a desire to excise something internal, something

I wanted to comment on this since I just finished it but I'm on mobile atm so this will have to be short for now.

So I'll say it since I've managed to consume the whole piece, this definitely isn't for me. I will try to be objective, but I just wanted to let you know from the start so you can take it all with a grain of salt. To me art is about feeling and good art will induce a range of strong feelings. That is my opinion, and that is why I consume art. This definitely gave me feelings, but it was mostly anger and disgust. A lot of aversion. I liked the second half of this part after the #, mostly because it was a breath of fresh air, but then the end made me depressed again so, I dunno. Anyway my point is, I have some thoughts, just one low-brow opinion.

Okay so. To me this reads like you're doing a Lolita meets the Metamorphosis thing, much more heavily leaning on Kafka for tone and atmosphere. This second part is far more nightmarish than the first part. The first part had a more

Hi, thanks for posting! 

Below are my criticisms. They might seem a bit harsh, but I want to reassure you that overall I did enjoy your piece and would read more, I just found the first part a bit of a slog. 

**Overall**  
So I really quickly skimmed part 1, but my criticisms/advice here are directed at part 2.   
The impression I got, reading this piece, was that you wanted to write a scary story. Your number one goal was to scare the reader, and so we have this sort of classic monster in the bedroom scene, almost out of a film. Goal number two seemed to be to communicate a unique narrative voice, which I will talk more about in the prose section. You didn’t seem overly interested (at least until the last part) in character/dialogue/plot. Which is fine.   
And the good news is that you managed to write a decently creepy story. I am now going to go to bed thinking about murderers and bug monsters.   
However, I do also feel that there is a lot to be improved upon with regards to 

This is the second part of that thing that had a first part. Let's hope it makes sense.

[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sWSwR-K8goDxZXF-LiBGqqNGAQdzwtjsVa1XahIajtI/edit?usp=sharing](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sWSwR-K8goDxZXF-LiBGqqNGAQdzwtjsVa1XahIajtI/edit?usp=sharing)

Critiques:

[A Cold Day in November \[2338\]](https://www.reddit.com/r/DestructiveReaders/comments/uzcic9/comment/iafr68o/?utm_source=share&amp;utm_medium=web2x&amp;context=3)

[Natural Fear \[2443\]](https://www.reddit.com/r/DestructiveReaders/comments/uxltms/comment/ia2oqcc/?utm_source=share&amp;utm_medium=web2x&amp;context=3)

Hide and Seek Part 2 [2450]