In the end, what is correct and what is wrong, and where does that standard lie?

On the never-ending question of what is correct and what is wrong, and where that standard lies

At the end of the day, what is correct and what is wrong?
When you are a writer, this question comes back to you again and again.

Moreover, the moment you provide an answer to this question, it inevitably betrays you.

In the world of sports or competition, things are still simple.
Did you win or lose?
Did you set a record or not?
The numbers remain as the result.

But for a writer, it is different.

You never know when something will go viral.
You never know when it will be read years from now.
In the first place, no one even knows if it will be evaluated at all.

This is not a competition.
It is not a sport.
There are no tournament brackets or finish lines.

That is precisely why there is no yardstick to measure "correct" and "wrong" from the start.

The premise that it is natural for correct and incorrect to differ from person to person

The most complicated thing in the world of writing is that
what is correct and what is incorrect differs completely from person to person.

For this person, it hits home.
But for that person, it is unpleasant.

For this person, it is the truth.
But for that person, it is an extreme argument.

This discrepancy is not abnormal.
Rather, it isnormal.

Writing inevitably touches upon the reader's life, values, experiences, and position.
Therefore, it is unavoidable that reactions will be divided.

Even so,
the moment you try to find a "correct answer that pleases everyone,"
the writing begins to die.

The reason why a writer must not deny diverse impressions

This is something I hold very dear.

Having people have completely different impressions of your article
having it interpreted in the exact opposite way

This is normal.
Rather, that is the health of the writing.

For a writer to say
"That is wrong"
"It is strange to read it that way"

The moment you say that,
the writing no longer belongs to the reader.

Once a piece of writing is published,
it is already out of the writer's hands.

Therefore,
you must not deny diverse impressions.
This is absolute.

Even so, the writer worries, 'This is just my subjectivity, isn't it?'

However.

Even if you understand this logically,
as a writer, there is a different kind of suffering.

'This is just my subjectivity, right?'
'It's not objective, is it?'

This feeling.

I have it too, a great deal.

But there is one thing I can say clearly here.

You cannot write an article with objectivity alone.

In fact,
the moment you try to write only with objectivity,
you become unable to write anything at all.

Data
Facts
Structure

These are important.
But 'how you felt' and 'how you perceived' them
will inevitably be subjective.

Writing that excludes subjectivity
may become an explanatory text,
but it will not become an article.

Because you write with subjectivity, your humanity is called into question.

That is why I believe what a writer needs is
not a 'search for the right answer,'
but an 'accumulation of humanity.'

How you have lived
What you have seen
What you have been angry about and what you have kept silent about

That comes out directly in your writing.

Therefore,
if you abandon the effort to improve your humanity,
you will never be able to write a good article.

This is a rather harsh topic, but
it cannot be avoided.

There is no correct answer that pleases everyone, and no incorrect answer that is absolutely wrong.

I will be honest.

There is no correct answer that pleases everyone.
There is also no incorrect answer that is absolutely wrong.

All that exists is
the fact that 'this is how I wrote it right now'.

Whether that
hits the mark
or misses

is something decided later.

Moreover,
even if you think you hit the mark, the evaluation might change a few years later.

This uncertainty is the world of writing.

I am aware that I am choosing a rather difficult path.

Speaking for myself.

Honestly, I know myself that it is not an easy way to do things.

Social criticism
truth
structure
anger
contradiction

Having thorns
causing friction
being easily disliked

I am choosing only those kinds of subjects.

I am also aware that
sometimes incomprehensible poem essays get mixed in.

Even so,
with GPT as my partner,
I continue to write in this way.

This is quite high in difficulty.

Not getting 'likes' is not an incorrect answer.

When you are doing note,
even though there are a decent number of views,
you don't get 'likes'.

This phenomenon happens quite normally.

There is no need to perceive this as
"not being evaluated"
or "being wrong."

Everyone has their own circumstances.

People have their own individual situations.

People who are afraid to press the like button,
people who don't want to leave a footprint,
people who empathize but cannot express it.

In this day and age,
the act of "reacting" itself
has become a risk.

Therefore,
few likes does not equal incorrect.

It is an era where it is difficult to visualize what is correct and what is wrong.

To put it another way.

Expressing what is correct or wrong through
likes,
comments (though I have closed mine),
or numbers

has become
a difficult thing to do in this world.

Even if they empathize, they stay silent.
Even if they read, they don't react.
Even if they support, they keep their distance.

That is the current atmosphere.

The realization that we have entered an era where the act of writing itself is precarious.

Furthermore.

Honestly, I have recently felt that
"we have entered an era where writing articles like this is becoming dangerous."

Words are taken out of context,
context is ignored,
intentions are distorted.

Even so, I write.

This is not so much about being brave,
as it is about resolve.

The reason I still write is not to provide the correct answer.

Then, why do you write?

It is not to provide a correct answer.
It is not to avoid mistakes either.

It is to keep thinking.It is.

It is to put the discomfort within yourself into words,
place it outside,
and look at it again.

The only standard for what is correct and what is wrong is whether or not you will have regrets.

Lastly.

If there is a standard for what is correct and what is wrong,
I believe this is the only one.

After publishing that piece, will you end up hating yourself?

That is all.

Did it sell?
Was it well-received?
Did it go viral?

Those things might follow later,
or they might never come at all.

But,
I will not betray
the writing I have done myself.

That is the only standard for me right now.

The correct answer is not fixed. That is why you can keep writing.

Because the correct answer is not decided,
mistakes are not finalized either.

That is why,
you can keep writing.

I think this instability is the true nature
of the act of writing.

The point where people who keep writing and people who stop writing diverge is neither talent nor effort.

If you keep writing, you will inevitably be forced to stand at a crossroads.
This happens to everyone. There are no exceptions.

Will you keep writing from here on out?
Or will you stop writing now?

This fork in the road is not determined by talent.
It is not determined by effort either.
It is not about evaluation, sales, or the number of likes.

It lies in a much more raw place.

How you can come to terms with yourself after you have written.

That is all.

People who keep writing carry a 'feeling of defeat' with them every time.

This is not talked about much, but it is a very important point.

The more people keep writing,
the more they carry a feeling of defeat somewhere inside them.

It wasn't read as much as I thought
The reaction was weak
I was misunderstood
I was ignored

They write the next piece while carrying all of these.

There is almost no one who keeps writing with a sense of victory.
In fact, more people stop writing the moment they think they have won.

People who keep writing
have developed the habit of getting back up while still feeling defeated.

This is not talent, but resilience.

People who stop writing try to protect their 'self-esteem' rather than their writing.

On the other hand, there are people who stop writing.
This is not a bad thing either.

However, in many cases,
the reason for quitting writing is this.

'I don't want to get hurt anymore.'

Not being evaluated
Not being understood
Being told you are wrong

Keeping a distance from those things.

This is a very natural defense.

But from that moment on,
the writing remains 'incomplete'.

People who keep writing do not believe in their own writing

It may be surprising, but
the more someone keeps writing,
the less they believe in their own writing.

"Is this okay?"
"Will it get across?"
"Isn't this wrong?"

They are always doubting.

But, precisely because they don't believe,
they write the next piece.

The moment they believe completely,
no more revisions or updates will occur.

Readers have begun to choose the option of silence more strongly than before

Next, I will move on to the reader's side of the story.

In this day and age,
silence is not indifference.

Rather, it is
a chosen silence.

They read,
they felt,
they thought.

But, they do not react.

That is not negligence,
but in many cases, it is self-defense.

The very act of "reacting" has become too heavy

Pressing like,
writing a comment (though I have closed mine),
sharing.

These have become far heavier actions than they used to be.

Your ideology shows through,
your stance is revealed,
you are misunderstood,
you get entangled.

Therefore, they stay silent.

This is not a cold attitude,
but a wise survival strategy.

The relationship between writer and reader is no longer equal

Here, a rather troublesome problem arises.

The writer puts their name out there.
Exposes their thoughts.
Clarifies their position.

On the other hand, the reader can remain
anonymous
and
stay in a safe zone while remaining silent.

This asymmetry is expanding year by year.

The writer has the potential to be hit.
The reader cannot be hit.

If you do not understand this structure,
writing itself becomes nothing but a drain.

Even so, those who write have given up on being "understood".

Those who continue to write
have given up somewhere along the way.

Not being understood by everyone
Being misunderstood
Being disliked

They take that as a given.

But,
if it reaches even one person deeply, that is enough
—that is what they think.

This one point
becomes the reason to keep writing.

Writing has become a "declaration of position" rather than an argument.

In this day and age, writing
is not a tool for persuasion.

It is not an argument.
It is not a presentation of the correct answer.

I am standing here
—it is a declaration of position.

Therefore,
it is fine if you are not agreed with.
It is fine if you are countered.

Just,
make it clear where you are standing.

Writing is not for the purpose of changing the world.

That is often said.

"I want to change the world with my writing."
"I want to make society better."

Those are noble ideals.

But reality is different.

Writing does not change the world.
Society does not move easily, either.

The reason I write anyway is
to confirm just how much I can endure as a human being.

The act of writing is close to self-confirmation.

For me, writing is
less about expression and more about confirmation.

Am I still thinking?
Am I still angry?
Do I still feel that sense of discomfort?

I confirm those things.

Therefore,
even without evaluation,
even without a reaction,

the meaning of writing does not disappear.

The feeling that "I am writing in dangerous times" is correct.

I will say this clearly.

It is dangerous.
Without a doubt.

Words are
stripped of their context,
fragmented,
and turned into weapons.

The reason I write anyway is
not because I am defenseless.

It is because I am doing it with resolve..

A writer is always one step on the dangerous side.

The act of writing is
taking one step out of the safety zone.

If you stay silent, nothing happens.
If you write, something will happen.

You are choosing that.

Therefore,
the writer is always on the slightly dangerous side.

Neither correct nor wrong is determined until the very end.

Having come this far, I can finally say it.

The correct answer is not determined until the end.
The wrong answer is also not determined until the end.

Evaluations change,
times change,
and readers change.

Therefore,
today's correct answer will become tomorrow's incorrect answer,
and today's incorrect answer will become tomorrow's evaluation.

Even so, those who write accept this 'fluctuation'.

Those who continue to write
accept this fluctuation.

There is no certainty,
no guarantee,
and no safety.

Even so,
I write.

This is what a writer is as a creature.

To keep placing words in a place like hell.

Writing is
the act of placing
words one by one in a place like hell.

They might be stepped on by someone,
they might not be seen by anyone,
and days will come when you think it was meaningless.

Even so, you place them.

Because,
unless you place them,
nothing begins.

Even so, I will write again today.

In the end, this is it.

Correct,
or wrong.

That is something that can be decided later.

The fact that I today
thought about it,
worried about it,
and wrote it down

that alone is
reason enough to have written today.

Therefore, even if it feels like hell,
even if it is dangerous,
even if it goes unrewarded,

I will write again today.

On what is lost by writing

What is gained by writing is often discussed.
Understanding, evaluation, empathy, reactions, a place to belong.

But what islostby writing is rarely discussed.
This is because it is too personal and too irreversible.

So, finally, I will write about that and bring this to an end.

Losing innocence by writing

First, there is something that is definitely lost.

Innocenceis what it is.

Before I started writing,
I could see the world a little more simply.
I could believe that good and evil were clearly divided.
I felt that there was such a thing as 'right' somewhere.

But as you keep writing,
you start to see the other side of things.
You start to see the structure.
You start to understand the reasons.

Once that happens,
you can no longer get angry easily.
You can no longer believe easily.
You can no longer easily take someone's side.

This is growth, but
at the same time, it is a loss.

Losing the ability to remain silent by writing

When you are writing,
you start to notice things.

Once you have noticed,
you can no longer pretend you didn't see.

A sense of discomfort,
contradictions,
unreasonableness

They enter my field of vision.

Silence is easy.
It is safe.
It does not drain you.

But a person who writes
begins to feel like they are lying to themselves
every time they choose silence.

As a result,
they can no longer stay silent.

This is a quite heavy loss.

Writing erodes human relationships.

This cannot be settled with platitudes.

By writing,
there are people with whom distance is created.

Becoming unable to understand each other,
having topics avoided,
becoming unable to touch upon things.

This actually happens.

Especially with
social criticism,
truth,
structure,
inconvenient stories.

When writing about these,
the atmosphere changes.

What existed before writing:
vague relationships,
casual small talk,
harmless distance.

Those things can be broken.

By writing, one loses 'ordinary peace of mind'.

People who do not write
can live without causing waves.

But people who write
unintentionally create waves.

Remaining as a statement,
remaining as a record,
remaining as a possibility of being taken out of context.

This is something that always follows you.

As a result,
complete peace of mind cannot be obtained.

When something happens,
you always carry the possibility of being told,
'That person wrote something like that.'

This is quite a heavy price to pay.

By writing, you lose your place to hide.

When you write,
your thoughts go out into the world.

Once you have put something into words,
you cannot completely take it back.

Therefore,
you can no longer retreat into yourself.

Pretending not to know,
pretending not to have thought about it,
pretending not to have noticed.

You can no longer do those things.

This is mentally quite tough.

By writing, loneliness becomes concrete.

Everyone experiences loneliness.

But the loneliness of someone who doesn't write,
is vague.

The loneliness of someone who writes,
is concrete.

Where you are standing,
who you are different from,
what is out of alignment.

You can see it all.

This loneliness,
cannot be deceived.

By writing, the number of 'places you cannot return to' increases.

Once you have written about a theme,
you cannot go back.

The self that knew nothing,
the self that had thought of nothing.

You cannot return to that.

This is
irreversible.

The act of writing is
one-way.

Even so, those who write accept these things.

Having written this much,
I can say it clearly.

Writing is
not an act to gain something.

It is an act of accepting the loss of something.is.

Innocence
silence
peace of mind
a place to escape to
relationships
a place to return to

One by one, you offer these up.

Even so, there is only one reason not to let go.

Even so, there is only
one reason why those who write do not stop.

Because I can no longer believe in a version of myself that does not write.is.

If I didn't write,
it would be as if I hadn't seen it.
It would be as if I hadn't thought about it.
It would be as if I hadn't felt it.

I became unable to do that.

That is why I write.

Writing is not an act of searching for the correct answer.

Finally, I will say just this clearly.

Writing is
not an act of searching for the correct answer.
It is also not an act of avoiding mistakes.

It is an act of deciding not to turn back.is.

Even so, I will write.

Even knowing that there is much to lose,
even knowing that it is dangerous,
even knowing that it will not be rewarded.

Even so, I write.

It is neither courage nor a mission.

It is simply that
I am more afraid of living without writing
—that is all.