[Rohan Maitzen has both a nice response][rm] to the usual criticism of academic blogs (or blogs written by people who also happen to be academics), which is the misperception by many that they are intended to substitute for more traditional/conventional forms of writing/publishing. It’s not an *either/or* but *both/and*.
I also confess that I have always hated the verb form of blog. I don’t blog; I’m not a blogger. I have kept a collection of notes in reverse chronological order since 2005 ([see for yourself][see]). Mid-decade, that’s what a number of people were doing. As some people cultivated audiences, and thus ad revenue streams, it became blogging and they became bloggers.
At one point, I was on the verge of becoming one of those — I was up to several hundred readers a day — when I realized that was not what I wanted. I went silent for several months, changed what I was doing, lost those readers, and re-situated myself in a more firmly academic context. Now that I’ve done that, and I find myself more firmly in the intellectual/ideational context for which I think there is a better fit for myself as both a person and a creator, I’m ready to re-think the nature of the readership of this blog thing that is almost a decade old.
I think I’m ready to try to engage some kind of general audience on the nature of narrative, cognition, and computation.