There is a point in which one can distinguish between 'stylistic choppiness' and 'choppiness for the sake of being choppy.' You don't want the latter, but this is what you did.
This may make sense with a little more pot, but I don't know what elves and dishes falling have anything to do with each other. The only possible reference between them (and the Phoenix feather) is some kind of connection to Harry Potter, and God help you if it is...
The tunnel image is worthless. Totally worthless. It's trite and the meaning is well-expressed in other ways. So the ending was nothing to jump up and down about.
You go from 'crimpson rivers' to 'futile fight' with no connective in-between. Okay, so you're going for the whole I'm-an-erudite-figure-this-out. As a general rule, this is a bad line of thought, insofar as you have to be well-read to accomplish such a task.
The biggest problem with this piece, however, is its utter lack of cohesiveness. One line does not flow into the next; one image is not connected with the next; nothing is connective. This could be a stylistic endeavor. I suppose you could argue nobody is going to truly 'understand' you (just 'put up' with you), but then if you don't try -- nobody's going to care. And besides, Derridaist 'Grammatology' is a loap of crap anyway.
