Chekhov's Mistress
Ogling Litblogs More Fun Than Googling Yourself, Writer Claims
Andrea Curtis writes in Canada’s CBC about her fascination with Litblogs (Word Associations 4/28/05) with some nifty comparisons to other decadent passions like
chocolate…
And yet, I’m sure I’m not the only writer for whom cruising the lit blogs is a bit like eating a chocolate bar — it seems like an innocuous enough treat sitting among its kind on the convenience store shelf, but even as you take that first bite, you know you’re going to regret it. You can’t possibly stop with just one section, so it’s going to be a spiral into gorging on the whole thing, feeling squishy, undisciplined and, just to amplify the misery, the deep lowdown of a sugar crash.
and porno…
Of course, in blogging lingo, I’m just a lurker — the creepy porno connotations are no doubt intentional — someone who cruises the sites but doesn’t join in the forums or attempt to communicate with other blog readers. Maybe people who write in and comment on items and have a back-and-forth with the blogger experience genuine human connections with one another. I can’t say, but I know my mother would tell me that what I should really do to get my daily interaction quotient is go to the gym or take a walk or go out and talk to my neighbours
and of course, books…
And yet, it’s infinitely appealing for a person who loves to read and aims to write to slip through the wardrobe into a parallel world where other people actually care about books; …
Many of the lit blogs are also unusually well written and even nice to look at (two qualities the blogosphere is not generally known for). They’re like mini-magazines with attitude and quirk to spare — and they actually provide time and space for new writers who may not have a forum elsewhere.
Ms. Curtis mentions a few of the regulars from the blogroll: “Bookninja or Bookslut or Bookangst 101 (not to mention Buzz, Balls & Hype, Maud Newton and Babies are Fireproof)”
It’s nice to finally see someone write about Litblogs without looking for some negative aspect or grand implications. Thanks, Andrea.
Read widely, think well, and write often
comments
Good story, Bud, I have linked to this ( can’t see your trackback URL?) GMT
– genevieve (05/09 at 07:52 AM)
Page 1 of 1 pages of comments
Creative Commons License Deed Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported
You are free:
- to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work
-
Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
-
No Derivative Works. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.
- For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page.
- Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.
- Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author's moral rights.
This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code (the full license):
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/legalcode
This site employs rank-denial and other anti-spam measures.
Your link here will do nothing for your rankings or traffic. Off-topic comments will be deleted.
Previous entry: Last Chance to Subscribe to Poetry at 1/2 Price
About this Post
- Posted by: Bud Parr
- Date: April 29, 2005
- Filed Under:
Litbloggers & Blog Floggers
- Comments:1
- Links to this Post: Technorati
