all photos are mine
To the 1.4 kg neuronal knot between my ears.
A blog can be evaluated by reach or by what the author gains from the writing process. This blog is about process, not readers or likes or subscribers. The purpose is to force myself to question unquestioned norms, broken systems, and everyday assumptions.
A Nature article, Writing is Thinking, inspired this blog. The unnamed author points to the value of writing for thinking:
“Writing compels us to think—not in the chaotic, non-linear way our minds typically wander but in a structured, intentional manner. By writing it down, we can sort years of research, data and analysis into an actual story, hereby identifying our main message and the influence of our work”
I write to think, not for fame. Seeking N followers is industrious and vain.
People think fondly of N followers but they rarely imagine each of those anonymous individuals to whom one has no connection and perhaps no shared values. The only reason to seek recognition from them is to harvest their attention for money.
If that is not the goal, then perhaps fame alone is the goal. But above average recognition by others does not make you think better. It's a social ranking system divorced from actual merit or substance. Being known is not an achievement. It's a circumstance. I reject the assumption of writing for fame, and for its applications of monetization or "vanitization" because being known has nothing to do with advancing my thinking. Do not like share or subscribe.
If I do not seek an audience then why publish online? Publication is accountability. Publication forces clarity. Without that pressure, the posts will become a "notes from the underground", a rambling neurotic knot. My metric is to maximize clarity in the confines of retaining an idiosyncratic style. Despite the ambition of clarity in prose, I want to afford some rawness in topic and prose and structure.
Writing for a specific audience is too niche. I intend to explore many topics in varying formats and varying styles. This blog will be a reflection of actual thinking, which is messy and non-linear. This seems to contradict the Nature quote, but only partially. Writing forces structure, yes, but I won't but I won't prioritize structure over exploration. I do not need the noise of an audience with expectations of tone, of content, of consistency, of all the markings of a brand. I do not want to become a Subtack subroutine. That is industry. Not thinking.
This does not mean I reject comments or perspectives on my writing. I welcome dialogue, which can also advance thinking, but I cannot suffer the trap of optimizing for that dialogue. I do not need the obligation to deliver a consistent experience. I need to be exploratory, unfinished