So I started my new blog, but I have a problem. Actually, until this evening I’ve been looking at the issue I’m about to reveal as a problem. It seems that I can’t shift out of snark mode. That’s supposed to be a serious blog, but I’ve been at snark for so long, I keep straying into it. This evening I decided that a little snark over there is not going to be a bad thing. It is possible to be passionate and a smart ass? Or am I wrong that’s it’s possible to be taken seriously as a smart ass? Wait. Let me rephrase. Can you be a smart ass and be taken seriously?
How is this a good problem? I used to be so serious, I bored myself. Now I just want to write, and if that means a little bit smart ass, so be it.
A picture for your trouble:
Oh yeah, Ricky was a smart ass — especially in this scene.
Screencap courtesy of RichardArmitageNet.Com
Share this:
13 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
RAFrenzy 
a little smart-assery and snark is good for the soul… and it’s entertaining to boot!
The interesting thing about writing is that your personality comes through regardless of the venue. That’s not necessarily a bad thing. I do five blogs on completely different subjects, and I tend to tell stories in the same manner and style.
When you write, you’re not acting … so don’t worry about emulating the Lad from Leicester. He morphs. As writers, we don’t, and we don’t have to.
Just be yourself and let the words flow, and most importantly, have fun and don’t take yourself too seriously.
By the way, the new blog rocks. You’re doing great.
:-D
I think a really good writer (talking fiction-writer here and maybe the occasional blogger and certainly top notch journalists) is capable of maintaining a style that doesn’t show their own deep-seated personality.
If a fiction writer, they should be role-neutral and let the characters shine. If they are journos they should be neutral enough to allow the subject matter of their topic or the personality of the person they are interviewing to shine through.
Style is very different to manner, ego another thing again.
Enjoying the new blog…
My goodness.
I agree about fiction and journalistic writing. Blogging is usually considered somewhat personal.
Whatever I do, I really appreciate you all encouraging me. It means a lot!
Prue and Heidi, I think you’re both right! :)
I don’t see it as being a problem, especially if it’t really what you’re thinking at the time your writing.
Kathleen, you are right. It’s not a problem, and I’m so glad I’ve come to that conclusion too.
When I was writing features for the newspaper and magazine, my goal was to let the personality, the character of the individual (s) who was the focus of the piece to shine through–to let the reader feel as if they had been properly introduced to the person.
Or in terms of a community event, to let the reader feel as if they had been there themselves and seen/heard/experienced what those who were there had. And then there were the straight news stories–the who, what,. when, where, why stuff.
In my columns, it was Angie that people saw. My reactions to what was going on around me in terms of both events I attended and in my personal life re aging parents and so forth. That’s where I developed my voice, which has carried over to my blog.
Now sometimes I wrote funny, and sometimes I wrote poignant stuff that made readers cry. And that still seems to be true re the blog. Mostly, I am light-hearted, but sometimes I get poetic and sometimes I get depthy. Because that’s how I roll. ;)
And I think you’ll find your new blog perhaps morphing a bit along the way, which is not a bad thing, either.
The truth is that most of the more passionate and creative people that I have known have awesome senses of humor, with a good measure of snark when need be. If your stated goal is to explore your passion sans snark, that’s one thing. But you need not deprive yourself of what makes you truly YOU in order to delve into it. Passion in all its forms can be broken down to joy or a succession of joys. Snark is just the smirky face of joy turned on its side and often cross-eyed.
I love this type of discussion! It’s much more fun to disagree with people over things like writing style and creativity than it is to fight over politics. This is fun!
I throw in one more thought to agree to disagree with my older and more experienced colleagues.
Regarding fictional literature, there is a distinct voice to each author. Stephen King and John Grisham are two of what I call the “pop culture” authors, and when you read their books, you always know that despite character development or plot, they are the voice behind the story.
The same goes for the classics. Dickens had his voice. So did Austen. And let’s not forget our much beloved Gaskell! You know when you read each of their books that the stories belonged to them.
I agree with Angie that when covering news, the reader has to feel that they were at the event to witness it. News stories have their own style. But my favorite journalist and hero is David Simon of The Baltimore Sun, whose crime coverage I tried to emulate when I was a much younger reporter. :-) And he had his own voice, too, no matter the crime story he was covering.
Yes, a great writer can change the voice of the story — but their voice is never lost.
This is a fun chat, and I enjoyed the brain stretch! I feel like I’ve just completed an hour of yoga!
:-D
Frenz, the thing I noticed about blogs is, even if you have a plan starting out as to what it’s going to be like, it takes on a life of its own. It comes with time, and I doubt you can avoid the process. Embrace the snark!