Origins of the faux-naif bloggy voice?

Are you talking about like steve roggenbuck etc.?

I also really don't buy this thing about the new meaning of periods.

xpost to etc—the one person i have seen type like that twitterer was someone arguing abt feminism/an art show on facebook and iirc they did explicitly frame their writing style as a form of or rooted in some kind of resistance. (also, do u mean cruising utopia or is there some other book?)

steve roggenbuck uses a different voice imo

I think so too but he does deliberately include misspellings. His style is about embracing the immediacy of internet vernacular though; it doesn't have much to do with oppositional or radical politics.

i think both groups are probably interested in the potential radicality of internet vernacular but for slightly different reasons

jfc there is no "potential radicality" whatsoever to writing like that

they might disagree but idrc about it enough to argue

Roggenbuck talks about radical populism and refers to Whitman a lot. He aspires to be a Warhol of web aesthetics but without the weary cynicism. The ppl etc seems to be talking about -- seapunks and others -- seem to be more traditionally subcultural and less interested in affirmation as a mood.

i think we can all agree that capitalization is just a huge waste of time + good riddance to bad rubbish

democratization of language and descriptivism over prescriptivism is one thing, but the style above just makes things really hard to read

what style above

that twitter

Agreed. I think that's the point tbh and there is a way in which faux naiveté is just obtuseness, deliberately employed to alienate and frustrate audiences. Warhol used it that way at times.

also claiming affiliation with people who write that way habitually, for whom it isn't at all hard to read, inside/outside

plus style points for offhand erudition

i guess the vast undifferentiated intellectual social class needs a house style too

!!!!!!!bingo!!!!!

is there any reason to believe these twitter ppl are not 13 yr olds looking to be difficultly rebellious?

(*searches twitter for 'liek'* no, no there is not)

i came across this site earlier today with really annoying prose: http://fuckyeahculturalappropriation.tumblr.com/

the tone is very much "everyday dude talkin' bout shit" but with occasional academic terms thrown in to indicate a casual greater knowledge of the subject. but what i found interesting is that they use question marks a lot to indicate a high rising intonation? never seen that before, but i don't read a lot of overearnest social justice tumblrs.

I had to stop reading a blog I quite liked because of its random exclamation points. I guess to indicate eagerness!

i forget the name of it but isn't that fuck yeah cultural appropriation thing basically copycatting another similar blog that answers questions about racism?

a+ hate reading - thx xzp

that tumblr is unreadable

its a stream of consciousness voice, which is fine, but its also actually actual stream of consciousness which is less fine.

archness, knowing, emulation, stylistic layers of internalized quotation -- i'm all for these things, and not just in the service of irony. but these things take lots and lots of work.

on the whole tho, i'm all for more expressive language, more misspellings with nuances and creative punctuation. but i'm not for saying these are about 'emulating' speech -- they're ways that text can express differently than speech can.

i mean it's like maybe because racism?

xpost to etc—the one person i have seen type like that twitterer was someone arguing abt feminism/an art show on facebook and iirc they did explicitly frame their writing style as a form of or rooted in some kind of resistance. (also, do u mean cruising utopia or is there some other book?)

― 1staethyr, Wednesday, December 4, 2013 3:27 AM (2 days ago)

Yeah, Cruising Utopia; had my wires crossed. RIP José Esteban Muñoz :/

Because the night.

i studied w/ munoz in grad school RIP :(

http://www.americandialect.org/because-is-the-2013-word-of-the-year

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=9494

<3

matt levine c/d

nailed it

https://medium.com/absurdist/the-bible-written-in-new-york-city-blog-voice-d8aa8341e081#.86blr6rat

a very reasonable take on the oregon clowns that opens five consecutive paragraphs with

Still, hang on.
All together now:
Here is the thing.
This, my good buddies,
Here is what this is:

Lol

ironically it never explains what a jamoke really is in case saying jamoke a bunch makes you start feeling unsure you really know

i blame bill simmons for this one

yah, the folksy sportswriter is a different but related tradition.

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/16929/16929-h/16929-h.htm

can someone help me pin down why i can’t stand the tone of online writing (fka blogging) in 2019?

everything i read seems longwinded, didactic, lots of unnecessary exposition, humourless, lawerly argumentation

i don’t think it’s faux naif blogger voice anymore (can’t remember if it was a good thing or bad... i do miss the gawker voice)

examples?

lol imagine 'reading' in 2019 when you could be neurally juuling in augmented reality

i imagine it. sometimes it's good! sometimes not. (continues)

i either write like that or write like fred rogers when i'm trying to discuss an issue

i go into dry and humorless mode mostly so i can avoid invective, which there's far too much of about. my sense of humor is often cruel. also, frankly, i seldom have the opportunity to try and make a reasoned argument, because there's seldom a fucking point to doing so these days. so it's a good way of keeping in practice so that my already dodgy reasoning skills don't atrophy completely.

i prefer writing in fred rogers mode but it's hard.

pa

can someone help me pin down why i can’t stand the tone of online writing (fka blogging) in 2019?

everything i read seems longwinded, didactic, lots of unnecessary exposition, humourless, lawerly argumentation

i don’t think it’s faux naif blogger voice anymore (can’t remember if it was a good thing or bad... i do miss the gawker voice)

can someone help me pin down why i can’t stand the tone of online writing (fka blogging) in 2019?

everything i read seems longwinded, didactic, lots of unnecessary exposition, humourless, lawerly argumentation

i don’t think it’s faux naif blogger voice anymore (can’t remember if it was a good thing or bad... i do miss the gawker voice)

lol imagine 'reading' in 2019 when you could be neurally juuling in augmented reality

― lumen (esby), Friday, June 7, 2019 1:27 AM (five days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

exactly. the faux naif voice ultimately was a literary technique, even if it was one you hated. it was about leaving space for uncertainty, and in this way reflecting the experience of thinking rather than just instantly jumping into "takes."

the internet moves too fast now, and is too paranoid and full of ill will, for this kind of approach to survive. "buckle up twitter" maybe has some residual cutesy quality but it's still just full on attack mode.

i mean, sometimes what was called the "faux naif bloggy voice" was used for being passive aggressive, but i think setting yourself up as an innocent contemplating the wild west of american culture is like a definitely literary trope. you can probably trace it to the "new journalists" of the 60s

The blustery faux-nihilism of ‘buckle up twitter’ and the bloggy faux-naïf voice of yore both strike me as two sides of the same coin - techniques by insecure writers of performing candor and ‘realness’ while actually keeping the reader at a safe distance

otm except i wouldn't say they're thinking about the reader at all, just the impenetrability of their own performance

I mean, it’s hard to wade into the online world without some kind of rhetorical armor.

I might be mixing up the faux naif voice with alt lit and the earlier new sincerity. The kind of like 2008 jezebel voice was insider-y and maybe a little different.

Faux naif in my sense was schtick but a less abrasive one than like the screaming style of 2019 social media