Sunday, December 11, 2011

Dead Blog?

Blogimissimo de la Muerto (That's Spanish, Right?)
So, I've been thinking,

Considering. 

Pondering. 

(Sigh...)

Is this where my blog is headed?


No. I said BLOG. DEAD BLOG! Freakin' voice recognition software.

Where was I? Oh, yeah. Is it headed that way? Well, the answer is no. For one thing, any blog would look ridiculous laying around with its tongue hanging out and its junk dangling in the breeze. (Which reminds me, it's probably time to post another redhead...)

Look, the question is why I'd bother to keep up with this thing. I've been dicking around with G+, and I gotta be honest, it's some good stuff. With the unlimited posting, specific sharing with a particular tailorable audience and all that noise, it's practically a combined tumblr and blog, with substantial elements of Twitter. It's pretty seductive. But the fact is, it's just too fucking fast. Did you hear that? Too fast. It's too easy to react, to snark, to smuggify, to...chat, not write. Does that even make sense?

I suddenly feel a direct-line kinship with authors who could never get their feet under them in the digital age, the ones who used an old raggedy IBM Selectric, or Royal manual till they couldn't get parts anymore. And I more than ever "get" those who say they don't feel like they're writing if it doesn't involve a pen and paper.

Now, I'm not that much of a Luddite; I don't think it's the technology. It's the format. It just "feels" like the blog is a more thoughtful place. And, as a logical extension, just writing and holding it and polishing it until it's done is...what, "real" writing? "More real" writing? All this is headed the same direction as the "what is a writer" arguments we had in the old days. 

They always started with some version of If a writer is 'one who writes,' then this is the work of writers:


Of course, the reason that there's an argument is that there are those who would not disagree with that description and example as an accurate definition of writing, and those who don't think that simple statement is true but can't figure out what a good definition of being a "writer" might be.

An argument for another day - the point is that THIS feels more like my concept of writing than G+ does. So, I may be there more, I may be here a lot less. And when I'm writing "for real," I may not be anywhere you can find me. 

But, then, that's how writing works.

In Our Next Episode: More Deep Thought. And a redhead. Maybe two.

3 comments:

  1. Fuck fuck fuck. G+ and FB are for pikers. That isn't clear yet? Pisses me off that you're the only writer who writes only at G+ because that means I miss most of your shi^H^Htuff. The few other writers who are at G+ also still keep their blogs. I do a shitload more at my blog than at those fucking social networking places. Yeah yeah yeah, I'm there too but that shit doesn't count. Blogging may not be quite the same as banging Thompsonesque on an IBM Selectric but it's a hell of a lot more productive in a writerly sense than flinging chatty little news-snarks out into the G+ wind.

    *sigh*

    I guess it's about balancing the desire to write well and having some sort of audience, and everyone's gotta figure that out for themselves. So just as a data point, here's one who will read you more here than there.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I try to read all a youze wherever you scribble cuz I enjoy it regardless. But I know what you mean... blogging is somehow more like craft. Check out my latest on lurve. ::shameless selfpromo::

    Http://lightmotifs.wordpress.com

    ReplyDelete

Well, Don't Just Sit There -- Say Something!