What is in Kelvin's Head?

Bad day for bloggers

01/07/2013

Today is, rarely, a bad day for bloggers. Today is the day that Google Reader is being switched off by those people at Google.

What it means is that the primary way that some people read blogs is not going to be available to them. Clever-dick readers will already have switched to another server. (I’m using Feedly). The worry is that non-Clever-dick readers (I’m using technical terms here) will just not bother or not rememeber in time and end up reading less blog posts as a result. Loss of readers is a bad day for bloggers.

Lots of people are cross with Google for turning off Google Reader. But it has been a service free at the point of delivery (funded by advertising and giving Google and insight into what one is interested in). I think that makes it harder to complain.

Some people can’t cope with the bother of using a reader service to aggregate or collect all their blog entries. For them, the joy of email is still the best way of ensuring that they don’t miss a blog post.

I’ve got a simple service that allows people to sign up to receive my blog posts by email and you can sign up here.

Don’t be shy!

And for goodness sake, sign up with Feedly or something similar too. Shake that magic Google dust from off your sandals. It is time to move on.

If you want to be reminded of why it is a good thing to use a reader in the first place, read my description of why you should have signed up to Google reader in the first place.

You can find it here: How to Read Blogs

And for good measure, here’s what I said about Google Reader’s demise previously: Google Reader RIP

blogs, feedly, Google Reader, how to read blogs, rss

9 responses to “The Lament Question”

kimberly

12/08/2009

ask it in the singular, and the answer is: because you’re a four.

you’ll have me playing the funeral ikos next.

Reply
kimberly

12/08/2009

the other answer is about possibility being revealed in limits.

Reply
kelvin

12/08/2009

Its not just me though, and not just fours.

Reply
Aaron Orear

12/08/2009

I think because sorrow touches the core of the human condition – we are mortal but can perceive immortality. “He has made everything suitable for its time; moreover he has put a sense of past and future into their minds, yet they cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end.” (Eccl. 3:11)

Reply
Erp

12/08/2009

I understand Aristotle talks about catharsis and various philosophers have followed up on that idea.

Perhaps it arouses sadness both from the art itself but also from our own sources festering within and allows us to let go. We feel better for the letting go, the lessening of our own internal sadness, and so perceive the art as beautiful.

Reply
RosemaryHannah

12/08/2009

Kimberly was there before me. However, even I, a nine, can sometimes see the beauty in sad things. For me they do two things (may be more but two are most obvious). The first is the catharsis thing. The second is to make me less lonely. Look, here am I weeping, but all around me people sit in the same sorrow. It is not just my sorrow – I am not alone.

I have long thought there is another answer, one I do not properly understand but I have (I think – and who am I to think it). Deep in God there is a huge well of sorrow. Unless we experience sorrow we cannot understand God. When we sorrow we tap into that well, and become closer to him.

And being a nice cheerful nine, I will now add that I live in hope that having sorrowed with him, we will share also and even more fully in the joy which swallows the sorrow. Delete this last paragraph from your mind on reading, it will only spoil the joy of the sorrow.

Reply
Elizabeth

13/08/2009

Edgar Allan Poe said the most beautiful thing in the world is a beautiful, dead woman. Nice, eh?

Reply
Ritualist Robert

14/08/2009

Surely it’s because the concept of beauty is independent from concepts such as ‘sadness’ and ‘happiness’ – just as a G major chord might be loud or soft, but that volume has no effect on its G major-ness.

Reply
Steve

14/08/2009

I remember Augustine saying (don’t ask me where) that for a picture to be beautiful it requires dark colours as well as bright.

There is also a hint of an answer in this poem by Edwin Muir:

Yet still from Eden springs the root
As clean as on the starting day.
Time takes the foliage and the fruit
And burns the archetypal leaf
To shapes of terror and of grief
Scattered along the winter way.
But famished field and blackened tree
Bear flowers in Eden never known.

Blossoms of grief and charity
Bloom in these darkened fields alone.
What had Eden ever to say
Of hope and faith and pity and love
Until was buried all its day
And memory found its treasure trove?
Strange blessings never in Paradise
Fall from these beclouded skies.

Reply