Sep
09
2008
Why We Blog, Part 3 of 4: Intellectual Coffee Talk
By: Patricia FancherFiled in: Cultural Studies
Margarita, in her contribution to this series, likened her blogging history with telenovela. Since this is my first blog, my relationship with blogging is more like a first date. I’m excited and eager to make a good impression, nervous but trying to sound as relaxed as I can in my perpetual state of over-caffeination. I’m sure at some point well meaning friends offered the same advice to prepare me for both activities – just be yourself.
My task in this first blogging effort is to answer Brad’s prompt
‘why do I blog?’ or tailored for my situation – Why do I read, comment and am
now attempting to write blogs? I participate in the blogosphere for the same
reason Picasso, Joyce, and countless other intellectuals sat in Parisian coffee
shops. The gnovis blog is described as
intellectual coffee talk and that is the perfect metaphor. Since the 17th century when Isaac
Newton frequented London coffee shops, these places represented an aspect of
our public culture where ideas (good and bad), perspectives, and theories can
be shared, tested out and argued. The
unique quality shared by the coffee shop culture and by the blogosphere is that
the ideas and arguments presented are more nebulous then concrete.
The legacy of the coffee shop intellectual has not died with
the spread of Starbucks… rather the scene has found a new (and in my opinion improved)
platform. But the blogosphere is
infinitely more pluralistic and dynamic than any coffee shop or piazza in
history. It is a place to share and
argue ideas with people across the word.
It offers an outlet for students and life-long learners to test out new
theories or discuss trends in technology and politics. It is a place to be
critical or supportive. It is also a
place where the end of the conversation is not determined by the waning of the
day but by waning user interest. If
coffee shops where the intellectual playground of so many great minds from which
sprung many of the great works of art and fundamental concepts of our
contemporary democratic society, imagine what blogs, our hyperlinked mega
playground, will help to create!
To end my first date with blogging I would like to add – Today is my birthday. 25 years old and one blog post down…. Many more to come.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Trackback URL for this post:
http://www.gnovisjournal.org/trackback/265
Submitted by Patricia Fancher on Tue, 09/09/2008 - 16:10.
Subscribe to comments on this post
Why I joined the Conversation
For me, your comparisons to the likes of Joyce or Picasso hit home. I actually started my first blog, which I'm trying oh -so-hard to keep up during the semester-- because I had this serious respect for the world of craft-bloggers. I found myself commenting but not feeling like that really counted as being "part" of the conversation-- in a way, I felt like if I was just commenting it was a bit like being the person sitting off to the side occiasionaly interjecting but ultimately uninvited.
I understand how funny this must sound, joining a conversation by creating a place that is all me all the time? Some how, by linking to the blogs of other creative women, I've found myself inspired (if sometimes sad I don't have more time in my life for creativity). Also, I think that by having all these thoughts in one place any members of the community could, in theory at least, follow the conversation fully.
I haven't quite worked this out enough to know if I'm making any sense... in a way, commenting feels like (and indeed looks like) a footnote whereas a blog is a monograph with references... Does that make sense? At all?
www.bashfullydesigned.com
the role of the commenter
I have two responses to this -
First, I don't think I agree with you. I'm new to the blog writing process but I comment regularly. For me, blogs don't get exciting till a conversation starts. Conversations don't start until the monologue ends and someone replies.
Second, I think I can relate to how you feel. Tell me if this is close to your experience. Could you mean that blogging is sort of a right of passage activity? Could just commenting be like going to all the skater kid parties when you don’t skate? You are not really part of the blogging party till you blog yourself. Commenting does not risk exposure and criticism in the same way blogging does.
Also, commenting is not linked to a continuous site that represents part of your online identity. Commenting is usually sporadic and anonymous. I wonder if Jed has anything to all about ‘non-persistent-subjects’ to add to this last thought?
Two ways of saying the same thing?
In a way I think maybe we're saying the same thing. Blogs can work like conversations if the commenting threads produce that (I think gnovis is a good example of comments leading to conversation). Perhaps the conversational aspects of blogging are dependent on communities-- although craft blogs generate huge numbers of comments they tend not to be particularly conversational-- lots of "oh I like this" or "what a beautiful photo" etc.
Thus, for me to present myself in the blogosphere I did need to have a continuous site that represents the whole of my crafting experience-- part of which is the hyperlinking...
Maybe what we're realizing is that each blog community generates a different kind of participation. So you can comment on academic blogs to be part of the conversation in a way you can't on, say, the New York Times' blogs or some more specialized/personalized blogs...
Also, this quarter's Bitch Magazine has an amazing article on why commenting is no longer really needed. Maybe my hesitation to comments stems from reading this article like three weeks ago (sadly, I can't find it online but it is worth skimming should you find yourself in an indy bookstore sometime soon).
www.bashfullydesigned.com
non-persistent authorship
Trish is, of course, making reference to my research on persistence (in this case of "the self") online. I have been arguing lately that mediating technologies provide a great way to examine non-persistence of the self (my craigslist work is scattered around gnovis). To Trish's point, I think you could successfully argue that when either the technology or a social structure anonymizes a user's identity, his or her contributions are interpreted relative to larger ideas, categories, or experiences, never punctuated by individuality.
Of course technologies like blogs can quickly invert this.Blogs and comments both have their functions, and it is interesting that some comments imitate posts more than comments, and visa versa. (I frequently wonder if I should stop typing in the comment box and just write a new post all together.)
To whip out a familiar axiom, "people are social creatures." As we consider the various configurations of technology and human expression, I think each of us has to find what works for us: Trish blogging to earn her social cred, Ashley commenting in order to place her thoughts into relationships with others. In the end, I suspect is all depends on the types of persistent relationships that participation on blogs allow.
www.whatknows.com