(but would seem not to be a shorter blog itself. Funny how that works)
Hi, I write a blog – did you know that? I’ll bet you didn’t, that’s why I had to tell you. This blog can be found here – http://www.YOU’REONTHEWEBSITEALREADYYOUSARCASTICALLY-IGNORANTFOOL.Wordpress.com – and I’ve been thinking about writing this blog recently, and more specifically, the length of my posts. I mentioned a while back that the objective means of judging a piece of work’s success, in terms of number of viewers, doesn’t particularly interest me, in fact yesterday’s shorter blog was one of my least-seen recently; however, said shorter blog received better feedback from my real-life friends, with one guy even commenting on the superiority of a shorter post than a longer one, which begs the question – do shorter blogs allow for more subjective success, ie in terms of the quality of work produced?
Logic would suggest yes: spending an hour to write five hundred words and checking them will almost invariable result in a better piece than writing a thousand words in an hour, in terms of technical grammatical accuracy and clarity of ideas expressed, as a writer will simply do more checking over of what they have written. Furthermore, rereading one’s work through lets a writer spot structural errors and inconsistencies of argument – what I believe to be the greatest sin of writing is to conclude with a different argument than the one you started with (unless, of course, your using the wrong kind of ‘you’re’, or making stupidly unfunny grammar jokes). Also, reading through each idea in a piece in turn allows the writer to develop ideas off of them; I find that most of my ‘developmental’ points I come up with while writing essays at school come from a single moment of inspiration, derived exclusively from reading over my points individually. However, logic isn’t always right – the post I wrote yesterday wasn’t short by design, or out of a conscious effort to produce a shorter piece and spellcheck it, but out of lack of inspiration – I realised half way through that there wasn’t actually that much to say about the topic of jovially being outraged at the unoutrageable.
Longer posts have their own benefits too; by definition, more words means either more ideas, or more development of the existing ideas. Although a writer can go over the top with unnecessarily verbose explanations, and pushy ideas that don’t really work, in my experience, it is better to write too much than too little (unless its a piece of coursework, where the marker will literally slaughter your entire family if you go so much as one punctuation mark over the word limit). For me personally, I find it easier to writer longer pieces too, and if I’m going to be writing this blog primarily for the enjoyment I get out of it, surely writing whatever I’m comfortable with would be a plus?
Ultimately, however, I’m not going to make a conscious effort to write short pieces or long pieces – I said I write this for enjoyment, and so if I’m feeling up for a longer post, I’ll write one, and the same goes for shorter ones too. Also, I feel that the content in a post will determine its length – if I’m writing about my genuine opinions on a game I badly want a sequel for (please, Maxis!), the post will probably end up being longer than when I’m taking the piss out of a smoke alarm. Overall, I’m going to do what I’ve done all my life with the stuff I do for fun – do whatever’s comfortable, and don’t care.