Today's the tenth anniversary of my first blog post. If you are a young scholar thinking of blogging, here are my reflections.
1. I have a platform. I view my near daily posts as something like a newspaper. People scan the headlines of all sorts of info sources and if my title strikes a fancy, you might just take a gander. The discipline of such regular posting means that I have a voice, for good or ill.
2. I have grown from the interactions. I have learned from critique. I have probably become less provincial, because I get reaction from all sides. I have developed a thicker skin. I've had a taste of what it must be like to be a politician.
3. I have cranked out a number of popular Christian books here, including some self-published one.
1. While I have written nearly ten books by blogging through, my scholarly writing has slowed down. I don't feel like I can blog through scholarly writing for more than one reason. It's hard to set aside time for the slow and arduous task of scholarly writing when you put the near instant gratification of blogging next to it.
2. I have made myself more controversial than I prefer. A blog inevitably blurs differing social roles. There is a way of being with family, with a local church, with a group of scholars, with friends who have one perspective versus friends who have another.
So I am just not sure if it's a good idea for Scotland to leave Great Britain. Most of you don't care. But James Petticrew does! I thought about posting something on the upcoming vote, but in deference to James I won't. :-)
In normal conversation, a polite person moderates their thoughts. A blog makes all thoughts accessible. You can't escape controversy without graying everything out.
On the whole, I think the pros have probably outweighed the cons, although I'm determined to write more on a scholarly level, even if it means backing off daily posts.
P.S. I think Word Press is probably the way to go if you're just starting out.