Re: [-empyre-] C. S. Peirce and Code

around the 18/10/05 mentioned about Re: [-empyre-] C. S. Peirce and Code that:
so, what you are saying is that as long as your blog is being linked to it is
not ending. what i'm saying is that when you stop posting to it then it has
ended. we are obviously not talking about the same thing.

Well, I think we are :-) To me in a networked ecology, just like the ecology out 'there', there aren't ends (a student said to me, when I proposed this, that when you died it was an end, I replied with asking what he thought happened to his body after he died, and he acknowledged that it was only an 'end' from a particular minor perspective).

would you say that for instance "war an peace" doesn't have a beginning because
people quote from it (from somewhere in the "middle" of it) and no end because
people are still mentioning it ? I would not.

Either would I, which is why War and Piece isn't a hypertext.

still if I accept your definition of begin/end then what you mention is not specific to blogs, it is an inherent characteristic of the web that our online pieces are zapped thru rather than experienced from elusive start to hypothetical finish

yes. Though many struggle with this very simple idea, and what I *like* about blogs is that they have a) recognised this, b) accepted it, c) figured out a medium that accommodates it.

There are a surprising number of web developers, and even more content owners, who think that a) all traffic is via the front page, b) readers don't deep link, c) put in place systems that police this (frames anyone?).


 Blogs are emergent ecologies that rely on links. Links are the
 fundamental transaction. (See Weinberger, Walker, Tosca, and myself
 for stuff on this.) They are an excess (in Bataille's sense of a
 general economy) that blogs celebrate, even when business is busy
 trying to appropriate them (but as an excess this will always only be
 partial). They are porous to the network in ways that most other
 writing to the web, certainly everyday popular writing, never

they are only porous to the blogosphere, very closed and small circles always retraced

No, they can be porous to all the network, it is only that blogs have lead the way with a viable technical methodology for realising this. There is no reason why other pages can't do the same thing.

I'm unsure at what point small circles became a criticism, I would apply this term to every major innovative movement/discipline at its inception. yes, in blogs there are a multitude of small circles, this has strengths and weaknesses, but I'm unclear why, in itself, this is something that is negative?

Every current system of authority in blogging (as far as I
 know), relies on links in to determine authority. I cannot write
 links in. I am subject to the network for that.

it's so perversely simple to get those links in and that is the burden of "the blog".

Only if you aspire to be an A list blogger. Many do, I believe many want to be pop music stars, film stars, celebrity directors, and to write best sellers. It does not follow that all music, cinema, and literature is therefore mediocre, or populist. There are thousands, if not millions, of excellent blogs that are highly specialised in tone and content. They will only ever have a minor audience, just like specialist journals. This is their strength, and these do not aspire to be join manytomany.

(This is something journalists still dont' get. The first question is always, how many readers are there. This is the old media question which was always about maximisation of audience, that's why it is *mass* media. Blogs are minor media, yes they're being colonised by mass media, just as Cervantes and Austen have ended up with 'airport fiction', but all of the real action in blogs happens in the long tail, it's just that all of us are still acculturated to older industrial forms of media production and consumption and so the idea of the minor text with an audience of 10 slips past...)

This is exciting and novel. It is emergent,

it's at least 6 years old and I got bored 3 years ago.

<cheek on>

Yes, of course, but at what point did your boredom become the index of value? And if that is the case what particular economy of novelty is being proposed, and how is that different to other mercantile forms of contemporary novelty?

</cheek off>
Adrian Miles
this email is [ ] bloggable [ ] ask first [ ] private
<URL: >

This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.