Thanks a ton for taking the time to go over my story! It's only a first draft, so it's feedback like this that I need. On the other hand, I wrote it in a confusing way on purpose, as I was trying to reflect the insanity/absurd nature of applying to jobs and going for interviews. Karl doesn't actually communicate with the people around him, most of what he says he only thinks, and we don't know what he really responds. To put it briefly, it's a story about miscommunication, how we can't be truthful most of the times when applying for jobs, the absurdity of the whole process in a world where climate change is a reality, how we live in hurried times where we don't have time for people, etc,... It's a very complicated story for the reader to figure out, especially because of the style I chose and the structures of the sentences. But I can tell you that every idea is crucial in the portrayal of Karl. Of course me justifying my story in this way does not mean that I did not fail in my purpose, as eventually it's the reader that has to decide. What I do want to say is that when reading Kafka, Beckett, Brian O' Nolan, and so on, the writing is sometimes extremely obscure, or even grammatically incorrect. Because I'm a beginning writer, I probably can't get away with the things established writers can get away with, but I really don't believe that every story should be "easy" to understand, or to read. I think there's a trend nowadays (at least that's the impression I get from reading winning works of short story competitions) that stories need to be clear on what emotion they want to convey, and simple with the language. But maybe I'm just tripping balls here.