I am sure Al Gore is a good guy. But I did not vote for him because I just could not imagine 4 or more years of him wagging his finger at us. The same holds true for his writing. I have tried several times now to get through his opinion piece from the Sunday NY Times and I just cannot do it. Frankly I did not make it all of the way through his movie either. I think he probably is right -- but it is just not fun to read. The same is true for Michael Moore movies – in the first half I get the message and the second half is unbearable. It does not matter if I agree with the argument or not, once it is clear that the model is: argument, supporting point, repeat, how many cycles do I need to endure?
This tracks back to my post yesterday about who is writing. An expert with too much ax to grind makes for some pretty dull reading. I want to figure out how I can write about subjects I know well, and am biased about, without turning off my reader. I suspect this is why biographies are generally more popular than autobiographies.
In an effort to somehow address this issue, I have posted my biases on my About Me page. My thinking here is to expose and acknowledge any agenda I might have and hopefully move beyond ringing that same bell over and over and maybe even to expose some interesting insights.
I want my writing to be interesting and valuable to my readers. I want it to be the kind of content I would like to read. Hey, I even want it to capture my current thinking so I can read it again in the future.
If you have thoughts about how I can improve my writing -- don't hesitate to post them here.