**** it. I told Brandon I was gonna wait a few days but here's a very lil bit of it.
The reason it's called _____ is just cuz I don't have a title.

And there's probably spelling mistakes cuz for some reason my spell checker doesn't work, and also, criticism/compliments welcome. Yes.

Also, the name of the file is just something stupid.

Edit: Nevermind. I'll have it up soon, haha. Sorry.

Ok ladies, here:

My rating: 2/10

-NO PLOT
-Terrible Storyline
-No connection
-Only descriptions basically, everything is 'fluffy'
-Horribly Layed out

It needs A LOT of work.

lol 9 pages of a book. You do realize it's a book right?
Now let's discuss why you say what you say, shall we?

I'm willing to bet your reasons are the exact reason I wrote it like that.

Yes I do realize it's a book and after those first 9 pages [about 6 of them are total bullshit], I would be willing to burn it.

[Sorry, actually 7/10 pages are total bullshit]
[EDIT: the last 3 pages remind me of a retarded volcano, its full of lava, but it goes nowhere]

But Wolf...

My questions are like so:
-NO PLOT (what's the plot? Why do you think there's no plot?)
-Terrible Storyline (what's the storyline???)
-No connection (why isn't there a connection? what makes it like so?)
-Only descriptions basically, everything is 'fluffy' (what's fluffy and what's wrong with that?)
-Horribly Layed out (why's it horribly laid out?)

What kind of books do you read?

First of all, I read 'normal books.'

-There IS NO plot. [which makes it terrible, a book without a plot is like lemonade made with limes]
-Sorry, no storylike [see comment above]
-Theres no connection [its just a random collection of jibberish IMO]
-only descriptions [is like reading a catalog from wal-mart, its just not humane; 'fluffy' is nothing is consistant and everything keeps just flowing]
-The first 7 pages are POINTLESS.
-The last 3 are ok, but WTF is why the 'side footnotes' and other footnotes. You have more footnotes in your first 3 pages than most people have it their 1052 page books.

There, finally. "Normal" books? Like what, Dan Brown? Then this book doesn't even apply to you and classics like Ulysses by James Joyce doesn't either. Neither does Naked Lunch or House of Leaves or Only Revolutions or any novel that wants to challenge you. Sorry if I can't trust an opinion of a 15 year old Christian who can't think outside of a box. I want valid open minded criticisms by people who know more than you probably do. But I'll respond to your criticisms regardless, so you know author intent, I'll even back it up with links:

1: There is no plot.

See Ulysses and Naked Lunch like mentioned above. It does have a plot though, really. It's obviously got some dystopian elements to it already. Also: Life has a plot does it? Harmony Korine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2: There's no connection.

Harmony Korine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia again. It's only "random jibberish" because it's the beginning. Do you expect a conclusion in 9 pages? Do you want me to piece things together perfectly? If you do then no, this isn't your kind of book because it's meant to challenge readers. Does life have a connection like that? No.

3: only descriptions [is like reading a catalog from wal-mart, its just not humane; 'fluffy' is nothing is consistant and everything keeps just flowing].

Right, ok. A catalog from wal-mart. That's personal opinion and that's cool. You don't like description. Whatever, you don't like that style.
But "nothing is consistant and everything keeps just flowing", what's wrong with that??? Nothing is consistant? Like what?

4: The first 7 pages are POINTLESS.

It's a start up to a book. You just don't understand it so you deem it pointless. True story.

5: The last 3 are ok, but WTF is why the 'side footnotes' and other footnotes. You have more footnotes in your first 3 pages than most people have it their 1052 page books.

So what you're saying is, you hate build up but you actually like the parts that are "actual story"? Thanks man. That makes you a valid critic.
More footnotes? That's the point. Some points of reference:
Postmodernism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Metafiction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



So from what I've gathered, you dislike the experimental parts of the novel. You aren't familiar with novels like this. Like I said, not for you.
You gotta ask yourself, why is it written that way? You clearly don't have a problem with the actual writing outside you think it's too descriptive which isn't anything I can do.

Lol it was kinda weird. I didn't get it.

Well sorry to break it to you, but even if there isa point, 99.9999% of people wouldn't read it, or people, after read those first 3 pages would return it or burn it or simply trash it. Plus from seeing the first 3 pages, I can already make the conclusion that your 'book' will be full of prejudice nonsense that has nearly no value to the common people. you might as well write "THIS IS WHAT I THINK" in size 72 font on every damn page.