Writing for an audience is a tricky bit of business; it's hard not to get caught up in the performance of it. Like a kid who wants to show mom how totally high they can jump, you want to do something clever and applause-worthy. Cleverness and eloquence is a double-edged sword though, and it's easy to come off stilted and inauthentic. Many of Obama's detractors complained about this, that he seemed distant and unavailable. I'd argue that in a statesman, that's not such a bad thing, but in a blog it's deadly.
It's hard to write to you and not at you. I tend to write the way I speak, but that works better if I'm writing the way I'd have a conversation, not the way I'd recite a speech. It's hard, but it's worth figuring out. I am here, in part, to learn to be a better writer, and that doesn't happen if I simply rest on the certainty that my writing is good.
Don't get me wrong, my writing is good. But it could be better, it could always be better. I would like to write something better to you.
One of the reasons I prefer LJ's to blogs is this effect. I feel like I'm being written at instead of shared in something. I can pick and choose the authors I read for entertainment rather than intimacy.
Posted by: Chris | February 24, 2009 at 01:10 PM