So... I'm going to forgo speaking about details like typos and focus on some broader topics. And I'm just gonna get right into it.
First thing, the beginning is a history lesson and it's a long one. It's hard to read through because of it's length and the information provided, was just that, information. A robust amount narrative that didn’t feel like it was going anywhere or was connected, and no dialogue, just things happening one after another. Novels that start out like this can be a hard sell on platforms like this because readers often prefer getting right into the action/story. It wasn’t like flashback, it felt more like reading from a textbook or string of consciousness ramblings. Also, things were said very plainly without much description or emotion, like whoever is speaking is detached from the events occurring.
Next, who's speaking? Are they just the narrator or are they important character? If they are just a narrow and are somewhat detached from the events unfolding that's fine. But, and that's a big but, that's still not enough of an excuse to not have emotion and descriptions. If the narrater is all seeing and all knowing, which would be 3rd person omniscient perspective, they should know what all the characters are feeling and thinking and also be able to describe settings and actions. All of the observations from the narrater are surface level at best.
Lastly, it's again less of a story and more like a history lesson. Everything is being told and almost nothing is being shown. I think if there was a character to follow or a group of characters through time, it would be more engaging.
Maybe this how tower stories are, I would not know but nothing about the story is pulling me into it nor keeping me interested.
Some things that could be reevaluated: who is the main character, who is the narrater, and what is the story really about? Why should we as the reader, entirely divorced from the dystopic world you've depicted, care?
Hope this helps!
