Wednesday, December 15, 2010

How would Jesus blog?

Jeremy Kidwell reflects on how his faith affects his approach to blogging. I broadly agree, though my reflections are in the comments.

As always, I welcome feedback on any aspect of my blogging, either in the comments or by email (or even in person if you have to!). Specifically, after reading Jeremy's post, I'd like to hear reflections on the volume (or perhaps velocity) of material on this blog.

Update: Jeremy has written a follow up post with a series of questions that I hope to answer at some stage.

5 comments:

arthurandtamie said...

It occurs to me that, as with others of my most well-loved blogs, I've been a pretty lazy commenter here.

So -- hi!

Some good reflections from JK...

I've not been able to keep up with your recent volume of posts, but that's no problem -- I like the way you've been moving back and forth between 'roundup' posts and commentary, and even when you're posting in 'information mode', you're still couching it in personal and/or theological terms, especially with your excellent network of self-links.

In other words, I don't think the velocity hasn't come at the expense of originality or thoughtfulness. Lovely!

Arthur

arthurandtamie said...

*has
(in the 2nd-last sentence)

byron smith said...

Arthur - Thanks for your encouraging feedback. That is all good to know.

(PS I also welcome feedback that is constructively critical. The lack of it here so far isn't because I deleted anyone who said anything bad!)

besideourselves said...

Everyone, I guess somewhat rightly, expects 'theological writing' to be considered, reflective, and therefore not at all redolent of the consumer news' continuous live feed. Hence Jeremy's guidelines I suppose, excellent blog btw, thanks for the link!

Though theology of course really 'has to do' with every aspect of life, and therefore 'theological writing' should, reasonably be expected to take in the entire gamut. Meaning that more, dare I say, journalistic content such as is often found on your blog, is not only completely valid (HWJB?), but that it furthermore finds itself behooved to come just as thick and fast as the relevant news does...

The only problem with that, in my view, has to do with the mind's remarkable ability to inure itself against any constant stimuli, eventually relegating even the most stridently sounded alarm to mere background noise. "Communication Bandwidth" certainly remains an issue even if the content is justifiably incessant.

I would therefore wonder, in the spirit of humbly offered constructive criticism, if the 'velocity and volume' of posts on particular topics may not begin to isolate your blog from the wider theological audience; I think we should all be alarmed at environmental issues, but perhaps slowing down the frequency and going in for more reflective analysis may reduce the likelihood that those around the borders (who are probably the most important) don't begin to dismiss the content as alarmist.

Which is not meant to detract at all from an excellent blog; your invitation for feedback simply came not long after these very thoughts had occurred to me as I became staggered by the volume of material coming though!

The only thing I really want to stress is sincere appreciation of your hard work in providing such excellent, provocative and compelling content.

Kudos.

byron smith said...

Peter, some excellent feedback there for me to ponder. I was already feeling that my current mix has been becoming a little light on theological reflection. And your point about incessant stimuli may well be accurate (though a warning that I've already got a couple more posts of links already scheduled). Thanks for your thoughtfulness.