(he asks, in a post with a single category)
I like to think that I write about a variety of things on this blog – even if a full one percent of my posts are about the unusually specific field of Geography Pickup Lines – but I’m not sure what this variety is, exactly, whether my posts vary based on their content, or their tone of writing. If categorising posts is designed to provide order to the randomness of this blog, how can anything be categorised if I don’t know how things are varying. Essentially, I wonder if posts should be categorised based on content, or style of writing, because both are equally important in conveying meaning.
So far, I categorise based on content: the pickup lines posts are in the Pickup Lines! category, and the ones where I tell you about things that annoy me are usually in the Stuff About Me one, but these divisions are already flawed, as a lot my posts are anecdotal, but I don’t have an ‘Anecdotes’ category to put them in, meaning a lot of them are shoved into Ideas or Reactions To Stuff.
The divisions I do have are also painfully vague; Ideas and Reactions To Stuff contain fundamentally similar posts, in terms of their content. I think my intention was for the former to be my ideas on society, and the latter my ideas on things that happen to me, but that distinction was never noted down, expressed in a post, or even adhered to recently, as this blog became increasingly about shoving sinisterly-worded driven onto a web page, and categorising posts became a means of rubber-stamping the completion of a post rather than providing it with actually navigably helpful identifiers, as it did a few months back.
I’m also not going to change any of the random and inconsistent turgidity of my old posts because this blog is, if nothing else, deeply personal, and I feel that everything about it reflects how I was feeling at the time of writing; if the posts were a discordant mess at the end of April, that just reflects the general chaos and confusion of the ’Oh my God, there are two months to exams and I’ve not done any revision’ phase of my year.
But the future is something I can change – to the extent that I have a whole useless category devoted to it on my home page, a decision that I find both embarrassing and reflective of my optimistic idiocy of starting this blog, but that I will not change so as to show what a moron I was a few months ago, an acceptance that is an important part of self-improvement – and so I wonder if I should change how I split up my posts.
If I do, there will be greater clarity on this blog, perhaps helping newer readers find their way around; I’ve said before that I don’t expect you to read all of these posts, like illiterate but well-meaning religious types that arduously study moss formations as indicative of the will of a god instead of a holy text, but only those that interest you, so surely making it easier to locate posts about a certain topic would be helpful?
And this is why I’ve divided posts based on content so far, because I think that’s what you look for – you want my opinions on x, not a list of all the times I present myself as a pretentious git.
Or do you?
Personally, I take great pleasure in reading the articles of Charlie Brooker on The Guardian, not because I’m interested in current affairs – I couldn’t care less about Paxman leaving Newsnight – but because I like seeing how he deconstructs recent events into individual examples of idiocy and hypocrisy that can be dismissed humorously, and with an underlying intelligence to them. Equally, I love watching CinemaSins on YouTube, even for films I’ve not seen, because I like the precise way they pull apart films for comedic effect.
And I wonder if some of you are the same, that you don’t care whether I talk about socks, pedestrians, lie-ins or buses, but as long as I do it with an air of self-unimportance and paradoxically general dismissal of everyone who’s not me, you’ll find it amusing, which is kinda why I do this. I’ve had commenters saying they can’t relate to the things that I do, but find the way I present them amusing.
But that qualified – ‘some of you’ – is important, because I don’t know what you want, and will never find out what you want, because the beauty of online content is that new followers and viewers can pop up all over the place; I’m not appealing to a single, easily-pacifiable demographic here. The ideal solution would be a form of double-categorisation, where I label posts based on content – Ideas, Sports, School, etc. – and on style of writing – Sarcastic, Sincere, Self-Loathing, etc. – so that people can search for both, and either. That way, they can either look for my genuine views on gender roles, and the times where I take on an exaggerated persona to mock a certain viewpoint, which I may or may not intend to do.
The only problem with this solution is that it would add even more terms to the long-ass list of Categories I have on my home page already, and would require an overhaul of all my old posts so they fit the new model, a prospect that is both inconsistent in its presentation of me, and frankly too much bloody work considering my first exam is in exactly thirty days.
But maybe over summer, hey?