To the book friends of 'I was kicked by the time roundabout' and ''
Yesterday I saw some book friends arguing about which of the two books "Back to 1977" and "I Was Kicked by Time" is better.
This of course shows that they value and care about my work.
So no matter which one they each like, I'm happy.
But I have to say that I actually think that such a comparison is not very necessary.
Although both books are reborn in the city, apart from the different eras in which they take place, the two books are completely different in terms of rebirth methods, story core, plot context, settings, and selling points.
They are not the same type of novels, so there is no way to compare them.
The only similarity is that because it is not a routine and cool novel, it encountered many doubts during the creation process.
Just like when I wrote "Return to 1977", many people questioned the slow pace, the necessity of side stories, the unnecessary experience before rebirth, the setting of the protagonist, and even the incorrect views of the article.
[By the way, the best app for reading and listening to books is Yeguo Reading, www. Install the latest version. 】
Now, on the other hand, some people are also questioning the fast pace of "I Was Kicked by Time", questioning the flaws of the protagonist, insufficient details, and why it is different from "Return to 1977"...
And I believe that it is precisely these differences that allow the work to express its unique meaning and value, and it is also the need for the expression of the work.
(First of all, let me state that what follows is not a complaint, I am just talking about my own experience)
In fact, after the performance of "Return to 1977" was just about to improve, but it was removed from the shelves by Qidian, I really realized the difficulty of innovation.
Although I have always been mentally prepared for the difficulties faced by this choice.
But in the past, I only thought that the difficulty of innovation only existed in the difficulty of creation, the time and effort required to write articles several times that of conventional articles, and the difficulty in getting immediate returns for my efforts.
But now I realize that I actually wanted to keep it simple.
Our social environment and our online writing system do not encourage innovation at all.
When businesses want money, they naturally want traffic, speed, large quantities, excitement, exaggeration, eye-catching, and a wide audience...
The recommendation and traffic drainage mechanisms are all determined by this.
The same goes for readers, who only read books to watch the fun.
Not many people are willing to really pay attention to the core expression of an article.
Many people even instinctively attack everything in life that is different from what they imagined.
As long as what you write is different from what they imagined, it doesn't matter whether it's good or bad.
They insult you as if they are full of hatred, but they are not responsible for their words anyway.
This is no longer a matter of not supporting it, but a matter of not tolerating the existence of "heresy" at all.
Regarding this, I only know that there were many such extreme cases in a special historical period.
If I had to give a real-life example, I'm afraid it would be very similar to the popular waste youth and the Swedish environmental princess.
Although most people claim that the model is single and they want to read innovative articles, do they really need innovation?
I’m afraid that for both businesses and most readers, “innovation” is just a slogan and superficial form.
What they are essentially chasing is the upgrading and refreshing mode that only requires a little "brainstorming".
But they never consider the major flaws in the fixed pattern and expression of this routine, and how to change it.
They also gave a narrow definition to Internet articles.
But they don’t understand that the word “Internet article” is just an expression of the way articles are spread.
In this case, if we say, there is still a glimmer of hope that truly innovative works can be born and survive.
I'm afraid I just have to wait quietly, persevere day after day, and rely on good works to retain readers' word-of-mouth fermentation purely by chance.
Unfortunately, the "strong wind" that attacks indiscriminately without warning may capsize your entire boat once it passes.
Even this last chance depends on a lot of luck.
Now "Return to 1977" is like this, and can only be seen in the qq reading APP.
Although the boat did not completely capsize, the "starting point" oar was lost.
Therefore, I can only publish a new article "I Was Kicked by Time" at the starting point, hoping to lean on this new ship and move forward against the old ship.
This is the pitiful thing about innovation. Facts have proven that the existence of routine writing and copycat writing is the right way to make profits from online writing.
Short, flat and quick brutality is the way to go.
As for me, it's too late to regret.
But fortunately, I am still thinking broadly, and although I am not as capable as I am, I am still resisting.
So I would like to thank all the book friends who have been supporting me with genuine subscriptions on Qidian and QQ Reading App.
You have given the most and are full of understanding.
In sharp contrast to those dirty people who spend nothing but love to criticize.
Without you, I might not have been able to carry on. You are all my motivation for coding. (To be continued)