Saw a pretty cool article in The Australian 'Review' section on the weekend. It's a long read but worth it if you are into blogging or writing, or comparing the two. Or something.
"[It] has become the default mode for internet writing. Taken with the failure of poetry and fiction to create a vigorous online presence, it suggests the web is reshaping the way we write." I think he(?) should complete the second sentence here with "...on the internet." It is an important distinction, because it is as foolish to think that the majority of readers consume their writing from the internet as it is to claim that books will not survive in their hard copy form. I can see how it evolves a particular digital literary style, however, I suspect that a) the majority of reading the world over is still done from hard-copy, whether it is newspapers, journals or books, and b) the majority of blog-reading is done by those who are bloggers themselves in one form or another. I was relieved to read that "world literature is filled with exhibitionists who would have relished the chance to blog." Why is it that writer's who value their readers' engagement and joy over everything else - including the approval of the criterati - aren't given the same respect as those who take their writing more "seriously"? Surely it is a more selfless and generous act for an author to write solely for the benefit of the reader, and one more deserving of admiration when the author has put the reader's experience ahead of their own literary noteriety. Many of the titles in the literary canon are a good read. So is a whole bunch of other stuff. All this said, I read the article as deeply as I could between feeding kittens, emptying potties and cleaning up vita brits. If I had the hard copy version available (and no, printing it out wouldn't be sufficient), I would have sat down in a comfortable chair with a cuppa some time when I knew I would be uninterrupted. Online writing - of any form - doesn't demand the same reverence(?) from me as does anything in hard copy.
30 something watcher of people, opinionated, thinker, student, employee, runner and rider, lover of books, music and coffee. Still finding my place in the world.
"[It] has become the default mode for internet writing. Taken with the failure of poetry and fiction to create a vigorous online presence, it suggests the web is reshaping the way we write."
ReplyDeleteI think he(?) should complete the second sentence here with "...on the internet." It is an important distinction, because it is as foolish to think that the majority of readers consume their writing from the internet as it is to claim that books will not survive in their hard copy form. I can see how it evolves a particular digital literary style, however, I suspect that a) the majority of reading the world over is still done from hard-copy, whether it is newspapers, journals or books, and b) the majority of blog-reading is done by those who are bloggers themselves in one form or another.
I was relieved to read that "world literature is filled with exhibitionists who would have relished the chance to blog." Why is it that writer's who value their readers' engagement and joy over everything else - including the approval of the criterati - aren't given the same respect as those who take their writing more "seriously"? Surely it is a more selfless and generous act for an author to write solely for the benefit of the reader, and one more deserving of admiration when the author has put the reader's experience ahead of their own literary noteriety. Many of the titles in the literary canon are a good read. So is a whole bunch of other stuff.
All this said, I read the article as deeply as I could between feeding kittens, emptying potties and cleaning up vita brits. If I had the hard copy version available (and no, printing it out wouldn't be sufficient), I would have sat down in a comfortable chair with a cuppa some time when I knew I would be uninterrupted. Online writing - of any form - doesn't demand the same reverence(?) from me as does anything in hard copy.
Geez. That article really inspired an unqualified rant on my behalf :)
ReplyDelete