December 29, 2003

Hissing and Other Territorial Noises

A post from Instapundit comments on this blurb from Editor & Publisher:

Blah, blah, Blogs: Probably the most hyped online development in 2003 (along with growth in site registration), but will these self-important online journals actually change the way newspapers do journalism on the Web?

I'm always amused when this topic comes up. I'm amused by how the established press reacts to the blog phenomenon and by the reactions of bloggers to whatever the established press says about blogs.

It all sounds a bit familiar to me, you see.

Back in the 80s when desktop publishing was the "hot" technology and made it easier for independent and underground publishers to produce their 'zines and newsletters, I remember seeing articles in magazines and newspapers from the established press (and especially from the publishing industry trade media) that were as dismissive and as snobby about those independent and underground publications as this little blurb from Editor & Publisher is about blogs. When they weren't being dismissive about how desktop publishing could be and was being used by the "unanointed," so to speak, they were being alarmist instead and accusing the new technology in various degrees of having the potential to foster some horrendous collapse of the whole of written English language and literature.

***

Arguing against the legitimacy of any upstart phenomenon is nothing new. The old guard is always sniffing the butt of anything new that deigns to enter its territory and hissing at it in the hopes, I guess, of making sure it knows without a doubt just who's Alpha cat or maybe just in the hopes that the upstart whippersnapper will just go away altogether .

Pardon my metaphor -- we just got a new kitten a couple of weeks ago and the inevitable interactions between my older cat and the new one have been perhaps too prevalent of a backdrop to my life as of late.

But it is, in essence, all just a territorial dispute between new and old -- whether they be ideas, people, processes, cats, or something else -- and just a differing perspective between the established and the not. The established will lash out when they think they are threatened -- either by decrying the encroachment into their establishment or by dismissing the encroachers as beneath their notice. That's what my older cat, Alecto, has been doing for the past couple of weeks all right, but I've noticed that whether she's hissing at the kitten or avoiding him completely by hiding far away from him from her high perch up in this storage loft we have in one room, she's highly aware of him at all times and has become obsessed with watching him constantly.

The cats, at least, will sort it out eventually.

***

My household cat dramas aside, there's an historical example from 18th century France that I can't help but bring up while pondering this particular subject. One of the early after-effects of the Enlightenment was an influx of young writers flocking into Paris, inspired by the great philosophes (Voltaire etal.) and eager to devote themselves to a writing life. However, a great many of them found that the literary world of the philosophes had become a privileged establishment of its own and this establishment did not exactly welcome these new aspiring authors with open arms. It wasn't long before there was a surplus of young starving unnoticed writer types toiling away in Parisian garrets (in fact, it was really here where that whole starving writer toiling in a garret romantic myth really started).

Voltaire, who one would think would have been a bit more sympathetic, was annoyed by them. He made fun of what he thought of as "dilettantes" and their "addiction to poverty and failure" and said they couldn't write or they would have been noticed.

But Voltaire was old and cranky by that time in his life when he uttered these sorts of things. In his earlier days, he had been the upstart fighting against the establishment of his time, which had been more than just a dismissive literary elite as Voltaire's main adversaries in his early days were an aristocracy and a Church that had absolute control over who could publish at all and what could be published. They had the power to outlaw what they objected to and even to outlaw criticism of their objections, which is of course far more egregious than a literary old guard merely rejecting and saying unflattering things about newer writers or different styles of thought and prose. At least, the newer writers had the freedom and luxury of getting to bitch about the old guard's elitism in retaliation. Which they did. Quite vociferously and in print yet -- as this bitching gave rise, in part, to a sudden proliferation of new independently published and self-published pamphlets and broadsheets.

Sound a bit familiar? It is quite an old cycle, isn't it? And as inevitable as my cats going through their little period of adjustment.

* * *

Amused as I was at Instapundit's post about Editor & Publisher's comment about blogs, I was actually more intrigued by the updates he includes in his post pointing to a few other bloggers' observations about his post. I was especially intrigued by his quote from Trudy Schuett and I followed the link over to her blog WOLves: "For writers who promote their works" to read her whole post.

As she points out in this post:

After all, many bloggers now have a readership equal to or exceeding that of a small-town newspaper. What's different here is that the blog's readership is scattered all over the world. While the Yuma Daily Sun informs their local hard-copy circulation of roughly 25,000 of general events, I'm informing about the same number of people globally on highly-focused subject matter, with my four blogs. We're not actually in competition, because our readership/frequency isn't the same.

Although her post was a reply in reference to the relationships between traditional journalism and blogs, I thought it was also relevant to some of the peculiar perceptions I've noticed over the years from the literary world. I've been a small 'zine publisher/editor since the mid-80s (both online and in pre-Web days, on low-budget print 'zines) Also, my own writing (mostly fiction and poetry) has been published from time to time in small 'zines and other weird little places since the late 70s (when I was in my teens). I have a healthy list of publication credits from obscure and little magazines that most people have never heard of (unless they tend to be pretty familiar with the little and literary magazine world, that is.)

I know from 'zines I've worked on, without a doubt, how much larger and diverse an audience the online 'zines can draw in comparison with the old paper versions. Yet, I've always found it difficult to try to translate web traffic stats into something intelligible to people who are immersed in the traditional literary world those rare times I am in a situation where I'm supposed to tout my alleged accomplishments and credits (which I've always hated having to do, but like having to have a decent resume for finding work, sometimes it is loathsomely necessary). A lot of people in the more established and traditional pockets of the literary world still seem skeptical about online publications, although that seems like it has been changing slowly in more recent years.

Anyway, I was pleased to discover the WOLves blog from Instapundit's link to her. I looked through a few of the other entries on her WOLves blog and was intrigued by her perspective on some of the issues she addresses that I know I'll be perusing her blog some more in future.