In the past few days I have posted well over 10,000 words here.
And they are not always small words.
They are not always pretty words.
Indeed, they are mostly big, ugly words about, I think, very abstruse, abstract, arcane (but still arsome!) topics like free will, the soul, human nature, and the like.
I have some other things I'd like to post, but I realize I need to let what is on the front page stand for a while, maybe a couple of weeks, to allow the few ghosts that get trapped here while passing from one plane to the next digest the big, ugly, hard words I am responsible for.
So, please, be not afraid. I really do want you to read what I have posted.
It means so much to me to imagine (and then sometimes discover!) not only that real human beings read my 'stuff' but also that they can find it edifying and interesting. (Mom, Dad, sorry, but your support doesn't count.)
In the meanwhile, I would like to pull back the curtain from which my voice booms and ask a personal (or should I say, blersponal?) question.
It is about a topic that I have addressed at FCA once or twice before.
Why do my readers––whoever or whatever they may or may not be––leave pretty much NO COMMENTS on the things they read here?
I don't really mind the silence.
After all, why else have a blog if not to wallow in the sound of your own voice? (Whoa, not so far with the curtain!)
I am simply perplexed. Baffled. Dumbfounded. Confused. At a loss.
Now, I have heard different reasons proposed before as to why my hypothetical readers are so mute.
I have been told that, when I write, I assume a tremendous amount of knowledge on the part of my readers, so it may be prohibitively difficult to interject something into the torrent of intellectual jibberjabber emitted by FCA. By analogy, it's hard to "make a comment" during the annual "Polymath Sufferers of Tourette Syndrome" convention. Better to just let it happen and politely go about your business. (Well, my friend said that in different words, mind you.)
I have also heard it suggested that the topics I normally address turn off about 99% of typical human beings. (I did once receive a call from "Mr. Charlie" about whether my material could be used for some kind of, what was it?, waterboarding festival in Cuba, I believe it was. But that was just weird.)
So I'a big nerdy turnoff, eh? (Hmmm, know your audience… know your audience….)
Again, it's hard to "comment" on seeing a combination quilting demo/medieval-tax-law-lecture by Ben Stein, so I can sympathize with this explanation.
I have also heard it said, more optimistically, that by the end of my more substantive posts, I have either said well enough what others might say, so that comments are superfluous, or I have presented such a great amount of challenging material that the would-be commenter is just not sure where to begin.
And then there is the plain old intimidation theory. That is, a commenter who might like to contribute something is blocked by a fear, conscious or unconscious, that she will be wrong or heretical, and will thus trigger a torrent––uh, from my keyboard––of ideas and facts to set the record straight.
And who really wants to get into most of these issues with a guy who "likes to touch books" (yes, I wrote that as a personal description of myself for some application years back)?
Well, so much for proposed theories; I want to hear the vox populi.
I'm asking––no, just about BEGGING you to leave some kind of comment here about, paradoxically, why you don't leave comments here.
I'd REALLY like to know who you are. I honestly have no idea who the people are behind my reader statistics.
Obviously, you don't have to explain anything; but my curiosity has reached a tipping point. This post is not going anywhere for a while; this plea is my new header.
Read the stuff I have below at your, ahem, leisure, and then see what you can do about enlightening me as to why FCA is such a seemingly comment-unworthy blog.