“Strangers”

By: Qyurie.

Reviewer: Gtoprenaissance.

1-Title: The title "Strangers" is suitable, I'd say. Considering your story is one of tragic drama, the noun 'Strangers' indicates the unspoken underlining of the romantic mien of the classical English tragedy (where love is not the main theme, pain is.) I don't think changing it would be necessary.

Rating: [10/10].

2-Description/Foreword: Though the description is there and valid, it doesn't serve your story justice. The description details the characters' relationship as toxic but it claims that one character doesn't value the existence of the other, which impressed upon me (as a reader) that this relationship won't happen in the first place, but it did. It's merely imperfect and abusive. But both characters were acknowledged by each other. I thought it was misleading to a certain extent, but it’s simply an observation, not a fault. The poster is quite lovely and the layout is quite neat and professional. Good job!

Rating: [9/10].

3-Plot: You've used the third-person narrative style which usually accompanies the characters' natural psychological and emotional development through the looking glass of the reader rather than the narrator. The story begins beautifully, you've employed the elements of time (winter) and place (car) and you've allowed your readers to anticipate the next element of action. Your beginning is tricky though, diving into the story without an initial introduction to the characters can be confusing for readers whose idea of either characters is slight and slim. I'm not a fan of either characters, and I assume I'm not the only one whose knowledge of this group is limited, so I suggest either introducing the main characters properly or obtain a strict use of titles/names.

The plot in itself is good, unoriginal, but good. As a reviewer, I’ve reviewed plenty of stories with a similar outline of your plot, whether it’s domestic abuse, psychological maladjustment or self-harm, they all tend to lightly touch on the topic without analyzing the core of problem. I’d say your story did well in analyzing the problem because the characters were built neatly and professionally. You’ve managed to lay out a certain issue and exhibit the proper reaction practiced by each character, I don’t recommend changing a thing about the general plot.

Your use of diction is brilliant in all its forms. Its effectiveness is usually elicited from the proper illustration of everything, from the environment to the characters' thoughts. You can succeed in extracting a catharsis from your readers by deploying a purposeful contrast between heart and mind; usually in post-modern literature, the contrast is between a developing theory and society. For example, The Help by Kathryn Stockett discusses racial discrimination. Your character's struggle to leave his lover is an adequate example, but it's not competent enough to carry an entire plot by itself. I recommend supplying your story with a sub-plot, perhaps one lead by minor characters.

Speaking of the aspect of dictionary correctness, I'd say your choice of words is suitable for a story with such ambience. As for the clearness of speech, I'm glad you've refrained from using commonly exhausted foreign vocabularies such as "Oppa" and whatever other authors tend to use in stories.

As for using Surrealism in your plot and contradicting the ordinary, I’d say it’s a riske move to mix tragedy and Surrealism but since it has worked so well in your story makes i