Whats, Whys, Whens and Hows of My Blogging
Below are the questions that he has asked himself. Let me answer them also from my perspective first and then get into the questions that he has asked us - the fellow bloggers...
Q: What motivated me to write my first post?
Q: Is that valid still?
A: Both. My previous answer answers this question as well, I guess. This is the advantage of giving more detailed answers than required. :)
Do you always have a compelling story- be it a political story, personal one or a romantic poem or a photograph or a picture or a recipe or a historical monument or religious site you visited- to share with others? If you always have a compelling story, what is the role of research? Without research, how do we get new ideas, new recipes, new scenes to be photographed? How do we form opinion on new developments?
Or do you choose a subject and then research on the same? In such a case, will you be able to emotionally connect with the same? Does it not sound too logical and less creative? Is it not a case of form over substance?
Q: Is it the irresistible inner urge that makes you blog? Or do you want to get noticed?
Do you see what is trending and jump into it? Pragmatic, I would say. Or do you intensely feel about something and genuinely believe that it will ‘trend’? Pragmatism or idealism- what drives you?
A: Yes. I try my best not to take sides. I use my experience in the corporate world. All appraisals start with the goods and then only we discuss about the bads. Even if the bads are more or more problematic, I should talk about the goods first to prepare my reader to listen to me. If I sound conclusive in the first paragraph, they may not even proceed to the next. They would just brand me as something and continue to remain what they are. I never want to hurt anyone nor do I want anyone else do that to me. Like in appraisals, there are also readers that only take the goods and conveniently ignore the bads. That's the flip side of this approach. Yes. Sometimes I don't try to be honest when I feel that's not the need of the hour. I know, it's more political than journalistic. It would sound positive if I say it's psychologically a better approach.
Yes. I just hate getting branded. I would even change my view on something to avoid getting branded as something. I know, it's not right, but as I said earlier, as a libran, I am more interested in consensus building and harmony than anything else. Like on everything else, there are exceptions on this as well. I don't mind getting branded as something in certain aspects. I feel - it's okay!
A: Yes. I do. Every time I look at the total number of posts I get more confident. If there is one person to appreciate my post, I feel fulfilled. And, yes - very often I have felt that I could have done better but can't help it considering the time constraints and other commitments that we have.
A: Yes. I do feel so. Let me put it this way. I keep saying this - one of the primary reasons why I love writing is, it helps me vent out my frustrations in some form; I also help someone else get more frustrated about it, which surely is going to lead to something some day. It's like being part of a silent revolution. This is what is happening with blogging and social media these days. So many drops together... becoming an ocean!
A: I want to be honest here again. I don't like such comments. I strongly believe that there should be some decency in whatever one speaks or writes. I am at least mature enough to ignore things that I don't like. At a minimum, I expect this from others. However, I am open to specific comments that help me correct myself or get better. I can't call intolerance constructive criticism. They are different. I think, I understand the difference between them. Hopefully, I am right! :)
Q: Is your answer a straight ‘haa’ ya ‘naa” for these questions? Or is it somewhere in between?