Is this poorly written? http://pastebin.com/GPgBC4ge

>>8443260
yep. didnt read tho

Is there a single poster on /lit/ willing to read this?

>>8443260
>Is this poorly written?
yes

>>8443260
did you even read it yourself?

>>8443453
>>8443430
Yes, I read it myself and thought some parts were good, while others were not good. Do you agree?

There's a lot of grammar errors and general mistypes. Some sentences can be reordered where you have the active object in the beginning rather than the end. My advice? Read more

Did you just watch Donnie Darko?

>>8443465
there are ~600 words, yet i've found plenty of typos and grammatical errors, that's why i asked.

File: ruined.jpg (174KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 500x375px

>>8443465
maybe a really rough diamond in the making, but people on /lit/ won't accept anything but the best thing.

lines like 14 screams for improvement. I think you need to add more to the actions of people in these kinds of situations. Maybe something about their thoughts. What their perspective is, or how they are or the terrain

I read a little bit of it and wouldn't say it's *poorly* written, but like others have said, there are a lot of spelling and grammar errors.

Fuck off, dangies, you pedo

>>8445336
pedophilia is the sign of a patrician
i shall be reading all of dangies work from know on

The prose is weak, the piece doesn't offer anything to be taken away, and it's nothing new.

I don't want to get into it, but I'll just say: Read more, and if you want a more detailed critique you should check out the subreddit DestructiveReaders. One of the few good subreddits, really. If you read solid books, learn how to take criticism (the good and the bad), and write daily, then you'll improve.