Wow. I'm used to reading your things in email and this was the first time I clicked the voice-over thingy and I was slightly shocked at how "produced" it was. This is not a criticism exactly, but it's a bit slick you have to admit and I suddenly felt a slight disconnect from the writer's voice I'd been hearing in my head through your little essays which usually start in a place of such humility. Sorry. I shouldn't say this but maybe it can be of some value to you that I did say this... Getting back to the subject at hand: I agree with your point that the unknown reader shouldn't care so much about who the writer is specifically. I agree with it and sympathize with the fatigue you feel for writers who lead with (often self-serving) biographical details. That said, the only thing anyone can write about with any real authority is their own experience and it is fairly natural for people to want to know where that experience comes from. One of the reasons I write fiction rather than essays is that my experience and memories can be processed into a product that isn't overly personal (though I have come very close to autobiography in quite a few of my stories I must admit). The other thing is, though I agree with you (sorry to have to say it) the ship has left the dock when it comes to online writing. Personality and celebrity triumphed over content quite a few years ago and this is where we are. Just look at any any contemporary media. Even print media leads with opinion pieces that feature well-known personalitiesof the opinion genre. Youtube is all about the messenger. The message has become secondary.
Hmm. Isn't it great that someone goes to the trouble of providing you and me with polished content, and he happens to have a pleasing voice with good cadence? (Some on Substack have dead reading voices, so I have to revert to the auto audio. 😆)
Substack isn't meant to be amatuer hour, although there's also plenty of that, we all get to choose.
yeah. You're right. It probably sounded like I was being overly critical. I do few readings on my own substack but all I have is voice memos on my phone so I'm in the category of amatuer hour and maybe I'm just jealous. My point was not that polished effects are bad but that to me they don't jibe with intimate sounding small scale pieces.
It's interesting that you started off by reading the daily posts, only recently listening to the audio, and your opinion changed.
I didn't have any particular expectations of these daily posts, and I don't know how Jordan is going to keep it up. I've enjoyed them at face value, and have only listened to them. I don't know if I would think differently if I'd been reading the text. The pieces are assertive, but that's obviously by design. I think they're equally assertive as written text.
I'm late to using audio, but now can't live without it. I can listen when walking the dog, or while doing mundane things. I'm old too, and visually impaired, so being able to consume some of my reading via audio is a relief. It's quite exhausting to keep up with my reading interests with only partial sight.
I'm sorry to hear about your eyesight problems. My mom has macular degeneration and struggles with reading though she is able to read with a kindle if the type is set to the very largest size. I have made voiceovers for four or five of my stories if you are interested in listening to some oddball fiction using low budget recording techniques. (I have over 100 posts now.) Here is one of them: https://rubenbix.substack.com/p/the-tour-van
Can't say I'm ever moved by anyone finding and sharing their voice, excited about practicing their art, or claims to vulnerability (which apparently appeals to 99 percent of Substack readers, btw).
Only pushback is the masses created this problem.
Society cares WAY too much about resume and experience and “why” before we get to the “what” of the idea.
Ideas should be judged by their own merit, bit by who said them and when. We rarely do that
Valid point, and Substack leans heavily into the 'tell people who you are'.
I admit I don't much care about the who, especially online.
I'd probably read hardly anyone on this platform if I was making judgements based on the about and bio blurbs.
Wow. I'm used to reading your things in email and this was the first time I clicked the voice-over thingy and I was slightly shocked at how "produced" it was. This is not a criticism exactly, but it's a bit slick you have to admit and I suddenly felt a slight disconnect from the writer's voice I'd been hearing in my head through your little essays which usually start in a place of such humility. Sorry. I shouldn't say this but maybe it can be of some value to you that I did say this... Getting back to the subject at hand: I agree with your point that the unknown reader shouldn't care so much about who the writer is specifically. I agree with it and sympathize with the fatigue you feel for writers who lead with (often self-serving) biographical details. That said, the only thing anyone can write about with any real authority is their own experience and it is fairly natural for people to want to know where that experience comes from. One of the reasons I write fiction rather than essays is that my experience and memories can be processed into a product that isn't overly personal (though I have come very close to autobiography in quite a few of my stories I must admit). The other thing is, though I agree with you (sorry to have to say it) the ship has left the dock when it comes to online writing. Personality and celebrity triumphed over content quite a few years ago and this is where we are. Just look at any any contemporary media. Even print media leads with opinion pieces that feature well-known personalitiesof the opinion genre. Youtube is all about the messenger. The message has become secondary.
Hmm. Isn't it great that someone goes to the trouble of providing you and me with polished content, and he happens to have a pleasing voice with good cadence? (Some on Substack have dead reading voices, so I have to revert to the auto audio. 😆)
Substack isn't meant to be amatuer hour, although there's also plenty of that, we all get to choose.
yeah. You're right. It probably sounded like I was being overly critical. I do few readings on my own substack but all I have is voice memos on my phone so I'm in the category of amatuer hour and maybe I'm just jealous. My point was not that polished effects are bad but that to me they don't jibe with intimate sounding small scale pieces.
It's interesting that you started off by reading the daily posts, only recently listening to the audio, and your opinion changed.
I didn't have any particular expectations of these daily posts, and I don't know how Jordan is going to keep it up. I've enjoyed them at face value, and have only listened to them. I don't know if I would think differently if I'd been reading the text. The pieces are assertive, but that's obviously by design. I think they're equally assertive as written text.
The daily philosophy certainly provokes thought.
I generally just read stuff. Fancy production values don't interest me. I'm old.
I'm late to using audio, but now can't live without it. I can listen when walking the dog, or while doing mundane things. I'm old too, and visually impaired, so being able to consume some of my reading via audio is a relief. It's quite exhausting to keep up with my reading interests with only partial sight.
I'm sorry to hear about your eyesight problems. My mom has macular degeneration and struggles with reading though she is able to read with a kindle if the type is set to the very largest size. I have made voiceovers for four or five of my stories if you are interested in listening to some oddball fiction using low budget recording techniques. (I have over 100 posts now.) Here is one of them: https://rubenbix.substack.com/p/the-tour-van
I'd love to know what you think.
Just curious if you are Gen X, because "tell me who you are" resonates more with Millenials than other guns, just saying 😉
Hard truths.
Can't say I'm ever moved by anyone finding and sharing their voice, excited about practicing their art, or claims to vulnerability (which apparently appeals to 99 percent of Substack readers, btw).