[This message has been edited by Kathleen Dalton Woodbury (edited September 29, 2009).]
POV is a kind of out-and-back zooming omniscient, everything from him "barely noticing" the terrain right out to a side note about angels loving to hover around wooded places (which the "narrator" knows, but has to theorise as to why).
Description - you give us nothing. Trees. That's a placeholder and does nothing to set the scene. What kind of trees? Deciduous, coniferous, tall, stunted, bare, twisted, festooned with moss...
The "if he doesn't stop, there'll surely be rainstorm" seems a complete non sequitur, and why would these angels care?
The angel names don't work for me - the "-el" ending tacked on to non-Aramaic words. One empathic, one practical?
Sorry, but I would not read on.
1. You have a very abrupt POV change in here - from the young man's POV to the angels. Not terrific, but a relatively easy fix.
2. One angel is more empathetic, while the other is more practical? I dunno, but the names bother me, especially Practicel.
3. Dunno if it's a formatting error or poor grammar, but dialogue from different people goes on different lines.
4. Why would the heavens weep if he fell off a cliff? Why are the angels so passive? What kind of condition is he in that an impressive display would kill him? Why do I not care to find the answers to any of these questions?
Now, homework for you. Spend some time critiquing the stories of others. You've submitted three stories for critique without returning the favor once. Critiquing others is as much a benefit to you as it is to others.