First Things seems to have added a new “group blog” to its site. If you ask how this differs from “On the Square” I’d say – good question! From what I can tell, the new blog is, well, bloggier (i.e. the entries are shorter and more informal) while the old blog seems geared more toward longer essay-type pieces.
Category: Blogs and bloggers
-
Fryblog
My wife and I have recently been watching the DVDs of A Bit of Fry and Laurie, the hilarious British sketch comedy show with Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie (now playing a misanthropic doctor on House, M.D.). They also, of course, did the Jeeves and Wooster series based on P.G. Wodehouse’s books.
Today the Young Fogey points us to Stephen Fry’s new blog.
Here’s one of my favorite sketches from A Bit of…
-
Isn’t “blogging elite” a contradiction in terms?
To me, the most interesting part of this WSJ piece on DC’s new ‘blogging elite’ is this: “D.C. ranks as the fourth ‘bloggiest’ city in the U.S., behind Boston, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.”
Seriously? Pennsylvania represent! My home state gets mad blog props. Also, note that the four “bloggiest” cities are all cities I’ve lived in. Coincidence? I ask you.
-
Spong’s Jesus
Ben Myers at Faith and Theology reviews the new book Jesus for the Non-Religious by the notorious John Shelby Spong.
Dr. Myers’ review is consistent with the impression I’ve long had of Spong’s work: in an attempt to be modern and relevant he evacuates Christianity of everything that makes it remotely interesting and weird and challenging. At that pont why not just sleep in on Sunday morning?
-
The Conservative Mind 2.0
The American Scene, formerly run by Ross Douthat and Reihan Salm, has a spiffy new design with a whole new raft of contributors. Looks like a great one-stop shop for smart, heterodox conservative blogging. (Salam continues to run TAS, while Douthat has moved on to a solo blog at The Atlantic.)
-
Who is my neighbor?
*Christopher has posted the text of a talk he recently gave on Christianity and the environment. It’s terrific stuff, with a very Lutheran and Benedictine flavor.
I think that rooting our ethics (including our environmental ethics) in our response to what God has first done for us is exactly right and it’s one of the insights of Reformational Christianity that I resonate the most with.
Andrew Linzey has written that one of the things that Christians can contribute to the movements for animal and environmental well-being is a sense of our solidarity in sin and our dependence upon grace. This can provide a powerful counterweight to temptations toward self-righteousness, as well as a motivation for doing good without falling into despair or utopianism.
-
anagnosis
Check out the new blog of regular ATR commenter Josh/Joshie/Joshie (Poo). He’s blogging texts of the Christian mystical tradition, beginning with The Mystical Theology by Pseudo-Dionysious.
-
Small Is Beautiful
This looks promsing: in the spirit of Crunchy Cons and Reactionary Radicals, a blog to promote Joseph Pearce’s new book Small Is Still Beautiful, which argues for the continuing relevance of the economic ideas of E.F. Schumacher.
From the book description:
Joseph Pearce revisits Schumacher’s arguments and examines the multifarious ways in which Schumacher’s ideas themselves still matter. Faced though we are with fearful new technological possibilities and the continued centralization of power in large governmental and economic structures, there is still the possibility of pursuing a saner and more sustainable vision for humanity. Bigger is not always best, Pearce reminds us, and small is still beautiful.
-
Pithy goodness
Have you ever found a good blog because you were impressed with something its proprietor said in a comment thread elsewhere and clicked through? Well, this morning I found Pith and Substance, whose owner goes by the name “PithLord” (one of the better handles in the blogosphere it has to be said). He appears to be a Canadian lawyer and writes about a variety of things political and philosophical. I found it through a comment thread over at The American Scene (itself a great blog).
I was also delighted in browsing his archives to come across this post, which, while probably a bit tongue-in-cheek, comes eerily close to describing my own basic political outlook.
-
Revolutionary pamphleteers as proto-bloggers
I started reading Bernard Bailyn’s fascinating book The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution and was struck by his description of pamphleteering as the primary means by which revolutionary ideas were spread:
It was in this form — as pamphlets — that much of the most important and characteristic writing of the American Revolution appeared. For the Revolutionary generation, as for its predecessors back to the early sixteenth century, the pamphlet had peculiar virtues as a medium of communication. Then, as now, it was seen that the pamphlet allowed one to do things that were not possible in any other form.
Bailyn offers this quote from Orwell:
The pamphlet is a one-man show. One has complete freedom to be scurrilous, abusive, and seditious; or, on the other hand, to be more detailed, serious and “high-brow” than is ever possible in a newspaper or in most kinds of periodicals. At the same time, since the pamphlet is always short and unbound, it can be produced much more quickly than a book, and in principle, at any rate, can reach a bigger public. Above all, the pamphlet does not have to follow any prescribed pattern. It can be in prose or verse, it can consist largely of maps or statistics or quotations, it can take the form of a story, a fable, a letter, an essay, a dialogue, or a piece of “reportage.” All that is required of it is that it shall be topical, polemical, and short.
Bailyn continues:
The pamphlet’s greatest asset was perhaps its flexibility in size, for while it could contain only a very few pages and hence be used for publishing short squibs and sharp, quick rebuttals, it could also accomodate much longer, more serious and permanent writing as well. Some pamphlets of the Revolutionary period contain sixty or even eighty pages, on which are printed technical, magisterial treatises. Between the extremes of the squib and the book-length treatise, however, there lay the most commonly used, the ideally convenient length: from 5,000 to 25,000 words, printed on anywhere from ten to fifty pages, quarto or octavo in size.
The pamphlet of this middle length was perfectly suited to the needs of the Revolutionary writers. It was spacious enough to allow for the full development of an argument — to investigate premises, explore logic, and consider conclusions; it could accomodate the elaborate involutions of eighteenth-century literay forms; it gave range for the publication of fully-wrought, leisurely-paced sermons; it could conveniently carry state papers, collections of newspaper columns, and strings of correspondence. It was in this form, consequently, that “the best thought of the day expressed itself”; it was in this form that “the solid framework of constitutional thought” was developed; it was in this form that “the basic elements of American political thought of the Revolutionary period appeared first.” And yet pamphlets of this length were seldom ponderous; whatever the gravity of their themes or the spaciousness of their contents, they were always essentially polemical, and aimed at immediate and rapidly shifting targets: at suddenly developing problems, unanticipated arguments, and swiftly rising, controversial figures. The best of the writing that appeared in this form, consquently, had a rare combination of spontaneity and solidity, of dash and detail, of casualness and care. (pp. 2-4)Bailyn goes on to identify three main types of pamphlet: the direct response to a current event, the “chain-reacting polemic” – a series of back-and-forth debates “which characteristically proceeded with increasing shrillness until it ended in bitter personal vituperation,” (my emphasis) and ritualistic commemorative orations.
At any rate, I think it’s clear that if the Revolutionary generation had lived today they would’ve been ardent bloggers. 😉