My suspicion is that my whole sense of
what it means to blog will forever be influenced by the first essay I
read on the subject, which coincided with the first blogging I ever
did in my life , and which, coincidentally, was also the first real
online posting I had ever done in any way shape or form.
The first kind of research or work on
blogging I had ever done was, like Matthew, in the Computers and
Composition course, where I read Tim Lindgren’s Kairos article,
“Blogging Places: Locating Pedagogy in the Whereness of Weblogs.”
Overall, Lindgren looks at blogging as a way of building and sharing
place- connections on a potentially global scale…blogging our
localized “places” builds those relationships for ourselves, and
potentially gives readers around the world examples of
place-connection that they can utilize or modify for their own
locales. The underlying effect of reading this essay so early in my
experience with blogs is that I tend to look at all blogging as a
place-building process. My sense is that, perhaps not wholly
consciously, I’ve been looking at my blog entries as a way to dig
me a nice little niche in theory land where I can live out my days
(maybe with a dog and a nice garden out back). So it’s possible
that my mental susceptibility has actually crystallized into a
definition of “blogging” that I can’t shake, for better or
worse.
I’m not sure this is entirely the
best thing, depending on how you look at it. I can certainly see the
danger of theoretical entrenchment, or entrenchment of any kind, as a
potential negative. But looking back at the blogging I’ve done, I
do see a themes emerging, and I’m not sure how to feel about that.
Is there anything necessarily bad about establishing particular
interests? Must it follow that, in forming interests or ideas, we
somehow—even unknowingly—shut out others? Ultimately, I think
what this has done for my sense of blogging and academic writing is
to influence my approach to blogging as still somewhat solitary—I
use it to build a sense within and for myself, more perhaps than to
converse directly with others. Whether or not this becomes a problem
depends, I suppose, on the blog in question and its wider purpose.
Case in point: could anyone other than me possibly get much from this
particular entry?
Amanda,
ReplyDeleteI just want to say that reading your post gave me courage to write my own. I know you didn't outright say anything about feeling disconnected, but your last paragraph here especially made me reflect on my own feeling of disconnection in the blogosphere. I, too, look at blogging (or any kind of writing outside of academia) very personal and hard to share. It's for me to, as you said, "build a sense within and for myself."
So to answer your question: YES. I got a lot from your entry. Thank you :]
Thank you, Kate!
DeleteAs Burke wrote, any terministic screen allows some things to be seen and not others. To me it is not if one has entrenched an area or space to cultivate, but how and what one grows. I liked your focus and it makes sense for you and your work. Do keep in mind that for Lindgren blogs are useful beyond that sense of self and place development, to make connections about this across places, even the globe. So I hope that your blogging eventually can move outward to encompass that, but it makes sense also that the first steps are focused on the self and then on self/others.
ReplyDeleteI also just practically know that we learn by repetition. Certainly, one can beat a dead horse, but If we flit from topic to topic we limit ourselves. I know that I have had a terrible time finding my place as a scholar because there was just so much to learn. It wasn't until I began writing about the same things over and over that I began producing more informed research.
DeleteAmanda, we can certainly be like Burke who was a scholar without a home. I however, I'm too sensitive a sort for that kind of uncertainty. If blogging corrals me to certain areas, it does allow others to capitalize on my ideas. While Marx might frown, I'm okay with it.