Is blogging writing or what?

This seems an important question these days. It may have been widely discussed and most probably by people far more experienced than me but here is my take. The second worst thing after being rejected is to be told you are not writing "high enough". I was recently exposed to a situation when I overheard an editor speaking of someone's writing as "blogging". It set me on a mental journey back to the times when I was studying philology and reading all classics from the ancient Greeks to Garcia Marquez. While I absolutely love Marquez, I wonder if we all have to become the next one or we could live a happy writing life just "blogging".

What did the editor mean? Is blogging cheap? I can think of at least five blogs which I consider worth reading as much as I consider worthy "Love In Times Of Cholera". The standartization freaks me out. Any kind of inforced frame wakes up the rebel inside me. The structure requirements that bothered Ursula Le Guin are also annoyng me a great deal. Not only that but some of the world reknowned authors like Jane Austen, for example, are sometimes accused in failing to develop their plot according to structure requirements. Surely, Austen is seriously concerned and regretting the unfogivable mistake. Yet, she remains in the hearts and minds of hundreds of thousands while tons of books written according to all rules are either forgotten on the next day or never published at all. So, what's the truth?

I dare to say the truth must be the inner one. If I like blogging and this template and tone suits my creativity well, I see no reason why I should write books in a totally different way. Yes, there must be movement, connection, and, as Le Guin says, focus - a book can not be series of fragments (although I've read such books and they can be remarkably good) or at least not all the time but who says each book has to be developed by certain standards? Agents do. Publishers do. They say the public wants this too. Does it? How come some blogs generate more readers than published books attract buyers? I had hoped, may be naively, that in the 21st century - an era of communicational outburst, offering hundreds of ways to express oneself, the accent would be on innovative, daring thinking and writing. I, for one, want to read more such works. Instead, the next "high" versus "low" debate seems to be taking place.

"Blogging" versus "writing". Those who scratch the surface versus the explorers of depths unknown. Ah, but I know this story. I've spent too many years studying, writing and critiquing geniuses' works for the sake of getting an A. The result - some of them I loved, some hated and still do, none of them I felt qualified to critique. Because they had achieved something I haven't yet - following their inner voice and playing against great odds for the right to do what they wanted to do the way they felt it should be done. Not the way they were necessarily told to do it. A fellow writer told me recently: "The only way to write well is to write what you want to read." I am 100% with her on that.

So, I was exploring the writer's face while this editor was pouring rubbish over the author's head. The writer was shrinking there, right in front of my eyes. He probably deleted his blog when he got back home. He may have rushed to the library and borrowed literary theory to read for the next couple of months. The manuscript may have been ritually burned on the front lawn. To hell with the blogging cheapness, embrace the classy paragraph-long sentences and thoughts requiring decoding while digging deep into the next desire-action-conflict-resolution piece. Or he may have bought "Plotting For Dummies" or similar and rewrote his work to the point when it was perfectly fitting the dummies part but had nothing to do with his own mind. I keep asking myself when the writer must set the limit. Where should be raised the border wall and put the "Stop" sign?

I must state here that I have nothing against the structure that has proven as working tool over the centuries from Aristotle to Stephen King. But I do stand up for the right to explore new territories and not be filed under categories. It is also true that by doing so a writer should be prepared to see his all works in the dusty boxes on top of the wardrobe and accept the thought that book signings and recognition may have to be postponed for after his death. For some reason unknown death seems to add much desired patina to the dusty works and turn them more often than not into marketable pieces. Still, I believe the personal satisfaction of writing (or any other creative endeavor) should be pursued and is worthy a war or two.

For the sake of myself and all bloggers, I suggest we start creating "blogature". That's for blogging and literature. Chances are it will never hit the bookstores' shelves but may earn the public's award which, as all Hollywood stars love to say, is the most important, no? Hey, it's the Age Of Aquarius, freedom of expression and mind should be the key words. Or, if you know or like Tarot, The Fool should be ruling.

Here is another poet on "blogature": http://mutiso.blogspot.com/2006/03/blogature-vs-publishers.html Check out some of the writers' blogs listed, there are really good pieces there.