Monday, November 13, 2006

Miss me?

So, I'm thinking I'm maybe ready to blog again, but not really sure.

As to:

*What is the point of blogging?

*Do I have anything remotely useful to say to the larger community?

*Am I a quaker blogger? (being, I AM a blogger who is a member of a quaker meeting, but I am bored and frustrated by too much quaker history or, for lack of a better word, dogma. As a f/Friend put it so well recently, "I'm not so excited about Quakerism. I'm excited about GOD, but not really about quakerism" (yes!)

*If I'm not a quaker blogger, what sort of blogger am I? Or do I want to be? I have toyed with the idea of being an eco-blogger, a vegan-blogger (damn, not vegan yet though!), an animal rights blogger, a confused about love and romance blogger, a whiney blogger, a meaning of life (or lack of it) blogger, and I could probably go on and on.... oh, a queer blogger (though being queer is so uninteresting really, if certain people would just get over it, there would be little to say)

love
Pam

5 comments:

Plain Foolish said...

Well, yes, I've missed you.

As for what kind of blogger to be, I think that changes from post to post (my last post was pretty whiny, but I don't like to think of myself as a whiny blogger.)

Does blogging make you happier in any way? Help you to sort things out, communicate a message that you think needs to get out? Is it important what religious label you hang on yourself while you blog? (In that case, I'm in real trouble!)

When I met you, I was amazed at the chance to meet such a wonderful person. Whichever side of yourself you care to write on is your gift to your readers.

earthfreak said...

Thanks

I didnt' meant to be "fishing" - but I think it might have come off that way.

:)

I think it just does change (what "sort of" blogger one is) from post to post, and yet somehow I feel stuck on this idea that I need a "theme" - how weird.

Marshall Massey (Iowa YM [C]) said...

Sounds like that old question coming up yet again -- you know the one: "What canst thou say?"

I trust you will have a good answer in good time. And I'll be watching for it!

I, too, enjoy your voice --

Liz Opp said...

"I'm not so excited about Quakerism. I'm excited about GOD, but not really about quakerism"

My take is that "classic Quakerism" has the excitement about and love for God that you (and I) are reaching for... and its the "acculturated"/assimilated/secularized form of contemporary Quakerism that has many Friends looking at, reading about, and discussing historical Quakerism, the Testimonies, the theology, etc.

Maybe it's a discipline, to restrain oneself from "talking about" and engage instead in just "living into."

Anyway, I've been out of the blogging loop for quite awhile myself, so maybe I shouldn't be too quick to jump back into the fray....

Blessings,
Liz Opp, The Good Raised Up

earthfreak said...

restrain oneself from "talking about" and engage instead in just "living into."

I think this is much of "where it's at" for me - although I have trouble with the idea of "restraining myself" at all - rather redirecting or something? I don't want to block energy, but channell it. Thank you for the concept, I'll be sitting with it (or maybe moving with it :)

I don't find spirit much more in "classic quakerism" than I do in present day liberal quakerism. I wish that I did (I wish I found it more easily, or it found me).

I do believe that some "classic quakers" had an energy, a connectedness, and awakeness, that I yearn for (do I seek it? not sure) - but I don't believe that that can be metaphorically bottled and passed on to me. I think they tapped into something, and I hope to tap into it too. In the process I can learn from them, and I can learn from other mystics and sages throughout history (I also suspect I can learn a lot from my cats and dogs, and from trees and rivers, and breathing) but tapping into it will be and is my own experience, a journey sometimes shared, but never copied.

peace
Pam