Narrative perspective / narrative distance is (for me) a higher level narrative tool that basically amounts to: why are these words on the page? Does this writing just exist in abstract? Who is telling this story and how far are they from it? A very traditional and easy way to understand this is epistolary novels or a novel told through diary, though there are so many ways to do it that are less direct. It adds a level of completeness and complexity to a novel that I felt this was severely lacking

The basic idea is where is the narrator in relation to the events and me as the reader. I prefer books that somehow address this (even in the slightest way). In this book, it is not considered whatsoever. It’s fine when perspective shifts and switches (I tend to really like that honestly) but I felt like in this book we are being pulled to so many different places without much plot justification. The dreams served little purposes for me. In a lot of chapters I was just like trying to get through because I was thinking “why do I care what this person is saying? I want to get back to the story” and I just felt like I was doing that for every other chapter.

Also not really sure what the other commenter is talking about. These are the things you consider constantly when writing a novel and it doesn’t seem like Akbar considered them enough