So.. I had an unexpected response to my writing which I considered narrow minded and needless to say it bothered me. So I wrote this in the midst of an elevated temperament.

But I hope all who read enjoy it, it's kinda funny how I over think things.

My best regards, dear Critic.

His explanation was: "If you look at all of the best writings in history, they are in first, or omni-person". So I accepted it as his opinion while he argued that my thoughts were invalid. Yet I must disagree. My reasoning behind this is simply because the "best" writings are nothing more then preference. Normally those that are more easily relatable. There can be no such thing as "best" in the grand scheme of things because to be the "best", such a thing requires judgement. Yet when judged by a broad panel of individuals, amongst those individuals there will be differing opinions. One panelist may take my written word to be the terrible ramblings of an imbecile. Yet another may find inspiration, a meaning so deep that it becomes a life altering philosophy.

Such makes anything regarded to as "best" highly subject to the perception of the individual, therefore rendering it as nothing more than opinion. But simply to humor you my critic I must ask. If the best already exists, that would leave no reason to write would it not? Wouldn't that be as to claim their are no original thoughts anymore? Now you see why I must disagree. The absurdity of your argument baffles me.

We all gather and perceive information in different fashions. Therefore I'm glad to have you my dear critic. You give me the insight I need to be able to reach out.
To touch the lives of more people through my writing. To those who cannot see the message written within through the fog. Writing isn't a competition. It is expression. The impression of the dynamics of the world that surrounds me. The dynamics of emotion, of pain, of loss, or gain. It is the contrast of light when surrounded by darkness. It is an extension of my being that is extracted and transmuted into language. I accept that my message will be inconceivable to some or even to many. It could also be considered the ramblings of a madman. That's perfectly acceptable to me, for you see. Like the hammer and forge my work will change with me. Inspiration fuels the flames while the steady strokes of my pen hammer these linguistic ingots into the words seen before you. Just like heat conditions steel; inspiration conditions my writing, the sources of which change constantly, thus varying the result..

Like anything in this life my dear critic, nothing can be perfect. I am not perfect and never will be. My writing is a reflection of myself, it is perfectly flawed. For it is in my flaws that I find my greatest strengths.

Thank you.

Since you really are as unique as any snowflake no one can objectively invalidate your thoughts.  Life is far more than a test administered by would be critics.  Your ownership and right of expression is unassailable and silly to argue against while ratings often say more about them than you.

Still, my harshest critics are somewhat unforgettable and have reinforced the need for quiet introspection and recognition of the vast pool we swim in.

I love the way you articulated your response!

Critics even if memorable will never take away our individuality. Allowing them to shush our creativity is to give them power over us.
This I refuse to allow.