The best thing with blogging is that it is instantaneous: you think of something and immediately you can post it (this is not my thought, I am quoting a blogger I like, who said that on the radio). This is both good and bad, it is good because communication with the world is immediate but it is also bad because what you post is not something you've thought through too much. It is not polished like a journal article or a research proposal for example (!) But perhaps, that's the charm: you think of something, admittedly a minor thought, it doesn't deserve to be a thesis or something, and the next moment it can be posted to the world. Like this picture of my coffee that I took two minutes ago. It's ephemeral yes, but it's still nice. Like a beautiful picture that captures a fleeting moment in time, like a short story that doesn't have the depth of a novel, but it still manages to give a glimpse of reality. It seems to me that we need these things, in addition to the heavier ones. We like both, we need both, life comprises of both: the posts and the theses. Brahms and Britney. Tolstoy and Mickey Mouse.
3 comments:
Absolutely agree. Tolstoi without Mickey Mouse is boring, Mickey Mouse without Tolstoi is not only boring but also stultifying.
I do completely agree with this right-on-the-money post: we need the popular and the intellect, the former makes us appreciate the latter more and so it's all good.
I was going to end this post (that started about the instant gratification of blogging and ended about the need for both depth and shallowness): cue to youkali. Write about the need for both, you do it better.
Lady V, you did it perfectly already. It's all in your post.
Post a Comment