Take the 2-minute tour ×
Writers Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for authors, editors, reviewers, professional writers, and aspiring writers. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Cautiously I rose, briefly leaving his side. Turning to the lugubrious window when suddenly I was forced to duck down as cantankerous Nazis dehisced from behind great timber doors, parading across the turbid ground moving in synchronization like irate geese. Something was happening; something bad. We were ensnared in a never-ending cycle of death; invisible to those who once cared. Reluctantly I stared at battered wagons of the dead. Emotionless. Cold, shallow corpses grossly shoveled into immeasurable heads like unwanted leaves in a school playground. What has happened?

share|improve this question

closed as off-topic by Standback Feb 2 at 15:40

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

3  
Hi, and welcome to Writers. While we do critique short pieces, you need a more specific criterion than "good." What effect are you trying to achieve? What do you feel the piece lacks? –  Lauren Ipsum Feb 2 at 13:17
    
Closing, but you can edit as per our comments, and we'll be happy to reopen. –  Standback Feb 2 at 15:41
1  
I think you're overusing needlessly "large" or obscure words. Using words that some people may need to look up before they can understand what they're reading is a sure-fire way to alienate people, and it tends to make prose plodding and difficult to read in any case (not to mention hackneyed.) I agree that this question needs work before it can be answered properly, but in the meantime you may want to address words like lugubrious, cantankerous and turbid. –  CLockeWork Feb 3 at 9:14
    
dehisced? That is amazingly obscure. Also: heaps, not heads. –  dmm Feb 4 at 21:19

1 Answer 1

No, it isn't.

  • The vocabulary starting in your second sentence is very uneven. While I'm a fan of large words, they should be used sparingly and to import a sense of characte, especially when you're writing in first-person.
  • It's hard to follow the narrative of this section. Are the Nazis outside, or inside? Where did the wagons come from? Are the Nazis disposing of corpses in a mass grave, or are they themselves corpse-like.
  • Some of your imagery is incongruent with other imagery. Irate geese usually don't work in lockstep, and are more comical that fearsome. (of course, assuming there's a mass grave, corpses as "discarded leaves" is excellently chilling.)

To improve the piece, I would encourage you to either simplify its vocabulary or insert some Yiddish, Hebrew, or biblical references. Either omitting the name "Nazi" or moving it to the initial mention of the soldiers would also improve the section's flow.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.