Used car salesmen? Garbage men? Dog catchers? Moonshiners? Voice talent? Congressmen?
No need to answer, it's a rhetorical question. If bloggers aren't at the pinnacle of the contempt scale, they're right up there near whomever is.
And it's not unjustified. Bloggers say some pretty stupid and awful things sometimes. Often on purpose. There was the blogger who wrote contemptuously about God filling Mary with his "hot wet sticky Holy Spirit". There are the bloggers who complained earlier this year when a terrorist attack on a U.S. base in Afghanistan failed to kill Vice President Cheney, who was visiting at the time.
And the worst of the blogging mentality is creeping into print journalism, too.
So my bloggin' buddy Jay, over at Pro Ecclesia * Pro Familia * Pro Civitate recently posted to express his contempt of Britney Spears' latest shenanigans, and his post (not for the first time) was picked up by The Washington Times, and, seeing his caustic words in a different place, didn't recognize them as something he was pleased to have written.
So, real man that he is, and a being a stand-up regular guy (in spite of being a lawyer), he posted an apology, and mentioned that he was considering giving up blogging.
Well, Jay has a good blog there, informative and entertaining, and so it was predictable that a score of comments would quickly be posted urging him not to give it up.
And, just as predictably, he got one (anonymous, of course) like this:
I suggest giving it up permanently. You are just duplicating others' efforts, and making a mess of it in the process. Try to burn up some of that excess testosterone by doing something else -- e.g., manual labor for your parish.The commenter later returned to revise and extend his remarks, too, saying:
As I said ... "You are just duplicating others' efforts." There are TONS of Catholic blogs out there, and most of them (like this one) just duplicate the efforts of others. It's all a massive waste of time, for the bloggers and their readers -- which pleases satan greatly. He wants people to be wasting 1, 2, 3, or more hours a day on reading/posting -- instead of going to Mass and/or adoration, spending time with family, studying Bible and Catechism, evangelizing door-to-door, watching EWTN, performing the spiritual and corporal works of mercy, and taking part in other good enterprises.I've gotten the same sort of attitude, from time to time, though never so bluntly.
Decent Catholics are now wasting massive amounts of time in going to multiple blogs in which they read the same stories (or comments about the same stories) over and over again. The purpose of my previous post was partly to give fraternal correction to the blogger but MORE to point out that this blog does not plug a hole. There was no gap that needed to be filled by this blogger. I believe that lots of bloggers are on an ego trip, WRONGLY thinking that they are needed by society and that they have something significant to say that no one else is saying. [Emphasis added.]
My guess: this anonymous commenter is a professional journalist.
This attitude is a big part of the reason why I took up blogging in the first place. The professional journalists would like nothing better than to return to their dominance over mass communication.
The underlying assumption here is that most people have no need and no right to be heard from, and should know their places and stay silently in them. There is only an undefined minority who are "entitled" to have their voices heard.
I once read an embarrassed account by a science fiction writer who, when he was young, upon meeting the great Robert Heinlein for the first time, and evidently wanting Heinlein to take him seriously, told him, "I've sold over a million words."
Heinlein calmly replied, "I don't think there are that many words. You must have sold some of them more than once."
It's all about how you string the words together.
No one else strings words together quite the way Jay does. No one else picks quite the topics he picks, or says quite the things about them that he says.
Oh, sure, perhaps, someone, somewhere, is doing "This day in Jacobite history" posts, but not in between posts of the latest from his favorite Ohio bishop, along with insightful comments about matters of politics, law, faith, and culture, together with yet another post about Our Lady of Walsingham, and some cute pictures of his kids or his lovely wife. Only Jay has Jay's values, Jay's passions, Jay's interests, and Jay's (usually, though perhaps not always) gentlemanly manner.
I've made Jay seem very special here. But the truth is that there are tens of thousands of bloggers that anyone could say similar things about.
Blogging is for anyone who wants to speak his mind. And the mind of the common man -- the regular guy, if you will -- is not unworthy to be spoken. I've written elsewhere that we all of us are entitled to think highly enough of ourselves to speak our own minds.
The popularity of blogging, I have no doubt, is primarily due to the fact that so many of us have been forced for so long to be passive consumers of others' opinions, rather than being able to set up our own little stalls in the marketplace of ideas.
Jay shouldn't shut up, unless he's run out of things he wants to say. Nor will I be shutting up anytime soon.
Nor will tens, and even hundreds, of thousands of others.
15 comments:
Well said!
I heartily second!
Sometimes, you really hit it right.
I don't buy the duplication of effort line. This is like saying their should be only one news channel and one newspaper. While their is of course a lot of coverage of the same story there are also a lot of different nuances in the responses, besides each blogger has his own audience.
The underlying assumption here is that most people have no need and no right to be heard from, and should know their places and stay silently in them.
This is for the most part true. Even I recognize in myself that the desire to pronounce an opinion on any given topic - as I'm doing here - is to my own detriment. I remember reading here, that your own opinionated nature has effected your refusal to financially support the Archdiocese. That's pretty serious business. It's also something most pew sitters never contemplate, because they don't believe they should place themselves as arbitrars over their bishop.
Personally, I hope Jay comes back to blogging. I don't think he could have stated his reason for taking a break better though, and you like others are missing it. To wit "you're suddenly horrified that you could have said such unkind things about another human being."
Jay is of course free to take a break for any reason he finds sufficient, including, as he said, as pennance.
But some human beings deserve to have unkind things said about them.
My objection is to the suggestion the anonymous commenter made that no idea need be expressed more than once (a point Jay's commenter made twice) and that most people have no business making their opinions known. I find that to be an offensively elitist idea.
As for my relationship with my bishop, I certainly do not see myself as an "arbitrar over" him. He is my shepherd. God will judge him; mercifully, I hope.
I, on the other hand, am charged with judging where to write my checks. And so I have made a judgment in this regard. Most people, without thinking, opt not to support the archdiocese. I have done so after careful consideration.
It's possible that I have made a wrong judgment in this matter, but it's not possible that I'm not entitled to make a judgment.
Some human beings deserve unkind things be said about them? Did you get that from the same theology manual that says you are not obligated to financially support the church?
"most people have no business making their opinions known" is a very true statement. Tongue and wicked appear quite often together in the Good Book.
Some human beings deserve unkind things be said about them? Did you get that from the same theology manual that says you are not obligated to financially support the church?
That would be the bible:
"When he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducess coming to his baptism, he to them, "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?" - Matt 3:7
So, John the Baptist was being unfairly harsh? Jesus was never similarly harsh with his listeners?
But I do support the Church financially, I write a check to my parish every week, without fail, whether I feel I can afford it or not.
"most people have no business making their opinions known" is a very true statement.
Maybe you haven't thought this through, but just signing on to such a statement marks you automatically as either a hypocrite or an elitist.
If "most people" have no business making their opinions known, what does that make you? Someone who shouldn't, but does anyway? Or one of the favored elite few whose opinions are worthy?
As noted above, it makes me a hypocrite.
And who, MZ, gets decide who has no business making their opinions known? You? Is disagreeing with someone sufficient cause to silence a voice? Or is it tone? Or shall we argue that it is education? Or is it wickedness? Or is it whether I see the logic in it? If any of these are applied, we could silence much of the world.
I would agree that all voices are not worthy of attention. Personally, I ignore those I find irrelevant. Some I would argue are dangerous. These I might actively work against by through argument and persuasion. Notice the difference in stance? No one is arguing "most people have no business making their opinions known."
And the statement that
"most people have no business making their opinions known" is not manifestly true. While two or more might agree to such as statement, the "most people" would certainly not overlap entirely. And with sufficient input all voices become either silenced or allowed.
How do you advocate the position you advocate, while maintaining a public voice. Clearly, you think that you deserve a voice - but why? You may be part of my or someone else's "most people."
Nothing like the illogic of elitism.
I find that to be an offensively elitist idea.
AMEN!!! No one is forcing you to read what I or anyone else writes. Don't like it, don't read it. That first amendment thing can be pesky, can't it? ;)
Thanks for your kind comments, Paul.
And you both are burning straw at this point.
Actually, in addition to prayers, I believe Spears needs to be taken over someone's knee and spanked (like Jay did).
I have a blog, I pay for my bandwidth, I will say what I want, when I want, and take responsibility for my words. Those who browse the web have the option of visiting or not, their choice.
If I'm duplicating effort (like highlighting something Paul found with my own scintillating commentary at the end) so what.
I've found that blog posts are more like conversations where you go from one link to the other getting different insights on a particular issue.
Jay, blog or no. Your choice, buddy. I know if I had read my words in WaPo, I would have felt so soiled I'd have had to take a 2 hour shower. :)
And you both are burning straw at this point.
What on earth does one say in reply to a man who self-admittedly has no business making his opinions known?
Especially when his remarks bear no discernible semantic content whatever?
I think he's made a valid point amongst some non-valid points. People do waste lots of time on blogs, and there's so many blogs that no matter what you say its been done and said somewhere else. And as I'm saying this, I know im wasting time, yet I have nothing better to do with a broken leg so what else can i do at night. Anyways, his point is equally as valid as any other so lets not deny the fact that all of us could be doing something much more productive. just an opinion :)
Yes, people may (and do) waste time blogging. Yes, that time would be better spent at Eucharistic Adoration, praying, fasting, etc. Yet how many people can do that every spare hour of the day? And many people (most of us?) need social interaction. And we were not, apparently, called to the monastic life. Yes, we need to make heroic attempts at charity. Human anger seldom serves God's ends. (When it does, it's through the same grace that He uses to make use of other catastrophic events.) So all need conversion. I suggest that those who carp at others' faults first take a good, long look at the log in their own eyes and see what can be done about that. Let us all begin again.
Post a Comment