Is A Quickie Less Satisfying?
Two A-list bloggers suggest that a good blogpost takes time. So now I know why I'm so low on the totem pole!
The huge majority of my posts fall into two categories - those that are created as fast as I type (and then amend for typos) and those that I dash down and then fill with links and slight refinement later. These still come in at under 30 minutes. A literal handful took closer to the six hour limit because of length, running them by the fellow blogger who suggested them and a wish to make prescriptive descriptions. But size is not always an important delineater - my RSS guide took maybe 20 minutes.
Now of course, the longer you take to refine and redraft the better the end result can be, but it's no certainty. The small, quick thought can have just as great an impact. Similarly, creative inspiration is just as important and can put you into the flow state that we all love.
But, of course, I'm not really writing about blogposts here. I'm writing about doing rather than refining. About acting on emotion. About having a seemingly small idea and implementing it rather than spending hours and days creating an over-arching, super-refined marketing plan that implicitly puts all your eggs in one basket and leads to committees, procrastination and paralysis.
[Post duration: 7 minutes]
posted by john dodds @ 10:20 AM
4 Comments:
I envy you! I have very few posts that take me under 30 minutes and most take be closer to 90.
But you've made me resolved to try to at least get them to consistently stay under 45! I think sometimes my problem is that writing helps me to clarify things in my mind. In which case most of my writing time is really mental organization.
By the way, was this post good for you? I loved it! :-)
Maybe quickies aren't so bad after all.
I've only recently started blogging and have found that my shorter, more spontaneous posts are much more "me" than ones I take the time to "refine and redraft". The difference is mostly seen between my newsletter articles (which I post on my blog) and my "regular" blog posts. I spend a lot more time crafting my newsletter articles, which end up sounding more "generic", broad and general. When I'm posting on my blog, it'll be because something I heard, read or experienced inspired me. I know that if I'm not "into the flow state", it's going to be one of those posts I can never finish — I'll spend time writing and correcting, changing and asking my best friend to look it over...
I agree, that "the small, quick thought can have just as great an impact." BTW, I love your posts, so don't change a thing. As they say: If it ain't broke, don't fix it!!
Thanks Christina and welcome. I agree completely that tone of voice is the great differentiator and we don't want to edit it out of what we write. Thus I cringe when I see a blog that's just a bunch of links or, at the opposite extreme, a series of arcane articles/book excerpts. Both conjure up in me a voice that I don't want to listen to. The blogs that got me blogging are far more seductive.
And Ann, I'm probably just covering up my laziness/glibness with this justification but yes it was good for me. But never forget that quickies should be seen as a prelude to stimulate more prolonged and in-depth actions that may totally move your corporate earth.
I've noticed that most written blog posts tend to fall into two categories: "essays" or "shorts." Your "quickie" here is a short -- and some of mine are, too. But most of mine tend to be essays....developed over a day or two (or more!) of thought and a few hours of writing.
While some bloggers flip back and forth between the two styles...seems that most find one or the other most satisfying.
Post a Comment
<< Home