A debate ensues
here regarding whether a blog, or to generalise, a writing is big because of its popularity or content.
The debate was sparked by some of us who have followed GreatBong (I personally have followed him for three years) and witnessed his rise in the blogworld. It followed an addendum to an earlier post of his regarding leveraging blog hits via marketing gimmicks.
It's the popular vs. meaningful debate. Does trying to cater to too many at one go mean the lowest common denominator of actual meaning? Does attention per se sometimes takes away the original spark of originality and genuineness?
A couple of years ago, i was in a funk and some blogs helped me come out of it. One of them belonged to a guy who had come out of a similar situation as me, was the same age and trying to rebuild his life in a new place too. every day he wrote about some very little thing. i discovered the blog after a year of its posts and sat through the night reading it. sounds very reader digestish but the resonance the guy unfailingly evoked was very deep. things which had mattered to me and i had always discounted, been almost ashamed of. i lost the link soon after; and i remember that the blog had no comments.
Similarly, i remember a single post in a blog of a NRI sitting in a cafe missing his homeland which moved me very much. it remained the single post without a comment for almost a year till i stopped logging to it.
And there have been bloggers who I have seen fall in the trap of popularity, who try to reach out to so many, that there is none they touch deeply enough.
One of the comments in the discussion mentions the need of the blogger to respond to comments. It made me feel guilty two-ways - not responding to the comments on my own blog which touch me, and not having encouraged those bloggers whose blogs I avidly and silently follow. Perhaps, the point is more relevant to a discussion - the sort GB initiates, objective and usually impersonal. I feel lost many times for words and feel silence is the most respectful comment. I remember a photoblogger I almost followed from scratch who got very popular who irritated me immensely with her inane replies to some very deep comments, often clubbed together as responses to 7-8 comments at the same time.
I really don't know where this is going.
Perhaps, it's like a basket of our needs. We need somewhere a resonance in the universal themes which go with our identity as a culture, a nation: news, discussions on national themes, popular culture -- the bigger the agglomeration, the more superficial the resonance. Every outer layer of our identity and self which unpeals reveals a deeper self within, seeking a deeper resonance. As the self contracts, so does the possibility and the resonance is rarer and more specific to that self. perhaps, it's a balance; and always has been.
But so many people remain unaware of those layers within, and the beauty their resonance evokes.
My own following of GB was partially evoked by the uncanny similarities of his style and thoughts to my best friend from college. Many things he said seemed to come from that friend. Now that personal flavour is mostly lost in his writing; I almost hear him clearing his throat every time he climbs the pulpit of yet another blog post.
