Tag: Writing

Thoughts on Letting AI Write For You [en]

I was planning to write another blog post. I may still write it – or not. But as I opened my computer, I had a pile of open tabs. I’d clicked on a bunch of articles of Daniel Miessler’s blog for possible further reading. Daniel is the guy behind LifeOS (previously PAI), a personal AI framework (infrastructure) I have written about and spent many (many!) hours battling with since April.

It had been a pleasant surprise to discover Daniel’s blog was active, and even more that it was readable, as most of what I’ve seen “from him” these last months is in the GitHub repo or PAI/LifeOS documentation and rather AI-sloppy, sometimes even to the extent that it sounds like his DA (Digital Assistant) posting on his behalf. (I say this with all due respect, the thinking behind PAI/LifeOS is genius.)

Not so with the blog, clearly well-written by a human (see, by the way, his AI Influence Level system, something in the same vein as AI Labels).

So I fell in the trap of looking at the topmost open tab before closing it, and I started reading, and I was even more pleasantly (ephorically?) surprised to read this:

I value text because I see it as one step away from thought.

I believe thinking is the one thing we should be careful not to outsource, and I worry what this idea smuggles in is a major step toward making our creations opaque to humans. Not just AI’s creations, but ours as well.

The reason I value Paul Graham so much is because of the idea compression work that goes into writing super clean prose. It’s difficult to write clearly because it requires thinking clearly.

Daniel Miessler, “Text is Thought, and Thought is Holy“

I worry that if we vibe-think to AI and have it spit out amazing HTML, we’re instantly disconnected from the idea. Like where did the idea go? It started as vibes and got put through a woodchipper and turned into someone else’s HTML.

I see this happen so much. A lot of writing is a way of thinking, it’s not “path to an output”. And I think that when thinking is missing in the process, we feel it, which is why AI Slop and even many “decently AI-generated texts” are so distasteful to read.

Because the “thought” they contain is not coherent, not organic, and we cannot access it comfortably through the text we’re reading. We need to do extra work to try to get at it – and sometimes it’s not even there. Just like “over-optimised” administrative processes end up outsourcing a large part of the work they’re supposed to do to the people they should be serving, “over-optimised” text production outsources part of its work to the reader.

We could maybe apply this analysis to badly constructed, hastily-written reports whose sections have been copy-pasted to death and which lack overall integrity and structure.

Jens-Christian wrote about this too in “Keep Your Voice“.

Daniel again:

I just feel like if you didn’t put the hard thinking and writing work into the original idea, and then maintain it in a format that’s easy for humans to read and edit, then you have somehow surrendered something Holy to the machines. I say this as a total AI maximalist.

This reminds me of two things that came upon my radar recently.

The first is this post by Alex Hillman about how generative AI has broken the social contract by upending the balance of effort from producing to consuming content. What used to be expensive (writing, creating a song, shooting a video, etc.) is now super cheap, in terms of effort (if not tokens). Sure, we used to have content farms and the like, but it was still a lot of manual labour. Now I can feed a one-line prompt to an AI model, leave the computer running and come back to a whole book of content. Sloppy, but a lot of words.

Over time, the world we live in has shifted more and more in the direction of “too much content, not enough brain time to absorb it”. It’s something humans have been complaining of since before the internet. But like everything, it’s speeding up like a hockey stick. The democratisation of online publishing, and social media on its heels, has brought in another height of cognitive overload and collective anguish about there being “too much stuff out there”. And now that more and more of this stuff is produced by machines that never need to sleep or eat (except a prompt or two), the overall quality of what is out there is going down as fast as its quantity is going up.

This reminds me somewhat of my thoughts about audio and video versus text, back in the day. If you record a 30-minute video and post it online, it took you 30 minutes, but it will also take each person who watches it 30 minutes. If you spend 30 minutes writing up your message, it will take the people reading it much less time.

Because what has not changed is the finitude of human existence. Not only is our time limited, but also our energy and ability to read, watch, learn, concentrate. This is, now more than ever, our bottleneck. Producing something today is pretty much worthless. Producing more is senseless. What has value is: does it enter somebody’s mind in a meaningful way?

There is a link between this and the AI brain fry explanation that I referenced some time back. AI has no limits on the concurrent projects it can work on, and no limits on how much content it can produce. But we have limits on how much delegation we can supervise, how many open loops we can stand, and how much content we can absorb.

And this brings me to the second thing: understanding cannot be outsourced. Andrej Karpathy now famously said you can outsource thinking, but not understanding. A lot of what AI produces does not help us understand anything. It gives the illusion of opening the door to that, but it’s more often than not just word froth. Reading is about understanding. It’s about meaning. There is no shortcut to that. Only you can learn and understand so that you later know.

When Karpathy says you can outsource thinking: well, some of it. But what we writers-as-thinkers know very well is that the thinking that we do when we write is the kind of thinking that leads to understanding. Saying that thinking can be outsourced is a slippery slope because it drags down a chunk of understanding with it.

Writing is thinking is understanding.

Well, that was the first open tap. 27 more to go. (Just kidding. I’m going to close them. I might write my Paléo Festival blog post tomorrow.)

Des mots sur un carnet à Paris [en]

C’est moche pour l’accessibilité, je sais.

Transcription IA non vérifiée (22.07.2026):

1er juillet 2026, 21h15

Ça fait longtemps que je n’écris plus à la main. Encore plus longtemps que je n’écris plus à la main avec soin. Depuis mes TMS en 2002 ou 2003, ce n’est pas confortable. Ça crampe, ça tétanise. Je regarde un peu de haut ces exercices qui disent de faire à la main. Je tape à l’aveugle plus vite que mon ombre. Bref : se passe-t-il vraiment autre chose dans mon cerveau quand j’écris à la main ? Avec mes “petits problèmes linguistiques” depuis mon accident, je me pose la question, à nouveau, de l’utilité de ce genre d’exercice. Pourquoi pas. Écrire à la main, c’est me reconnecter à un rapport plus primitif de mon rapport à l’expression écrite : le seul que j’avais jusqu’au milieu de mon adolescence, quand j’ai appris à taper ; et le principal, jusqu’à la fin de mes études, justement autour de 2002-2003. C’est moins rapide et moins confortable, mais en ces temps post-commotion, je me réconcilie — tant bien que mal — avec le temps lent.

Je suis à Paris. Une semaine pour deux journées de formation à l’IGB. La dernière était aujourd’hui. Mon cerveau est cuit [?], et c’était fascinant et ultra riche, comme toujours à l’IGB. C’est le genre de formation où je prends des notes à la main, relativement illisibles, parce que les schémas de boucles interactionnelles entre les différents protagonistes des situations abordées, c’est quand même assez galère à faire à l’ordi. Avec ma logo la semaine dernière, j’ai évoqué ce que je ressens un peu comme une récalcitrance à l’effort cognitif, parfois. Il y a des articles un peu pointus que je veux lire, mais je rechigne à la perspective de cet effort. Un peu peur d’en faire trop, aussi, bien sûr. On s’est dit que ce serait peut-être un exercice utile de m’y mettre, de façon contrôlée : limité dans le temps, lentement, et — sa suggestion — en surlignant les points clés ou prenant des notes. Ça m’a parlé — et travaillé.

J’ai passé une décennie de ma vie à lire en prenant des notes — quand j’étais aux études. Je prenais aussi des notes de livres que je lisais “en plus”, par intérêt. Prendre des notes m’aide à comprendre. Quand j’écoute aussi, d’ailleurs. C’est ce qui m’a amenée à live-bloguer, en fait. Je peinais à rester concentrée sur des conférences (le TDAH était très loin d’être sur mon radar !) et j’ai fait l’expérience, un peu par hasard, qu’en prenant des notes ça allait beaucoup mieux. Pas très étonnant en fait, après avoir fait ça quasi quotidiennement sur les bancs de l’uni.

Alors oui, si on se dit que je dois peut-être “ré-entraîner” mon cerveau à certaines choses, lire en prenant des notes pourrait être une pratique intéressante à revisiter.

Ce qui est marrant, c’est que je n’ai pas arrêté de lire des choses “difficiles”, après mes études. Mais j’ai lâché la discipline de la prise de notes, en partie je pense car elle n’était plus forcément nécessaire en vue des raisons par lesquelles je lisais, aussi un peu en partie parce que c’est un effort en plus, et parce qu’avec les supports numériques dans lesquels on peut “rechercher”, les notes semblent un peu moins utiles — en tant que résumé permettant d’accéder au contenu.

Mais le travail cognitif de tri de l’information, de synthèse, d’organisation des idées, il se produit. Et au fil de toutes ces dernières années, j’ai parfois senti, en toile de fond, que je pourrais perdre un peu en rigueur, que les choses que j’avais lues et comprises finissaient par manquer de précision, qu’avec le temps il me manquait quelques bouts — rien de très grave — et qu’évidemment je n’allais que rarement replonger dans la source (si tant est que j’étais capable de la retrouver, malgré les miracles de la loupe et des images…)

Alors oui, écrire comme exercice, prendre des notes, pourquoi pas. Je me dis que je pourrais mettre au propre mes notes IGB par exemple. Il y a quelques articles écrits par un psychologue français sur la question de “l’énergie” dans le TDAH qui m’intéressent et qui méritent une lecture attentive, d’autant plus que je suis aux prises avec ces questions de “gestion de l’énergie” de façon criante depuis mon accident — je suis d’ailleurs au milieu d’un programme en ergothérapie sur la gestion.

“Journaler”, c’est aussi une pratique que je souhaite reprendre. Ma mémoire épisodique est souvent un peu confuse, et c’est pire depuis mon accident. Prendre quelques notes en fin de journée m’aide à ne pas me sentir en dérive temporelle. Il y a dix-huit mois, quand j’ai pris deux semaines de vacances pour réaménager mon chez-moi, j’ai eu envie de me mettre au scrapbooking. Peut-être qu’il y a une idée à creuser là. Écrire à la main, c’est peut-être aussi quelque chose qui pourrait être pour moi une forme de “repos”. Le rythme plus lent, la linéarité, je sens en effet que c’est différent de taper ou dicter sur l’ordi ou le tél. Chaque mot écrit est écrit.

On verra.

J’étais partie pour faire une page. J’en ai fait cinq. J’arrête là pour aujourd’hui.

Writing After Breakfast [en]

Maybe I should kick off my day by writing. After breakfast of course. Do you know this blog is going to turn 25 in a month or so? It sounds crazy. Almost half my life. I remember the early days, before Facebook, when a blog post was a small thing one wrote, not a full-blown essay. I would sometimes post more than once a day. I had blogging friends who blogged every day. I did, for long stretches. Not because it was a decision, but because the blog was where we lived online.

Now, for me, it’s still clearly facebook, after all these years. That’s where people hang out. This blog feels a bit lonely. For many years, writing here has felt more “private” than Facebook, isn’t that weird? Both are quite public, but the audience isn’t the same.

Anyway, maybe I should kick off my day by writing. Breakfast comes first, I learned that years ago. Interacting on an empty stomach is not a great way to start the day for me – it usually goes sideways. Breakfast, then write a bit. It’s not like my balcony can’t wait another half hour or sixty minutes for me to get to work turning it from a pile of stuff to a cozy hangout. I’m on my balcony already, actually. You can see the photo.

My balcony has been waiting for weeks. It’s been waiting for weeks because I struggle with managing my time and activities since my accident two months ago. I’ve always struggled with that, you know that, but since my ADHD diagnosis and medication, it had improved a lot. Night and day. Now I feel I’m back to pre-diagnosis days, although I’m taking my usual work-day dose of medication. Not to worry, it will get better. It’s getting better. I am thankful to have the time and space for that.

So my balcony has been waiting for weeks because I struggle with time and task management, and also because unexpected tiredness will hit me. Not unexplainable, just unexpected, because I’m still in the process of understanding what costs me in terms of cognitive effort, and where my limits are. Again, not to worry: it is improving and will improve. But for example, this Saturday I was pretty much completely non-functional after a first small session of cognitive training. At least, that’s my working assumption at this stage – that this session is the cause. I didn’t expect it, but I was warned it could. We’ll see if the next session brings similar aftereffects, or if it was a coincidence and the reason is elsewhere.

Anyway: I had planned on “doing my balcony” Saturday, and I didn’t.

Yesterday I would have had some time for it, but instead I ended up taking the cat to the vet for a few stitches. He’s fine, though unhappy about his cone. I feel for him. I also helped a friend put together a non-IKEA wardrobe. I love IKEA furniture even more now. This happens each time I grapple with non-IKEA furniture design and instructions.

The small stack of yesterday’s dishes can also wait a bit, so can yesterday’s grocery shopping which is patiently waiting on the kitchen floor, half out of its bags. The cats can also wait a little for their medications. Insulin is done, that’s the most important, and I have had my meds, which is the absolute priority in the morning to increase chances I actually have a morning to do something with, be it tidy the balcony, put groceries away, or write a blog post.

As facebook goes downhill in terms of functionality, and as the world goes downhill with it. Between what’s happening in LA right now and the interception of the Madleen, it’s taking more energy than I have to keep the lump in my throat down and the tears out of my eyes. There is a time for trying to change the world, and a time for self-preservation.

My friend Pierre Crevoisier wrote about selective indignation last month. It struck a chord with me. We cannot care about everything. Just like we cannot do everything, we cannot get up in arms about everything. We cannot fight all the causes. We are finite, and though the world is too, at our scale it is not. And there will be times in life when our finitude is even more finite than usual. When maybe just facing more than the balcony that needs to be done, the dishes and the groceries, the cat’s medications and one’s recovery, and a few words thrown on a screen is just not doable today.

At Some Point I Started Caring About What I Wrote Here [en]

[fr] A un moment donné j'ai commencé à me soucier de ce que j'écrivais ici. Dans le sens de me soucier de ce qu'on allait en penser.

When did it happen? I’m not so sure. At some point, I started caring about what I wrote on my blog. I started thinking about what others would think. I used to just write what I felt like writing. I didn’t have this sense that I had an “audience”. Sixteen years ago, pretty much nobody I knew was online. I knew online people, of course. But they were online people. My tribe.

I realised that after following an online course called Writing Your Grief. It was just after Tounsi’s death, but I’d already signed up – it was coincidental. For the first time in a long time I was writing things that weren’t meant to be published, but that weren’t journaling either. It was an extraordinary experience: not just as related to my grief, but for the writing. We had a private Facebook group in which we could share our writing and read each other’s pieces. A room full of compassionate strangers. I hadn’t written like that in years. More than a decade, maybe. And I loved what I wrote. You know, when words seem to write themselves, and your writing actually tells you something?

Morning Pages do that, but they are less structured. More stream-of-consciousness. I haven’t been able to pick up Morning Pages again since Tounsi died. Maybe I will someday. Right now I feel like I’m holding on by the skin of my teeth, so I don’t have the courage to dive back in.
While I was mulling over this new/old writing I’ve connected with (again?), Adam shared a link to this piece about blogging. Which I read.

You know it’s a recurring theme here on Climb to the Stars. I miss the Golden Age of Blogging. And when I was reading the piece linked above, about how blogging went from carefree online writing to being all about influencers, my feelings finally collided into a thought: yes, that was it. I missed writing without caring too much about what people would think. About being judged. About having to be “good” because my job depends on it now. Similarly, I noted the other day on Facebook that I wasn’t online to sell or market stuff, I was online because I liked it here. Because I enjoy it.

Catch-22, right? Because I enjoy it, I made it my job, and now it matters. I’m not a nobody anymore. I have clients. Colleagues in the industry. And I care what they think. And so I write less. I’m careful. I self-censor – more. I enjoy it less.

And now I’ve found a different pleasure in writing. Writing things I’m scared to show people, because I hope they’re good, but fear they’re banal. Expectations. Ah, expectations.

I guess I’ll just keep writing.

img_1178

Elle écrit plus? [fr]

[en] Why I'm struggling to write, these days: I'm trying to clarify all my cluetrainy ideas about the internet, people, and the world – and though they come out readily in conversations (having a lot of those these days as I have launched my 2016 professional website) I am struggling to squeeze them into post format. I wish I had Euan's gift for concision!

Not that comfortable

Mes articles ont du mal à sortir, ces jours. La raison en est que je suis en train de mettre de l’ordre dans tout un tas d’idées qui servent de fondement à mon travail. Des évidences (pour moi) concernant notre condition d’homo numericus, la nature des espaces numériques qui imprègnent nos vies, nos relations les uns aux autres et le rôle que celles-ci jouent à influencer le cours de nos vies.

Ce ne sont pas des idées nouvelles, mais je les développe généralement au cours de conversations, souvent en tant que prérequis aux autres thèmes qui nous préoccupent plus officiellement: est-ce que je devrais vraiment être sur Facebook pour mon travail? A quoi ça sert de poster des photos de vacances? Twitter, je capte toujours pas, c’est nul… Sur quoi je vais communiquer pour ma présence en ligne?

J’ai déjà pas mal dégrossi en préparant la nouvelle mouture de mon site web professionnel (en anglais, mais il y a une page en français). Parlant de nouveau site, à part ça, n’hésitez pas à diriger chez moi les gens de votre entourage qui pourraient bénéficier de mes services ou mes ateliers, je vais avoir de la disponibilité pour prendre des nouveaux clients cet automne à côté des ateliers de développement de carrière pour musiciens que je donne avec Elisabeth Stoudmann.

Je reprends le fil: toutes ces choses que j’expose si joyeusement dans un contexte de discussion, j’ai du mal à leur donner une forme d’article. Tout est lié, enchevêtré, et somme toute assez complexe. Je n’ai pas le don de la concision de mon ami et collègue Euan Semple, et chaque fois que je me dis “ah je pourrais faire un article sur ça” je me retrouve à ne pas commencer de peur que l’article devienne un livre. Problème classique que je connais bien.

Histoire de vous montrer que je suis capable de suivre mes propres conseils, je vais me lancer directement avec quelques réflexions sur internet en tant que lieu de vie – versus canal de communication.

No Blog Post Is an Island [en]

[fr] Une des grandes difficultés dans l'art de bloguer: intégrer des liens à son texte. D'une part parce que les liens rajoutent une dimension au texte, perçant en quelque sorte des trous dans celui-ci par lesquels le lecteur est libre de s'échapper, à la façon des "livres dont vous êtes le héros" de notre adolescence, et d'autre part parce que la nature hypertexte du web donne à l'intertextualité une place capitale. Un article de blog n'est pas une île isolée, mais un fragment textuel nageant au milieu d'un océan d'autres fragments similaires, avec lequel il a des liens plus ou moins proches, que la bonne maîtrise de l'hyperlien permet d'expliciter. Ceci nécessite, outre une habileté avec les mots (pour pouvoir retourner sa phrase dans le sens qui permet un bon ancrage du lien), une certaine culture des autres textes entourant le sien. Sinon, comment faire des liens qui feront sens?

Fellow blogger Adam Tinworth points to a leaked memo from The Guardian encouraging internal linking. He shares his astonishment on Facebook “that this still isn’t standard practice at most places”. I am not that astonished, I have to say.

During my many years as blog editor-in-chief and teaching blogging to students, I have seen again and again that from a technical point of view, aside from managing to write in your own personal voice, the most difficult aspect of blogging to master is integrating hyperlinks into your writing.

Autour du chalet, colliers de perles

I think this is because writing well with hyperlinks requires one to write differently. It is not just about “writing and then adding links”.

Adding meaningful hyperlinks to your sentences is going to have an impact on the way you construct them. You need to be comfortable shuffling the words around, or looking for others, so that you end up with a phrase that provides you with adequate anchor text for the link you want to insert.

Most people’s training in writing is probably in standalone texts. Offline writing, the type that worked well on paper. Your reader starts at the top, and finishes at the bottom. You may have footnotes and references, but nothing as dramatic as a hyperlink, which literally pokes a hole in your text.

I like to think of hyperlinks as adding an extra dimension to a text. Normal text is 1D. Just follow it through. Hypertext is 2D at least — remember those books we must all have read as teenagers? If you go right, head to page 16, but if turn left, run off to page 67?

So, the first challenge in writing with links is finding a gracious way to anchor all those links into your words.

The second challenge is less obvious, but even more important: intertextuality.

“Intertextuality” is a rather vast topic, but it generally has to do with the fact that how you understand or read one text can be shaped by your knowledge of another. References or allusions, explicit or not, that connect different texts.

On the web, everything we write is swimming in a sea of other interconnected texts. It’s not called the World Wide Web for nothing, dammit. Everything that is published on the web is stitched together. The blog post you are writing now is not an island, it is swimming alongside all sorts of other pieces of writing. How you position your piece of writing amongst the others may be just as important as the writing itself.

Intertextuality in the world of hypertext is a crucial thing to be aware of.

What are you going to link to? What is there out there that complements your writing, or takes your reader further, or down a parallel path? What are the associations between parts of your writing and preexisting writing?

This requires, in addition to the will to connect one’s writing into this existing web, some degree of knowledge of what is out there. Culture. Or dexterity in the use of the search engine. Or both.

I agree with Adam: internal linking should be a no-brainer. I do it a lot on Climb to the Stars: whenever I’m writing a blog post, I’m wondering what else I have written in the past which is related to it. Am I building upon a previous post? Am I writing on a topic I’ve already touched upon? How can I work a link to this or that post into what I’m writing now?

I do it on Open Ears too. As editor-in-chief, I have read all the articles we publish. The difficulty is I often receive articles which are written as standalone pieces, so I have to either work with the blogger to incorporate a reference to another article, or do it myself as part of the editing process. But as I mentioned above, adding links changes the way you write and construct your text, so “adding a link” is rarely as straightforward as “just adding a link” — and in some cases can only difficultly be done if it wasn’t planned for from the start.

When I was discovering the web, one of the first sites I spent a lot of time reading was The Psychology of Cyberspace. It’s still online, and I encourage you to visit it: as the author explains, it is an online book, that is, written with hypertext in mind.

There is a table of contents, but in addition to that, inside the chapters, there are links to other chapters whenever there is a mention or a passing reference to something covered elsewhere. This frees the reader to wander around in the order they wish, and avoids redundancy — if you need to explain X again, just link to it. I think this was a very good learning example for me of how to build text online.

So now. How would you teach people the skills to do this, when it doesn’t seem to come naturally to them?

Disconnection [en]

[fr] Certaines formes d'écriture ne peuvent plus se faire déconnectée, pour moi.

I’m at my chalet. Cats are curled up on the bed and I have a nice cup of tea ready. There is no wifi here. Cellphone reception is extremely patchy — and cellular data, when it works, is excruciatingly slow and unreliable. This is my “disconnected place”.

There is a lovely café in the village which offers free wifi as well as delicious home-made syrups, smoothies, and cakes. And tea for winter, of course. I go there to work and connect with the world.

I use MarsEdit to edit and write blog posts offline. As you can imagine, this is not something I do often. But this time around, I had quite a few to work on for my client, and I figured I could also do some of my work at the chalet.

While I was at it, I updated the settings for my blog (yup, still in server-move limbo) so that I could write an article or two. Everybody knows that being offline is great for productivity, particularly for writing.

Well, it turns out that there are certain types of writing for which it isn’t all that great. A lot of the stuff I write about here is nourished by things I’ve read online somewhere. I want to include links, check sources again to make sure I remember correctly what I have read. Search for more information.

I have become so used to writing/blogging plugged into the internet that I forget how much I rely on this extension of my mind that the network has become for me. (See, I’m sure there is a good piece somewhere to link to about that — but as I’m writing this offline, I can’t dig it out for you.)

I don’t think this is a bad thing. My brain still works. I haven’t lost the ability to write, and more importantly, to think. But I find myself in the situation where I am so used to functioning with a given tool that I forget its absence will prevent me from doing certain things.

The article I wanted to write is about doing what we want versus doing what we have to do. I’ve been through a series of realisations on that topic, and I want to be able to reference them and map them out for — maybe with the same sources, somebody will come to the same realisation, and my article will have been useful. Oh well, I’ll write it another time, when I have access to the internet.

Maybe I just have to remember that blogging/writing is not something I should try do to when offline.

Some Thoughts on Blogging: Original Content, Linking, Engaging [en]

[fr] Quelques réflexions sur l'enseignement de l'art du blog.

I like teaching people about blogging. Right now I have nearly 100 students who are learning to blog, with varying enthusiasm and success. Teaching blogging makes me realize that this mode of expression which comes naturally to me is not that easy to master. Here are a couple of the main hurdles I’ve noticed for the student-blogger:

  • Original content. It seems obvious that a blog will contain original content, but in the age of Tumblr (I love Tumblr) and Facebook (I love Facebook) and Twitter (I love Twitter) it seems there is a bias towards republishing rather than creating. One of the things that make a blog a blog is the fact that the blogger has taken the trouble to think and try and communicate ideas or experiences or emotions to their reader, in the written form. Some early attempts at blogging resemble Facebook walls.
  • Links. Writing in hypertext is not easy. A blog is not an island. A blog is connected to many other pages on the web, be they blog articles or not. It’s caught in the web. It’s part of the web. A blog which never links elsewhere? Might be a journal or a memoir, but it’s missing out on something. What do I link to? When? Which words do I place my links on? The art of linking is full of subtleties.
  • Engaging. Blogging is about writing, but also about reading and responding. Links ensure that a blog doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The parallel human activity is responding to comments, reading other bloggers, linking to them socially, and actually engaging with content found elsewhere. Some will say “comment on other people’s articles”, but that is not the whole story. Leaving a superficial comment is not it. Trying to understand the other, daring to challenge and disagree (respectfully), push thoughts further and drag others out of their comfort zone: there is something philosophical about the practice of blogging.

Some things are relatively easily taught: how to hit publish; how to write in an informal voice; how to dare being subjective. But how do you teach engagement? How do you teach debate? I know the Anglo-Saxon (at least American) school curriculum includes debating. Switzerland, sadly, doesn’t — and we tend to shy away from it, or end up in “dialogues de sourds” with two polarised camps each trying to convert the other.

2nd Back to Blogging Challenge, day 7. On the team: Nathalie Hamidi(@nathaliehamidi), Evren Kiefer (@evrenk), Claude Vedovini (@cvedovini), Luca Palli (@lpalli), Fleur Marty (@flaoua), Xavier Borderie (@xibe), Rémy Bigot (@remybigot),Jean-François Genoud (@jfgpro), Sally O’Brien (@swissingaround), Marie-Aude Koiransky (@mezgarne), Anne Pastori Zumbach (@anna_zap), Martin Röll (@martinroell), Gabriela Avram (@gabig58), Manuel Schmalstieg (@16kbit), Jan Van Mol (@janvanmol), Gaëtan Fragnière (@gaetanfragniere), Jean-François Jobin (@gieff). Hashtag:#back2blog.

Second "Back to Blogging" Challenge [en]

[fr] Un court article par jour pendant 10 jours, histoire de reprendre le rythme et de se souvenir qu'écrire un article sur un blog, ça peut être vite fait.

Do you have a blog?

Have you been really bad about blogging of late, like me?

I bring to you, for the second time, a 10-day “Back to Blogging” challenge.

Starting tomorrow (Monday), I will write a short blog post each day. Quick and dirty. Get something out the door. I expect to spend maximum 30 minutes on it.

Feel inspired to join in? Hashtag: #back2blog.

(Last time around I published links to all the posts of the day at the bottom of each article. It took way more time than the actual blogging! If anybody has ideas about how to automate this, I’m all ears.)

The winning team!

Urges [en]

[fr] Un vieux texte ressorti des brouillons.

A draft dating back from March 2010. Probably inspired by a dream.

Loud rhythmic music started drifting in the air, and the crowd on the festival river boats slowly went quiet. People stood up and started dancing and cheering.

I looked at Paul. We could feel the urge, but knew that giving in would only make it harder to resist what would come next.

Everyone sat down as the music went silent.

People looked at each other grimly. They knew that however strong the urge, they should not jump overboard.

In a flash, I noticed the group of children a few seats away.

“You! Come here right away!” I ordered.

A little bewildered, they came withing reach. People around me had understood, caught the children as they arrived, and sat them firmly in the seats next to them.

As for me, I grabbed two under each arm — two girls and two boys.

The girls didn’t budge, but the little boys started struggling and hitting me. I didn’t let go.