Write something inspired by what you feel

(I haven’t thought of a title for the article yet, so I won’t write it yet)

When I used deepseek recently, I really felt what "technology reshapes life" means. But there is a phenomenon that always makes me a little frustrated -

People can frankly admit that they rely on technology to be lazy, but are ashamed to face their real needs for cultural consumption.

Humans were too lazy to walk, so cars and airplanes were invented; humans were too lazy to send letters and wait for a long time for replies, so modern communication tools were invented. They are signs of progress.

The history of mankind is the history of lazy people, and laziness is the meaning of civilization itself: we have evolved from primitive people who ate raw meat and drank blood and lived from day to day, to living in air-conditioned rooms that are still cool in midsummer and enjoying delicious food at our fingertips. The purpose of development is to make humans "qualified to be lazy."

It is human nature to pursue convenience, comfort and ease.

Admitting that they wish their mobile phones were more convenient to use, or their cars were more comfortable to ride in, or that they could rave about delicious food without causing any psychological burden.

Complaints about "the high-speed rail is too fast and I don't have enough time to appreciate the scenery along the way" generally only occur in one situation: teachers ask primary school students to write essays that are whining and insincere.

I remember that when I was in primary school, our Chinese teacher asked us to write a short essay based on a question. The theme was "Since modern communication methods are so convenient, do we no longer need to write letters?"

According to the teacher's requirements, I quoted from classics, guessed the questioner's thinking, explained the cultural connotations carried in the letter, and used various parallel sentences and metaphors to prove: why cold e-mails cannot replace paper letters, and why instant communication methods are "too fast" to carry silent warmth.

That day, I was the student with the best answers in the class. I stood up and was praised by the teacher, enjoying the admiring gazes of my classmates.

But today, if I were to answer this question again, I would only say:

"You can write a letter, put a stamp on it and have the post office send it if you want. It's up to you. I won't be that boring anyway!"

More than ten years later, sitting in front of the screen, enjoying the achievements and convenience of modern civilization, without the pressure of schoolwork and the gaze of teachers, no longer needing to guess the intentions of the test setters or climb to get high scores, I can finally feel at ease to admit my "laziness" and recognize the greatness of technological progress.

This may also reflect the development of a certain era - when I was a child, people were full of distrust of "technological progress" and "postmodernism".

At that time, science fiction movies and animations always depicted a dark future brought about by technology: pollution everywhere, the demise of traditional culture, and the rebellion of artificial intelligence...

It took us many years to finally face up to the convenience brought by technological progress, and our insecurity about technology has gradually dissipated in the beauty brought by technological progress.

Today, we don’t need to feel ashamed when we praise the user-friendly design of smartphones or marvel at the sophisticated algorithms of autonomous driving.

"Yes, I am lazy. I just want something more convenient and faster, and a more comfortable experience."

Unfortunately, this recognition of the "convenience brought by technological progress" has not been extended to cultural products at the same time.

Most people have not yet realized that the progress of cultural products and the progress of technological products follow the same path.

Once faced with cultural products, novels, comics, animations, games and movies, society seems to have returned to its old ways: wanting a smoother narrative rhythm, more precise emotional highlights, and more considerate fragmented reading design - these optimization demands are completely the same as technical products, but they need to be concealed.

This may stem from a kind of social shame - admitting that you like cultural products that pursue intensive emotional and sensory stimulation and are cleverly designed will be considered a manifestation of low aesthetics and lack of appreciation.

This also makes people subconsciously ignore how much effort the creators of popular culture products put in and the great efforts they make to meet customer needs. Just like the actual machine demonstration played on the big screen by the "Black Myth: Wukong" team at the Cologne Expo, the effect of the tiger vanguard's hair brushing against the moonlight was the result of 2,000 hours of motion capture debugging.

For technological products, user demands are reasonable. But for cultural products, real and objective user demands are drowned out by social shame, leading to double standards and aesthetic bullying.

I used to see hundreds of companies’ product ideas in PPTs at investment companies. They described “user portraits”, explained what the “competitive barriers” and “core advantages” of their products were, and tried to prove that their projects had commercial prospects. These companies included e-commerce, dental hospitals, and offline stores, but their product ideas were the same. It was their efforts that made our lives better.

As I became more involved in online writing and my horizons broadened, I discovered that cultural products also follow the same pattern.

Those game makers, those writers of best-selling novels and online literature, those cartoonists and animation creators, tens of thousands of creators have worked hard, racked their brains, and used all their wisdom and technical means to study flow, explore human psychological characteristics, retain the most effective preparations, reduce people's energy, and improve comfort during product use - just as transportation replaced human feet and mobile phones replaced letters to become the new communication tool.

This creates a rather ironic phenomenon:

In technology products, the more you pursue convenience, the more you pursue comfort in user experience, and the more accurately you meet customer pain points, the more praise you will receive.

But for creators of cultural products who have put in the same amount of effort, the standard has suddenly changed. They are clearly making the same efforts, but the harder they work, the more they are considered to be running counter to "excellence". The harder they work to improve the user experience and attract as many people as possible, the more they are considered inferior, and the more they are suppressed by the so-called "highbrow".

Their hard work and efforts are sneered at in the obvious double standards. We enjoy the modern life built by commodities, but we put up a moral arch for cultural creations that are also commodities.

This is why I hope that online writers who have achieved certain achievements and are creating their own works rather than working for a studio will muster up the courage to call themselves “writers” rather than “writers”.

The latest novel is published first on Liu9shuba!

Are there levels such as “Lv3 author” and “Lv4 author” on Qidian.com?

Doesn't exist! The correct names are "lv3 writer" and "lv4 writer".

You may only need one twentieth of my average subscription to join the local "Online Writers Association" and wear this title legitimately. This is a title recognized by the platform and society. Please don't take it for granted and feel unworthy of it.

Stand up straight, happiness is not lower than heaviness, and work of art is not more noble than commodity.

Modern human life is made up of commodities rather than works of art. When you use a refrigerator, ride in a car, turn on your computer, and see this paragraph I wrote on your mobile phone/computer, you are enjoying the convenience brought by commodities.

I am not saying this to prove that those commercialized cultural products have in turn suppressed "classic literature" and "art films". What I oppose is the unfair way of comparison. Different tracks should not be simply compared. Even if a comparison must be made, it should be more objective and fair, and should not be done with a condescending attitude and only use evaluation criteria that are obviously more favorable to the latter. Criticizing 100-meter runners for not having the same endurance as marathon runners is a groundless accusation. When comparing things in field A with things in field B, only using the standards of field A is a typical unfairness.

A refrigerator is not inferior to blue and white porcelain just because it is practical.

After all, true progress in civilization has never come from crushing the bread in other people's hands to raise one's own wine glass.

(End of this chapter)