.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

I Don't Get It

I don't get this whole blogging thing.

Well. No. I absolutely get my self-absorbed, moody, confusing blog thing, I just don't get the rest of the blog universe. Well. No. I do get "it" because "it" just seems to be a reflection of society. What I don't get is how I can fit myself into "it." Did that make sense?

The tincanman recently posted about how blogging is an activity for herd beasts. Yes. I see how that seems to be mostly the case. I also see how it is not the case for me. Irksome.

If I didn't know better, I'd think from reading my blog that I don't read other people's blogs and/or have much of an opinion about anything much at all.

Recently, around the NZ blogs, there have been several heated "discussions" about various hot topics, you know, religion, rape, feminism, fat, labeling people etc. I admit a lot of the time I have been thinking things like "what planet are these people from?!" and "how stupid!"

I actually have very strong opinions about all these topics and they might not be what you'd expect (surprisingly enough I agreed with the Agrarian fundamentalist more than I agreed with the feminists). I just don't feel like expressing my opinions, not even from the comfort of my own blog. I guess the point is that I don't actually care whether anyone else agrees with me or not and I don't care whether I am right or wrong or somewhere in between. Maybe it all boils down to me not caring that I am different. Well...not enough to do anything significant about it anyway.

What IS this post about?

I don't know. But it seems the ability to see things from another persons point of view is very rare and the ability to let other people have their point of view without trying to change it is even rarer.

Personally, I find others' points of view fascinating.

You shouldn't care that you're different. You should revel in being different. Other's don't get it? Their problem. Believe me, I know your frustrations in being different. But the silver-lining side of it is that those few who can appreciate the difference will *really* be worth knowing.
The blogging software platform enables a variety of blogging styles, but you seem to be referring largely to political opinion and philosophy of life bloggers, who will obviously promote and defend their opinions much more than a self-employed journalist using blogging software, or a scientist using blogs to broadcast the latest developments in his field, or a software developer using a blog to document his new project and receive feedback. I think by excluding blogs which aren't politics-based, you have created an invalid premise for your claims.

You also seem to be critical of the fact bloggers aren't arbitrators in a big debate. Well no, people with opinions people with opinions. Why would you expect them to waste their spare time promoting other peoples opinions?

And I'm also puzzled about the 'herd' claim. You can't get more non-herd like than blogs - unless you mean one particular blog and are suggesting all of its readers/commenters form a herd. Well there is without a doubt a minority of blog-readers who form a non-questioning one-way relationship with blog authors, but the others are just playing nice. But most political blog readers don't comment - therefore how can you draw the conclusion they are acting like a herd? Also, most readers of political blogs are more interested in the news or reading links than writing their own opinions in a comment. If they wanted to invest substantial time writing opinions on the Internet then they'd get their own blog. As simple as that really.

I am only interested in opinion blogs (mostly personal). The other types of blogs that you refer to (journalist, scientific, work) don't interest me, so we can exclude them from this pseudo-analysis. Political blogs tend to get nasty and personal, so are therefore also interesting. I tend to class politics/religion as personal opinion, which I am sure you will disagree with.

What were my claims? I have no idea now, but on re-reading this is what I think I claimed:
1) Blogging is a relfection of scociety and makes sense to me as such.
2) I don't understand how I would go about fitting in to blogging/society.
3) I agree with tcm's herd beast analogy.
4) I have strong opinions that I don't feel like expressing.
5) some other stuff but I am sick of writing this list now.

Which claims (other than the herd one) do you disagree with?

I think the point of my post was that I am quite impressed by the amount of energy some people go to to express their opinion and to try and change other people's opinions. I am impressed, because I can't do that.

What debate are you talking about?

I don't expect most people to spend spare time promoting other people's opinions (there are exceptions).

I disagree with you about the herd claim. I think blogs do tend to form "herds". Not one big herd, but lots of little herds. Cliques, if you will. VRWC for example. Obviously "herd" is a metaphor. Groups of blogs/bloggers do not act exactly like herds. They are not eating grass.

The non-commenters and non-opinion posters are irrelevant. I wasn't talking about them.
They are not eating grass.

Except, of course, for the blogs dedicated to eating grass.
Al, think of the polarisation in political viewpoints. There is definately a 'right-wing' herd, just as there is a 'left-wing' herd. Any changeover from one to the other is extremely unlikely.

Generally, a blogger will link to others that they enjoy - people they can in a way associate with.

Much like making friends in real life; you attach yourself to the herd that you feel most comfortable in.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?