I’ve been working on a more substantial piece about music and gigs and nostalgia and my gig-going plans for the year, but it’s getting long, and possibly out of hand. So I’m going to delay it till later.
Consider this a placeholder.
And so it’s got some content of value, let me just draw your attention to the National March to Parliament next Saturday, 25th March. Meet from 11:00 in Park Lane.
I don’t know if it can do any good, but if you believe, as I do, that Brexit must be stopped, then you should try to be there.
One of the blogs I follow is called And now it’s all this, by the mysterious Dr Drang. He writes mainly on engineering and provides lots of interesting Python scripts.
What I’m interested in his blog’s title and subtitle, though. “And now it’s all this”; and “I just said what I said and it was wrong. Or was taken wrong.” I’ve been reading it for years, and had only idly wondered about why it was called that, or what it really meant.
I’ve also been listening to, and reading about, The Beatles for years — for a great many more years. And so I was very familiar with John Lennon’s “more popular than Jesus” line, and the subsequent furore.
But not that familiar, it turns out. Or not with his apology, at least.
We recently watched the excellent Eight Days a Week film, which has lots of Beatles footage I’d never seen before, and puts it all together into a compelling narrative.
Of course, it covers the “Jesus” period. So there was John, at a press conference, making an apology of sorts. And out pops:
I just said what I said and it was wrong. Or was taken wrong. And now it’s all this.
Oh. OK. Right. I should have seen that years ago.
Of course there are two remaining questions:
- Why did the good doctor choose to name his blog that?
- And what does the “leancrew” mean in his domain name?
I’m sure you all pay great attention to the goings on at this here blog. You’ll almost certainly have noticed things going very strange yesterday, with the same post being repeated three or four times, in various forms and ways.
No? Well, in case: what we had is (probably) a glitch caused by a WordPress plugin. Or maybe not. Maybe it was something else entirely. Really, we’ll have to see what happens when this one posts.
But I’ve turned of some of the sharing features for now. So you might not even see this if you’re used to being notified via Facebook or Twitter.
Actually since that’s where most of the interaction comes from, it would be interesting to know who if anyone is not reading it that way. Is anyone subscribed to the feed? that’s how I still do most of my blog reading.
Note: If you’ve seen multiple copies of this post, it’s because I had trouble with accidentally posting it in the wrong format, and then WordPress refusing to let me change it. Hopefully be all right now.
“Write even when you don’t want to,” say some people encouraging us to write every day. That would be me right now. The “don’t want to” part, not the “encouraging” part. It’s late and I haven’t written anything yet and I’ve made this daily rod for my own back.
On the other hand, I do love to write, and I can’t deny that I’ve done more of it in this last couple of months.
Though, not, as I hoped I might, any more fiction. I’m still stalled in the middle of the novel which in idea, at least is nearly five years old. It’ll be starting school soon!
And I need to get round to submitting some of the other, finished, things I have. Because they’re no use just sitting here on my
hard solid-state drive.
Sometimes you just want to write something. Maybe you have something specific to say, maybe not. Maybe you have nothing to say at all, but just want to get something out there.
Maybe you’ve set yourself a target, and having missed a day (and being aware that you’ll doubtless miss others) you’ve decided you want to keep the average up. So that at the end of 2017 you’ll be able to look back at at least 365 posts in the year.
Maybe at the start of the year, that was about as many posts as were on your blog in its whole history. So it’s a major challenge. But maybe you keep going, even with nothing to say.
OK, I missed a day. Obviously it had to happen sooner or later. But yesterday I just totally forgot.
Oh well. We pick up and keep going.
I may not get to do a proper post today, as I’m in Edinburgh visiting friends. As well, my phone’s battery has become increasingly erratic, so it could go down at any moment.
So this is my post for today, unless I get round to writing more.
Have a good weekend, everyone.
I don’t mind people posting a tweetstorm, wherein they have a lot to say and do so via a series of linked tweets. I think there are better ways to do it; better places to host medium-length pieces of writing, but whatever works for you.
And of course I don’t mind other people tweeting a link to the top of the thread and urging others to read it.
But I really don’t care for the habit of doing so while saying nothing other than, “Thread.”
I mean, come on, people: if it’s worth linking to, it’s worth writing few words to tell us why you think we should read it.
This post could fit in five or six tweets. I suppose I should have posted it that way. Except #OwnYourContent.
Yes, yes, it’s all very meta: all I ever write about is blogging. But that is exactly what I want to talk about today: is a blog better if it is only on one subject?
I suspect that the most successful blogs in terms of size of readership are fairly closely focused on a single subject. I read several technology blogs, such as Daring Fireball, Six Colours and MacStories, which all write mainly about technology with an Apple slant. They have all achieved success by keeping that focus.
On the other hand, there are some highly enjoyable ones that take a broader scope: Tim Bray’s Ongoing, John Scalzi’s Whatever, or Wil Wheaton’s blog; those authors write about whatever takes their fancy.
I, as you’ll have noticed, take the latter tack. But the question is, should I be more focused? Should I concentrate on writing about politics, say?
It’s worth considering, certainly, but here’s the thing: I’m not actually sure what I would focus on. I don’t think I have the single-mindedness to keep to the same subject. I value the flexibility of the old-school, personal blog.
Which is just as well, since that’s what I seem to be writing. So there you go.
Something I forgot to mention yesterday was that I thought the “bitface” term was useful not just to refer to people who manipulate bits for a living (or hobby) — programmers, like myself. It can also work to discuss anyone who makes digital content: websites, blogs, podcasts, videos, photos, and so on.
We’re all moving bits around. We’re all labourers at the bitface.