Blog metamorphasis

While the internet has allowed us to connect, it’s vast option anxiety has kind of forced people into these little cosy corners of personal authority.

I smiled when I read that. It reminded me of something I complained about back in 1999 or so when I was putting my opinions on an html webpage before discovering blogging. I liked Amy’s thoughts, and have been reading both her and her husband for a number of years.

As Amy points out, “”Information” becomes vacuous, saleable “content”. Stuff.” in some of the blog transformations, but still, from my vantage point ( as I blog, anyway) there are blogs that are connected to the personal and the real experience of the writer. we are seeing greater commercialization, and some of that can be used to further develop the blogging, but some does prostitute the original purpose and beauty of the medium.

Can we stop that? I don’t think that would be the right question, the question being more which road will we as individual bloggers take? The road less traveled will be to continue as personal hands on crafters of our writing and our blog expressions; it will simply separate from the mainstream direction of blogging as business pursuit. We are seeing hybrids right now, but I think eventually there will be more distinction in the blogging itself and in the niche, so it will be recognizable. Blog marketing has a different purpose than blog expression, and many bloggers who have begun to monetize ( like me, with my google ads, etc) have to make decisions on their writing. I have decided that I will go for individual self expression, which means ignoring things like keyword placement writing or whatever it is that marketing bloggers are mainly interested in….

Still, I don’t think someone should be penalized for trying to make use of the market potential of their writing. If there is compensation for ones art, or ones time writing, it is going to help create a better experience for both the creator and the audience. And everything public has an audience, so let’s not be disingenuous about that.

It shouldn’t be an artificially outward imposed choice of time spent writing or getting a job in “RL” to help the family budget, or pay the internet expenses.

It all comes down to the direction and dictates of our priorities.

I thought Amy interpreted blogging quite well, the essay very worthwhile to read.

read on for that 1999 opinion of mine

I’m placing a little thought here.I’ve been considering the nature of cyberspace-what it’s good for and what the limitations are.What do you get when you are interacting with people through a computer? Why are there so many caveats? (I probably should verify the meaning of that word before I use it; well, later)

Right now,I’m thinking this: This medium is mind meeting mind-without the extraneous physical or, even emotional(if one chooses to edit that out).It is alot like the Victorian practice of letterwriting,but with a freedom and spontaneity that allows for a whole fantasy-life to be played out, if that’s what is wanted.

In some ways I would compare it to watching soap operas on TV. At first, you are very aware of the difference between what you see on the screen and real life. It seems the plots are so “out there” and then,after some time, they seem more plausible and the characters seem like they “could be real”. The final progression can end up in a place where the whole episode of the soap opera is more real than “real”. A person can end up having real worries and speak audibly to the situation “No,no,no don’t do that you dummy-can’t you see he’s just using you?”

The beauty of the internet is the possibility of meeting minds in so many different spheres and cultures from one’s own, and allowing other’s in on your own inner world-at their time and leisure.It’s a great opportunity,but it does have it’s limits. That’s my opinion at this time-and that’s why I’m really enjoying this thing right now-opinions with no immediate repercussions.I do try to be as authentic as possible,partly because that’s how I am and partly because people who know me sometimes read my stuff.
and later in 2000:

(2/18/2000) I ran across an article with the statement ,”Many users of email and chat groups tend to seek out only like-minded individuals”. If my experience so far is any indication, I think this is true; and it’s an unsettling situation. One of the things that I felt was so attractive about the net was the unsurpassed opportunity to interact with people from very different circumstances and circles than myself. To expose my own mind to different viewpoints and to express mine to people I would otherwise never encounter was a euphoric prospect. Naivité thy name is newbie.

The actual experience I have had is the trolling or baiting that simply shuts down open conversation. I expect to be closely examined and even criticised on subjects that are controversial, but when my views were used to neatly pigeonhole me in a nice closed little file, I found myself gainsayed in even the most bland and universal of subjects, which seems like a waste of everyones time. “The weather is great here” ” Oh, aren’t you patronizing and condescending to us (implied, you pompous and insensitive person)?” Does one answer, ignore, or drop out? If I had only truly patronized their views earlier, I could, tentatively, of course- for this is how people become on the net- put forth most any little tidbit. It is political correctness in its strictest, most stultifying form. Be Yourself, as long as WE agree…and we’ll flame you like you’ve never been flamed if you don’t capitulate. And so, people learn to congregate in their own constricted groups; even more so than in real life. How small and mean.

So, I implore you, dear reader, can you recognize that your fellow man is far more complex than profiles and subgroups? We may change each other, we may not, but we certainly can understand more of each other if we allow open communication; sharp, bland, sensitive, or rankling.
I thought Amy interpreted blogging quite well, the essay very worthwhile to read.

One thought on “Blog metamorphasis”

Comments are closed.