A couple of years ago I was on a plane reading New Literacies by Colin Lankshear and Michele Knobel. Among the literacy practices discussed was blogging. In the second chapter, the authors explained blogging, using Andrew Sullivan’s among their prime examples. They go on to explain the appeal of blogging thusly:
[B]logging is in tune with the tenor of the times. Blogs invoke the personal touch and put the character and temperament of the writer out front, rather than disguising it behind a facade of detached objectivity underwritten by the presumed editorial authority of the big formal newspaper or network (38).
I’d been reading Sullivan for a few years at that point, but mostly in his mainstream published work. Though I’d occasionally read it, his blog remained mostly a curiosity to me, and it wasn’t until after Lankshear and Knobel wrote about it, in the context of other modern literacy practices, that I felt pushed into learning more about it. I did, by reading Sullivan more often, then clicking on links, and reading those, and reading more, and I was soon hooked.
I’ll save any further self-indulgent recounting of my life reading blogs and sending the occasional note to their authors for another time. I have finally started one myself. It has been a long time coming.
As a novice blogger myself, I read a few words of advice before starting; apparently, you’re supposed to stick to one topic. I would find that difficult. I, and my fellow blogger who should be joining me soon, expect to blog about popular culture; education (we are teachers, teacher educators, and literacy researchers); literature; politics; and whatever else is on our minds. If this turns out to be a fatal mistake, then it will have turned out this blogging thing wasn’t for us after all.
Here goes.