Blogoholism
My friend 
vasco_pyjama mentioned an article in Slate about Blogoholism.
Well, I wonder about blogoholism too.
Though I read and comment more than I write entries to my own blogs.
In my case, I think I'm always likely to have some kind of -oholism though, so if it's not blogging, it'll just be something else.
Blogoholism is better than most, as I do get to connect with interesting people all over the world, and have worthwhile conversations with them.
And I get a lot of pleasure out of writing my little stories and having people enjoy them. Which without interested readers and immediate feedback, I wouldn't be doing at all.
The article in Slate is about a would-be novelist. I'm thinking there is a bottom line about the demand and supply for writing. One good novelist (or whatever other type of writer) can meet the needs of millions of readers. So there have always been far more people that would love to be writers than could ever earn a livelihood from it.
And reading the blogosphere, I see that there are actually very many good writers out there. It's not their lack of ability that would prevent them from being professional writers, simply the reality that there are far more potentially good writers than available readers for all of them. We can only read so much.
So the blogosphere is an outlet for writers who want to write for the love of it, not to reach a wide audience. Instead of everyone being famous for fifteen minutes, it's everyone being famous to fifteen people.
It's like amateur drama, or playing in a band for fun.
For a few it might be a pathway to being discovered, but for most it's all about the fun, the fulfillment, and the creativity of the act itself.
vasco_pyjama mentioned an article in Slate about Blogoholism.
Well, I wonder about blogoholism too.
Though I read and comment more than I write entries to my own blogs.
In my case, I think I'm always likely to have some kind of -oholism though, so if it's not blogging, it'll just be something else.
Blogoholism is better than most, as I do get to connect with interesting people all over the world, and have worthwhile conversations with them.
And I get a lot of pleasure out of writing my little stories and having people enjoy them. Which without interested readers and immediate feedback, I wouldn't be doing at all.
The article in Slate is about a would-be novelist. I'm thinking there is a bottom line about the demand and supply for writing. One good novelist (or whatever other type of writer) can meet the needs of millions of readers. So there have always been far more people that would love to be writers than could ever earn a livelihood from it.
And reading the blogosphere, I see that there are actually very many good writers out there. It's not their lack of ability that would prevent them from being professional writers, simply the reality that there are far more potentially good writers than available readers for all of them. We can only read so much.
So the blogosphere is an outlet for writers who want to write for the love of it, not to reach a wide audience. Instead of everyone being famous for fifteen minutes, it's everyone being famous to fifteen people.
It's like amateur drama, or playing in a band for fun.
For a few it might be a pathway to being discovered, but for most it's all about the fun, the fulfillment, and the creativity of the act itself.