Just an Opinion?

While I don't want to put words in Paul D's mouth (or on his page, as may be more suitable here), I think it would be fair comment to say that we have both been struggling to come up with blog posts lately. Partly, this has been because we've been intensely busy with real world things (ok, Paul has been busy, and I've been playing a lot of Stick Cricket.) But I also think it reflects the difficulty, after nearly 6 months of blogging, of consistently coming up with issues that we think are interesting, presenting arguments that we think are well-reasoned and putting them out in the public sphere for anyone to read, analyze and tear to shreds. Again, I can't claim to speak for Paul - but when I first started blogging, I couldn't figure out if I was doing it because I wanted to gain a cult following of thousands of readers and be anointed as the liberal Rush Limbaugh of the internets, or if I was doing it simply because I wanted to create an 'opinion snapshot' of a certain period of my life, with reader comments being a exciting, welcomed but unintended byproduct of my spasmodic brainvomits. And I guess I still haven't decided why I'm doing this. Probably because its more fun than reading my Company Law textbook. (Yuck.)

I think the greatest tension I have found is between trying to write consistently, and trying to write perfectly. When I first started, I set myself a goal of two posts a week. In that regard, I'm a complete and utter fail - the James Buchanan of bloggers - but I've still tried to update regularly, because I figure its good for self-discipline, and good to ensure that my half of the blog doesn't collapse into disuse. That has led to several times when I've pushed 'Publish' on a post I'm not entirely happy with, or in many cases not happy with at all. Its one thing to expose your naked thoughts to the violent, swirling maelstrom of the internets, but its another thing to expose your thoughts when you convinced that what you are showing is wholly inadequate. Don't get me wrong, I'm inordinately proud of some of my posts - but there are others that the moment I read them over again the next morning, I cringe. I guess this is why I write, in a stream of conciousness style, very late at night, or the moment I wake up. I'm less picky then, even if I lose ALL ability to keep my word count within a readable limit (much to Paul's chagrin).

In a way, I'd like to think that through the constant verbiage that spills on this page, I'm contributing to the fine intellectual tradition of the 'opinion column'. In a sense, an opinion column is a first draft of history - the immediate responses of reasonably intelligent people (who are not, and should not claim to be experts in the field they write on) to a particular event or issue. By producing my opinion on a given topic, I'm taking a stance on the issues of our time, trying to convince other people like me of the cogency of my arguments or at the very least, fostering a reasoned debate which doesn't take place in a rarified academic circumstances, but between a couple of ordinary citizens who give a damn.

I realise that to a large extent, my previous paragraph was a manifestion of some Winstonesque delusions of grandeur. AWordOnFailure's readership is almost totally derived from friends I've bullied into checking it out, and people who googled the term 'Teen Harlot'. (Seriously. Although, I should add, both Paul and I always excited when we get comments from 'randoms from the internets', so thankyou 'randoms'.) But my delusions of grandeur shouldn't detract from the power of the opinion column to have real impact on public opinion and on the direction of intellectual tradition in a liberal democracy, generally. Which is why it is to the great shame of newspapers New Zealand-wide, that our current opinion columnists are lacklustre. Compare the columns that appear on the New York Times, with the columns that appear on the 'stuff' website (a collection of many major NZ newspapers). I'd encourage you to look at both those links, but the striking difference for me was that while the New York times columnists offered idealogically principled, progressive approaches to the big issues of our time, the New Zealand columnists were content to offer reactionary commentary,that was in line with the public sentiment and not a deep analysis of whether those sentiments should be ones the public should be proud of. (This is not say, that I think I am the great white hope of New Zealand journalism, and I alone could bring the light of awesomess to the dark cesspit of New Zealand opinion writing. If you have read my previous posts, I clearly couldn't. But unlike the people (and Michael Laws) who write for major newspapers - I don't get paid to produce flagrantly unprincipled drivel.) Maybe, I'm wrong. I do have a major case of AmericaEnvy that could cloud my judgement so I would be interested, as always, to hear what you think.

I started writing this post, because I felt I needed to write a post, and had no ideas where I would end up. I suppose my overall conclusion, 'having opinions is cool', isn't going to set the world on fire. But having opinions IS cool, and the opportunity the internet affords us to be able to give an opinion and put it in the public square (in our case, a squalid and ill-attended public square) is awesome with a capital O. I guess on that note, Paul and I have been trying for ages to get people to write a 'guest post' on an issue of their choice, which we'll put up on the blog for you. If anyone is keen, it would be much appreciated, it would great to get a plurality of different opinions on this blog, rather than just my hatred of Michael Laws and Paul's hatred of hippies. Plus, it's better than studying.

Alex



(lol, Ron Paul)