Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Continuing the Conversation

The comments to my last post are very interesting (it comes from having good readers), and I would also like to direct your attention to the comments thread (23!) to the Gaia Bernstein post at Prawfsblawg. I was but a minor participant in this lively debate. But I got a compliment from Ann Bartow, who's "a fan." I blush. She also warns me never to underestimate the misogyny of the blawgosphere. I furrow my brow and take heed.

After reading all of the comments, I feel validated in my choice to blog pseudonymously here, where the community-building "Chronicles of Academia" aspect is important to me. It is my blog, so I can control this structure and space to suit my needs and blogospheric ambitions. But I can't control reactions, and don't want to--what people do with my legal/non-legal ramblings is their choice--they can read me or not, they can take me seriously or not, and they can respond to me if they wish. But I can promise my readers this: I will not engage in "drive-by" blogging, taking down other people/ideas with snark and vitriol. If I have an intellectual disagreement, I will make an earnest argument about it. I will always endeavor to keep the tone of this blog civil and collegial. And if I comment on other sites, I do not act like a troll, drop F-bombs, or do any other kind of drive-by commenting. If I disagree or make a criticism on someone else's site, I write under my own name. In my space, I have the freedom to write about the more personal aspects of academia, and I choose to do so anonymously. I discredit no one but myself in that case. And if there are those who take me less seriously because I do so, then so be it. It is their choice.

For everyone who reads this blog, whether you are a beloved regular or a fortuitous click-by visitor, thanks for reading and helping to shape this blog. It changes everyday in its subject matter, focus and aspirations. The debate about anonymity is interesting and will always be controversial--since the days of Publius. And blogging about blogging is just the hi-tech, slightly less respected companion to scholarship about scholarship. Everyone (except critical theorists, linguists, and pedagogues) who reads such things is left wondering if there is anything nerdier/more loserly than to read writing about writing.