I suspect this is a different kind of experience than if I did what I inevitably berate myself for not having done, that is, followed along on a daily basis and read about things as you posted.

This makes me think about the writing/blogged self as being different through its persistence as much as through the kind of performance it is (no argument with the notion that the F2F self is a performance, too).  But I’m fascinated as well by that difference that results from the possibility of reading PO in big bites (big gulps?), whereby your posts about work, reading/writing, travel, health and personal demons come together like (food metaphor about to get out of control here) sticky rice—those glutens which pull the grains together making it a substance qualitatively different from the experience of having the rice grain by grain.

It’s a bad metaphor in that it implies the superiority of the agglutinized KF, and of course I don’t mean that at all.  Sticky rice isn’t good unless it’s sticky, but PO is certainly as fine if not better consumed grain by grain.

OK, I’m stopping with the food metaphor.  My point is that my own experience of knowing you through the blog (which vastly expands my grad-student-friend experience) is reflective of the persistence and (growing influence) of “the archived self” which seems to live and breathe on the Net in a way that continues to astonish me. 

And we often worry about that from the standpoint of privacy, or the persistence of a self-presentation we wish could be forgotten.  But there’s a richness to experiencing it that I have kind of grown to like—so long as you’re still there to renew/deepen, and keep it growing.

Essentially, I use the term ‘editing’ as a process in which people to clarify/rework statements without constraint, into a tone/dialogue they find satisfactory.  I specifically don’t think of ‘editing’ in this context as a synonym for ‘restrained’ ( which I may have inadvertantly suggested), but the exact opposite.

[FWIW, the same colleague/friend who made the comment to KF told me that my blog tells absolutely nothing about myself.  So even a blurt like me can switch into Ice Princess Mode in certain venues.]

Everything you write, thought out, edited, revised published, circular, cryptic—its the ‘you’ you’re willing to present.  The meticulous arrangement of words and ideas to say one thing, and suggest another—offering a disclaimer, context, and subtext to every concept discussed.

Because of the nature of this ‘arena’, some ‘personal’ things can never come out in a blog.  BUT, as your friend/colleague pointed out, other things come out more easily (and perhaps only) in a blog, as you can handcraft the way the material is presented, and can go back and edit everything before anyone reads it.

But you raise a good question:  has the need for this kind of revelation-through-blog (or perhaps character-creation-through-blog) developed in part because of the series of extremely intimate interpersonal relationships that I’ve left behind over the years—college friends, grad school friends, those few with the key—and because of the whole long-distance relationship situation?  And, having developed, does this space for character-creation and connection lessen the need to find that kind of intimacy IRL?

Perhaps.  But is there a qualitative difference between that reticence and the much celebrated reclusiveness (or reserve) of writers or artists in other historical moments, working in other formats?

I don’t want to over-blow the meaning of my distancing mechanisms.  All this is just to say that sometimes they’re functional, and sometimes they get in the way.

(See you in a few days.  We’ll talk.)

What are the ramifications of using distancing mechanisms with those in your physical reality–who could more easily give back input, even unexpectedly, unwantedly (comments from the point of view of a non-blogger of the lurker type–I rarely leave messages, other than recently on your blog).

In fact I sense another persona–the one that you show to those who know you in the non-virtual way and to whom you’ve given the Shit-key.  How does this person/persona interact with the two others (and the rest…)

I’m actually having a hard time putting down my thoughts, as I get different reactions to different parts of your post.  When I reread the end part, I feel like we’re (you’re ?) talking about more intellectual, idea-oriented exhanges.  On projects, writings and researches, etc.

But at the start of the post, you recounted the reaction of others who feel they know you better by your blog. There I’m on another plane, and I’m thinking of intimacy and sharing–emotional, relational–but this could be from my mode of functioning.  Perhaps this colleague considers knowing what someone is thinking to be knowing that person ?

So I’m trying to figure out where all this intersects : what we are doing, what we are thinking about, what we are feeling (and then all of that in the past tense, too).

And what particular configuration of all that is highlighted by blog-contacts ?

And to return to my original impetus for this comment–what are the implications qualitatives for relationships via blogs ?

(jeez I do so much better doing conversations in person, where it’s easier to interweave topics and to think things through while still making sense.)