Re: the many re: to blogging challenges
It seems like many are replying to Loren's blogpost on blogging challenges, discussing blogging challenges. Since I discussed this two days ago, I'd like to claim I was ahead of everyone else by a day, and as such I'll do something I dislike doing - retreading upon my arguments, albeit in a new method.
Loren starts out by saying this: Blogging challenges, especially those requiring daily posts, often lead to low-quality content.
I suppose this depends on how you define blogging challenge. Is a blogging challenge something you do to test your writing skills? Is it something you do to test your ability to meet deadlines? Is it even meant to be challenging, more fun? And do they lead to low-quality content? They may do if you're not thinking ahead, deciding to jump into the deep end for the fun of it. They may do if you're not a particularly great writer - but if you've got a list of prompts lined up, and are able to utilise creativity to its fullest, it can be a very satisfying thing to do.
Loren then states this: I prefer reading spontaneous posts that are authentic, not those written solely to meet a daily challenge goal. As a reader, I can easily tell the difference.
Indeed, so do I - in a way. I rarely sit down and blog, immediately publishing the post once it's finished. Instead, I'll let it wait and I might refine it, perhaps even in the future when I catch a spelling mistake in the future. And who knows? Perhaps those posts are just as authentic.
I will agree, though, that posts written out of desperation just to meet a deadline aren't my favourites. But in a way, I wonder what these posts are often like - what is this difference? Is it that they're very short, often flavourless - in which case, I reckon many blogposts on the internet are merely out of desperation (and I will admit, I am a victim of this too - I have written poems mainly to publish them on my blog, not out of my love of poetry, and I regret this).
Write when you have something genuine to share, Loren adds, and I agree - except, wouldn't that be many posts? What is the meaning of something being genuine, and who is the juror to decide if that throwaway post was genuine or not? My poems were possibly throwaways, yet I'd say they were still genuine, merely not in intent. Yes, I think power stations are often key historical parts of towns, just because I wrote about them in a poem I only wrote to plug a gap in the schedule doesn't mean my thoughts weren't genuine.
I think the only truly bad blogposts are spam, marketing, and trollposts which only serve to spread hatred. Every other post will have heart and intent put into it, which thus means there's nothing wrong with blogging challenges. I personally think discipline is key, and those writing a throwaway post means they're ensuring the streak keeps on going, meaning they maintain confidence and carry on writing. You don't have to like every post, after all, and on a platform like Bearblog where every post is part of a large community, you're bound to find a brilliant piece of writing amidst a few sentences which don't do much for you.
I'm personally embarking on what I consider the greatest blog challenge of all - writing and being confident and arrogant enough to think someone out there wants to read about that time I went to a pond in Herne Hill, or that someone wants to know what I think about a New Order album. Most blogposts, apart from the aforementioned dark triad, have something valuable to say. So let's not deride challenges for doing the thing we should all want - people raising their voices, no matter how quiet they may be.
17/14?
JC's reply
gru:Bz's reply
Forking Mad's reply
Matan's reply
here's to the future replies of Loren's post, and all posts in the future - communication can give hope, as paraphrased from an OMD song.\