My own problem with the blogosphere is not that it's selling out to the mainstream, but that most of it is spectacularly boring. The dominant quality is tedium: writers without editors, fact-checkers or paying subscribers to keep them in check. As Butterworth succinctly puts it: "If the pornography of opinion doesn't leave you longing for an eroticism of fact, the vast wasteland of verbiage produced by the relentless nature of blogging is the single greatest impediment to its seriousness as a medium."Given that I basically agree with that quotation (despite its horrendous, overly ripened condition) as recent discussions will confirm, I was saddened by the reference to David Eddie, author of the excellent Chump Change of about a decade ago:
But this doesn't hold up in all cases. Take my friend and peer David Eddie. A Toronto-based novelist, journalist and screenwriter, Eddie maintains a blog at http://www.davideddie.com even though he invariably has several other professional writing projects on the go. When I ask him (slightly incredulously) why on Earth he would bother to write down his opinions for free, he shrugs. "It's a good way to limber up. You get up in the morning, fire up a blog, write the thing in 15 minutes and then you know what's on your mind. I think it was Nabokov who said, 'How do I know what's on my mind until I write it down?' "Unfortunately, the fact checkers failed this time to note that Mr. Eddie's blog has been dead since Monday, October 17, 2005. What is the word for the status of one's limber if not upped for four months?
Never mind. Soon it will be again as retro hip to say you blog as it is now to say they are worthless.
Comments
Flea - February 25, 2006 6:03 pm
"My own problem with the blogosphere is not that it's selling out to the mainstream, but that most of it is spectacularly boring."
Clearly yet another person who is reading the wrong blogs and blaming the medium for their laziness. This is no more clever than saying all pop songs, film, radio, television, books or newspapers are boring.
Flea - February 25, 2006 6:04 pm
Or rather, that "most" are. Really, so what?
Alan - February 25, 2006 10:18 pm
I think you just have to look her name up on Google to know what "most of it is spectacularly boring" is a euphemism for: "it is full of people who do not like anything I write."
Marian - February 26, 2006 9:59 am
Speaking of fact-checking, I think it was actually E.M. Forster who once wrote, “How do I know what I think until I see what I write." I came across it the other day on a blog. It can also be found elsewhere.
I'm still waiting to hear about the W. S. Burroughs quotation.
portland - February 27, 2006 9:34 am
she could just not read them i suppose.
Flea - February 27, 2006 10:12 am
"Given that I basically agree with that quotation (despite its horrendous, overly ripened condition) as recent discussions will confirm"
"I think you just have to look her name up on Google to know what "most of it is spectacularly boring" is a euphemism for: "it is full of people who do not like anything I write." "
So, this is a post to the effect that you agree anyone who does not like what she writes is spectacularly boring?
Alan - February 27, 2006 10:24 am
No, I like the quote by Butterworh but not the rest. I think she fails to understand her spectacularly boring-ness. It is a mean-spirited irony I note. Do you see an inversion of logic? I expect you do.
Marian - February 27, 2006 1:03 pm
And the W.S. Burroughs quotation?