Regardless of the type of text, formal or informal, fiction or non-fiction, professional or amateur, vulgar or elegant, it seems that people always expect to see a thematic elevation of the text content at the end, whether appropriate or not.
For example, in an article about intangible cultural heritage, the conclusion often mentions cultural confidence. This is certainly understandable and seems to be a matter of course. However, for some articles, the ideas they express are not worthy of a thematic elevation, or the content they want to convey is sufficient to benefit readers. Applying the writing paradigm of elevating the conclusion to such articles would be awkward, at least in my opinion.
Unfortunately, most people do not think so. In such an article, the author may receive suggestions such as "you can organize the language more logically" and very likely "you can elevate the conclusion." If the author really does this and publishes the article, the feedback received may also include praise such as "great conclusion, well done!"
I am not a literature major and I do not have much research on the Chinese language, so I cannot provide any good insights on whether the technique of "sublimation" can be universally applied. However, as a reader, or more broadly, as a recipient and judge of information, because the term "article" mentioned earlier can actually be replaced with "podcast," "film," "video," or other media, some unfounded sublimation does indeed affect the experience.
Nowadays, most people who write articles and produce podcasts have a basic level of writing skills that surpasses most people, but they are mostly amateurs like me. Among the video bloggers in the public eye, there are also very few with strong writing skills. Many of them rely solely on talent, inspiration, and daily accumulation to write scripts. Perhaps they do not have much in-depth thinking about writing articles.
Of course, I am not saying that elevating the conclusion is a sign of "inability to write articles." I just happened to read a comment praising the sublimation content of a video blogger's video one day, and I felt that the sublimation was really awkward, so I started thinking about it. I believe that authors with excellent writing skills will not produce content that feels awkward.
In other words, the phenomenon I have observed is that many amateurs, including myself, love to elevate the conclusion of the text, treating this technique as a necessary template to use. However, we often use it incorrectly and write it poorly, which affects the overall impression of the work.
I think people are enthusiastic about sublimation because they pursue the quality of the work. According to the Peak-End Rule, the reading experience of a work depends mainly on the most exciting part in the middle and the ending. If the ending is too plain, it seems to overshadow the highlights before. Elementary school teachers say that compositions should have a "strong beginning and a strong ending," probably for this reason. For general articles, especially those that do not originate from the author's own thoughts and are written just to complete a task, they do not have remarkable viewpoints or descriptions, so they can only put a seemingly exciting paragraph at the end that resonates with readers, at least not making readers underestimate the author's writing skills.
From this perspective, the fundamental reason why many people like to sublimate without cause is impure writing purposes and unpolished writing skills.
The so-called impure writing purposes refer to authors who write articles not to express their own viewpoints. These authors may be completing a task, participating in a themed essay competition, or taking a language exam. However, all these types of writing are passive, and even active writing still lacks purity of purpose. I am a moderator on a Chinese wiki in the back room. It is a collaborative, shared worldview online novel platform. Most people on the site are around 17 years old. Although we have age restrictions, there are still many middle school and high school students, and even elementary school students who have built a community for creative writing. Many works on the wiki lack depth, which is not a problem for popular online literature, but many works have significant problems in conception and plot arrangement. Their purpose of writing may be out of love or to gain fame within the community, but regardless of the reason, they rarely have genuine feelings about what they write, and they just want their works to be liked and recognized by more people. Because of this purpose, they rarely truly polish their writing skills and pursue "high productivity" and "high scores."
The examples I mentioned are the ones I have observed the most and felt the most deeply. In fact, there are many cases where the purpose of writing is not pure, such as writing for the sake of creation, for fans, or for popularity, rather than writing for ideas or beliefs. These cases can be found in abundance on self-media platforms. For example, after the popularity of "Zoo Rules Strange Tales," there was an explosion of various cliché works that did not capture the essence of the rules. After the popularity of a humorous Nestlé commercial, there were various "funny" short videos made by piecing together clips from Sherlock Holmes and Doraemon animations. I have also created some low-quality works because I liked a certain trend.
I am not criticizing these authors because many of the works they create are worth reading and have entertainment value or inspirational significance. Both the authors and readers can derive value from them. However, the quality of these works varies, and they cannot be compared to serious articles.
The so-called unpolished writing skills refer to authors who do not understand when to sublimate, whether it is necessary to sublimate, and how to sublimate. I dare not say that I have a clear answer to these questions, but I have indeed thought about them when writing articles. I believe that if the theme of the writing is strongly related to a larger theme, appropriate sublimation can connect the smaller theme to the larger theme and deepen readers' understanding of the smaller theme. In other words, although the purpose of sublimation is to apply the Peak-End Rule and enhance the reading experience, the basic function of explaining viewpoints is essential. If a paragraph does not help readers understand the author's thoughts, there is no need to write it.
As for sublimation, in my opinion, it is a summary and connection with embellishments and rhetorical devices. The summary is an aggregation of previous viewpoints, and the connection is related to relevant themes. In other words, sublimation should be highly relevant to the overall content and a higher-level theme. The relationship between "intangible cultural heritage" and "cultural confidence" mentioned earlier is an appropriate form of sublimation. Such articles often mention the origin, historical stories, production techniques, development process, domestic and international influence, status, and significance of a certain intangible cultural heritage, all of which reflect the culture of a country from ancient times to modern times and can be summarized as "culture." The theme of "culture" is related to the larger theme of "cultural confidence" and can be linked to the significance of identifying with and inheriting culture and cultural confidence. This theme can also be further linked to higher-level themes such as national sentiment and patriotism.
Once the summary and connection are completed, the purpose of helping readers understand the author's thoughts is achieved. Sublimation still needs to fulfill its role as the ending, which relies on the author's own writing skills.
Writing up to this point, I seem to have a clear understanding of what sublimation is, why it is necessary, and how to do it. However, to be honest, the purpose of writing this article is not for that. I still have a question that I haven't answered, which is: Is sublimation necessary?
Let me use the example of intangible cultural heritage again. If I write an article about iron flower craftsmanship, can't I just describe the breathtaking iron flowers and the exquisite skills of the performers? If I portray these aspects to the extreme, allowing people who have never seen iron flowers to feel the beauty of them as if they were there, arousing people's enthusiasm and awareness of intangible cultural heritage, wouldn't that be enough? Do I really have to mention a larger theme at the end? If I don't, how will it affect the reading experience of the readers? Will it hinder their understanding of the message I want to convey?
You might say that sublimation is naturally better, but what is the reason for doing so? Why is it better? Is it because the article is related to a larger theme? But why is a larger theme better? If that's the case, why can't I directly write about the larger theme instead of linking the smaller theme to it?
If I use the example of intangible cultural heritage again, it won't be very convincing. So let me give an example from a novel. Edogawa Ranpo wrote a short story called "The Caterpillar," which tells the story of a soldier's wife who continues to care for her husband after he loses all four limbs in a war. However, she gradually develops a strange affection for her husband and uses him as a tool to vent her desires. In the end, she even cannot stand any human gaze in her husband's eyes and almost loses her sanity, almost harming her husband. In the final scene, the husband escapes and throws himself into an old well, wriggling his body like a caterpillar before falling to the ground.
In this imagination, the caterpillar and the branch both have symbolic meanings, and the event of the branch breaking also has a symbolic meaning if you carefully savor it. Edogawa Ranpo is very good at such gentle yet thought-provoking endings. Such endings summarize the entire story, emphasize the ideas the author wants to convey, but do not link to a higher-level theme.
For the same story, if written by someone else, especially an amateur like me, the ending might not be like that. It is very likely to bring up topics such as the plight of women or the dignity of disabled people. However, in fact, this article, even without sublimation, triggers related thoughts and forcibly sublimating it not only becomes awkward but also seems redundant. It is more like adding something unnecessary rather than a strong ending.
Due to the lack of better ideas, sublimation at the end seems to be a universally recognized "good" writing technique, so most people do it, which can also add a golden touch to their articles that lack original thoughts. Even many people, including myself, may not have thought of other ways to conclude the entire article besides sublimation.
However, after writing so much, have I come up with other methods?