Allow me to take a second to step away from addressing writing in books to discuss writing in blogs. Yes, I know I've done that before, but those have been about this blog. Now I'm going to talk about other people's blogs. No blog in particular, just a disturbing trend I've seen.
I get the urge to go on an angry rant. We all get mad. However, lots of people in the comments sections of these blogs read an angry post and automatically make some absurd assumption like, "Oh my God! That's so insightful! I love how you keep it real!" Am I the only person on the planet who thinks you don't have to be mad to be real? Are people being dishonest or less real when they don't go on an invective-laden tirade?
Some bloggers seem to revel in this approach. Hey, they think, if I can convey how mad I am, then people will give me props for being 'real.' I guess that's where some of my aversion to this comes in - folks are looking for affirmation when they do it, which makes it fake, not real.
Being mad and then telling everyone about it doesn't give you any greater insight into the world. The reaction people give is an emotional one, not a substantive one. I can go on and on about how much I love my wife or enjoy what I do, but no one comments that I'm "keeping it real" when I do these totally normal things. Is an emotion any less real just because it isn't an angry one?
If you want to rant about something, and Lord knows I've done that, that's great, but it's no more real than anything else you post unless you decided to lie when you said those other things. It's a release for whatever was pissing you off, nothing more. I take insult when people say my mad voice is real, because it implies that I'm not as real other times.
Stop blogging looking for affirmation because you can post something angry. Hey, I'm just keeping it real.
I get the urge to go on an angry rant. We all get mad. However, lots of people in the comments sections of these blogs read an angry post and automatically make some absurd assumption like, "Oh my God! That's so insightful! I love how you keep it real!" Am I the only person on the planet who thinks you don't have to be mad to be real? Are people being dishonest or less real when they don't go on an invective-laden tirade?
Some bloggers seem to revel in this approach. Hey, they think, if I can convey how mad I am, then people will give me props for being 'real.' I guess that's where some of my aversion to this comes in - folks are looking for affirmation when they do it, which makes it fake, not real.
Being mad and then telling everyone about it doesn't give you any greater insight into the world. The reaction people give is an emotional one, not a substantive one. I can go on and on about how much I love my wife or enjoy what I do, but no one comments that I'm "keeping it real" when I do these totally normal things. Is an emotion any less real just because it isn't an angry one?
If you want to rant about something, and Lord knows I've done that, that's great, but it's no more real than anything else you post unless you decided to lie when you said those other things. It's a release for whatever was pissing you off, nothing more. I take insult when people say my mad voice is real, because it implies that I'm not as real other times.
Stop blogging looking for affirmation because you can post something angry. Hey, I'm just keeping it real.
I'm not sure I think that everyone who posts angry is looking for affirmation ... not *everyone* ... but I do think one key to good blogging is to not do it until you've calmed down.
ReplyDelete