I think that is the most ever.
No good reason that I can think of; but apparently I have had more than usual to say.
Doesn't seem to have made any significant difference to numbers of views or comments - indeed my biggest current source of 'readers' is what I assume to be a 'bot' or attack site that appears to be associated in some way with Ms Britney Spears (I haven't bothered looking... not a fan).
7 comments:
I'm not Britney Spears (thank God), but I enjoy your posts.
Oh, I have those bots too, and I have looked. Not for the aspiring saint or sage.
It's been interesting and worth it, I'd say. Not all of us dedicated readers comment much. I rarely have anything to say. I'm not sure that you can rely on comments as a determinant of readership. Your blog is so different from everyone else's that standard patterns may not apply anyway.
If you ever decided to stop blogging here, would you pull down your site? Would you consent to having them archived on the web?
@DR - Thanks -
"If you ever decided to stop blogging here, would you pull down your site?" Probably not - indeed, but I would have lost access to it, so I don't suppose it would be my decision.
"Would you consent to having them archived on the web?" I don't really control that either - once writing is in the public domain, it's out of control. Of course I wouldn't object to being archived (it is flattering), but it is not a likely scenario.
I just found you this month and have been reading daily, so there's me, too!
Your posts are so interesting. I'm glad I found you:)
The lack of reader participation at CharltonTeaching has mystified me since I found this blog a few years ago. Intuitively, I've assumed this site will one day "blow up" after linkage or referral from (to some extent) comparable blogs (Voxday).
However, I think an absence of conversation is expected when considering how the writing at CharltonTeaching distinguishes itself from religiously motivated commentary offered by superficially comparable bloggers.
For example, while I do not read a wide range of blogs, I do have the impression that the writing at CharltonTeaching is:
- Esoteric enough to break the engagement of most readers (even those that have already found themselves to belong among the outnumbered minority of those that are explicitly Christian, critical of modernity and PC, bookish. How many people are stimulated by musings about William Arkle and Colin Wilson?
- CharltonTeaching is written from a frame of reference that is palpably British. This localized reference frame is going to limit the number of readers compelled to (capable of) "joining in".
- Refined abstraction is enticing and potentially applicable to few. Final participation, metaphysics, Copernican inversion: these are ideas that are far removed from the materialistic mental make-up of most modern Christians; so, most opt for religious/right-leaning writing that is more of the "here and now".
- The writing at CharltonTeaching is not, shall I say, "open-ended". To agree with your beliefs about the current situation of the West is to conclude that the only well-guided response to the demonic carnage of modernity is to patiently wait for the necessary and spontaneous spiritual re-awakening of Christianity among the presently soul-dead, first-world masses? Therefore, activism, political involvement, attempts to influence the public and comments are almost totally ineffective at moving the needle toward Goodness?
- Finally, CharltonTeaching is emphatic on the importance of rejecting hedonism. Anti-hedonism, by itself, generates a monstrous amount of fear within the minds of the functionally-atheistic, pseudo-utilitarian, morally-relativistic automatons (i.e., NORMAL PEOPLE nowadays); hence, exposure to proper Christian metaphysics is likely to send normal people desperately rushing back to the supposed comfort blanket of secular self-indulgence. If all of realty is ultimately a bland and unloving hodgepodge of random sub-atomic responses, then, hedonism is all you got!
Thanks
@AR - Interesting analysis, thanks.
I often forget that this blogs original title, and therefore, url is charltonteaching - this is because it began as a student-orientated resource supplement to my teaching.
At some point I deleted all the early teaching material, and renamed the blog Bruce Charlton's Miscellany to be my daily multi-subject blog - then later renamed it again as at present.
Pretty lazy - but in those days I didn't realise how quick and easy it was to make new blog addresses.
Ironically, I now have about 26 other blog titles - all of them with names corresponding reasonably closely to their content, except for this one (which is, of course, by far the most often viewed...)
Post a Comment