The price of exuberance is eternal vigilance

[gurdonark]

The problem with any hobby involving personal interaction, including LiveJournal, is the problem of exuberance. Exuberance for a hobby can be a very good thing. When I was a kid, I always admired that my father, who worked hours that can only be described as impossible, could develop in-depth expertises at his hobbies to an extent I never could do. When he was interested in rocks and minerals, he actually took the exams and became a certified gemologist, even though this was a great challenge, as he is color blind. When he developed an interest in old cars, he didn't just stop at acquiring a few Model As. He and a friend built a Model T from the frame up. I remember when we went to see the man who owned that old rusted Model T frame. The owner was a World War I veteran who had moved to the deep woods and become a real life "hermit". We pulled up to his house, and my mom and we three kids had to stay in the car. The old man never showed his face; instead, he made odd "war whoops" in the distance to let us know he was about. We had to leave, and my father came back to close the purchase another day. He converted his love of reading history into several articles for historical quarterlies; one won a state-wide "best of" type prize. When asked, as some kind of officer, to write a column for the local medical society newsletter, he began a weekly column that ultimately expanded to the local newspaper. My dad had/has an enthusiasm for his hobbies that I really admire---a baseline belief that one can *do*, and not just wish, that I wish I emulated more often.

There's a flip side to exuberance about hobbies, though. I remember becoming deeply interested in playing chess just after high school. I'd played in my very first tournament, the state championship, and finished seventh in the field. When I went off to university, I spent hours some days sitting at my little chess table, playing over opening strategies, trying to refine my game. This particular exuberance, though, backfired. Rather than increasing my "chess rating" and improving my confidence, my many hours spent studying the game actually depressed me with my lack of skill, and perhaps alienated me from the other folks in my dorm--
they felt there was something weird about a guy who studies chess one-handedly. Ultimately, I did improve my rating to the high but not astronomic goal I had set for myself, but only by relaxing, enjoying the game, and studying less, but more effectively. My enthusiasm, rather than improving my experience, betrayed me.

I have had experiences when I was a fair bit younger in which I imagined that I had befriended a work acquaintance, say, only to discover I was sadly mistaken. I rememember what a relief and a revelation it was to stand in a nightclub restroom before the mirror, after some work kids that had gotten "everyone" to join them at the club for a work outing, promptly ditched everyone to head to another bar. They weren't really blameworthy--they just didn't see the social faux pas, because it was all very casual to them. I felt such a release when my hurt evaporated, as I looked into the mirror and literally told myself "Remember. These are not your friends. These are not your friends. They are just people you work with". I have never unlearned that lesson, which has served me well--don't confuse interface with intimacy.

I was on the converse side of the same phenomenon in Los Angeles.
I became involved in a chess club which organized and ran one small tournament a month. The club met all my definitions of how a club should be run. It was a bunch of folks who just got together and ran one small, successful tournament. No infrastructure, no meetings, fairly token elections (who wants to be "secretary"?), no politics, no interpersonal worries. It was like being part of a monthly clock that, with a modicum of effort, produced chess tournaments. I would get together with the fellow who was president to play casual games. He was a nice fellow, whose chess rating was hundreds of points below his true strength. He just had not found that formula to make his game results show his skil level. I guess a simpler way to say it is that he would get into "real game conditions", with those odd twin-faced clocks running, and choke. He liked playing with me, because I was rated some 400+ points higher than he was, something like the difference between a fellow who is below median, and a fellow who is one notch from an expert rating. He and I would talk together about how perfect the club was, because it almost ran itself, and had no extra commitments.

What changed over time, though, was he got the gift of exuberance, and I lost mine. He began to organize weekly "meetings" at a nearby coffee house. Soon the club was no longer a "cool way to run a single tournament", but instead just the sort of "organized thing" that I didn't want to take active part in. My friend was not to blame for this--growing a club is an exuberant, fun thing. Meanwhile, though, my own work schedule, always fervent in those days, gave me less time for the club. We also moved from the westside of Los Angeles, near where the club was, into the foothills of the Crescenta Valley, a bit of a commute. We didn't play casual games as much together.

One Saturday, when I called to tell him I couldn't attend the next day's tournament, he became very angry. From his point of view, he was entirely justified. I was an officer of this club, but I hadn't really participated at all in the new places to which he was taking the club. I had clearly hurt his feelings, because in terms of the club and our casual games, I had dropped the ball. I had not shared his exuberance. I did not, and do not, feel particularly at fault here. But I do feel badly, because I'm like most folks, I prefer to be liked, and not to alienate people.

His exuberance turned out fine. He played casual games with other strong fellows, and his rating is now just a bit under mine. He's a writer, and he's now had interviews with west coast chess masters appear in the national chess publication, Chess Life and Review. Not surprisingly, my rating slipped a bit, and I now have not played in a "serious" tournament since 1998. For a while, I substituted play on the internet in little five minute games for "real chess", thousands upon thousands of games at the Internet Chess Club. Since February, I've let even that slip away. I'll still play in tournaments as time goes on, but unless I need a retirement hobby someday, I doubt I'll ever be as good again as I once was. When I had my best run, I could see that I could, through work, have been an expert had I worked at it. I just lacked the exuberance any more.

I started this journal as a website alternative, in which I could discuss law careers. That idea of the journal lasted about one day. Soon I realized that the journal could be a place for me to
write creatively, to pontificate without shame, to record for myself just how it is I live, and to examine my thoughts on things. I set rather simple rules for myself. I remembered the P.G. Wodehouse tag about how one could write a novel one of two ways. One could either make it a sort of musical comedy, as he did, or one could get right down in the heart of things "and not give a damn" how difficult it was. This journal, I decided, would be of the former variety. I would never intrude on my wife's privacy,
nor my work privacies, nor put anything in the journal that I do not mind the world reading. This has not proven that difficult, as I can tell the world a great deal about myself without any real fear---I guess I have learned that though I am not always an "easy person to get", I am a person always willing to try to communicate who I am. Thus far, I haven't even bothered to use the "friends" mode, although I might sooner or later. I'm very pleased that I have "transmuted" my journal into a device which lets me write something again besides briefs. I can see my efforts turning into creative writing and completed projects, a true extension of the creativity and fun that at the outset of this year got me involved in mail art. Although I have written creatively for years, my output has increased since I began to journal. The journal also has a real "diary" effect--it's a real help in self-defintion. I've really enjoyed my journal.

One thing I did not expect was how much I would enjoy reading others' journals. In the early days, of course, one uses the random keys a bit, to read what other journals are like. I soon discovered that I liked the folks here--many of whom are my friends' list--who have something to say. I am not a snob, or a person interested in only one type of story, and the things my friends have to say are very diverse. I never imagined that I would find reading others' journals as interesting as I have.

One thing that has been difficult for me, though, is avoiding the dangers of exuberance. It's one thing to excessively pontificate in one's own journal(s). It's another thing altogether to excessively pontificate and emote in someone else's journal. I don't mean merely writing a lengthy comment, as this can be fun for everyone. I mean taking the journal at face value, and trying to respond to the journal as if the journalist were a person to whom one is speaking in person, rather than a journal in which the journalist does not really want that kind of interface. Livejournals are places where we all try out ideas, record emotions, trot out things we don't say in real life. We all value comments, and in my own case, I thrive on them. But I know I don't want people to feel that what I write in my journal is a series of thoughts that need the same type of interface that, say, an expression of frustration or uncertainty in a lunch with an old friend might require the old friend to give. We do make "friends" in our journals, but not that type of friend. We want our friends to read our novel/journals as novels, not as pleas for sympathy or attention. Stated, another way, we want the attention and comments of a reader and reviewer, not necessarily the sympathy of a counselor or "best friend at lunch". This is not to diminish the high quality of these "friends list" encounters. I feel "close" to people to whom I am not close at all, because they give me the gift of their journal(s).

Today, surfing around journal comments, I came to realize that my exuberance has gotten the best of me. I like that I have commented liberally when journals interest me. In a few instances, though, my comments, rather than being confined to the "literary" quality of the journal--the LiveJournal "interface" if you will--seem to treat the journalist as a personal friend describing a problem for which the journalist wanted "help" or "comfort", rather than as a person who made a journal entry to capture the moment. I have made the mistake of cheerleading or giving advice, when the journalist really wanted to create a literary experience. As my own journal is almost entirely an accurate but surface musical comedy, I should have been much more perceptive that other journals, in other genres, similarly are not intended to be taken as "pleas for help" or "quiet lunches with a real life friend". The result, my sense that I have given discomfort, and perhaps even made someone seek other avenues of expression, makes me sad, but mostly makes me ready to curb my exuberance.

I had taken comfort in the fact that my approach to my journal, and indeed, to all on line experience, is extremely non-acquisitive. I have a wife, and don't need new romance. I have a job, and don't need someone to help me earn an income. I have offline friends who care about me. I am not a "joiner", and grant myself such approvals or disapprovals as I need. I rationalized to myself that since I didn't want anything but shared ideas, and perhaps the interconnection of kindred spirits, then my exuberance was justified. Today I determined, though, that my assessment was deeply, embarrassingly flawed. I started to type "I feel horrid about that", but then I realized that this sounded needy in a way that I don't really feel. I do not really believe in disabling "comments" (the power imbalance does not appeal to me), but I'm not looking for some new reassurance or denial. I'm just recording a moment in my journal. I am tempted to make it a private post (earlier this morning, I was tempted to just delete my journal, which would simply solve the problem), but then I thought that this is one more aspect of the "musical comedy" of LiveJournal. I am now examining whether I have developed a new "acquisitiveness", the desire to acquire kindred spirits with whom to exchange ideas. In my life, I have always had such people, and I am not often prey to loneliness of any kind. But my sheer exuberance about this form of interface has led me astray, and I now realize, graphically, that this can cause discomfort in others. One example is one of my Australian friends, to whom I made a comment which, while well-intentioned, sounded almost intrusive (thankfully, on a minor, semi-rather-than fully-personal point), when I had really intended to sound jolly. Another matter is a series of comments that were little more than expressions of enthusiastic, friend-at-lunch "reaffirmation", which was mistaken for sympathy, in response to posts that did not really seek reaffirmation or sympathy. I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with sympathy or with wit per se. It's that old exuberance thing. In the case of my own journal, I want people to care, but not to care. So I "get it".

I value very much that people here write their journals for their own reasons, which are in some cases very different from my own theories of my journal. I hate, and will learn from, the idea that I comment in the wrong way to anyone's journal, as causing people unintended discomfort frankly makes me feel odd about myself. I've not committed any irretrievable faux pas, I hope, but I have learned today especially that the journal experience is not a lunch with a "real life friend" who wants sympathy, but a more complex and less interpersonal thing. I am just grateful that I was able to piece together this "new truth", although, really, it's just confirmation of something about which I worried.

This has made a long, self-denigrating post. I don't really have a good conclusion to it. But I resolved today to continue to enjoy journals, but to treat them a bit more a journals, and a bit less as lunchtime chats. I value my LiveJournal friends very much; I like to think that they value me. But part of this mutual valuation is to deal with journals as journals, and not as acquisitions of posts with which one is expected to directly "help". I would hate, and do hate, to make anyone feel uncomfortable by showing an inappropriate expression of "caring" in that "friend at lunch" way. After all, we got to lunch with friend or spouse to get that kind of care, not to our journals, necessarily (I know different people are different, I don't mean to state a general rule for all journals). I am a helper by nature, which is both good and bad. But I learned today (convincingly, in black and white, thankfully, in indisputable terms--I am not much one for suspense) that sometimes I must be a better LiveJournal friend by trying to be less of the old-fashioned kind.

I've been on LiveJournal just under five months now. How did I come to feel I "knew" people well enough to say the things I have said in some instances? I'm not trying to be some self-flagellator--it's not an omnipresent problem. I have just learned that the enthusiasm to "make friends" can be an off-putting thing. Did I learn nothing from junior high? Perhaps not, but I have learned that the unexamined journal comment style is not worth having. I would hate to make anyone feel badly by expressing a sense of caring, when all that was wanted was a good reader. Be that as it may, I will continue to comment vigorously, make friends and interact with them, and plunge in. But I will try to remember that a journal has its own roles, and exuberance is not always a good thing. I brag lately that I am a good reader. I will remember that what a reader does, is read.

Comments

[marstokyo.livejournal.com]

Well. Did you ever say a mouthful! I've got a million things swirling around my brain in response and it's going to be hard to harness any of them and bring them into focus but I'll try. I think what you're experiencing is one of those LJ *adjustment periods* where you start to feel differently about the whole thing, expectations change, realizations are made, and you start to approach the LJ community differently. That is inevitable--you call it your exuberance--but you've illustrated several instances of that happening with you in the past when you've embraced something so fully and wholeheartedly only to end up backing off.
Robert, I really hope you don't *back off*---I know it's a fine line between caring and caring too much. But the fact that you cared at all, has always made you a stand-out in the mostly mediocre sea of live journals. There ARE a lot of needy people in the world. And I think Live Journal becomes a forum for a lot of need. That doesn't mean, though, that you have to save every needy person, or come up with the perfect response in every situation, OR be able to *FIX* the problems that the journaler expresses in their journal. I always felt your *exuberance* at trying was one of your most endearing traits. Even when sometimes the cheerleading was too much to take, I still always felt--"That's just Robert, bless his heart"--- and I DID think that. And many a time I thought to myself "Thank god for good old Gurdonark! If he wasn't around to respond to some of the things I write I would truly feel like I'd been sucked into the vaccuum"...
You've apologized sometimes for the lengths of your posts, here it almost sounds like you're apologizing for being yourself, for caring, and for getting sucked into the whole milieu of Live Journal. I don't know if there was some specific incident that brought you to this realization or if it's something that's been brewing awhile in you. Exuberance never lasts forever. Eventually you just get pooped out from it. And I can understand where you're coming from and what you expressed. I guess what I hope is that somehow a part of your natural exuberance and spirit hasn't been reigned in or squashed by the sometimes depressing nature Live Journal introspection. Because what you have, and what you express, especially in your commentary is one of the most refeshing things I've come across in LJ.
And I mean that, most sincerely.

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

I will start by saying thank you, I appreciate it.

I think that my feeling, as I play with these ideas, is not that I want to post less, or back away from LJ, but that I want to post things that interest me more--things that get to the heart of what the poster is saying. Sometimes that's simple comfort,
but often there is meaning beneath the words, and to me, that's where the interaction occurs. I totally "get" your well put point about fixing people. I can't really do that. But I never want to lose my exuberance for relating to people. I am not hunting for a way to escape LJ, or "pull back" right now, I'm looking for a way to avoid the sort of helpfulness that can degenerate into disguised neediness.

I have always been grateful for the folks on my friends' list, and for the way that LJ has sparked in me all sorts of creative
things. I am a bit different from many here on LJ, who seem to seek who they really are. I know I am a polymath, jack of many, many trades, master of none. My father was the same, tho I fear he was a much better doctor than I am a lawyer, and damn it, I'm a good lawyer. You're a bit different, too, in that you know what you're called to do. Sometimes, because marketing and business are among my many "can do a little, can't do a lot" skills, I want to help "fix" you in your art calling and make you "marketable". But we both know that that's not what you're about at all. That's not to say I don't come up with good ideas...people in the real world hire me for my ideas. That's to say that LJ is not a good pinocchio's workshop to make real boys out of journalists.

I cannot believe that in 12/01 I had never heard of MarsTokyo, whose art now seems incredibly significant to me. More importantly,though, your art aside, I enjoy interacting with you on LJ, and this would be true if your calling had a 7 and an 11 in it.

Thanks for the kind words.

[marstokyo.livejournal.com]

You're most welcome. I still say you're one of the most thoughtful journalists on LJ-- whether it's the entries you post yourself, or your commentary in other's LJ's. Just as long as you keep on keepin' on--go ahead and fine tune it anyway you want.

[nacowafer.livejournal.com]

I don't think you can comment in "the wrong way." If comments are allowed, then you give and you get whatever there is to be given and gotten.

I sincerely hope this post has nothing to do with my journal, although I suspect that maybe it does, a little.

We are all different, and for many of us (I presume) this is a totally novel way of interacting with the rest of the world (a pun!). It is a new and challenging experience for introverted, shy folks to receive attention, even when it is very kind, gracious, appropriate, and even solicited by the very fact that a public journal exists.

I've noticed there's a lot of action-reaction that goes on here. And that's interesting. Like everything else, there is a definite ebb and flow. But people must be allowed to react in the manner they choose. You choose to be supportive and kind. There is nothing I can see wrong with that.

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

Thanks for commenting. Although we might, if it were worth the trouble, explore a "bandwidth" of acceptable comments (certainly some comments in my journal would not be acceptable, but nobody done any of those racist, etc. comments yet), I suspect that within that bandwidth there is a strong argument for what you are saying. Yet, even within the "acceptable bandwidth", I still feel it "takes away" from, say, your discussion of how you feel in some ways to comment with a reaffirmation that the objective facts don't "justify" the feeling (whatever such a reaffirmation means). It runs the serious risk of 'weirding someone out',
which I, for one, would never wish to do--at least not unless I intended to do so with a vengeance, which I never do with someone I enjoy interacting with. But your point is a good one--there is give and take, and one thing all we shy people learn is that not only can we not take our current mood as gospel for all truth,
but we cannot always take comments or actions by others as effective evaluation of the "value" or "lack of value" of comments. This morning, as I surfed within friends of friends of friends, as I sometimes do at dawn, I read a comment you had made in a journal (oddly, about yet another journal, so it gets thrice removed, an LJ thing involving whorls indeed) which caused me a bit of the concern which I expressed in the post, but altho this was the 'immediate trigger', the feeling runs beyond that narrow context. I am a fairly consistent communicator, rather a different species of fowl from the "quiet type" shy person, but I loathe above all things the idea that my willingness to be honest and effusive should be mistaken as something that causes discomfort. I think you made a good point the other day, when you said "I rarely post for sympathy...". I think the point of my post was that I think it's important as a reader to do more than just be sympathetic and reaffirming. It's important to see why people post, and read for that, too. I'm not against showing kindness of any sort. I am for showing more kindness. But it is discerning kindness and not "disguised acquisition" or
maudlin kindness, which I like to see and show.

I intend to comment on journals as always. I just want to see beyond expressed frustrations, into what a journal is "really about". That's what I mean. I hope I didn't sound too pathetic in how I said it. I hate to alienate people, unless they are people whose values require me to do so.

[nacowafer.livejournal.com]

Okay, now I'm a little confused. I'm not sure what you mean when you write:

Yet, even within the "acceptable bandwidth", I still feel it "takes away" from, say, your discussion of how you feel in some ways to comment with a reaffirmation that the objective facts don't "justify" the feeling (whatever such a reaffirmation means).

Can you explain what this means?

I firmly believe that everyone has the right to write what they wish, you have the right to comment as you see fit, and no one is obligated to explain or reveal themselves any further than they care to. I'm sure you agree. I'm just not sure if you're taking issue with something I've expressed or what. I've never found your comments to be anything but sincere, not a hint of "disguised acquisition" (which I hope you'll describe further because I don't really know what you mean) or maudlin kindness. I would feel terrible to have made you feel "weirded out."

The second journal is for me to sort things out that I don't want to discuss or even share, except with maybe one or two other people. But keeping a journal on-line is the only way I've been successful at keeping up with writing down my thoughts. It's not an attempt to be secretive or anything like that.

Things cannot really be "mistaken to cause discomfort," they simply do or they don't, whether that's the intention or not. There are probably many things which have the most lovely intentions that cause discomfort in others. (And here, I'm speaking in the abstract and certainly not of anything you have done/said/implied.) Perhaps this should continue in another, less public forum as I see something I posted innocently enough has caused you some bit of discomfort, which certainly was not my intent.

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

I did not say it very well.

re: 'bandwidth': I meant that sometimes when any of several journalists write "I feel....x negative thing", I sometimes want to leap to their defense by saying "but you aren't x negative thing". But the journalist is not really saying "please assess me for x negativity". The journalist is usually saying "this is how I feel". There's a mismatch of comment to post. I am brought around to your position that the mismatch is not inherently good or bad, but the mismatch inspires in me the desire to match comment to post in future. I just was trying to say that I hate it when someone says "I feel x" and I just say "but you're not x" or "let me help you be y". There's a place for me to make that sort of comment in the right context, but often it's just a bit off topic. It's not a matter of "right to post", it's only a matter of "what I prefer to post". No right or wrong necessarily implied.

I am still toying with this term "acquistion", which seems so meaningful to me, and yet I've not really pinned it down.
I'm using it as a catchphrase for any interaction designed to gain anything for the actor, but the "construct" is flawed, because we all do everything for some reason or other.
I must think more about what the ideas behind the words mean.

We share a belief that anyone can write anything, etc. in journal or comment. The distinction I tried to draw doesn't fly.
On my walk today, I realized that even a "delete key" use by a journalist for an "offensive post" would just be another communication.

Of course, anyone should set up private journals for private thoughts on any matter at any time. I loved that 18 year old's journal I happened upon at random, who explained her tiers of friends' lists, which sounded for all the world like Dante,
and even the stalkers got a special "9th" tier, in which she explained they got some posts, but only the most innocuous.
I was not trying to criticize you or anyone, and I hope inexact phrasing did not make me come off that way. There's nothing wrong even with an attempt to be secretive, if that is what one wants.
Surely a journal is free for such things, whatever they may be.
I would write more on this, but I know we think the same about it.

You didn't do anything wrong, or whatever. I just took an idea, not limited in applicability to the context I took it from, and explored it. I don't think I was "wrong" to do so, but right or wrong, that's how it worked out. I agree with you that discomfort arises or does not arise. I do not have any great wisdom about it.

I appreciate your taking the time to reassure me.

I don't know the HTML for "chuckle"

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

I was reviewing this, making sure I didn't offend, when I just got the "novel" pun. I "laughed", "out loud", a little.

[voodoukween.livejournal.com]

again, your level of self-examination is thorough and to be commended

at the same time i truly believe in the evolution of all things and that in allowing ourselves to explore new ways of interacting, we evolve even more

you're journal and comments truly are, as Miss Manners referred to, one of the shining moments of my day and that is not out of desperation or loneliness, it is that i have found a new jewel

i appreciate the myriad levels of disclosure and testing the waters of how much or what to say in return

your journals are enjoyable and inspirational and i'm glad that they are assisting your process of self-discovery

i just want to say "dude, you are way too hard on yourself!"

there is room and importance to the "coffee room" intimacy in these journals, that is what differentiates this LJ from online diaries or blogs as far as i'm concerned

and the reason i joined

it was the reason i was invited as well

i'd been told there was a more communal feel, a modicum of support when needed

you certainly bring great depth to these encounters and i truly hope that you continue to truly be yourself with all of us

hang the inquisitor and the judge!

and if i've gone beyond some invisible boundary here than that's the risk involved in human interactions

i would rather people dare to interact with me, say what is on their minds than to be held at arm's distance like i'm in some therapists office

if i don't like it then i have the choice to say so

i don't like people making up my mind for me

there is intimacy in our interface, it is undeniable

i would not bother to participate otherwise

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

Good points, all. I do think that hanging the inquisitor and the judge can be a good thing, altho my inner inquisitor and my secret judge have sometimes served me well. It's that boundary I'm trying to define--for myself, nobody else--between encouragement and excessive advice. This post raised the issue reasonably well, but did not provide any great "solution". I appreciate you sharing your thoughts, which help me refine my thinking.

Law school's an odd place, but one thing (in fact, one of many things) I loved about it was that the most credit on examination wasn't given for knowing the answer, it was given for spotting the issue. I think all I've done here is to take an idea I applied out of context from something I read,
and use it to spot a "personal issue" for me. I can't claim I know the answer, and hence I posted it publicly. If I knew the answer, it would be less fun to post.

I am so grateful that you put such a nice comment here, but I am more grateful for the day to day LJ interaction we have.
I learn a lot here, and I know you do, too. It's fun!

[voodoukween.livejournal.com]

here i believe you are spot on!

then again, it is like the notion of "balance" for me

one moment i will find the "balance point" and get up the next day to find that the prior days location now creates imbalance

intuition, gut feelings are often reliable and i like even more "i may be wrong here but is this what you meant?" when it comes to misunderstandings between people

[reneesarah.livejournal.com]

You can say any damned thing you want to me.

I always appreciate your comments.

I am always glad to see a post of yours.

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

Very kind of you. Already, since I posted, I now see the issue as "reading comprehension" and not "I did something wrong".

It's always fun to interact with you, and damn it, I will!

[amatrixangel.livejournal.com]

a baseline belief that one can *do*, and not just wish

heh ---> "Do. Or do not. There is no try."

- Yoda (wise words!)

I have had experiences when I was a fair bit younger in which I imagined that I had befriended a work acquaintance, say, only to discover I was sadly mistaken. I rememember what a relief and a revelation it was to stand in a nightclub restroom...

I don't get this paragraph here. You mean, like, you were invited out and then got left behind? Is this what it was? It's funny how the next paragraph starts out,like, when I was in LA because that's the sort of thing that people do to you in LA rather than other parts ;p

I started this journal as a website alternative, in which I could discuss law careers.

hmmm. Look here (http://www.livejournal.com/stats/stats.txt) and you'll see the average age is around 17 in LJ. sergeianbubbles is a (mature age) law student who is a wonderful writer, very well-informed and a great person to get to know. um, the only 'law' person here I know personally apart from yourself.

...when I had really intended to sound jolly.

Yes. Well. This is one of the biggest problems I've found; misinterpretation. With the lack of face-to-face, people often can get the wrong idea. You could make a comment "X" and as you write it have a big smile on your face because you mean it as a joke ('you' being the general you and um, not you personally :-)and then that person gets all mad with you because they didn't understand and/or weren't able to see the smile on your face when you wrote it. Thus the use of emotes: ;p :D ;0 etc. I had an enormous argument once with one user who has since become an online friend and on my friends' list. I wrote a comment which they took great offence to because they had presumed I was having a go at one of their real life friends who was also an LJer. The fact couldn't be further from the truth because what the person didn't know is that the history of our cross-commenting has been one of banter for months. I was 'forced' to defend myself when I didn't feel that defence was needed. heh ..very silly it all was ...oh well ;p

This has made a long, self-denigrating post.

No. Not at all. I think this is a wonderful post!

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

Thanks for this comment. You hit the nail on the head--clearly expressing oneself in this two dimensional text only format is such a challenge--particularly if one is trying to be humorous.
I always have to tell witnesses before their deposition (sworn statement) is taken--"don't joke! don't be sarcastic! no matter how funny it sounds, it will read ALL wrong".

Even in this post, I would have to define all my terms and set up a common analysis matrix to reall say what I am trying to say.
The game is not worth the candle one has to keep burning in order to play it. It's much better to go for imprecision and allusion, the pleasant literary quality of the journal. Thus, altho two or three actual events in different folks' journal were the kernel of this post, the post is not about those events specifically at all. But it takes two to 3 paragraphs to say that properly, and then nuance still enters in : )

Very wise, that yoda is. Oh, and the nightclub story--Dallas is a city of many, many clubs. To get asked out with friends is commonplace when one is single, but to get "ditched" in one club for friends to go to another, while not unheard of, is not common. Among coworkers, though....different story....it's all context, these things. That's what the story is intended to render as metaphor....LJ is its own context, too.

Thanks...thoughtful comments, I appreciate it!

[holyoutlaw.livejournal.com]

Man! A lot of thoughts, a lot of great thoughts.

I haven't made any post "friends only" yet, because I think that if it's personal enough to do that, it's personal enough to keep off the web -- it WILL get out. I DID disallow comments on one entry recently, and I didn't like the power imbalance.

However, I did it then and I've seen others do it when writing a post that's about elucidating a problem or just plain venting. Even in real life coffee lunches, sometimes your friend wants reassurance, sometimes they want cheerleading, and sometimes they just want to vent and have someone murmur "oh dear oh dear" every two minutes.

The relationship of intent and effect in communication is one of the big conundrums we face in social interaction. Noble intentions do not excuse bad effects (Stop me if you've heard this one before: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."). Yet, if we spend all our time worrying about our effects, and what the other person wants or doesn't want, we'll never do anything.

There's one journal I read by a person who has a lot of social anxiety. When I started reading it, I tried to be reassuring in my comments. Pretty soon I realized this person didn't really want comments. Dumping their anxieties into their journal was their way of dealing with the problem; then they could turn away and leave it behind. I still find it frustrating to read.

There are times a person wants reassurance or cheerleading. And times when they don't. I guess the only real way to tell the difference is by getting a context over the time of reading the journal.

What interests me in a journal is not whether it's a musical comedy, or action/adventure, or drama, or mystery story, but how lived it feels -- how much is the person living in and engaging in their own story? Yeah!

Hmmm, I think I've replied, tangentially at least, to a few of the ideas you presented in this long and intriguing post. Yeah! But there's a lot more in what you wrote than what I'm touching on. Yeah! (again).

It was pretty amusing to read all the way through your post and the comments you'd received so far, click refresh -- and more comments! Wah! And I bet when I click "Post Comment" now, there will still be more comments and replies and interaction. Good job!

Thanks for the post.

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

You hit it exactly. What I am trying to say is just what you said. Some posts want reassurance. Other posts want to record history. In the latter case, comforting comments are of course permissible,but they do not engage the poster's point. That is te key point I'm making.

Very thoughtful comment, thanks! I like it when someone can sum it up with concision like that. I guess that's what you're a writer and I'm,.....uh, ....oh, yeah....an attorney.

[taebopper.livejournal.com]

Wow, great post. Please know that for me, at least, your comments in my journal have been most welcome.

The "comments" feature of LJ is one of my favorite aspects of the system, as it allows us to give and take freely, sharing thoughts and opinions with each other.

I send you love and peace.

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

I am so touched that you said that. Thank you.

I was just thinking during my park walk today how I want to
do some posts in the future on new thought ideas, and how they work and don't work for me. It'll be fun to get your input on this, as I know this is an interest for you :).

Much peace, love and employee barbecue recovery to you, too!

[taebopper.livejournal.com]

You're welcome!

I look forward to reading your new thoughts on New Thought! ;)

[sortofkindof.livejournal.com]

Sometimes I think my journal is too full of complaint-worry and I thereby open up the need for comfort-advice. If anything I'm glad anyone takes the time to comment or try to help me. Even if I do feel guilty or annoying. I feel a strange sense of the whole "friends" on lj, like I'm using this because I'm too socially inept to have enough satisfactory "rl" friends. Sometimes I too think of deleting my journal or just making all my posts private or just making it all public or just... (whatever).

I don't have a major response. But I'm glad I finally got you on my friends list. Please never feel uncomfortable responding. If I can't take your advice - which you emphatically state is only suggestions, since you don't know my exact situation - then I won't take your advice. It does help me to hear what other people think or know about.

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

Thanks for commenting. Actually, a post I made to your journal, the one which was in essence, "gee, you're so bright and talented, you could do x, y or z", was one of the 'too much pontification ones" I was thinking of. It's not that I mind giving any advice I can to anyone, it's just a little intrusive (I like the notion that one appropriates the "right" one does not have, and therefore use the word "acquisitive"), which doesn't seem "wrong" to me right now, but perhaps "less well styled" if you will. The other post, about a mundane work matter, was just simple "everyone should offer it type advice" and entirely different.

I'd hate to see you delete your journal. You have a lot of
things going on in your head, and a journal is awfully good to
let them spin out of control and then into magically appearing pleasing pattern.

[t-pot.livejournal.com]

for example, this is the wrong day for me to write comments. in fact i only have semicoherent words.

my journal is true, in the sense that it's not filtered in the process starting from the mind composing thought and writing them down. my entries would like to be my self. and exuberance is most welcome, for people are losing it. i don't have the support of "real life friends", and LJ has undoubtedly become an important part of my life. mind you, i don't consider it a place to find shelter or to hide, as it were some sort of "other world". i don't make distinctions. perhaps i am mistaken or too naive. it's a means of communication, like correspondence, email, telephone.

i have forgotten what i wanted to say.

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

I don't know what naive or mistaken is, when it comes to internet v. real life. I think that internet friends are important, and that the role they play can be different for each individual. I wish you many such friends, and much joy of the ones you have.
I am glad whenever you post or comment here, because I wish to count you as my friend in any context.

[sushimonkey.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, I usually don't have enough patience to read these wonderful long entries and all the comments :(
I promise, when I wake up in the morning, I will give it another shot. These days I have the attention span of a gnat.

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

I know the feeling. Long posts can be hard to get through :)

What I have to say

[burninggirl.livejournal.com]

Please, please, please don't give your comment the other night another thought. It didn't mean any harm, I even read it how it was meant to be read, I just felt like writing back what I did. I was almost going to make it a journal entry rather than a reply to your comment, but then it still would have seemed directed at you (which it was, but not in an accusatory way, more just sharing a story).

Personally I always look forward to and enjoy your comments in my journal. I don't know if I've ever said that specifically before - probably not, to avoid you then feeling *obliged* to comment, which I wouldn't like. But I like what you write to me. I enjoy answering your questions about things here, I enjoy what you tell me about things over there. I enjoy the advice, whether or not I actually heed it.

And I like reading your journal. I like the way you write. I've followed it regularly since the first time I came across it after you left a comment in my journal. I often wonder what you can find of interest in my journal, but...(and the only thing I can think of to say is "I won't look a gift horse in the mouth", which isn't quite the right cliche, but close enough).

Everyone uses LJ differently, and I don't think anyone should have to apologise for how they use it (unless it hurts other people, which I'm sure you haven't done). As for me personally, I do use my Friends-only feature, liberally, with the custom filters and everything. One of the reasons I added you to my list was so you wouldn't keep missing out on things I had to say but was locking away. If there were something I didn't want you to read, and therefore comment on, I would lock it away, but I can't see any reason for doing that.

And please don't delete! As least, not to solve this perceived problem. I enjoy your journal so much, and so do plenty of others.

You are proof of my theory that dawn is always a good time in Australia

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

I think that falling asleep before 10 p.m. was a mistake, because now it's 3 a.m. here (though for some reason my computer clock wants to shave time off that), and I'm quite awake. I'm always glad that whenever I awake too early, it's actually a decent hour tomorrow in Australia, so I can look forward to LJ posts.

I am not living in day to day worry about expressing myself so poorly the other day. I just used that as an obvious example of a comment that didn't come out quite right. It was no big deal, really, but it helped me focus my metaphor for my own thinking.

I have liked your journal ever since I stumbled across it on laruth's friends list. For some reason, the thinking in your journal is something I understand. I think I had realized that you use the "tiered friends list" approach, but I had the sense that there are sections of your journal in which there is more than is in the posts I'm seeing, and hence dditional "tiers". But maybe those posts are instead in your "private" journal :). But altho it is impossible to "get" why I feel that way, I feel like I can relate to that person who writes your journal, whom I assume bears some remote resemblance to you :).

I think that use of separate journals or the tiered friends list makes perfect sense to me. Those folks with offline friends in whom they confide can use the LJ as a perfect way to "tier" that level of confidence right into the journal. As it happens, two people in my journal are long-standing off-line friends, one person is a friend of a friend who is a friendly acquaintance of mine, and two people are on-line friends from "other forums" who saw my journal and decided to set up their own. I don't keep "tiered friends" for any of them, because altho I would arguably confide in either of my offline LJ friends, I'd almost always do that in person or by e mail.

I really enjoy keeping a journal, and commenting in journals, and I feel inclined to do so more, not less. The thing that I am focused on is replying to what is really going on in a journal, which sometimes is not addressed by advice or a glib "well wish". Nothing wrong per se with advice or a glib well wish of course, but sometimes I like to think that one can read a journal a bit more deeply (except for the delightful friend or two I have who merely posts polls). I am still a relative newbie to LJ, though, between four and five months' standing, so I am still exploring the medium.

I like the way that you and Iain use mass transit so effectively, and the way in which a restaurant meal in a nice restaurant is still a big event, and the way in which Canberra sounds so enchanting. On a subject from your journal, by the way, I always picture your accent as "midbetween", neither quite a "posh" Brit accent nor a rural stereotypic accent.
When I go to Los Angeles, by the way, most folks can tell I'm from the south, so I was intrigued when you wrote that no such similar rule applies there.
When one is 21, as you are, one is clearly grown up,
but you're in that last window in which you're a bit younger than you will be shortly. By 24 or 25, one gets about as old as one will ever be, and maturity is more acquiring experiences than "growing up".
You're in that last window when you can make little fine tunings on your maturity, and that's always fun to watch in progress :). But here, I'm starting to sound like a scientist, when actually, I rarely have much, if any, idea what I'm talking about.

Thanks for commenting, but no worries, I have no plans to delete (it was just a description of a reaction I had upon becoming irritated with myself), and I plan to comment in your journal so long as you don't mind :). It may be my questions will focus on that US/Oz minutiae, the things like "what do you pay for soap?" or "tell me what percentage they withheld from that first paycheck?", but that stuff has its place, too :)

thanks again

Re: What I have to say

[gurdonark.livejournal.com]

I'm grinning now, because I can't even count.
I have 3 offline friends on LJ, and 1 friendly acquaintance who is a friend of a friend.

I was shorting myself a friend, and that's a lonely thing to do (smile).