Sustain
I’ve been breaking new ground lately. I’ve managed to write about such obtuse topics here that I’ve been comment-free for around two weeks (not that it really bothers me). I’ve managed to procrastinate and be so scattered that I didn’t even get my school schedule together until yesterday. And I’ve managed to get a non-schedule schedule. Virtually everything I have to do this term is virtual. I’m teaching online; all my courses are reading courses (covering about twenty books in sixteen weeks) and there will probably only be a few scattered meetings with advisors.
It’s getting pretty deep in here. I’ve been following some difficult stuff and it’s going to get worse. I keep reading other blogs, trying to keep some contact with the online social environment, but it’s now thesis crunch time. I have to write about that; it helps me stay focused and process this stuff. I’m also moving in the next few weeks, so there just isn’t much time for “fun” writing. Of course, every time I say that, I always think of something non-academic that I just have to write about. Perhaps that’s why I’m writing this now. I haven’t stepped from behind the curtain in a while.
The number of search-engine hits I get astounds me. People search for the strangest things. My favorite one lately is “public ass.” The grief over the loss of my father has started to hit in the last few days. But, with the increased traffic I’m likely to get from local students/teachers I hesitate to write about that topic much. Writing in public forces a person to set boundaries, and the complexity of the audience (students, random surfers, and what I consider to be long-time virtual friends) makes it hard to figure out which way to go.
In the past, I’ve thought of setting up separate theory /photography /personal silliness type blogs. But I have come to believe that the real benefit of blogging is the ability to blur distinctions like this. So this will remain what it is—a personal thought-space that does not segment or cater to a perceived audience demand. I am gratified that people still seem to visit even though this blog often diverges widely from any easily discernable pattern of entertainment / scholarship / or personal diary site. I’ve often taken great pride in my marginal / freak status.
So, though many things are changing on the outside, this place will remain the same. It’s a matter of frequency and sustain. As long as I feel free to write about anything, I can keep things moving forward. It’s when I stop to wonder just what the hell I’m doing here that I have problems.
Neither fish nor fowl… I know; I’m the same way. I’ll keep reading, because when you lose me (often), it only makes me gladder that somebody’s thinking about this stuff.
. . . trackbacks ≠ comments . . . hmmm sounds like a reflection may be necessary . . . please don’t fragment . . . this public address, with All the Public/Private confusion/enlightment is fine as is (for this reader) . . .take care . . .
I’ve been enjoying your postings more than I can say lately, Jeff, but I’m still churning over the words in my mind and have little effective comment. Yet. I hope you continue with what you have written about, your photos, and don’t let comments, or lack of same, influence you.
I did an experiment this week and wrote a weblog entry exploring community and linking and comments and whether we’re writing to write, or to invite people into a conversation. If we’re writing to write, then we have to be careful in linking, and we have to be philosophical about communication back — through trackback or comment. If we’re writing to communicate, then we need to incorporate hooks. To demonstrate this principle I linked to some other efforts in what I hoped was an open hook manner, and the conversation exploded. Sometimes you want a conversation, sometimes you just want to write.
My challenge is to find a way to write that generates conversation that stays on the topic of what I write. Some people have an amazing gift with this. Jonathon Delacour comes to mind.
As for your point on fragmented weblogs, it’s a good one, and one I considered myself before I split mine all to hell and gone. The separation of the photos into separate weblogs made sense for me, as I’m trying to work through how to know when I’ve taken a good photograph or not (without having to push it into people’s faces).
(Why is it that when photos are grouped, what looked like a good photo when published separately, or with surrounding text, loses its appeal?)
Publishing the …for poets entries into their own world felt necessary because they’re as much experiment as anything. Still, I notice that people visit the ‘off weblog’ entries much less than the regular one. I’m not sure if it’s because they don’t want to be bothered, or because there’s no appeal in the effort.
What a shameless attempt to get comments, Jeff.
Personally, I decided to take my split personality to two different blogs, not wanting to impose my political viewpoints on my literary friends.
I figured it might be percieved that way, Loren.
All I really wanted to do is let people know why the reading around these parts might be getting a little “dense,” and to reiterate what I have said many times about comments— while I enjoy them, sociality isn’t the primary reason why I blog. I enjoy it as a form.
If I ever started blogging politics consistently I’d probably do the same thing. But I really don’t have enough interest in that sort of thing to devote too much time to it. I’m more interested in matters of the spirit. But even saying that, one can’t help but be political. There’s nothing like the fundamental issues of representation to drag your ass right into the thick of the political field!
But, it’s like Shelley said. It’s hard to find a balance between staying true to your own writing agenda and wanting to be part of a larger discourse. I think if I fragmented myself, there wouldn’t be enough of me to go around.
I’m not too proud to admit that you lose me often, too, Jeff. I like that. 🙂
Don’t change a thing.
You sometimes lose me, too, but that’s fine. I join with the general hue and cry against fragmentation, and I like your definition “a personal thought-space that does not segment or cater to a perceived audience demand”; I think that last part is crucial to keeping one’s enthusiasm (as the esteemed Delacour-san has discovered). Blog what you gotta blog; we’ll be out here, admiring even if we don’t have anything to say.