Monday, December 20, 2004

Simon holds forth on blogging

It's all very incestuous - here I am, posting to this blog about an interview with me about blogging on someone else's blog!

Anyway - this morning I was interviewed by internet marketer Chris Price about blogging for beginners. Finally, you can hear my Russell Crowe accent! (Warning: Not as exciting as it sounds)

The more observant among you may notice that I'm not as articulate in speaking as I am in writing. I notice this in other writers too, and wonder if it actually helps the writing process, because we have to work harder to really explain what we're on about. Or perhaps not.

In fact, Adam and I were discussing this just the other day during his visit to New Zealand - which was great, by the way, and will probably be the source of many posts on this here blog.

Adam was saying there are some who appear quiet in person but then write forcefully, others who have a powerful personal presence but their written communications fall flat, and others still who seem to 'have it' both ways!

At the time we concluded that it's just how each person is made up, but since then I've developed an addendum - we can all learn how to beef up the areas we're not naturally proficient in.


At 8:44 AM, Blogger Sandra said...

How true. I certainly know which "side of the coin" I fall on. Often, I feel like it's easier (not harder) to be more expressive in the written word. I don't know why that is -- maybe the page (or computer screen) acts as something of a shield to hide behind. Speaking (especially forcefully) is something that seems a little too dangerous, sometimes, for me anyway. Although, I think that having a strong communication style, either written or spoken (or both) is a gift, and maybe not all are blessed in every arena. I know my my mind connects to my hand in a way that it does not to my mouth. And while it's good to try and improve that which one is not so talented at, I think it's almost a better idea to cultivate and use to the fullest extent the talents that one possess naturally (and I've written about that it a topic I keep going back to). Which is a life-long process in itself, one that I know I'm guilty of dragging my feet on at times.

Nice interview, by the way.

At 11:22 AM, Blogger Simon said...

Thanks! You make a good point about making the most of what you're already good at - your strengths. I guess it's a perennial dilemma - boost your strengths and downplay your weaknesses, or try and be an all-rounder?

The more I talk about it, the more I realise you're right ... we should work on what we've already got, and know when we suck at something. Actually knowing when is a skill in itself - as witnessed by half of the entrants for American Idol (Canadian Idol, NZ Idol, Australian Idol, etc... it's the same everywhere!)

I guess what I meant in my original post was that there are some areas where there's a little bit of talent just peeking out that needs developing. I suppose knowing what's worth developing and what's not is another valuable skill - and often something that can only be done by trying different things.

At 9:38 AM, Blogger Sandra said...

I totally agree with you on this. It's good to be the most well-rounded person possible, I think. I mean, it is one thing to think you're Aretha Franklin when you're really just belting out bad karaoke, and quite another thing to realize that maybe there is a quality you possess that you could be adept at IF you give it a little nudge. That strength will either get stronger, or you'll lose interest and move onto the next thing.

And it that way, you can become something of a Renaissance Man (or Woman), good at a variety of things. However, that just brings me back to my original point, which is -- you can't have an impactful strength in all areas. At some point, you have to choose (or realize may be a better word here) what you're most good at and pursue it with abandon. Spread yourself out too thin, and soon you're mediorce at everything.

At 11:23 PM, Blogger Borscht said...

Holy! -- I see that I really HAVE been missing the action here!

Let's work in stepwise fashion...

There is a certain rich learning experience coming about when one - in fact - DOES get to meet one's writing colleagues in the flesh. Meeting Simon for the first time was just sublime -- a chance to really chat with the man who's been at the other end of the monitor for nearly three years taught me a thing or two about the nature of the blogging/emailing thing (that most of us have sorely addicted ourselves with! -- or, SY, in our case t'was email and then blogs).

However in the future, I shall avoid long-drawn out email correspondence without first meeting the peron 'live and direct.' A recent experience bears this out -- you'll have to email for the specifics.

In Simon's case, had I known him 'for real' (sho' 'nuff) as of months ago -- I am convinced the profundity ('triple word score' alert!) of our exchanges would have been vastly better -- for only because he resides at the opposite end of the globe does our meeting arrive at such a late stage.

Sandra -- ditto for you hon' -- meeting you makes reading your material all the more inspiring -- there's something about meeting the person that gets your jaw hanging in that wonderful state of jeez aw-shucks.

Okay -- now to kick copious booty about "skills you don't have but that you think you have but that you don't really want." Blah, blah, blah.

My views...

I don't like saying 'no' to anything.

I repeat -- I am not the sort of person to say no to anything. Ever. I refuse.

And I'm a huge advocate of "if you can learn how to do it" (egs. if you can either read about it, watch someone else doing it, or through sheer brute willpower comprehend it 'muscling it,' as I like to call it -- the probably a good chance it's within your realm of expertise.

The comments I've read sound more to me like rationalizations (for Simon rationalisations, or was it colour/color? -- smiles) -- two people trying to sound too PC for their own good -- and a duo whom I'm quite certain can have a much greater impact on their various spheres of influence than what they're prepared to give out.

You two are people whom I know could work very well within the context of a team-building exercise...who could take a ball and run with it through the uprights -- people who can really be good at anything they decide to be good at. I mean it -- I've seen it, and I know it.

About talking to people:

I don't mind face-to-face conversations. Again, make the distinction for which purpose...

Are you chatting for business

...or for pleasure...

And if you're chatting for pleasure, ideally you should be at your most relaxed.

Otherwise, it's still just business. ;-)

Basically, I have a tough time contemplating I don't know if I'm going to allow you two to get away with them now.

Why should I?

Ach, it's good to be back!

-- AM

p.s. smell of napalm in the morning, the dew on the grass, and the gunsmoke in my pocket...


Post a Comment

<< Home