The struggle to find a “voice” – a balance between content/topics and form – continues, but I may have found a workable solution.
It’s the Christmas season, with shopping centers crammed with consumers, and corporations touting the latest releases just in time for the holidays: new books, new fashions, and new gadgets. While I love new gizmos and doohickeys, and I’m always happy to see what the latest technological developments can do (and to devise all sorts of diabolical new uses for things), I’m not always sure that the latest technological “wrinkles” in consumer goods are good. Sometimes designers take perfectly good solutions, and just “muck them up”. Perhaps it is time to examine our quest for the “latest thing” and really think about what makes a new technology, or technological approach, a good one.
Did you read comic books as a kid, or do you read comic books now? Do you remember those ads in the back which advertised all sorts of amazing sounding junk: sea monkeys, Charles Atlas body building books, pepper gum, and x-ray specs? I do, and although I never did send in my hard-earned money even for sea monkeys (I was in my mid 30s before I ever owned sea monkeys, but that’s another story…), I was fascinated by those ads.
I think what drew me in about the infamous “X-Ray Specs” was the idea of seeing the world differently. At the age of 8, I had little interest of the more prurient uses of x-ray specs, but seeing the world in a way that I could not normally was a fascinating concept. Of course, (I’m sorry to tell you) “X-Ray Specs” don’t really do what they claim, but modern technology does allow us to alter our senses, in ways that are both commonplace, and in ways that no one seems to be doing – yet.
I’ve noticed a real problem with writing in this blog.
It isn’t that I don’t have any topics to write about; my “drafts” collection in this blog’s control panel has half-a-dozen articles on the go. It isn’t that I don’t know exactly what I want to say about those topics; I have the articles perfectly pictured in my head.
That’s the problem, they’re pictured.
When I explained why I blog, I said I’d also explain the “weird name” and why it changed from Memetic Selection to Memetic Syns — although blog names tend to be quirky and often admit no explanation other than writer whim.
I explained that that this blog is a forum for me to structure and articulate thought through explanation to a — possibly fictional — audience. The name reflects that, being a blend of two ideas.
The short answer is that I blog to explain the world to myself.
Having other people read my thoughts, comment on them, find them interesting and/or entertaining, discuss them with me, point out new implications that I hadn’t thought of on my own, present contrasting views, and correct my errors, are all possible, and quite welcome, benefits (possible because it isn’t really happening yet – and it may never happen) – but they aren’t the raison d’etre for the blog.
However, for the (very) long answer … Read the rest of this entry »