Roberto Rivera y Carlo talks about the narcisissm of MySpace and the dull “ordinariness” that characterizes most blogging. If you’re like me, you’re growing a bit tired of articles bemoaning the banality of blogging—and fortunately this is not such an article. Roberto thinks we ought to learn to appreciate the beauty of the ordinary, in the tradition of GK Chesterton and the apostle Paul:
What’s wrong with being ordinary? A lot, if you live in a culture like ours that has turned “ordinary” into an epithet, a synonym for “mediocre.” Then, the fear of being (or appearing) “ordinary” exceeds the fear of possible humiliation or any other repercussions of inappropriate disclosure. [...]Turning “ordinary” into an epithet requires forgetting (or denying) that “ordinary” is the stuff that real life is made of. “Ordinary” comes from the Latin ordinarius meaning “customary, regular, usual, orderly.” How we handle the ordinary — and not how many people know who we are — is the standard against which we should measure our lives. It, and not some fleeting (or even not-so-fleeting) attention, is what gives our lives significance. (For the Christian, it’s what Jesus meant when He said, “He who is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much.”)
An interesting take on things. Much has been written (often by non-bloggers) about the mundanity of most blogs; and while there’s a point to such criticism, it’s usually accompanied by a healthy dose of condescension towards the masses of bloggers faithfully chronicling their thoroughly ordinary adventures. There’s a definite streak of self-obsession in the blogging world, but really, what’s wrong with just chatting about the everyday things that matter to you?
(Something to keep in mind next time you read, or are tempted to write, a thrilling blog post about what you had for lunch….)
Loading ...
March 21, 2007 at 09:17
The ordinary can be spiced up by well written rhetoric. Have you ever seen the movie “Big Fish”? The father figure took the art of storytelling and applied it to “ordinary” life. So, in one sense he was definitely stretching the truth but at the same time he was passing on his own history in a captivating way.
I don’t want to necessarily hear about your Rye bread sandwich for lunch, but that doesn’t mean that Rye bread sandwiches cannot be made EXTRAordinary.
March 21, 2007 at 18:40
I don’t necessarily want to read about everyone’s mundane life, but my mundane life is where I live as a disciple and experience the grace of God. There is a perception that everything in life must be exciting, that real life occurs on the edge and that Christian discipleship always involves a compulsive need to do great, exceptional things things for God. Christian life, some think, is never tame or routine. I don’t think that’s true. I’m grateful for those who do accomplish extraordinary things for God. But that’s not where I live. I live in the ordinary.
In the arts, God’s presence in the ordinary is portrayed in films such as “Tender Mercies” and in books such as “In this House of Brede.”
In worship, I’ve come to love the ordinary, historic liturgy of the church more than forms that attempt to “make it exciting.”
Personally, I meet God most frequently in the ordinary.
March 22, 2007 at 08:31
I always wanted to write a book called “The Glory of the Ordinary.” It’s the idea that God uses very ordinary people and circumstances to do extraordinary things or make a difference for His kingdom. I do see that occasionally in blogs, but not often. When I run across blogs by very common people, of any age or stage, who are revealing and exploring their own spirit and humanity, whether with seasoned eloquence or awkward simplicity, it is a bit of glory. It can even be an unintended revelation of the glory of God’s image within them, even though distorted. That’s the glory of the ordinary!
Truthfully, though, I think the term “ordinary” is far too generous for the kinds of blogs the post alludes to, even in its secodary meaning of “being of poor or mediocre quality” (M-W Unabridged). The more applicable biblical term that comes to my mind is “vain” from Ecclesiastes. The blogosphere is awash in blogs that are truly vain—empy and meaningless, “words on the wind” that go no where and mean nothing. There is no glory in that kind of ordinary. They are a waste of both the writer’s and the reader’s lives and time.
Blogger (and others) allow you to flag a poster for “objectionable content.” Perhaps they could add a new flag for “vain content.” That might at least save a searcher-surfer time in the often vain search for meaning on the internet.
March 22, 2007 at 22:29
Like all writing (professional or not) we will find some really mature and immature material. Maybe some folks do find the simplicity of someone’s “immature” or “vain” blog interesting. I once heard someone say that they did an auto-analysis of themselves after reading a blog of someone who got into a fight after school because of the same color jeans (aren’t most jeans blue anyway?). Apparently, the shock of such foolish behavior made this person seek how truly vain we are by nature.