Is Blogging Narcissistic?

Blogging sites like WordPress offer a soapbox for us to stand on and express our thoughts, however trivial those thoughts might be. But there’s something about blogging that irks me. Whenever I take to writing something I always pause and ask myself, why am I expressing these thoughts to an anonymous audience and not to a friend? It has always felt like an exercise in narcissism, as if I’m asking the world to listen to my thoughts on Topic X, Y, or Z.

And truth be told, my thoughts, when they do somehow formulate in the mostly empty space inside my skull, are rarely insightful.

I group blogging together with the rest of social media — Facebook, Twitter, and the most self-serving of them all, Instagram. These online platforms provide convenient forums for us to express ourselves. And whereas in day-to-day life we need to find a willing listener, and interest in what we have to say can be gauged by verbal responses and facial cues, social media gives us free reign to post, tweet, and share with no regard to who’s listening.

There’s been a lot of discussion about the society-corrupting qualities of social media; the inherent isolation involved and the obsessive relationships we have with our phones. I’m not here to shit all over social media (full disclosure: I use Twitter daily and Facebook sparingly). I think there are a lot of positive ways social media can be used, even if it requires careful navigation to dodge the ubiquitous selfie landmines.

But what about blogging? Is a blog post the equivalent of Instagramming a duck-face selfie at the grocery store? While any sensible person would agree that those who take duck-faced selfies deserve to be shot, the same can’t be said of bloggers.

I’ve come to the realization that blogging is more about creative expression than anything. There’s no doubt that receiving likes, followers, and comments is a gratifying experience, but that’s because it validates bloggers creative efforts. People who share their every living moment online are likely looking to fill a void – they crave social interaction and want to know their lives have meaning (or whether they look hot in their new shirt…).

Bloggers want validation and attention, but not in the same way a shallow, insecure Instagrammer or Facebook-obsessive does. It’s about knowing we can articulate our thoughts in a way that is engaging or relatable, and not about being popular. It’s more highbrow and less desperate.

Now will you please like this post, comment on it, and follow my blog? Pretty please?

Writing is a lot like…

I often use analogies when explaining or attempting to understand something. I like to think I have a knack for it. A good analogy can really help someone better understand something or see it from a new perspective. Recently I’ve been trying to think of one for writing, but I’m stumped.

In a way, writing is like archery. A writer picks words like an archer draws arrows, and with them hopes to hit the target as accurately as possible. The target in the writer’s case is not a distant circle but the perfect expression of an idea or emotion.

I like the bit about accuracy, but the analogy isn’t so convincing when you look any deeper. For starters, arrows are chosen without discrimination, whereas words are selected very discriminately. One arrow is the same as the next, more or less, but that isn’t true of words. So writing is sort of like archery. But there must be another analogy, both witty and ingenious, that fully encapsulates what it is to write, right?

Maybe writing is like fighting a war. I don’t mean as a soldier marching around and shooting at things, but rather some sort of General or high commander. You know, one of the guys who comes up with strategies and clever names, like “Operation Rolling Thunder” or “Operation Magic Carpet” (a real operation, by the way).

Yes, just as a military planner tactfully deploys resources to accomplish an objective, a writer deploys his or her resources (words) to accomplish an objective (write a blog post?). Both require structure. Troops are organized and certain units are selected based on with what the mission requires, sort of like how sentences are organized and words selected depending on the purpose of the written piece.

Alright, so maybe this analogy is neither witty or ingenious (it’s terrible). So what is writing like? Maybe it isn’t like anything. Maybe it’s just… writing.

Thoughts?

Collecting words: the Sontag list

It goes without saying that great writers have a strong command of language. A big part of this can be attributed to having an extensive vocabulary from which to draw from.

The Oxford English Dictionary contains 171,476 words. Imagine if you knew every single word and exactly what they meant. Once you decided on what to write about the words would flow effortlessly from your pen (or, more likely, your keyboard).

But alas, we are not robots (despite my best efforts to pretend otherwise on the dance floor – yes, I’m single).

As it is, our vocabularies reflect the words we’ve been exposed to, as well as our brain’s ability to soak up these words and file them away for future use. A lot of it is memory.

I read the other day that Susan Sontag–the multi-talented American writer, filmmaker, professor, literary icon and political activist–kept lists of words that she encountered. Words like “persiflage”, “gruel”, and ” integument”. I don’t know what her motive was, but it’s a brilliant idea.

When reading I often come across words that are peculiar to me or that I’m unable to define accurately. There are other words I’ll come across that are familiar but not part of my vocabulary. The Sontag list is a perfect remedy for these situations. By recording words that are unknown or underemployed I’ll be more likely to look them up and learn their meaning, and by writing them down I’ll be more likely to remember them and utilize them in the future.

And who doesn’t like lists?

Writer’s today are at an advantage, historically speaking. It has never been easier to find the meaning of a word (dictionary.com and its companion thesaurus.com serve me well). It’s sad but I can’t imagine consulting a physical dictionary to discover the meaning of a word. If the dictionary isn’t within arms reach I have to get up, and then I have to use my legs to walk to it, and then I need to put it down somewhere, perhaps needing to clear off table space to make room. That’s not to mention the page turning! My god, the page turning!

Maybe I’m being a little bit dramatic (a little?), but the point remains that it is easier than ever to expand your vocabulary.

Collecting stamps hasn’t been cool for years, if it ever was, and you’re going nowhere in life if you collect rocks. Start collecting words. Start a Sontag list.

For those who are wondering, courtesy of dictionary.com:

Persiflage: light, bantering talk or writing

Integument: a natural covering, as a skin, shell, or rind

Reading to Write Better

“If you don’t have time to read, you don’t have the time (or the tools) to write. Simple as that.”

– Stephen King

We communicators are not pioneers. We use an existing tool — the English language — and try to use it to the best of our ability. We deliver a message to a target audience using a string of words that we find appropriate.

Communicating is a simple concept but one that can be done in infinitely different ways. Ask one hundred people to write a paragraph about any one topic and you will have one hundred different paragraphs.

The words we choose are derived from our unique experience listening to speech and reading text. People speak and write in the language and dialect that they have been exposed to.  Everything you read is an experience that influences how you communicate, however subtly.

Sometimes we have a strong sense of what we want to say but can’t figure out how to say it convincingly. It’s a constant hurdle for the writer, one which I’ve tried to overcome multiple times as I write this very blog post.

That is why reading is invaluable. Ideas and feelings that are obscure can become lucid when articulated by somebody else.  Reading not only expands your vocabulary, it teaches you how to utilize the vocabulary you already have.

A writer never realizes their potential, because their potential is boundless. There is no finish-line. A writer is constantly evolving. Ask the same writer to write about the same topic five years apart and you will likely find two different products. New books and articles we read shape how we communicate. Not only that, they shape how we think.

“Think before you speak. Read before you think.”

– Fran Lebowitz, The Fran Lebowitz Reader

 Some writing is dull and some writing is clever. Some writing is succinct and some writing is bloated. To put it simply, there is good writing and there is bad writing. So how does one improve their writing? Writing workshops and grammar lessons will only take you so far. In my mind there are two ways to improve your writing: practice and reading.

We often neglect books or long articles and essays because we find ourselves overwhelmed with other responsibilities. We think we don’t have time for it. If you want to be an effective communicator there is no excuse. Reading and writing go hand-in-hand.

Instead of fooling around on your smartphone or tablet while commuting to work, read something. Instead of counting sheep in bed, read a book. Instead of turning on the TV while eating breakfast, read a magazine, article, or essay (http://www.aldaily.com has daily suggestions covering a wide array of topics).

Everybody knows that reading is beneficial. It educates, it elicits complex emotions, and it helps us see the world from new perspectives. People still neglect it. If you want to succeed as a writer, blogger, or PR practitioner there is no excuse. Make reading a habit and you will find the time spent is a small price to pay for the benefits you will receive.

“Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.”
– Charles William Eliot

The Horror of Trite Language

“The horror… the horror…” -Colonel Kurtz, Apocalypse Now (1979)

When I see people who describe themselves as a “people person” or a “dynamic candidate” I feel a little like Kurtz did as he lay dying on the jungle floor. The horror he was speaking of was the horror of war, but is it really any worse than the horror of bad English?

I am thinking in particular of the language of employers and those seeking employment. Job ads, resumes, and cover letters are littered with language so unoriginal and overused that it is devoid of meaning. A resume is not complete if it fails to mention the job-seeker’s willingness to be a “team player.” And employers must think they will attract the wrong candidate if they do not specify that they require someone who is “detail-oriented.” This type of language is ubiquitous; It’s as if you must include a requisite number of bullshit phrases to avoid seeming suspiciously out of touch with the rest of society.

When I was in grade ten, I was forced — school work at this age is never accepted willingly — to read George Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language.” It stuck with me and has influenced my idea of proper writing ever since. Principle among his claims was that language should be clear and concise. Orwell concludes with six tenets that every writer should adhere to:

(i) Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.

(ii) Never use a long word where a short one will do.

(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.

(v) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

(vi) Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

These are useful rules for writers of any pedigree. Those who have a mastery of words can be especially prone to complicating their writing; Self-indulgence occurs where simplicity should prevail.

Bad writing can be found in many places. Orwell directed his ire towards politicians, his perennial antagonists. Politicians are certainly deserving targets. Their language is a fog in which you will strain to find substance or intention. They have made the use of unclear language and stale metaphors an art form. Just try and say so much while meaning so little. It’s quite challenging.

There are many whose writing could be more clear and concise. However, my main problem is with those who intentionally write with no originality. In this article I have mentioned politicians, employers, and job-seekers. It should be noted that job-seekers do so only because they feel it is expected. Human resources, those who make the rules of the game which the rest of us must play, are to shoulder the blame. Clear and original language should be rewarded and trite language condemned.

I hope this post is a reflection of my desire to champion good writing. I fear it is a tirade written by a bitter man whose attempts at finding employment have so far been unsuccessful. I’ll leave that for you to decide.