Chaos Daily Essay | I am in Matt City, becoming a "forgotten" creator

I remember finding out that Matters was a text platform he recommended to me when I was chatting with my friends. At that time, I was discussing with him what kind of text and style is popular in the society, and I asked him what he thinks my style is suitable for where to post.

Chatting about these topics easily came from the fact that Taiwan’s epidemic alert was upgraded to the third level, and I was overly worried about my future income situation: worry about what to do after graduation from graduate school, worry about what else can I do if I want to be financially independent and live a postgraduate life Can it be converted into income?

As I pondered these questions, I remembered that my favorite things to do are reading and writing.

Otherwise, I'll give it a try, okay? A lot of stories start this way.

I tried to speak to my confidence, read a lot of forums that I wanted to contribute to, and finally chose the two platforms of Thought Tank and Think Forum as my targets. According to the general rules of submission, if the editor does not respond within three days, there should be no chance.

Sure enough, I chose to give up after waiting for about five days. I thought to myself: Many articles on the forum are the author's subjective "experience" about current affairs. Why is my text not favored?

Later, after a small revision of this submitted article, it became this article. I put it in the related works, and you can take a look if you are interested.

Recalling the experience of being "shot" for his writing, to be honest, there are quite a few: a research project that was shot with a text confession, and a carefully written research project was described by an anonymous reviewer as "profound research potential" but failed, and an on-campus literature award The second round of submissions was brushed off, and I briefly practiced in Philosophy New Media . As a result, when the first report was about to be reviewed and approved, it was considered at the last level:

(Description format problem) … Then there is a more serious problem. After reading the full text, I am not sure what the relationship with philosophy is. I feel like I am introducing literature and psychology.

...which makes this article an introduction to a summary of recorded speeches, which does not arouse the reader's interest in reading. If this part cannot be supplemented to highlight the readability of this report, I recommend that this article not be published.

A year ago, the stinky brat had just experienced the setback of failing to pass the plan, and also encountered the failure of the Humanities Department to find an internship, and was also busy with church work and research institutes. There was some gunpowder in the process of discussing with the editor, and he even told me at the end:

The review process is not about challenging the authors, but about improving the article. There is no need for you to tell me your thoughts or defend your proposed amendment.

What you need to do is to understand why the reviewer suggested such a fix, what the problem they saw, and then figure out how to fix, defuse, resolve the problem the reviewer pointed out.

Please complete the review process efficiently and not waste time explaining your ideas to reviewers. After all, when the article is published, the author has no chance to defend himself, but relies on the article itself to defend himself.

I ended up taking a break from my internship because I was too busy. Freshman college students see their text being "requested" to be revised for the first time, without any room for discussion.

At that time, I was shocked: it turned out that my favorite philosophy was so vulnerable in the environment of work and review, and the one that met the requirements of the reviewer and modified by me was bound to be the biggest winner.

At that time I even had deep doubts about writing, about philosophy: issues that I thought didn't need to be changed, and reasons for them were seen as justifications.

It turns out that I simply do what I want to do and write articles I think are good, but no one cares at all.

I seem to think that philosophy is too omnipotent. I don't need philosophy in the editing and reviewing process, as long as I simply fulfill the requirements; I seem to be too confident in my words to be a little conceited, and can't stand any challenge with dialogue.

This is the lesson I learned last year. I learned that even if I don’t recognize myself very often, it is still necessary to get the approval of others when it comes to work. After the brief internship experience of Philosopher Media last year and the forum submissions two or three weeks ago, the importance of it has completely emerged.

What makes me think is what is there that I can still hold on to on the premise of becoming a "job" or "being affirmed by others"? Does anyone really want to read my text?

It was against this whimsical background that Matt City was introduced by a friend, but it is indeed a friendly gathering place for writers. I slowly regained my confidence in my writing in Matt City, and I became more humble in learning, because I saw too many, too many more refined words.

I wandered in the city of Matt, forgetting the eyes of others and concentrating on the words in front of me; I forgot the unrecognized past and believed that my words were still valuable; I forgot the rhythm of the flow of time, and I spent several hours unknowingly. hours of reading here.

I'm in Matt City, becoming a "forgotten" creator.