Or, “Why blogging is difficult for me at times…”
I’ve known for years that former Major League Baseball star Curt Schilling has a blog. He has always been opinionated and outspoken: countless fans will never forget former Philadelphia GM Ed Wade’s famous crack about Shilling – whose inspiring pitching performance in Game 2 of the 2004 World Series helped the Red Sox win their first title since 1918 – being “a horse every fifth day and a horse’s ass” on the four days that he didn’t pitch. But for some reason, outside of baseball, he’s generally only existed in the periphery for me.
Last night, I was looking up something frivolous (I think it was about C.B. Bucknor being regarded as the worst MLB umpire) and came across a link to Schilling’s blog, 38 Pitches, and I decided to finally check it out. Schilling hasn’t posted often over the past couple of years, but there’s some content there that I read and enjoyed, such as his relatively recent post about the Pitcher’s Dominance Factor (PDF) statistic. On the other hand, he also writes somewhat inflammatory political blurbs that he occasionally prefaces with the words “flame on”, as if to divorce the nature of his post from that of his commenters while simultaneously acknowledging that he’s provoking those flames.
As I read through his posts from the past couple of years (yes – that’s how infrequently he posts), I began to think about the differences between Shilling as a blogger and myself. Like mine, his blog has a range of topics that he is passionate about, and that range is not comprehensive. However, he’s (again) pretty outspoken about his politics (among other things, but those subjects are less pertinent here), and this is where we differ.
There have been long periods of silence on this blog, for a small variety of reasons. As I read through Schilling’s blog tonight, I was able to clarify for myself that one of those reasons is that, while there is a lot on my mind – the “potential blog material” – much of what has been on my mind in recent months is not “material” that I feel comfortable writing about. I have opinions, and I certainly feel strongly about things; however, for me there is a sensitivity to certain political topics, and writing about them in absolute terms goes against my nature. I think that I feel this way for a few reasons.
For one thing, I’m aware of the fact that there are others who have valid viewpoints that are incongruent with mine. I enjoy exploring these viewpoints when they are presented reasonably, because they are opportunities to learn and grow. On the other hand, views that are presented in a way that makes the provocation overshadow the viewpoint have the net effect of redirecting my attention elsewhere, because I’m not interested in reading or thinking about something that belittles my point of view. There’s a distinct difference: I can respect and acknowledge mature delivery of a message that I disagree with, because with maturity comes an invitation to constructive dialogue, whereas messages delivered with provocation present a combative front, and I’m not a fan of that kind of dialogue, regardless of whether I agree with the stated views.
I would be a horrible politician, I guess. Whatever… I at least know that about myself, even if I don’t know what I want to be when I grow up.
Curt Schilling is, as far as I can tell, extremely conservative all the way down the line – and I respect that, even though my worldview does not fit into a neat little box like his does. My political views tend to vary from issue to issue, from situation to situation. Because he presents his opinion in the manner that he does, I don’t feel welcome to the debate that he initiates, because I don’t like combative debate. I don’t like spouting political views as absolutes, rights-and-wrongs, with an air of smugness.
Another thing that I’m not comfortable with is slapping one-size-fits-all labels on people and issues. Schilling posted this last December, and if you read it you’ll see that the entire second half of the post does exactly what I’m talking about. As I read through the post, I was almost disappointed to find that I didn’t fit into most of the narrow descriptions of “liberal” and “conservative”. I say almost disappointed, because I ultimately didn’t care all that much (queue the above paragraphs and the rest of this post)…
I don’t just fit one of the two molds. I am not simple, and am not simply a conservative or liberal. I am a complex person, with variably complex views, formed over many years of thought and study and conversation and life experiences. More importantly, I think that millions of people are this way, and that’s something that I’m not sure most politicians – or partisan commentators, for that matter – give people nearly enough credit for. “The American People have spoken.” “The American People want (fillintheblank).” “The American People are tired of (suchandsuch).” Give me a break. America is incredibly diverse. To label all people as just conservative or liberal is short-sighted, dismissive, and neglectful, as far as I’m concerned.
Perhaps that is the real difference between me and the Curt Schillings of the world: I don’t think about all of my political views as the correct ones. I give credit and respect to different viewpoints. Assigning a “right” or “wrong” label to every view that doesn’t correspond with my own is incompatible with how my brain functions.
So, I realized that this is why I don’t generally like to write publicly about my opinions on “the issues”, or on much of what I read. “The world is a mess”, and so the issues of the day are on my mind, but it’s not in my nature – or, I’m just not able – to bring myself to publish blog posts about them. Perhaps that is a glaring weakness of mine, as a blogger… that I am unwilling to come out and make bold political statements and defend them like it’s my livelihood. Then again, perhaps it’s not a weakness. I don’t know. I do know that I’m pretty comfortable approaching politics quietly and internally. It suits me better that way.
* * * * *
Thanks to every person who writes about political issues in a reasonable manner. In my opinion, it’s the best way to engage people, and I appreciate it.
Also, Curt Schilling was a great player who pitched with skill, power, and a lot of heart. The 2004 playoffs were extremely exciting, and the long-awaited World Series win by the Red Sox was both the cake and the icing. Much respect. 
Like this:
One blogger likes this post.
Restrictive political labels and the complex human
Or, “Why blogging is difficult for me at times…”
I’ve known for years that former Major League Baseball star Curt Schilling has a blog. He has always been opinionated and outspoken: countless fans will never forget former Philadelphia GM Ed Wade’s famous crack about Shilling – whose inspiring pitching performance in Game 2 of the 2004 World Series helped the Red Sox win their first title since 1918 – being “a horse every fifth day and a horse’s ass” on the four days that he didn’t pitch. But for some reason, outside of baseball, he’s generally only existed in the periphery for me.
Last night, I was looking up something frivolous (I think it was about C.B. Bucknor being regarded as the worst MLB umpire) and came across a link to Schilling’s blog, 38 Pitches, and I decided to finally check it out. Schilling hasn’t posted often over the past couple of years, but there’s some content there that I read and enjoyed, such as his relatively recent post about the Pitcher’s Dominance Factor (PDF) statistic. On the other hand, he also writes somewhat inflammatory political blurbs that he occasionally prefaces with the words “flame on”, as if to divorce the nature of his post from that of his commenters while simultaneously acknowledging that he’s provoking those flames.
As I read through his posts from the past couple of years (yes – that’s how infrequently he posts), I began to think about the differences between Shilling as a blogger and myself. Like mine, his blog has a range of topics that he is passionate about, and that range is not comprehensive. However, he’s (again) pretty outspoken about his politics (among other things, but those subjects are less pertinent here), and this is where we differ.
There have been long periods of silence on this blog, for a small variety of reasons. As I read through Schilling’s blog tonight, I was able to clarify for myself that one of those reasons is that, while there is a lot on my mind – the “potential blog material” – much of what has been on my mind in recent months is not “material” that I feel comfortable writing about. I have opinions, and I certainly feel strongly about things; however, for me there is a sensitivity to certain political topics, and writing about them in absolute terms goes against my nature. I think that I feel this way for a few reasons.
For one thing, I’m aware of the fact that there are others who have valid viewpoints that are incongruent with mine. I enjoy exploring these viewpoints when they are presented reasonably, because they are opportunities to learn and grow. On the other hand, views that are presented in a way that makes the provocation overshadow the viewpoint have the net effect of redirecting my attention elsewhere, because I’m not interested in reading or thinking about something that belittles my point of view. There’s a distinct difference: I can respect and acknowledge mature delivery of a message that I disagree with, because with maturity comes an invitation to constructive dialogue, whereas messages delivered with provocation present a combative front, and I’m not a fan of that kind of dialogue, regardless of whether I agree with the stated views.
I would be a horrible politician, I guess. Whatever… I at least know that about myself, even if I don’t know what I want to be when I grow up.
Curt Schilling is, as far as I can tell, extremely conservative all the way down the line – and I respect that, even though my worldview does not fit into a neat little box like his does. My political views tend to vary from issue to issue, from situation to situation. Because he presents his opinion in the manner that he does, I don’t feel welcome to the debate that he initiates, because I don’t like combative debate. I don’t like spouting political views as absolutes, rights-and-wrongs, with an air of smugness.
Another thing that I’m not comfortable with is slapping one-size-fits-all labels on people and issues. Schilling posted this last December, and if you read it you’ll see that the entire second half of the post does exactly what I’m talking about. As I read through the post, I was almost disappointed to find that I didn’t fit into most of the narrow descriptions of “liberal” and “conservative”. I say almost disappointed, because I ultimately didn’t care all that much (queue the above paragraphs and the rest of this post)…
I don’t just fit one of the two molds. I am not simple, and am not simply a conservative or liberal. I am a complex person, with variably complex views, formed over many years of thought and study and conversation and life experiences. More importantly, I think that millions of people are this way, and that’s something that I’m not sure most politicians – or partisan commentators, for that matter – give people nearly enough credit for. “The American People have spoken.” “The American People want (fillintheblank).” “The American People are tired of (suchandsuch).” Give me a break. America is incredibly diverse. To label all people as just conservative or liberal is short-sighted, dismissive, and neglectful, as far as I’m concerned.
Perhaps that is the real difference between me and the Curt Schillings of the world: I don’t think about all of my political views as the correct ones. I give credit and respect to different viewpoints. Assigning a “right” or “wrong” label to every view that doesn’t correspond with my own is incompatible with how my brain functions.
So, I realized that this is why I don’t generally like to write publicly about my opinions on “the issues”, or on much of what I read. “The world is a mess”, and so the issues of the day are on my mind, but it’s not in my nature – or, I’m just not able – to bring myself to publish blog posts about them. Perhaps that is a glaring weakness of mine, as a blogger… that I am unwilling to come out and make bold political statements and defend them like it’s my livelihood. Then again, perhaps it’s not a weakness. I don’t know. I do know that I’m pretty comfortable approaching politics quietly and internally. It suits me better that way.
* * * * *
Thanks to every person who writes about political issues in a reasonable manner. In my opinion, it’s the best way to engage people, and I appreciate it.
Also, Curt Schilling was a great player who pitched with skill, power, and a lot of heart. The 2004 playoffs were extremely exciting, and the long-awaited World Series win by the Red Sox was both the cake and the icing. Much respect.
Share this:
Like this: