Return To 1977: Report to book friends of “I Was Kicked by Time” and “Return to 1977”

lnmao.org, the fastest update to return to the latest chapter of 1977!

Yesterday I saw some book friends arguing about which of the two books, Return to 1977 and I Was Kicked by Time, was better.

This certainly 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 they are both reborn cities, the two books are completely different in terms of rebirth methods, story core, plot context, settings, and selling points, apart from taking place in different eras.

They are not the same type of novel, so there is no way to compare them.

The only similarity is that because it is not a routine and cool novel, both of them 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.

Now, on the other hand, some people are also questioning the fast pace of my time spin, questioning the protagonist’s flaws, questioning the lack of details, and questioning how it is different from returning 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 returning to 1977, my performance was just about to improve, but it was delisted from the starting point, and 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 lies only in the difficulty of creation, which takes several times the time and energy to write a conventional article, and the difficulty in getting immediate rewards for your efforts.

But now I realize that I actually wanted to keep things 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.

Readers only watch the excitement.

Few 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 are just as abusive as if they were filled with hatred, and they are not responsible for their remarks anyway.

This is no longer a matter of not supporting it, but a matter of not tolerating the existence of "heresy" at all.

In this regard, 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 “innovation” is just a slogan and a superficial form for both businesses and most readers.

What they are essentially chasing is the upgrading of the cool writing model that only requires a little "imagination".

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 online writing.

But I don’t understand that the word “Internet article” is just an expression of the way articles are spread.

In this case, if we say that there is still a glimmer of hope for truly innovative works to be born and survive.

I’m afraid I just have to wait quietly, persevere day after day, and rely on the word-of-mouth fermentation of good works to retain readers purely by chance.

Unfortunately, the "strong wind" that attacks indiscriminately without warning may overturn your entire boat.

Even this last chance depends on a lot of luck.

This is how it is now back to 1977, which can only be seen in the qq reading app.

Although the boat did not completely capsize, the "starting point" oar was lost.

So I can only post a new article at the starting point. I am being kicked back by time, 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 copywriting is the right way to make profits from online writing.

Short, fast and rough 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 be able to hold on anymore. You are all my motivation for coding