Reliving the previous cycles of edition wars and the associated outrages over race, sex, and all the other moral offenses can allow you to weather the current tempests by providing you with the long view on things. "This too shall pass," is a maxim that will cross your mind time and again as you see the latest controversy flare up and sides are taken; but there's a danger in too frequently living in the past. You become dull and repeat the old standards (Gary said . . .) without consideration for the wider implications. Worse still you stagnate.
I think that most of us would do anything to avoid that stagnation and I think that's why so many of us latch onto the most relevant topics of the day, clinging to them like they were a life raft to relevancy. We want to matter and to have people listen to our words of wisdom. We all want to be the blog that people check first thing in the morning and the last one they check in the evening. We want to be thought of as smart and clever so we use our biggest words when we write and pray that no one realizes that we had to look up their meanings before posting that latest article.
It's easy to naval gaze once you start seeing success and to constantly remind everyone that you broke this important story or that you've written this article that everyone read on reddit. Doing that though is the first step backwards towards becoming the sort of myopic topic of derision so many people make fun of when it comes to this hobby. So how do you remain relevant when you're holding onto the past?
I don't have all the answers, but sometimes I just want to say these things out loud.
Maybe just do what interests you and if it happens to make you 'relevant' then it's a happy coincidence?
ReplyDelete- Ark
That's actually been my conclusion as well. :)
DeleteJust what I was coming here to say. I was going to formulate it as "don't worry about the current fashion, just do what makes you happy".
DeleteThen send the Judge a token. Write it on a pound note.
faoladh, you rock in every way. :)
DeleteMan, it's Ark that rocks. I wish I could draw like that dude. Have you been watching his Inktober entries?
DeleteNo, faoladh, YOU da man.
Delete- Ark
I wonder if Chess had these problems back in the 15th & 16th centuries. Were Castling and En Passant considered scandalous? What happened to the Camel? Did annoying people like me insist that the 6th century version was way better?
ReplyDelete"Getting rid of the die that determines which pieces you can move fundamentally changes the nature of the game, and not in a good way!" - Timur the Lame*
Delete*Not really.
I seem to remember that people got upset by changes to the game but I'll be damned if I can remember where I saw them.
DeleteI think if my blog brings a smile to someone, then it's worth the effort. Of course even if it's only me grinning, I've found my joy.
ReplyDeleteI think you're absolutely right. I wrote this mess because I was up late and had gotten a message that really bothered me.
DeleteKick it like a cunt punt because she scratched your face and tossed your whiskey in the wound. 5th edition is good, in fact I say we should all call it "True 3rd" because this is the stuff that should have followed 2nd. This is not just my opinion, but the facts as they are.
ReplyDeleteI'm honored to be an "Explorer of the Nyr Dyv". Never know what I'm going to end up reading, and that is why I read. To paraphrase, "Other blogs type, Dyvers Blog Kills!"
"Other blogs type, Dyvers Blog Kills!"
DeleteAndrew, I'm putting that quote on the fucking blog!
I feel like I'm in good company here, because my thought echo those already here. I do my blog more for me, in the end. If it pleases someone else in some way, bonus!
ReplyDeleteI also try to stay out of arguments, and only post commentary on "key issues" when I have a definite opinion.
Tabernacle, Holmes, tabernacle.
Delete