Talk:20 Questions/@comment-24229645-20151119175054

Any pasta "written" by a narrator who died at the end of the story automatically fails for me. There are countless ways to cause readers to engage with a story; resorting to the use of first-person narration is lazy and inelegant. That being said, the story was engaging up until the final exchange. I'd have greatly preferred third person narrative and a cliff hanger ending, in which the reader isn't informed about the protagonist's fate. The writer shows promise, however. In fact, the writer shows far more promise than the person who wrote the two-part review at the top of the comments section. It is a bit of a cliche to suggest that critics are jealous of those whose art they criticize, but in this case it seems an accurate assessment, because the reviewer's prose was sloppy, choppy, and filled with unfortunate typos and lapses in gramma and spelling.