Blogging, formation and theological writing

I'm quite interested in how blogging becomes part of the way we write, reflect and grow. I'm also interested when I get a mention in someone's posting! Here's a note with a bit of both: "I could never have recreated this dynamic record of my thoughts and other people's responses to them with a conventional diary. Let's just hope our academic institutions are up to speed with the way that their students do their theology these days, Andii Bowsher's blogs are perhaps indicative that they certainly are." see at Re-vis.e Re-form: Blogging as formation.
I think that I'm one of only a few regularly blogging academics in UK theological colleges -so perhaps Rachel is being a bit optimistic (?) to see me as an indicator that academics are blogging in theology; some do, most don't. I'd have to say that for me it is a kind of reflection/research tool. There are blogs I use to collect things that I may later use in writing, I make brief comments on whatever it is to help me later on orientate whatever it is to the main area of thinking. Then there is blogging I do more widely where it may not be directly theological (ie work) oriented but related to my wider interests (though even here I note that nothing truly escapes theological interest completely) and even amusement; this is about feeding my curiosity and thinking out loud. I think the latter is related to being an 'E' in Myers-Briggs terms; ie I tend to find that I discover my own thinking/ideas by externalising it or them.

I think that the other reason I blog is to keep me writing. However, it is this that I have to consider: does it get in the way of more 'serious' writing? That is to say, the kind of writing that 'counts' in RAE, for example and goes down on CVs as 'publication'. And perhaps in that we name one big reason that perhaps more academics don't blog. For me it's a shift of paradigm which may, or may not, take hold. In the inherited academic paradigm 'worthy' writing is recognised as such by passing through the filters of peer-review in 'recognised' journals. In the possibly-emerging way-of-things, worthiness is recognised by hits, citations and commendations. The good stuff snowballs into something with lots of links and comment.

However, I have to say that all is not as simple and rosy as that schema might make it. In both worlds there are the vagueries of 'reputation' and some good stuff is missed because either the author is not known, not known by the 'right' people, is diffident about putting themselves forward, mistimes their contribution so it cannot be 'heard' for the noise or in the unpreparedness of the audience or simply it is in the wrong place to catch the attention of a wider audience perhaps because it's a blog hosted by the 'wrong' company because the fashion is for certain kinds of writing to use particular platforms.

So you see, in both worlds/paradigms, there are gatekeepers. In one formally appointed (and prey to the dangers of being self-perpetuating hierarchies and group-think), in the other informally grown but not less prey to distortions. The ideological justification for the blogging model is the Wisdom of Crowds. The reality is that the conditions for the 'wisdom'is don't always exist and we have an informal reproduction of the same-old-same-old. It remains to be seen whether web3.0 with its more semantically-aware algorithms and bots might help to change that, or whether such changes will act to reinforce the brakes on crowd-wisdom emerging.

 

my other blog says ...

As I wrote this post on my 'work' blog The Alban Institute – 2010-06-28 Why Blog? | 4orty2wo I realised that the topic might interest some of you who pop along to this one. Here's why I thought that: "I’ve found some corporate entities like small colleges and charities doing this. I’m not yet sure I’ve seen a church blog set up this way (but if you know of one, let us have a link in the comments). And, alerting us to the misuse of blogs as mere official announcement media, we are reminded usefully that “Blogs have a distinctive voice: conversational, personal, and informal. “. I say ‘misuse’ in the previous sentence not because it is an absolute rule but simply because the coriolis force of usage and expectation with regard to blogs has meant that this is what people tend to expect: a blog that is mere announcement without the personal opinion and reflection will tend not to attract revisits. That’s not to say that some announcements aren’t in order, but they should contain a personal take.
So, not just: “There’s a coffee and study morning on Friday at 10 in the narthex” but rather something like; “I’m gutted not to be going to this week’s coffee and study event. I love the way that the narthex has been kitted out to engender a really lovely atmosphere. And for the last 2 months when I’ve gone along to it, it has helped me to … This week they’re looking at … go along yourself and see if I’m not right!”"

My question is: do you think I'm about right? Also is anyone aware of collaborative church blogs?

What to images want -as well as bloggers?

For ages now I've had an edublog. The idea was to collect stuff relating to my teaching and college practice. However, it was a bit difficult to use compared to blogger. But they seem to have fixed that with an array of tools including a one-click equivalent of 'blog this'. So I'll be posting more stuff on Edublogs now where it relates to learning and some areas of practical theology. Toward Visual Eco-Criticism: what do images want? | 4orty2wo

Oh, this link on culture analysis is worth a quick look.

We don't hate Muslims

In calling attention to this Distinctly Welcoming: The Lost Art of Identification - incarnation by another name: I want to do two things, one is to commend Richard Sudworth's blog on Christian-Muslim relations. Noteworthy because it exemplifies an approach which is both Evangelical and eirenic.
The other thing is to highlight from that post this phrase in the light of an experience I had last night. First the quote:
"Your average Muslim would rather continue to follow their faith in a manner that fosters goodwill, neighbourliness and peace."

My experience, coming into Nottingham late from the knock on effects of high winds blowing cabling astray somewhere north of London, was to go to the end of the carriage towards the doors to be ready to alight when the train pulled into the station. On arriving at the corridor I was confronted by a young man (in his 20's?) who had been drinking strong cider for a while and was way more curious about me than I was comfortable with and was disinhibited enough to verbalise it. So in the course of a conversation when, uncharacteristically, I was trying to say as little as possible without being offensive (he seemed to be in the unpredictable phase of inebriatedness), we still managed to exchange some information including that I originally hailed from an area of the West Midlands that could indicate I might have been a Wolves supporter which prompted him (and I had realised his accent was west of Birmingham) to indicate he was a West Bromwich Albion fan and that he "hated Wolves" (imagine; I was starting to feel nervous!) and launched into a lively and fist waving rendition of a song about a Wolves player. After that he informed me, with some pride how he had been part of what must have been a mini riot involving a cohort of Albion supporters smashing up a part of a town (not sure which one) for which he had gained 4 restraining orders. I bit my tongue; not feeling it prudent to mention that he probably ought to have been made to pay for the damage or that his pride in this was something I assessed very differently; he seemed to think I'd find it impressive; in fact I found it depressing and oppressive.

Now, why am I mentioning this? Well, because the next thing I know he asked me whether I'd been in the army (perhaps I look the part) and went on to ask me "I hate Muslims, don't you". I said "No" in a tone of voice that tried to imply that there was no reason why I should (what a funny thing to ask) and started to wonder if I should mention loving ones neigbour, Christian regard for human welfare or something. While I was still running through possible follow-up remarks he tried to tell me that they would soon take over the country. I replied that I didn't think that was likely, that in the past people had said that about other minorities and it hadn't happened and that it wasn't going to happen this time either. By this time we had pulled up at the station and, mercifully, we got off and I was able to pull away by dint of being a naturally fast walker. Just before we got off, I recall thinking how I'd rather have most Muslims I knew as neighbours than someone who thought it was clever to make other people pay to clear up his mess and who thought that behaving unpredictably and occasionally belligerently while drunk in public was okay. "Your average Muslim would rather continue to follow their faith in a manner that fosters goodwill, neighbourliness and peace."
Which seems to be a darn sight better than your average BNP sympathiser.

I also found myself worried about how he and people like him seem to define themselves so readily in terms of what or who they hate. That's a terrible and tragic way to find an identity: it constrains you to enmity and to nurturing resentment and to searching for the unlovely to become focussed on grievance and put-downs. All of which tends to produce habits of thought and character which become more and more unlovely, unpleasant and uncompassionate. A far cry from thinking on whatever is true, noble, lovely, pure etc. I just pray that my straightforward "no" might somehow begin to challenge him ... a faint hope, I know, but who knows ....

Write like a blogger

Now here's an interesting set of ideas over at Seth's Blog. Seth's core thesis is that we "can improve your writing (your business writing, your ad writing, your thank you notes and your essays) if you start thinking like a blogger" and then goes on to list some ways to do so. I'm also intrigued by his final question: "What would happen if every single high school student had to have a blog? Or every employee in your company? Or every one of your customers?"
Mainly because I'm thinking that this may be something to encourage our ministerial candidates to do as part of their learning. For which I would add the following to Seth's list of reasons to write like a blogger: it is something some clergy do and it can help in their church leadership or pastoral practice (though we need to be aware of how it can't and mustn't too!); it can help us to reflect theologically; it can help us to note those odd little things that become important potential factors in the exploring or the reflection stage of the pastoral cycle. A bit more on blogging as reflection at Postmodern Bible.
There is a further question though; some of the things he suggests may not be quite such a good idea in an academic essay; though some definitely should be there. I'll leave you to decide which is which, though I would say that in the latter category I would place the use of headings, if only they didn't go into the word count! I'm for excluding such things from word count (along with footnotes) on the basis that they are simply aids to the reader. Of course, one way to do that would be to make the headers into graphics files and simply add them as pictures. Don't tell anyone I said that, but, well, it's a good idea if people were to be picky. I'd actually produce a text only file for the word count proper and then add the headings and even Title and contents pages later.

Posada chainblog 2007?

Sally has just enquired whether I was thinking of doing the Posada chainblog again. It's funny, but I was just wondering that yesterday as my church in Ryton are attempting to set one up ecumenically... So if anyone would like to see it happen again or has any comments about doing it better another time, let me know promptly!

I did find getting posters everyday was quite a hassle in the end, and I'm wondering whether a lower key approach would be better. Though I'm not sure what that would look like ... perhaps not organising a master list myself but rather simply 'releasing the couple into the wild': a true chain where someone simply picks up the chain by leaving a comment on the latest place of arrival with a link to their own post. I like the idea of maybe taking the picture from blog to blog.
I think that it would need a sense that there are enough potential takers to make it work without stranding the couple in cyber limbo.
Nouslife: Posada chainblog 2006. Start here.

Make wealth history

A new-to-me blog with an in-your-face title which I think I'm going to sub to. Here's what they are about.

we’ve chosen the pretty brash Make Wealth History as our name, mainly because it’s bold and memorable. It gets an immediate reaction and catches people’s imagination, but it does slightly overstate our case. There’s nothing wrong with wealth per se. In the right hands wealth can be a real power for good. ‘Money is the root of all evil’ is, after all, a common misquote. It’s derived from something the Apostle Paul said in the Bible, but what he actually said was ‘the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil’. I agree with that. It’s that ‘love’ that makes the difference - greed, avarice, the compulsion to aqcuire - that’s where wealth becomes harmful.

We’re not really against wealth. We want to see equality and justice, and an end to poverty and the abuse of the environment. In order for that to happen, we’re going to have to fight greed, unsustainable consumer habits, and wealth that is generated by exploiting others. And we’re not all negative either. We need to learn and promote new ways of using wealth well, to redistribute it, give it away, invest it in sustainable development and job creation, find ways to make that money go further and do more good.

wealth is not the enemy « MAKE WEALTH HISTORY

Technorati Tags: bligs, wealth, poverty, Christian

I'm touched

Just yesterday I discovered that someone (Phil Johnson) considered nominating me as worthy of being considered for a thinking bloggers' award.
"I am required to nominate five other blogs that I deem to be ones that provoke the reader into thinking (irrespective of whether I agree with them or not).
So here are the five:
1. Steve Hollinghurst (UK) On Earth As In Heaven.
2. John Morehead (USA) Theofantastique.
3. Matt Stone (Australia) Journeys in Between.
4. Andii Bowsher (UK) Nouslife.
5. Paul Fromont/Alan Jamieson (New Zealand) Prodigal Kiwi."

I guess I may need to think of my five ...
circle of pneuma: A Generous Endorsement

Blogging: overtesteronised and unaccountable?

I don't think that I share the alarm of the author over the future of blogging being undermined by incivility: my guess is that the rage merchants will be increasingly sidelined by people looking for serious and helpful content. A case in point is my own search habits and my desire not to inflame but to moderate opinion. The flaming and mudslinging is a spectator sport for those who like to see the online equivalent of boxing or WWE.
However, there is one issue that could help.

My immediate hunch is that the anonymity of the web is the problem. People do not tend to call each other Nazis in public meetings, or on radio phone-ins, because other people would know who they were. But if you're called DaffyDuck you can insult whoever you like. If democracy means anything it means accountability - and that should include accountability for our own words.

It'd help in respect of spamming too. There's a thought....

There's an interesting draft code of conduct being proposed which has six points:

1. We take responsibility for our own words and for the comments we allow on our blog.
We are committed to the "Civility Enforced" standard: we will not post unacceptable content, and we'll delete comments that contain it.
We define unacceptable content as anything included or linked to that:
- is being used to abuse, harass, stalk, or threaten others
- is libelous, knowingly false, ad-hominem, or misrepresents another person,
- infringes upon a copyright or trademark
- violates an obligation of confidentiality
- violates the privacy of others

We define and determine what is "unacceptable content" on a case-by-case basis, and our definitions are not limited to this list. If we delete a comment or link, we will say so and explain why. [We reserve the right to change these standards at any time with no notice.]

2. We won't say anything online that we wouldn't say in person.

3. We connect privately before we respond publicly.
When we encounter conflicts and misrepresentation in the blogosphere, we make every effort to talk privately and directly to the person(s) involved--or find an intermediary who can do so--before we publish any posts or comments about the issue.

4. When we believe someone is unfairly attacking another, we take action.
When someone who is publishing comments or blog postings that are offensive, we'll tell them so (privately, if possible--see above) and ask them to publicly make amends.
If those published comments could be construed as a threat, and the perpetrator doesn't withdraw them and apologize, we will cooperate with law enforcement to protect the target of the threat.

5. We do not allow anonymous comments.
We require commenters to supply a valid email address before they can post, though we allow commenters to identify themselves with an alias, rather than their real name.

6. We ignore the trolls.
We prefer not to respond to nasty comments about us or our blog, as long as they don't veer into abuse or libel. We believe that feeding the trolls only encourages them--"Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig likes it." Ignoring public attacks is often the best way to contain them.

I think that it is interesting that many Christian sites I visit seem to do these things as part of a 'do as you would be done by' 'love your neighbour' sort of informal ethic ...

The blogosphere risks putting off everyone but point-scoring males | Guardian daily comment | Guardian Unlimited

under-rated, under-appreciated, or under-valued

It's enough to warm the cockles of my heart: a list of "under-rated, under-appreciated, or under-valued" emerging church bloggers. And I made that list! I was just having to admit to myself the other day that my writing is unlikely to win me a wide readership: I suspect I'm far too eclectic and use a challenging range of vocab and draw from a wide range of subject areas to ever be 'popular'. So nice to have a little recognition. Anyway here's what it's about. Htt Matt Stone, The Blind Beggar and ultimately to Brother Maynard for starting it all off.

Brother Maynard has come up with the interesting suggestion of circulating a list of  under-rated, under-appreciated, or under-valued
emerging/missional blogs to help promote them in the wider blogosphere. Below is the list I picked up from The Blind Beggar.

• Emerging Grace



• Robbymac


• Lily


• Nathan Colquhoun


• John Smulo


• Todd Hiestand


• Theopraxis


• Chuck Warnock


• John Lunt


• Webb Kline


• Mark Wilson


• Rick Meigs


• Brother Maynard


• MakDaddy
  
  


• Glenn Hager


• Paul Mayers


• Jamie Swann


• Paul Walker


• Jerry Frear


• Phil Wyman


• Rainer Halonen


• Shannon


• Matt Stone


• Erika Haub


• John Santic


• Colin Lamm


• Julie Clawson


• Phil Johnson


• Andii Bowsher


• John Moorehead


• Paul Fromont & Alan Jamieson


• Steve Hollinghurst

To participate, copy this list into a new post on your own blog, and
add the names you have to the bottom of the list, and encourage others
to do the same. They should be people with under 150 links so we can truly scew the Technorati rankings. When you’ve done that, leave a
comment at Brother Maynard’s blog so he can keep track of who ends up participating.

Incidently, if you want to repro the list, you might want to view the source of the page and scroll down to the relevant bit to do a cut and paste. Certainly Firefox has that facility. Dunno about that other browser (ptui).

Technorati Tags: blogging, emerging-church, missional