There’s a comfort in brevity, it leaves the reader with more to think about.
`leoraigarath

Lets talk about that, cause Omri is certainly right. But it also takes reasonable courage to create in this way, think of it like having a much narrower margin for error or something of the like: less time to explain yourself or weave a pretty cushion of words to fall back on. It can be related to really good 3-minute pop song writing vs extended 15-minute pieces of progressive art-rock, with a simple question... What's harder to write, 10 average sections or 2-3 amazing ones? Poetry in extreme brevity such as this requires careful choice of the words one will be using, impact has to be made immediately.

You may notice what I have Omri a 5 rating for

He drops the full stop on the end of a most enigmatic phrase, and a final word of equal interest, so the reader is definitely left to think over a serious w-t-f afterwards... Sure it seems reasonably bizzare, but by no means is this being strange and whimsical for the sake of it. This still contains strong imagery to me, but more of an abstract situation than a proper mental image. What does this scene look like? Somehow I think there's a little more to this setting than a murky and winding river with grey-brown tussock grass steeping the banks under a decidedly mustard sky.

I don't want to comment too much on the writing or literary technique here, but would like to settle more upon the insane impact the hits with and the myriad of questions I was left with after reading:
Are they in a river, lake or the sea?
Are they in water at all, or some other liquid/abstract concept?
Compromises are usually negative or at least slightly annoying, isn't that an odd thing to be denied?
Is the ultimate compromise that on one's life?
Are the bodies dead?
Are they even people?
How can a juxtaposition be something one can find 'solace' in?

Super kudos Omri, I'll be thinking about this one for days.
Most definitely a

I am still getting used to writing critiques in the 3rd person

This is one of those things that made me suddenly go and look up the definition of a word that I already know - in this case, "juxtaposition". I think that's a neat thing, to use a word in a way that makes a person notice it enough to want to be absolutely sure that they know what it means; just understanding it vaguely from context will not work in this context.

I take this to be about two people who are dead only metaphorically. They are disengaged from life and each other and just "floating" in the world. They are perhaps a couple or else just two individuals who maybe could build something together if they would connect. I may be totally off, though.

Personally, I would change denied of compromises to perhaps simply denied compromises or, depending on where exactly you want to take it, deny compromise(s). I would also change and the solace of / juxtaposition to and the solace / of juxtaposition. Obviously that's just personal taste; I like the pause after solace better than after of, just because solace seems like the more important word.

If you wanted to (which you probably don't) I think that you could make this a little longer without losing too much feel of brevity - to me the Two floating bodies opening makes me want to hear about something that they do, rather than just description of them. For that matter, that might be why I kind of like deny compromise... it implies action on part of the bodies, that they deny rather than being denied.