All salient points. He understands the medium. Take a look:
NT Wright on Blogging/Social Media from Bill Kinnon on Vimeo.
Wright’s one big worry: isolationism. Sure it is human beings typing and human beings responding, but there is something about human communication that involves bodies and faces, and however good you are as a writer, you can’t engage in all those ways. We are in danger of dehumanizing our communication.
I like that he uses the terms “gnostic dream”and “cultural masturbation” to describe the sort of self-stimulation that seems so prevalent in in the (bad neologism alert) “blogosphere”. There is nothing more bland in the blog world than the comments section a blog with an exceedingly narrow audience.
Wright’s General Rule of Blogging:
For every hour you spend on a blog, you ought to spend at least that amount of time with real, touchable, hug-able human beings.
Amen.
Related posts:
- Time for a break… 2010 has been a bit of an experiment for me – and a successful one. I’ve been trying to put up one post per day...
- Neologism FAIL – Introducing “Jeggings!” #FAIL Seriously, marketing department… this was the best you could do?!?! I’m sure you could have come up with a better “jeandea”. Previous FAILs Child Safety...
- Hello Readers Hey, if you’re out there reading and care to make this a bit more like a community, leave a short note in the comments section...
- Can Lust Be Subdued By Exercising “Emotional Apathy”? A few weeks ago at The Ascent to Truth, we had a lively discussion about pornography and internet monitoring in the comment section of the...
- On Roman Polanski and Celebrity Worship Matt Gurney in today’s National Post: “Our celebrity worship has finally reached its logical conclusion. For years celebrities could beat their partners, go on drug-fueled...
Great message from Wright – thanks for posting it Michael. I was challenged once again to take what I am learning (in blogs, books, movies…) and translate it to action. If I don’t my learning is just “cultural masturbation”.
From http://www.inhabitatiodei.com
Is Blogging Superficial?
Kent has pointed us to a comment made by J.I. Packer about the usefulness of blogging/reading blogs:
I’m amazed at the amount of time people spend on the internet. I’m not against technology, but all tools should be used to their best advantage. We should be spending our time on things that have staying power, instead of on the latest thought of the latest blogger—and then moving on quickly to the next blogger. That makes us more superficial, not more thoughtful.
Now on the one hand I suppose it could be true that there are tons of people out there writing and reading blogs to stroke their own sense of coolness and contemporaneity. However I think Packer’s comment really just reflects little more than the all too familiar phenomenon of cross-generational disgust. So much so that it actually obscures some of the important issues, such as Packer’s claim that we ought to be spending our time on “things that have staying power.” I’m not sure what exactly Packer has in mind by this, but it sounds far too calculating and utilitarian to be virtuous. Rather than seeking “the new” we ought to be seeking more obvious, substantial, and permanent things that have abiding power (Like Packer’s many published books perhaps?).
Might not a more charitable and realistic reading be that what is being pursued by many bloggers is not simply novelty but truth? It seems to me that consciously seeking exposure to new ideas, books, thoughts, and arguments should not be denigrated but encouraged. What seems decidedly less virtuous is Packer’s recommendation of pursuing things having “staying power” over against “the new.” Seems to me that this is nothing more than an encouragement to be satisfied with the familiar rather than allowing one’s thought to be challenged by a wide exposure to ideas. What’s virtuous or radical about that?