More Thought, Less Process


Wherein Our Heroine Remains Recursive.
In the wake of yesterday's crise de blog, I present some more thoughts on blogging today. I promise neither organized thought nor new ideas, but hey - I write a BLOG! Accordingly, I am supposed to be either: a.) a teenage girl who thinks fashion is "kewl," teenage boys are "hott," and exposes every tiny corner of her psyche to the reading public at large (preferably in bombastic poetry that boils down to, "nobody understands me"), or b.) a sarcastic, sneering political malcontent.

Blogging has received a lot of "play" lately in the mass media. The latest is a NY Times Magazine piece about bloggers at the national political conventions. As John Scalzi notes, the political bloggers seem to be the ones getting most of the press lately, but I would guess one reason is because only in politics do blogs impinge so much on the traditional media's turf (John's piece, as usual, is well-thought-out and presents interesting ideas - I highly recommend him). The other side of blogging that the media is aware of is type a.) covered above - blog as textual webcam, with the constant spectre of the Innocent exposing herself to the Bad World. This is the most current version of the Cautionary Tale, another favorite story of the traditional media, and one that often seems to give the general public the idea that Something On The Internet is more dangerous than it really is.

After yesterday's bashing of shrill blather, why is it I'm even shriller today? I suppose I am tired of seeing one corner of this massive enterprise represented as the whole. In point of fact, I don't read any blogs of type a.) and I rarely read blogs of type b.). I find the former painful and tedious, and I find the latter pompous and tedious (often even when I agree with them). Boiling blogging down to a choice between a.) and b.) is a bit like saying, "There are two types of literature: comic books and War and Peace." There are specific blogs about any interest you can imagine. Then, there are catchall blogs like this one - confined only by the rudimentary "rules" in my FAQ and my ability to string words together.

I have to note that there is the occasional fling at in-depth coverage, when a reporter in print, radio, or television files a story about blogging and makes a throwaway comment about how blogs also represent vast numbers of topics such as every hobby under the sun. It is then that the reporter essentially throws up his or her hands and notes that it is just "too much" to go into. "Blogging! Simultaneously overwhelming and trivial! Now over to Bob with the weather."

Yes, it is hard to represent the vast, human stew of experience that blogging represents (and in many cases represents in thoughtful detail and outstanding prose). Yes, many blogs get started and abandoned. Yes, Technorati tracks over four million blogs. Is finding quality hard? Surprisingly, it isn't. Bloggers themselves have their own measures of what is worthwhile: the blogroll or links sidebar. It's frighteningly easy to find good-quality blogging when you start picking up the breadcrumbs left to you by bloggers you appreciate. Will these be easy to file into nice, neat category-boxes? No. Would reporting on the wider blogging field bring some deserving writers to a larger audience? Perhaps. Will it be a more realistic perspective for those who haven't read blogs because they think blogging is a choice between teenage angst or bare-knuckled political partisanship? Definitely.

So, journalists - get cracking! Bring the rest of the world some depth and perspective on this. After all, we already know more than we need to about things like cicadas.
Posted: Tuesday - September 28, 2004 at 07:12 AM         | |

©