RD’s two-liner post posing the question on whether bloggers make better observers, made Java bring up a few thoughts on the subject. Actually, come to think of it, the question would have made more sense if it was posed in reverse – that is, ‘are (good) observers better bloggers?’ – as opposed to bloggers that are not all that observant. This would obviate some of the comments that quite correctly pointed out that some excellent observers don’t even blog.

And then again, what is it that makes a ‘good observer’? Is it someone who is so attentive that nearly everything going on is ‘observed’? Or is it someone who focuses on one facet of what is going on and absorbs the essence of it so that it gets embedded in the memory bank and can be recalled at will? Or is it someone who takes in the whole picture but yet has the ability to assess and zoom in on what is considered to be the focal point in relation to the object of the observation? Or, in the case of a blogger who is looking for a subject, is it one whose ‘observation’ enables a flight of imagination that is based on the observation, but really has nothing to do with it? Or is it the blogger who has that kind of memory that will enable a snapshot like reproduction of the observed events to be blogged about? There are other possibilities as well, so the question gets complex.

Anyway, since (presumably) RD’s post had to do more with ‘bloggers’ than ‘observers’, Java ventures to ‘observe’ the following:

Hey maaan, seems to me dat bein a good observer shurre would help wit addin to what dem writers (not jus bloggers, hear?) get into dere heads and den down on paper, but den da individual’s creative abilities mus be up to som standard to get dose observashuns down in a way dat makes what be written eider interestin or informative, or both. Like ol RD – good blogger, an fair to middlin observer (dat last bit jus so he won’t be wit his head in dem clouds!).

That’s Java’s take on it – and it seems a fair ‘observation’.

As for my thoughts on it – it’s probably a combination of being a good observer, with the added inputs of insights, imagination and the skill to express oneself with wit, intelligence and lucidity (not necessarily in that order) that makes for a ‘good’ blogger (or writer). But then again, I guess ‘good’ depends on who is reading and what level of ‘intelligence’ is present (or not!) – not to mention interest in the subject(s) being blogged about.

So there – some thoughts for RD, and for the rest of us who give a shit, to ponder on with regard to his original question: ‘Are bloggers better observers?’