Saturday, April 28, 2007
Writer's Paradox
As an avid writer with limited technical understanding of the medium I often inhabit, I am always intrigued by the routes people use to arrive at our weblogs, posts, and papers. This morning's comment by a reader from Amsterdam, submitted to a page in our index, left me wondering if this person was perhaps a student of one of our colleagues in Europe, or if they just happened on us through a search engine. (Tracking down random anonymous guests is not something I'm inclined to do.)
As a storyteller who began learning the craft around campfires with a visible, audible audience, I have had to adjust to generally less responsive online readers more accustomed to passively consuming my creative output than they are to participating in the discussions I attempt to generate. It's a paradox I live with: more readers, less communication.
The distance correspondences I have managed to develop, however, are frequently more rich in content than ones I can produce locally, so there is indeed a tradeoff. Which got me thinking about the irony of online publications like the International Journal of Communication (a great resource), and the fact that they have no built-in method of conveniently producing correspondence with their readers. Broadcasting, but not receiving.
All this reminded me of a remark made years ago by my friend from the University of San Francisco, who observed that perhaps my unique contribution to understanding social change was the accessibility of my presentation of ideas developed through discussions with my more formal colleagues.
A task I gratefully welcome, even if it sometimes leaves me wondering just who my audience really is.
As a storyteller who began learning the craft around campfires with a visible, audible audience, I have had to adjust to generally less responsive online readers more accustomed to passively consuming my creative output than they are to participating in the discussions I attempt to generate. It's a paradox I live with: more readers, less communication.
The distance correspondences I have managed to develop, however, are frequently more rich in content than ones I can produce locally, so there is indeed a tradeoff. Which got me thinking about the irony of online publications like the International Journal of Communication (a great resource), and the fact that they have no built-in method of conveniently producing correspondence with their readers. Broadcasting, but not receiving.
All this reminded me of a remark made years ago by my friend from the University of San Francisco, who observed that perhaps my unique contribution to understanding social change was the accessibility of my presentation of ideas developed through discussions with my more formal colleagues.
A task I gratefully welcome, even if it sometimes leaves me wondering just who my audience really is.
