@Hart- Then I'd like to give my honest opinion about it. I apologize if I sound harsh though, I've been through the wringer a few times with unsympathetic folk and I think some of the bitterness has brushed off on me.

To start off though, I think Toby's first intro was clear enough. I got an idea of how Toby looks, his character and the situation at hand. I didn't have a problem with the character or the story. I was a little bothered by the writing though.

That said, I have to put in a disclaimer. My own writing isn't brilliant or anything. Sometimes I skip out on so many details that what I write doesn't make any sense at all... I've also slaughtered my own characterization before.

What I have trouble with in your post is the sentence structure. They're rather long and it seems like you add a lot of extra words that don't need to be in there and make the sentences heavy and passive.

Toby had no idea of how long he'd been lying there, drifting in and out of consciousness. Pressure from the waves that washed up over him finally nagged him awake, a body half dragged from the sea onto the cold, wet sand. It felt surreal, like he might have been dreaming, but the pounding of his head and the chill that coursed through him said otherwise.

A passive sentence muddles up the action that is in a sentence. Your first sentence is muddle, but not necessarily passive. Your second sentence is definitely passive.

What is happening in your first sentence is this: "Toby was lying there, drifting in and out of consciousness."
Your second sentence is arranged so the subject (Toby) is acted upon by the waves. "He was awakened by the nagging pressure <this word...> of the waves passing over him," Is more active, because the subject is earlier in the sentence. It could be re-arranged or restyled in a number of different ways and still be active.

You use passive sentences a lot, this not necessarily bad stylistically, but it does get in the way of clarity. Usually, using passive voice is something one should do sparingly.

Passive/Active voice <-Purdue Owl

Of those three sentences, the last one is the best and pretty good. We immediately know what he's feeling, thinking and then it's explained a little more.

It seems like you use a lot of clauses, but they break with parallel structure. Parallels are something I'm new to myself, but they are suppose to make the sentence smoother.

Again, he touched the bump on his forehead, fingers brushing against his dark orange-brown hair, and reminded himself that yes, this was real.

Parallel Structures

I think the parallel would look like: Again, he touched the bump on his forehead, his fingers brushed against his dark orange-brown hair, and it reminded him that, yes, this was real.

The ing ending would be a little more difficult...

The base sentence is: He reminded himself that this was real. (or) He touched the bump on his forehead and reminded himself that this was real.

Again, touching the bump on his forehead, fingers brushing against his dark orange-brown hair, reminding himself that, yes, this was really happening.

Not a good revision. If you do that you have like three intro clauses. I don't honestly know if having a non-parallel clause in the middle of the sentence can be more ideal than having a parallel one or vice versa.

(Grr, this enrages Nuke, the clause master.)

Now, I have to defend the short sentence. You don't seem to like them. Length is to a sentence like beat is to a song. If you want something to happen fast: "It was dark. Where was he?" If you want something to happen slow: "In this dark place, he didn't know where he was." If you want it as a run-on: "He had not know where he was when he awakened in this dark place, where he lay upon the cold stone floor." *feels poetic*
There are short, medium, long and super long sentences in the word world. If you're word DJ, it's best to mix it up.

This became rather long and, obviously, I don't understand parallels well. Does my obsession with random grammatical structures make me a hardcore grammar nazi? Did I just become grammar Hitler?

It's true that I like to cram a lot of words into my sentences. I never learned how to write properly, so I have trouble with certain tidbits in English, including commas/semi-colons and transitions between paragraphs. I write the way I think and the way I speak --as such, my sentences tend to be pretty long. I've studied some other writer's styles in comparison, and though they seem to be shorter, more simple, their words flow smoothly and get the point across in a way that still seems interesting. I like the way certain authors write --it probably more proper and grammatically correct, but when I look at my own wordy sentences, I also feel quite content. Perhaps it's because I picture what I write just as I write it, and it might not have the same pace that people are comfortable with, but it has a pretty good beat to me.

I honestly don't know how to use short sentences, except in casual conversation. *headfloor* Most of my sentences come with a number of different clauses --and it looks cluttered, but even when I realize this, it's hard for me to break them up.

Added a new meme (a written one) as requested. >>b

Well, it's always the writer's choice what they want to do with their writing. I think it would be clearer if you mixed it up a little, but if you're dedicated to long sentences, then you're dedicated to long sentences.

I try very hard to improve my own writing. That's why I'm a bit of a grammar and structure nazi. There are authors who can pull off long sentences and it'll still sound good; however, they seem to be a rarity. Grammar is kind of my area of interest. Writing is as well, but I could actually do something work-like with grammar.

I'm convinced of writing as an art. To me, there are basic forms to the art and advanced forms to the art.

I think everyone who takes writing seriously tries to improve in their own ways. Grammar is one thing, and focusing on plot, or details, or character development are some others. The fact that it could go in so many different directions is what makes it interesting, and what makes it art.

Though I like words and writing, I don't think about it from a work-like perspective; only as a sort of serious hobby that I can take pride in.

Yes, I understand that. That's probably the more enjoyable way to go. I'm not saying I'm going to write a book, but I'm hoping my degree will take me into editing or maybe scouting- whatever they call agent work.

A writing meme? How fun. I wish I was more decisive with my OCs. I need a di, that's like my version of a coin toss. Darn, I use to have so many.

Don't you have favorites?

It's hard to have favorites. They all pretty different and I like them all. I mean I'll choose from my "online RP" characters. I also have my serious writing characters, but they're rather locked in their own stories and are archetypes of my other characters.

I may have explained this earlier, so sorry if I'm just repeating myself, but most of my characters come from an archetype I've recycled. Mikkousha is one of my OCs who's kind of spawned other OCs, so I consider him very close to an archetype, though he was originally based off an earlier one. Of my archetypes and semi-archetypes its very hard to have a favorite. To me all their lives, wants, needs and such are authentic and I want to show off all of them v_v;

Mikkousha has literal descendants and then he has character/soul descendants, though I recently wrote a descendant who'd probably be a time parallel. Probably a "look-a-like."

Nuke, Morris and Mikko are my most spoiled characters. I have the most art of them and have drawn them the most. I use to frequently use Mikko in RPs and I continually use his name in games. I've collected a lot of art of Morris, not so much of Nuke- though I've drawn him a lot and RPed him some.

Of favorites I haven't really spoiled there's Wings, Shin, a psychic I have imagined and drawn some, but haven't thought of a good ironic name yet, and Lunar. Then several important secondary characters.

Lately, I've been rather fond of a character I called Autumn in one story. Didn't really turn into an archetype until when I wrote a story with a character that was definitely a sort of spawn of Autumn's I gave the sort of "nickname" Cherry (kind of a wip while I think of a name.) I'm terribly at thinking up names, so I'll have the character concept, the personality, even how things happen in his/her life, but not have a name. I had someone help me name Wings. ^_^;;

I probably do have a favorite written archetype who would be the archetype of Wings and the other name I use for the archetype, Terran or some variation.

I'll be busy organizing my inventory. Expect slow responses. XD;