h&f 0015 plub #002 The Manual …of sorts.

It is daunting to expose onesself to the plubber’s standard.  Plubbing is not squarely bound by any rules, being guided by the integrity of the author’s capture of the event and the quality of the reflection on the event.  That said, a good plub will be marked by:

  • clear orientation for the reader:  what was the event? when did it occur? where did it occur? who were the key players, attendees? what was the explicit and implicit subject matter of the event(s)? what, then, is the plubber’s opinion or position – supported by sound argument.
  • plubber’s arguments will reference not only logical schema but also anecdotal and systemic evidence or even (rather, especially) literary examples, the idea behind the latter being to attempt to wend our way from the seemingly mundane to the base force that caused that idea or behaviour to surface.  Why?  Accountability – not allowing an idea to be it’s own boat.
  • Edits may happen until finalplub. that opening signal (at beginning of the plub)locks the editing. why? Accountability again.  If I find I’ve written something grossly wrong, then marking the spot final and later offering the correction gives the highest benefit: learning.  The process of learning often hurts, but the achievement of it is a joy, happiness notwithstanding.  No matter, the thing is to make a deliberate choice to close it without regard to tomorrow’s knowledge.  A hanging plub will evidence its own expiry.  No need to put a time limit on it.  You know when it’s rotten or disingenuously stalling for time.
  • finally, plubbers waste no words.

FAQ:  (There’s only one.) 

Q:  How in tarnation is this still considered blogging?  Aren’t you just writing essays?

A: Plubbing is blogging. (Compare to its near opposite, micro-blogging.) It is web log content supported by references to other blogs and multimedia content, all pegged to a particular date, with multiple plub entries on a single topic showing up in reverse chronological order.   So you can plub a conference, a trip to an amusement park, a day on the rooftop spent wandering in thought.  Whatever.  It’s not an academic excercise, despite the tone of this tome.  I just wanted to borrow the gap-filling essence of the legal ethic to make a best shot at, well, closing gaps.  This form will take its own shape and give its own rules and values, any explanations of it eventually becoming immediately trivial in the face of a solid plub.  The best of literary criticism, for example, can only say infinitely less than the work itself, right.  I say that, even as one who considers pretty darn magical Harold Bloom’s deconstruction of Browning’s Childe Roland To The Dark Tower Came. 

I see you thinking… Yes, the term “macroblog” could work, descriptively, but not in a comprehensive sense as it gives excess deference to its opposite, giving us a circular reference, much like the one we use for describing color.  Try Arthur Japin here:

“Conversely, the red plant itself burns a brighter red when set off by the green than when it grows among its peers. In the bed I always reserved for poinsettia seedlings, there was little to distinguish one plant from its neighbours. My poinsettia did not turn scarlet until I planted it out in new surroundings. Colour is not something one has, colour is bestowed on one by others.”  [from The Two Hearts of Kwasi Boachi]

That is: We would like to see a plub not in terms of the anti-plub, red in terms of green, but for whatever true rendering it is.  That’s of course, impossible: You can’t see red, except for any other color. And anything that exists without reference to relatives or opposites we usually and rightly call… plain crazy.  John Donne and Martin Luther King both ring clear on this point of unavoidable connectedness. But as a subtle, guiding (not rigid) standard, it will push us to true writing as we honestly seek what we know to be an impossible standard.   It ain’t deep, just true, having also been reduced to, “Shoot for the moon.  The stars aren’t a bad second place.” Perfection is too often relegated as an unreasonable goal.  It may be.  But it is not an unreasonable standard.

<end faq>

So, whew!  I’m pretty scared of all that.  I’m allowed to be because I’m not the plub lawgiver and, as such, I’m open to record revisions.  Do join the plub.  I believe we will trade some wonderful, mad, silly, smart, timely, dead ideas, all consumating in lifeblood, a dimly lit yet traverssable walkway from the vulgar now to the sublime infinite.



~ by ericjhenderson on July 7, 2008.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: