Inconsistent and Arrogant...Does It Matter?

*walks in, swipes an index finger along some furniture and picks up dust, raises an eyebrow at an infiltrating ant colony*

Well, it's been awhile, hasn't it, O Imaginary Reader? I say Imaginary because, in all likelihood, this blog will pile up, unread, part of the huge glut of material the internet churns out on a daily basis, and no one (except a few friends in the interest of humoring me) will ever read it. Even more so, since I'm a notorious internet raven (I like something until something shinier comes along) this blog goes through periods where I post 4-5 times, and then abandon it for anywhere from 6 months to a year before I slink back, shamefaced, and give it another go. As a record of my day to day life (trust me: not really blog material) this has pretty clearly failed. So...why am I back, and why am I writing? Well, the direct answer to that is that I've agreed to be involved in BEDA, which, for those not hip to the world of Internet Memes, is an acronym (not an initialism, since this IS pronounceable!) that stands for Blog Every Day in April. The reason I'm committing myself to this project is more or less the same reason I put myself through what was simultaneously the most grueling and most rewarding experience of my life thus far: writing a novel in 30 days (well, technically 45 days, because I went over-wordcount, but minor detail, that), spurred by NaNoWriMo (National Novel Writing Month).

Also, I saw something today that formalized an intuition I'd had for awhile. For the last 3 years, a musician named Jonathan Mann has been writing a song a day, about whatever he feels like: politics, general geekery, nonsense, viral videos, etc. The theory behind it all, for him, is what he calls the 70-20-10 hypothesis. It goes as follows: out of everything you write (sing, create, compose, etc, same holds true) 70% will be cringe-worthy, 20% will be mediocre, and 10% will be truly good. That may seem like pretty dreary odds, but the more you write, the bigger that 10% is going to end up being. So, in the hopes of producing at least 3 blogs (out of 30) that might possibly be worth reading, here goes. Right now, as far as people I know, Scarlett, my fantastic and peerless twin, is joining me in BEDA, but YOU SHOULD TOO. Yes, you. Comment on this post if you're willing to give it a shot, and we can team up; mutually reading and encouraging and all that jazz.

Now, on to your regularly scheduled 70% drivel.

Since this is a project centered around the blog - a totally (or relatively) new phenomenon - I wanted to talk a little bit about aspects of this Blog thing that interest me. The foremost is...why the hell do any of us do it? Sure, there are some people for whom blogging is more of a formal, every day, living-earning business, but for the vast, vast, vast majority, it's just sending scribbles out into this vast aggregate of text we produce every day, work published in a completely public forum, but usually published with next to no expectation of dissemination or a widespread audience. My first inclination is just to label the blog the dysfunctional, kooky, slightly more arrogant cousin of the journal, but I'm not sure that's true. Traditionally, there was a huge and rigid industry that acted as gatekeepers of the written word: if you didn't please them, you were sunk. Now, even if the overall readership is the same (next to zero), we FEEL as if our words MIGHT matter to SOMEONE, and it's always possible that someone might stumble on our post. Unlikely as hell, but possible. Anyway, this is a longwinded way of saying why I'm still a little uncomfortable making this blog about ME -- because I'm next to certain my life isn't interesting enough right now to warrant a play-by-play. My goal is going to be to talk about my day, sure, if anything interesting happened, but more broadly try to tie it to something I personally find interesting.

I'm running out of steam, but one last quick thing.

Has anyone ever heard of/read Francis Fukuyama? BRILLIANT political development theorist who came to speak at Tulane and totally blew my mind. According to his theories, what was the main catalyst that drove Europe out of the tribalist funk that every civilization had to pass through and towards what he defined as a more modern, impersonal, non kin-centric state? The Catholic Church. By establishing a divine code which was commonly accepted to supersede the rule and the whims of any given leader or any given government, it gave Europe a strong concept of the Rule of Law. Additionally (I'll admit, I found this the most fascinating) part of the reason that the proscription against priests marrying and having children came about because the church, wanting to "purify" the church, didn't want priests to appoint their family members or to pass on the parishes to their children, and in so doing broke the tribalist pattern within that institution...since tribalism relies on family ties.

I'm buying his book as soon as it comes out April 12, and if that was interesting to anyone other than me...they should buy it too.

Peace, Love, and Happiness
Cody