I thought I'd expand a bit on what I mean by saying the quote I posted yesterday applies to me. To be more specific, the part about it being "...a subject much bigger and more important than he will ever be". Firstly, I think it is quite a mean attack, and you can apply it to anyone who is interested in something but is not acclaimed in it. Lord knows I'm the same as Mr. Ott in that I fawn over these artists, albums, and for that matter books, and love writing and talking about them. Of course, I will never be able to reach the same level of greatness or genius as these people and things that I praise. But that's not wrong, surely?

It does make me wonder though whether it's wrong to spend an inordinate amount of time talking about a subject when all you can offer is "meaningless commentary". I'm not a critic, I know precious little about most things, so why should I bother writing about these things? Basically it boils down to ego. It makes me feel good, for one, since I like writing about what I like, but also I think it makes me feel important, as if by giving views on something important, that I become important by association. The difference, I would like to think, is that the blogging medium does not imply expertise at all, which I suppose a book might. It's true, the commentary I provide is still meaningless, regardless of medium, but surely a lot of what we do is meaningless then? I suspect the attack was aimed specifically at the fact that Ott chose to write a book about it, which I suppose is more understandable.

There still is the matter, though, of whether it is wrong to be thinking and writing about these things in the first place. Maybe it's a waste of time (and for me it invariably is), but it is an ego-boost, and does that make it wrong? If something makes you happy, and yet it has no point, is it "wrong" to do it? Unfortunately it would be hard to define what the "point" of anything is. I mean, what's the point of life? It may be better to replace "wrong" with a "something you shouldn't be devoting your life to". That would seem to make a true(er) statement - don't spend your life on something that you can't offer anything new on. But this begs the question, "Who are you to tell me what to do with my life?!". Indeed! I don't think the statement is of a command-nature, it's more of a guideline that one would do well to follow. Especially me.

I think I've gone and confused myself. I'm sure the author of the comment didn't intend something so deep, all he meant was that the book was pointless droning, and I suppose he chucked in an insult for good measure.

It's interesting to chalk up a list of fallacies I've employed: appeal to emotion, appeal to common belief, straw man... Hmm perhaps I am far too self-conscious, I cannot go a post without having a disclaimer that basically says "I know what I've written is total nonsense, so spare me".

Blogger's server seems to be taking quite a beating. I knew they would have trouble once they offered unlimited image space!