Obviously, it’s your blog and you should feel free to run it as you see fit. At the same time, I retain the right to decide who to endorse on my own blog.
Eric
]]>I can appreciate that you want the links on your site to be interesting, regularly updated places for your readers to go, but this notion that you’ll withhold your regal endorsement if Sean and I don’t pick up the pace (the two examples you cited) is a little off-putting.
For my part, I would simply encourage you to go ahead and do it — no need to serve notice, and gently scold people for letting their jobs get in the way. It’s a question of style — everyone’s got a different pace. If it were all about volume, to include what are essentially personal diary entries (sewage backup in the basement, house-breaking puppies), what’s to stop any of us from posting daily?
Regards,
Dave Woodbury
I pretty much agree with everything you said in your last post. When I said “a little harsh”, I guess I just meant that I was surprised by the comments a little, even though they they were all 100% true.
I think I’d like to take back my use of the word “scholarly” as well. I read blogs for the same reason I read books on the Civil War. I want to be informed as well as entertained. Sometimes I’m one or the other, sometimes I’m both.
BTW, does anyone know exactly how old Adam is? I got the sense he was in high school from having read the articles.
Brett
]]>
s one of the things I like about blogs – they are an equalizer. Everyone who writes one is just a guy (or gal), saying what is on their minds. On his or her own dime. The difference between someone who has published in the field of Civil War history and someone who hasnâ€t is that, well, one has published in the field of Civil War history and the other has not.
I donâ€t think the “criticism†of Adam (or of Ericâ€s assessment of the blogâ€s content) has been harsh. Hopefully, if Adam wishes his blog publications to be “scholarlyâ€, it has been constructive. Regardless, itâ€s his right to write his blog as he sees fit and for his own reasons, as it is ours to read it or not read it for our own reasons.]]>I don’t think the “criticism†of Adam (or of Eric’s assessment of the blog’s content) has been harsh. Hopefully, if Adam wishes his blog publications to be “scholarlyâ€, it has been constructive. Regardless, it’s his right to write his blog as he sees fit and for his own reasons, as it is ours to read it or not read it for our own reasons.
]]>As a regular Joe Schmoe who has no real qualification to write a Civil War blog other than having read several hundred books and even more magazine articles (Kevin both teaches and has had quite a few book reviews and articles published & Eric is obviously an author as well), I thought I’d weigh in. I think from simply reading his blog entries that Adam means well and wants to inform others with these articles, and also that the comments were a little harsh for someone who was just starting out. I don’t know what age group Adam falls in (I’m 27 myself), but I personally figured I’d give him some time to adjust. I know it took me several months to come up with a formula that I felt comfortable with.
With that said, I also reread my blog entries to ensure as much accuracy as possible when it comes to things like place names, names of people, dates, etc. Mistakes can, do, and have happened along the way. That’s another reason I like blogging. If I am laboring under some misapprehension I’m sure someone much more knowledgeable than myself on a given subject will come along and set me straight. It’s interesting to do a set of entries on Eric Jacobson’s Franklin book for instance, and have the author and Sam Hood (relative of General Hood) commenting along the way. I feel like I can learn so much more this way than simply by reading the book.
I agree with Chris that I expect these blogs to be somewhat scholarly, but I do not have the same expectations as when I read Civiil War History journal or North & South magazine, for instance. My payment for these publicatons ensures expectation, while the free nature of reading blogs dilutes this to some extent. I visit the various Civil War blogs for fun, mostly daily. Without blogging, I doubt I would have found Kevin’s Crater manuscript, bought some of the more obscure books Drew reviews, or started looking at cavalry books written by Eric and others, for just a few examples. By its very nature, blogging is a grassroots sort of thing. Some blogs are more scholarly than others, and I find these differences to be a good thing in many cases.
Brett S.
]]>Both of you accomplished one thing, made me look at your links to ensure that I was still listed.
I’ve talked to many a “researcher” who was looking for information, I’ll give it to him and then 5 years later receive another email asking for help again – because they are just starting up again. Blogs are a lot like any other hobbie, people go at them full steam and then, well, run out of steam. It’s too bad because I really do enjoy reading what others think, even when I don’t agree with them. 🙂
]]>One final point: I don’t consider much of anything that is published on the various Civil War blogs – including my own – to be “scholarly.”
]]>