56 Comments to “Vaspers Asks a Wonderful Writers’ Question”

1. February 19th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
   V-+a%S(p#E*rsT=`hE..]gra_Te[ said

   I love your new header and the black background. I love the sense I have of being in a cozy cave with you. Your blog seems way more intimate now.

   If you keep innovating at this speed, we will all have to run so much faster to keep up with you.

   You are the one who is developing social media into a very personalized and humanified event.

   Thanks for linking to my goofy little blog and my awkwardly worded post on a topic that was astonishingly difficult to write. It was hard to be that introspective, and I had to revise it a few times, kept forgetting key issues.

   I also forgot how people relate to diaries and journals, those No Audience things on paper.

2. February 19th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
   ME Strauss said

   Hi Steven,
   Thank you. I was going for a more intimate, inside, “get away from the rest of the universe” kind of feel. I’m glad that comes across to you!

   I could tell how much work it was, it’s a beautiful work. I so enjoyed it.

3. February 20th, 2007 at 7:05 am
   Dawud Miracle said

   You know, I write as though I’m engaged in a conversation with a partner. Though I approach my conversation from the perspective that my partner and I have just merged out businesses and we’re getting to know each other.

   And when I’m speaking to clients, I take a similar approach. I put myself in the place of being their new partner - the one they just merged with to get their web business needs met.

   This seems to be more effective for me than writing for my client or for a specific ‘imagined’ person. I think it also works because I do become like a partner to my clients.

4. February 20th, 2007 at 7:23 am
   ME Strauss said

   Hi Dawud,
   What a great image to have for your audience. You should write a blog post about that — elaborating on it — your invisible and visible partners.

   Working with a partnership ethic has always felt the best to me — not that can claim I’ve always achieved it. But true partners collaborate naturally and when you get there the work is so much more fun!

5. February 20th, 2007 at 8:16 am
   vaspers the grateFUL said

   I agree with Dawud. As I ponder this more, amazed at how it’s not a superficial question and is not easily answered, I find that I mainly blog for exactly that: a semi-fictional persona, a composite person labeled “my client”.

   I usually feel like I’m exploring a topic or event or principle with an ally, and we are seeking truth together.

   But it’s not illusory or totally imaginary. I think certain specific persons float through my mind and heart as I write a blog post.

   It’s a shifting persona. One sentence of a post seems directed to Liz, another sentence is directed to Jim Estill of Synnex, another sentence seems more pointed at maybe, oh, Paul Woodhouse (thinking: “he’ll get a good laugh out of this description”), and so on.

   Often, when I am responding to another blogger, say Dave Taylor or Robert Scoble, I have one exact person in mind, as I reinforce or rebut (is that a word? it is now…) their position.

   So I think the blog audience is not necessarily a fixed entity, but swirls and shifts and fluctuates, sometimes post by post, or even sentence by sentence.

   Yet it also, in my case anyway, is more often my text responding to someone else’s text, it is text interacting with text, and not necessarily personalized.

   Like if a MSM journalist makes a claim: “blogs, wikis, podcasts, and social media networking are assaulting our culture, economy, and values through the invasion of the amateur”.

   Then text pours forth from me defending the rise of Individual Voice against entrenched Domination Systems.

   Though I may feel anger or passion, they are not the real source of my post, it’s more the text itself, in my head, coming through my fingers into the keyboard and onto the post template.

6. February 20th, 2007 at 8:23 am
   ME Strauss said

   Wow! Steven,
   I could have written that! You articulated how I write for an audience in aggregate. You defined that person I call “my one important reader.” That reader is not a moving target, but more like in the movies — Based on a true story. Some characters are composites of many people.

   I have written more than once, possibly the first time in 1989, that my word come from brain down my arm through fingers onto the page.

   You are a writer. There is no denying that.

7. February 20th, 2007 at 8:55 am
   Chris Garrett said

   It definitely helps to at least have an idea of who you are talking to in your writing, if you get too specific though it can make your writing cliquey and have people feeling excluded.

8. February 20th, 2007 at 9:09 am
   vaspers the grateFUL said

   true

9. February 20th, 2007 at 9:13 am
   ME Strauss said

   Hi Chris!
   Welcome!
   I agree about getting too specific as to who you write for. If a writer doesn’t talk to his or her readers, then he or she will miss the mark no matter how wide or narrow the audience he or she writes for.

10. February 20th, 2007 at 9:27 am
    Chris Garrett said

    Yup it often comes down to actually talking to people rather than force-feeding (broadcasting) content to “consumers” :O)

11. February 20th, 2007 at 9:27 am
    Mike said

    Hi Liz,

    This was a fun question to ponder. For me, there are two answers, one for the blogging process and one for the end result text (maybe two for the end result text). The end result ends up being one of two audiences: sometimes I’m commenting on something someone else wrote, and so I’m writing to them and anyone else who’d like to throw in a comment. At other times, I write things that I think are generally useful and publish them for someone who might find them useful at some point in the future. Nobody in particular across posts, each one is unique. Sometimes I do this when I see a search term that brought someone to my blog and I think “Oh that poor person. This must have really thrown them for a loop. I’d better write something that would be useful to future searchers.”

    As for the process, that’s always for me. I usually start with a fair idea of what I want to write, but invariably the writing process itself takes my thinking process in an unexpected (and usually superior) direction. For example, in the first linked post, my answer to the question “Where’s the line between gift and investment?” wasn’t going to be the one I ended up with. But the more I wrote the clearer the answer became.

    Anyone still awake? I’ll try to be more succinct next time…;-)

    Mike

12. February 20th, 2007 at 9:31 am
    Whitney said

    I maintain two blogs: one business (the link behind my name here) and one for an animal rescue (http://guineapigconnection.typepad.com/pig_notes).

    The latter blog is easy to write — I’m writing it for folks who love their guinea pigs and love talking about their guinea pigs. Being an animal lover, it’s easy to write for other animal lovers.

    The business blog has become easier to write, since I’ve started writing to a group that I used to write for all the time.

    I often write a posting for the rescue blog first. It gets me focused on and relaxed in my writing in general; by the time I shift into the business blog, the stiffness is gone and the ideas are flowing.

13. February 20th, 2007 at 9:31 am
    ME Strauss said

    Ah, Thank you, Chris,
    Consumers, users, all of those “lovely” words that diminish people who read what we work so hard to write for them. If we respect who we write for, we think about them when we write — or we try to when we’re learning.

    It’s the writer’s version of paying attention to the person across the table in a conversation, of watching the audience from the podium to see whether they’re still with us.

14. February 20th, 2007 at 9:32 am
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    zzz, erm, uh, huh? Oh, hello Mike. Your point about the post that changes direction as you write it is what woke me up.

    Many times I have a topic in mind, I slap a title on the post template, start writing, then the direction changes as I think, and I end up changing the post title.

    Very good hardcore blogging observation.

    By deconstructing our mental processes, we are moving rapidly closer to the kernel.

15. February 20th, 2007 at 9:35 am
    ME Strauss said

    Hi Mike,
    Your thinking is never boring.

    Sometimes I write to pass on information, but usually I write to share an experience. When I share an experience, there’s a need, I think, to be intimate with my readers for them to care about reading it. For them to care, when I write I have to care about what they care about and choose how I tell the story within that frame.

16. February 20th, 2007 at 9:35 am
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    “user” is a common technical term for anyone who “uses” a web site or product. In usability analysis, we “use” the word “user” for one who “uses” what is “used” and is subject to “usability” analysis.

    “consumer” simply means a similar thing.

    While these words may not be very attractive to average people or ppl, they are no more ugly than “blog” or “wiki”.

17. February 20th, 2007 at 9:36 am
    ME Strauss said

    Hi Whitney,
    I do the same thing — choose the order in which I post to my blogs so that my writing flows more naturally.

    I envy you your guinea pig blog. It’s been fun for me to peek in there!

18. February 20th, 2007 at 9:36 am
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    who put that LSD in my Frappacinno?

19. February 20th, 2007 at 9:37 am
    ME Strauss said

    Hi Vaspers,
    I know about users and consumers, but the people who come here are incredibly cool people who read. But then, you already know that.

20. February 20th, 2007 at 9:47 am
    Mike said

    Liz,

    I agree with your point about ‘caring about what they care about’, because that will greatly increase the depth of the reader’s experience (not that I always heed that advice).

    Mike

21. February 20th, 2007 at 9:48 am
    ME Strauss said

    Um Vaspers, I think you did.

22. February 20th, 2007 at 9:50 am
    ME Strauss said

    Hey, Mike,
    If all of us got the “care about what others care about” thing right all of the time . . . we’d be saints, not just great writers.

23. February 20th, 2007 at 9:51 am
    Whitney said

    Liz:
    It’s your stories that help make your information stick. I like people who talk “in stories” from their experience; you do it a lot in your blog and you’ve done it some in your PVM work (at least, with me you have).

    Sheila Bender over at http://www.writingitreal.com talks a lot about “Velcro words” in essays, memoirs, and poems — words that stick in your memory long after you read and leave a piece. (Off-topic: I highly recommend her newsletter and her online workshops to all creative writing types out there.)

    I would argue that in blogging there might be something along the lines of “Velcro posts” — posts that resonate with and stick with readers long after they’ve read them. Posts that readers remember even when the blogger’s archive of posts hits a thousand.

    The more authentic the mental/emotional place you’re writing from, the more clearly you can SEE your target reader, the better the chance of producing a Velcro post.

24. February 20th, 2007 at 10:09 am
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    I get the most positive feedback when I post How To articles, scathing attacks on things that are screwy, and when I post poetic, metaphysical sounding inpirational articles.

    How do we know what our readers really care about? By asking them, by interacting via comment threads, and by doing Google Fight or Google Battles on post titles.

25. February 20th, 2007 at 10:13 am
    ME Strauss said

    Wow! Whitney.
    I have posts like that — posts of my own and posts on other blogs — they’re just with me forever. They are like favorite famous quotes. I call them up and revisit them in my mind when I need to recall their wisdom. It’s the same as recalling a story my dad used to tell me.

    Thanks for saying that!

26. February 20th, 2007 at 10:15 am
    ME Strauss said

    Hi Vaspers,
    Your readers and mine cross in a Venn diagram. I can’t imagine ever writing a scathing attack on purpose — I might by accident . . . I can be clueless. If I can’t imagine me doing it, I suspect my readers would be thrown by it too.

27. February 20th, 2007 at 10:16 am
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    Excuse the slight threadjacking nature of this comment, but I wonder what our most memorable blog posts are.

    I mean: what blog post do you recall reading that has stuck with you more than any others you’ve ever read at other blogs (not your own)?

    Am doing a mind sweep right now, not coming up with an immediate winner. Is it a post that I spent a lot of time commenting on? That I linked to? That I quoted and added running commentary to on my own blog?

    Think, Vaspers, think! Come on man, think, I cry, Think!

28. February 20th, 2007 at 10:24 am
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    OH heck, Liz, I write scathing attacks on MSM jerks all the time, when they attack bloggers, especially.

    You she-bloggers tend to be more nurturing, while us men folk blog-dudes tend to be more combative. I guess.

    For example, some guy has published a new book on How Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts, and Social Networking is Assaulting Our Economy, Our Culture, and Our Values (pretty exact title of book).

    Now this author hates the rise of individual voice, and is merely defending the Morbid Stream Media, Business As Usual, and a variety of Domination Systems, mostly patriarchal Luddites, who feel anger and loathing of us bloggers and other digital media pioneers.

    So I launched an attack against him over at the Wikinomics wiki. I have yet to be scolded for such barbs, though I am not sure how long my luck will last.

    Bloggers have been historically more opinionated and aggressive than typical humans.

    ;^)

29. February 20th, 2007 at 10:27 am
    ME Strauss said

    On the great posts, Vaspers, I have several. I quote them. One quality they all is that they read like music.

    On the scathing writing, in my case, it’s because I gave up being mean.

30. February 20th, 2007 at 10:34 am
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    I don’t see it as being “mean” if you know what I mean. I see it as defending the blogosphere, or exposing the jerks, or warning people about dangers, like MySpace predators or Intellitxt content hyperlink spam.

31. February 20th, 2007 at 10:37 am
    GP said

    Vaspers… great most excellent “food for thought” from innkeeping land. I’ve pondered that before when something happens here at the B&B or other life lesson and think” I need to post on the blog about that”… but “who is it to?

    Mike just made some milk and cookies after i awoke from my nap but i think youve said it well. For me it’s like articulating to a friend and business partner in the hopes that it’ll somehow make a difference.

    GP in Montana

32. February 20th, 2007 at 10:40 am
    Mike said

    Liz,

    Giving up being mean is a great virtue. I subscribe to the philosophy that everyone is always trying to do the right thing given their lattice of mental models.

    That said, I also subscribe to the philosophy that there are some malignant memes that should be folded, spindled, mutilated and expunged from the lexicon of rational thought. They, not their ‘hosts’, should be roundly savaged! Sometimes keeping the two separate can be a tight rope walk, but some of us are more foolish willing to do it.

33. February 20th, 2007 at 10:42 am
    Mike said

    Absolutely, GP!

34. February 20th, 2007 at 10:50 am
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    I side with the Buddhist thought that every living entity is seeking happiness and avoiding pain and sorrow, even if they’ve got the whole business all messed up, as in warmongers loving bombs, or rapist loving rape.

    We try, not to be “nice” but to be nice if that will avoid discomfort, ostracism, pain, embarrassment, etc.

    We are “mean” when we feel hurt or disrespected, or in the case of sadistic misanthropes, when we enjoy inflicting pain on others.

    This world is full of idiots and evil persons who want to hurt others, or mediocres who want to coast through with lousy customer service and shoddy products.

    The blogosphere is a great place for setting the record straight and for launching positive agendas and justified attacks on what is bad.

    All evil needs is for good people to do nothing.

35. February 20th, 2007 at 11:41 am
    ME Strauss said

    I agree with you all.

    I gave up being mean. That doesn’t say I gave up. I still stand for things and won’t stand for other things.

    I still have to look in a the mirror and still plan to look back on my life without regret. I just fight evil by outflanking it.

    I grew up the baby of the family by 8 years. I never had a chance at fair fight head on — I never learned those skills anyway.

36. February 20th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
    Lisa said

    Dear dear Liz,

    I took this post seriously and commented a bit on Vasper’s site. The result was to turn this conversation on its head a bit and get transparent. Instead of asking myself to answer the question, I am asking readers and bloggers to answer it in a slightly different way. A sort of wiki-meme survey, that I truly hope alters what I write about. At the very least I hope it starts a big fat conversation.

    Care to play? You are now in possession of the magic wiki-meme wand (of course you always have been…).

    Lisa

37. February 20th, 2007 at 1:13 pm
    ME Strauss said

    Oh Lisa,
    What did you do now? You mischievous one. :)I’m so ‘whelmed! I asking friends to breathe.

38. February 20th, 2007 at 1:31 pm
    Lisa said

    I know. I didn’t originally post with you in mind, since you have this so nailed, but I felt funny leaving you out.

    Breathing is good.

    L

39. February 20th, 2007 at 1:45 pm
    ME Strauss said

    No worries, Lisa, I’ll get to eventually.

40. February 20th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    Being combative and aggresssive, I beatcha to it! erm….

    ;^}

41. February 20th, 2007 at 2:33 pm
    ME Strauss said

    Oh Vaspers,
    You’re so silly!

42. February 20th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    Sure, but don’t let anyone know that, it would ruin my badboy reputation. Please keep this secret as confidential and hush-hush as possible. If anybody found out, blah blah blah.

    Ergonomic Economics is Kling!

43. February 20th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    You’re only a stranger once. From then on, you’re a weirdo!

44. February 20th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
    Michael A. Stelzner said

    Hey Liz - Love the “new” look! - Mike

45. February 20th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
    ME Strauss said

    Vaspers,
    No one calls any of my readers weirdos . . . Every reader who hangs here is incredibly cool and intelligent.

46. February 20th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
    ME Strauss said

    Thanks, Mike!

47. February 20th, 2007 at 3:45 pm
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    I know. I funnel all the loveable weirdos over to my site so we can bask in the bizarro realminess.

    ;^)

48. February 20th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
    ME Strauss said

    All of the people I’ve ever seen over there look surprising like the people over here.

49. February 20th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
    Robyn McMaster said

    I’ve met amazing people both on the internet and in person. As I write I keep these folks in mind and imagaine I’m conversing with them.

50. February 20th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
    Mike said

    Vaspers,

    Didn’t Plato write about a “cozy cave” once?

    Mike

51. February 20th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    Mike: Yes Plato did have a cave with a fire and shadows.

    Robyn: I keep reminding myself of the cool people I’ve met, from obscure strugglers to famous authors, by virtue of blogging and posting comments at other blogs and through email correspondences.

    I’ve been able to distribute my research and insights and also mp3s or CDs of my music. I have learned many amazing things, seen interesting videos and photos, and heard other people’s lectures and music, via the blogosphere.

    I also recall my first blog post. I had no idea who would read it or care about it. It took a long time to attract readers, comments, emails, and lasting friendships, but they did come.

    The joy of seeing my words, then photos and more, on the web.

    The compassion that greeted my more intimate and sad posts.

    The flames that made me think more deeply.

    The spam comments that taught me how to distinguish human sentiments from robot remarks.

    The compensated PayPerPost boilerplate comments that taught me how the web can be broken and destroyed by incentivized, inauthentic, coached opinions.

    The blog abandoners who taught me how to stick to it, no matter what.

    What a wild and wonderful trip it has been. And we’ve only just begun!

52. February 20th, 2007 at 8:02 pm
    ME Strauss said

    Robyn we have to figure out what Akismet finds so attractive about your address that it keeps eaching you. Then my response is so long after your comment comes.

53. February 20th, 2007 at 8:07 pm
    ME Strauss said

    Vaspers,
    I love when you talk about the old days. Though your olds were before mine. They were still a lot like mine were, waiting for ever for that first comment. Mine took 21 days, but then the man who left it said, “May I quote you.” I don’t think that I’ll ever forget him. Two months later I celebrated him and made him a knight.

54. February 20th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
    ME Strauss said

    Vaspers come over to comment night. We’re playing with crayons again.

55. February 20th, 2007 at 8:22 pm
    vaspers the grateFUL said

    Can I bring my dream record and playback unit? Your crayons have new colors that the human eye has never dreamt of.

56. February 20th, 2007 at 8:31 pm
    ME Strauss said

    They’re onto on Dove bars and Klondike bars now. . . .