Link to rough draft of piece:http://philome.la/KMarzinsky/nj-route-29
Peer Review Questions
1. Is it clear that the narrator is the road itself? If so, is it too clear? That is, does the piece lack subtlety and rely too heavily on the novelty of the narrator’s identity?
2. Is it clear what Route 29 wants to accomplish and why? Does the narrator’s motivation feel organic? Does the conflict have high enough stakes to engage you as a reader?
3. Are the somewhat sparse language, the brevity of the piece, and the abundance of simple sentences effective? Are enough images evoked?
4. Does the tone of alienation and melancholy come through? Is it effectively juxtaposed with Route 29’s goals and purpose?
5. Does the piece rely too heavily on knowledge of the road and its geographic features? Or would someone who’s never been on the road still be able to appreciate it?
6. Does there need to be more interactive elements?