Art & Perception

Writing parallel blogs is the new big thing. Writing parallel blogs makes you a multi-blogger, a super-blogger, a hyper-blogger.

Parallel blogs are more than a sum of the parts (as a house is more than a collection of bricks). But what should we call the new latent structure?

Arthur Whitman suggested “meta-blog”, which I find good, and “personal blog network”, which I find less good. C. Robin Janning suggested “book”, a bold proposition — it requires modifying the definition of this word.

In bookofjoe we see an alternative solution: combine several parallel blogs into one (with a separate archive file for each day). I can’t quite follow it, but I enjoy what I read.

John Foote writes parallel blogs (mm and mydr2) without using a blog at all.

Auspicious Dragon runs seven blogs in parallel (and confuses the heck out of my RSS reader [well, see the comments]).

Do you write parallel blogs? What are you creating between the lines?

Easy: understand the medium, give key information first, and say something that inspires discussion. To do this, optimize key parts of the blog post. Notice what is missing here: there is no reference to the concept of a diary, or “web log”. Although blog may have its origins in these, the blog is a distinct, interactive type of writing with goals different from a traditional journal. Does a blog post need to have anything to do with a diary entry? If not, why think of a diary when writing your blog post?

. . .

What am I talking about with “understand the medium” of a blog post? Consider first the diary, an empty paper book, perhaps with a lock on it, which probably only you will write in and read. Now compare this to your blog, online, which you want everyone to read — and the smart ones to leave a comment. The difference could not be greater. That’s why I say that thinking of a blog in terms of a diary is a mistake.

A diary has one intended reader: the writer. The writer tends to be a sympathetic audience for his or her own work. The blog has millions of potential readers, almost all of whom will never meet the blogger in person, and, general considerations of humanity aside, would not care too much if the blogger dropped dead the next day.

The blog reader is not a sympathetic audience, in other words. The blog reader has many other blogs to look at. If your blog does not grab them directly, the reader will read somewhere else.

But wait. Blogging is not generally a paying job. We blog in our spare time, mostly. We cannot so easily invest the effort to be concise. Long-windedness is thus a typical feature of blogging. Just look at Ed’s blog.

How do we reconcile these two factors, the fickleness of the reader and the inherently unprofessional character of blog writing?

You could say, just write better. Well, we can try. But let me offer an alternative, an optimization strategy. Let’s look at the key aspects of a blog post:

1) The title. If this doesn’t attract attention, you have a problem. In an RSS newsreader, the human reader may only see your title, initially, among a list of other titles. If your title is not interesting, they will not read further.

2) The first sentence. When scanning blogs, I often drop off reading if the first sentence does tell me something. Nothing personal, it’s just that there are millions of blogs out there . . .

3) The break point. This is place in the blog post where the responsible reader feels they can stop reading, but still leave an intelligent comment. Most blog posts lack the break point. Everything before the break point should be easy to read quickly.

4) The question for the reader. This is where you cue the reader to make a comment, an essential part of successful blogging. The question does not need to be explicitly in the form of a question; it can be a statement designed to provoke response. It seems to me, though, that phrasing the question as a question is polite.

If we focus on these four points and optimize them, then we do not necessarily have to write the rest of the post perfectly. We can’t write the post perfectly — have to take the kids to school, go to work, etc… But optimization of the key points should go a long way in making the post successful, in the sense that people read at least part of it and join in the discussion with comments. Remember, once a reader commits to leaving a comment, or has joined in discussion, they will likely go back and read the post more carefully.

So the key to the perfect blog post is realizing that optimization, not perfection, is the goal.

Is this a reasonable approach to writing online, or only a way to justify lazy, opportunistic writing? Is there a difference?

We need new names, folks. Some of us have multiple blogs. We use blogs as building blocks for sometime larger than a blog. If you use bricks to build a house, then what is it that you build with blogs? We need a name for this thing.

“Site” is not specific enough. You can have a site without any blog components at all.

“Hyper-blog” is lame. Who wants to be a “hyper-blogger”? Ditto “super-blogger”.

Any ideas on names for the structures we are building?

A reader mentioned that my RSS feed was not in order. I didn’t even know I had a site feed, but now I have become a dedicated RSS user, for my own site as well as for other people’s. I realize I’ve long been yearning for something like RSS. [Below is an example of Candy Minx’s blog as seen in my newsreader, click image to enlarge]

Some time back we debated the virtue of minimalist site design. What RSS lets readers do is to take the content out of your site and display it in a minimalist context. Every site has a different “look and feel” which the webmaster lovingly crafts. RSS let’s you bypass all of that and get the content in pure form.

Which means, you should read your own blog in an RSS news reader to see how it looks. I got some surprises.

As for the art of web design, site feed suggests that the minimalist approach is best. If readers can bypass your site’s style, then it makes sense to keep flourishes in web design to a minimum, and focus on the content itself.

Or do I have the conclusion backwards?

Karl Zipser: Jordan, your blog is unusual because of its broad scope. You write about topics ranging from art collecting to internal medicine, and also publish your poetry and stories there. What was it that first inspired you to start writing a blog?

Jordan Grumet: In my younger years I had written quite a bit of poetry. As I describe in a series of posts, the process of becoming a physician hardened me. It squashed the more sensitive side and I stopped writing. The creative side has slowly worked its way back since the birth of my son Cameron.

I started my blog as a companion to my web site in which I collect and sell art work. In the beginning I concentrated mostly on art topics. My idea was to generate interest in art discussions and increase flow and readership to my site.

Karl: That’s practical.

Jordan: Yes. But reading other blogs, in particular Ed Winkleman’s, inspired me. So I had a paradigm shift. I went from writing solely about art to revisiting my poetry and starting to write creatively again.

Karl: And your blog is the primary place for this?

Jordan: I use my blog to practice the art of writing. Most of my posts are spur of the moment and are made up as I go. Often I do not know where a post or story is going when I start to write it.

Karl: How does the open, public aspect of blogging affect your writing? Is there a feeling of inhibition, or something the opposite of that?

Jordan: I love that my blog is public. Having an audience challenges me, challenges me to continue creating. To give it my best.

I have found that there is an interconnectedness in the blogging world. Recently I posted a story about rape called “Her Blues” at the same time as one of my commentors wrote about her own rape. It was a completely random coincidence. Neither of us knew about each other’s plans. Yet I find that the things I write connect with my reader’s experience. This is highly gratifying.

Karl: You talk about “random coincidence” in what you and others write. Is that really the same as “interconnectedness?”

Jordan: Maybe there is less “random coincidence” out there than we think. When you connect with your fellow bloggers (i.e. read there blogs and comments) you get to know someone in a much different way then when you meet them in person. Instead of being distracted by their looks or even their facial expressions, you are keyed into something much more important . . . their words. It is more intuitive.

I once wrote about how doctors use nonverbal cues to glean information about their patients. I think that something like this holds true among bloggers as well. Sometimes by reading a statement or post we subconsciously sense other’s needs and react to them. Was it a coincidence that we both posted on the topic of rape at the same time? Maybe. Or maybe we both sensed the need in ourselves and in our community of medical bloggers.

Karl: You talk about the importance of communicating with words, but also “nonverbal” communication. I’m confused.

Jordan: I think the word “nonverbal” is problematic. I guess what I am trying to say is that the mood of the blogosphere can be changed by subtleties in how and what people post. For instance if someone I usually read who is a prolific poster all of a sudden takes a few days off it means there is something wrong. Maybe they are having a crisis. Maybe they are feeling tired or bored. These things affect my mood as I post. And whether their posts are light and humorous or serious or sad, these things definitely affect what I write about.

Karl: Can you give an example of this influence?

Jordan: Recently in the medical blogosphere there was a lot of discussion about what was going on with the doctors accused of euthanasia during Katrina. This inspired me to write “A New Orleans Story” which was a more positive look at healthcare in that area of the country.

Another example is with the story “Her Blues”, which I ended on a positive note because I sensed from comments and others posts that some positivity was needed. There had been so much discussion of people’s horrendous experiences among the medical bloggers. Yet these “survivors” were healing, living life, and standing strong. I wanted to recognize that in my story.

Karl: You see the blogosphere as a real community?

Jordan: I believe that the blogosphere is a community. It’s not in the traditional sense a geographic/economic community. However, this frees us to concentrate on what is most essential . . . the emotional ties that bind us together as people. In a good active blogging community you will have a group of people who discuss difficult and often essential life issues. Blogging can bring people together. In many ways isn’t that how we define communities? A group of people with shared goals or experiences?

Karl: But is there not a danger of the integrity of your work being compromised by such a public way of writing?

Jordan: My writing is affected by the blogosphere, but the topics and presentation come from my inner voice. I had written the poem “Her Blues” 10 years ago. I blogged the story “Her blues” (which includes the poem) recently. The stories are innately mine. My interactions in the blogosphere add color, texture, and shading.

Karl: You were frank earlier about starting your blog to increase traffic to your art collecting/selling site. Now that you have made a paradigm shift in your blogging — to creative writing — have you abandoned the economic goal? Are you content to provide your writing for free?

Jordan: My paradigm shift has certainly changed my goals. I still operate my site selling artwork, although sales are definitely down. I would love to feel that my writing appealed to enough people that I could make a living at it (I would really enjoy that). On the other hand, writing has taught me that while there are a lot of things I don’t like about being a physician, I could never stop doing it completely. It is safe to say that my enjoyment in medicine is greatest since I started blogging and writing.

For now I will continue to provide my writing for free and I believe blogging is the best way to do this. I would like to write and have “traditionally” published either a novel or a collection of short stories. Not as much for economic gain but more to get my writing out there for others to see.

I asked Arthur Whitman about his secret for blogging success. He denied he has had much success, but his advice was interesting nonetheless:

I would just say write well, in your own voice, about things you know and care about.

I’ve been consumed with my artwork lately and all but stopped blogging. I realize though that this might be the perfect time to write on what I “know and care about.” I’m going to try picking up the blog again, with a focus on what I am doing from day to day with my painting and sculpture.

The answer to the question, “What is art?” will no longer be “That which is in museums and galleries”, but, “That which looks good on the internet.”

I’m not so concerned about the accuracy of the prediction; I find it a reasonable bet. What bothers me is the extent to which the digitalized image separates us from the essential physical character of the artwork.

In creating an artwork, especially from imagination, the nature of the materials influences the process. The subtle traces of this which remain can be some of the most powerful aspects of the physical work itself. And yet these are easily lost in the digital reproduction. A striking example I have seen of this is in Michelangelo’s drawings. The drawings which I studied in the recent exhibition in Haarlem have great power, but this is mostly lost in the internet reproductions.

The Sistine Chapel ceiling does as poorly on the internet as the study drawings, but for a different reason; the awesome, encompassing quality of the work is lost when it is reduced to a miniature flat image on the computer monitor.

If this can happen to Michelangelo, what are the implications for artists today who wish to use the web as their exhibition space? Will the medium distort and degrade the artist’s methods as he or she attempts to create “That which looks good on the internet”?

_________
Related:
Fall of the Art World