Justin King: Good evening Matthew. So, just what is the essential difference between writing a journal and blogging in your opinion, and how far along the line is sessodio. Whereabouts on the scale? Be as harsh and critical as you need to be - it is a must that you exploit your experience and knowledge to the full in order to help us better ourselves. And eachother.

Matthew Thomas: Oh, hello jay, let me see..

JK: i accept it is not a light subject to suddenly bring up, since its implications not only on the writers but their audience can alter significantly

MT: hmm, I would say that it treads the line pretty close depending on who's writing, though as a journal its writing is entertaining enough to attract new readers (me)

JK: i feel in parts, it does tend to lower itself to the level of needless pointlessness rather than amusing pointlessness, which may be treading dangerous grounds as we steadily lay the foundations of our legacy

MT: as far as the essential difference, i think it's just who you're writing for

JK: as in writing for the audience rather than for your own recollection of events later on

MT: consciously and unconsciously really, like I'm at a point now where I'm getting paid to write, so I don't care too much if anyone reads my livejournal or comments, because clearly some people like it and they pay me well enough to support a sizable drinking habit, but even though i'm not trying to write for an audience, i think i do anyway. but some people are just lucky enough to have a writing voice that is entertaining to most people who read it, and isn't just fulfilling to the author and I'd say that's generally true of you two, when you're sticking to day-in-the-life type entries

JK: i think in part progression to a higher level of communicating with the audience is hindered by the sheer volume of entries we seem to have as standard now -- a tendency to react and take a passive stance of certain events rather than consider the longevity of the content we're producing

MT: yeah, i've found that when i write less and pare down what i write to what's essential, it's better to read, which is why i never write fiction, since i could never think of a story complex enough to fill up more than four pages

JK: of course you can always embellish a fairly standard account of something with a few half-truths -- blur the lines between fiction and non-fiction as it were, i guess that could make things more entertaining

MT: yeah, I've thought about it, but it's kind of like telling a joke in third person versus telling a joke in first person, it's always funnier in first person -- not that i've ever made something up and posted it like it was a real event, but if something great happens to me, it would be better to tell about it as if it actually happened to me, or more satisfying for me anyway

JK: i can definately appreciate where you are coming from. i often find it hard to try and make a story interesting when at heart i know it's not and i'm just stuck in a habit of almost statically reporting what has happened to me

MT: I think I'm lucky in that a lot of weird things always seem to happen to me, and the rate of those things have only increased since moving here (though I think they do for everyone when they move here)

JK: if indeed there is a certain reliance therefore on interesting things happening to the writer almost at random, how can someone who is stuck in a place where very little occurs attempt to improve the end product. so much as to ask, how much is it about the author and how much about the event or subject matter itself

MT: I don't know if it's a reliance really, but it certainly makes it easier. I think that since moving, my creative half has pretty much gone down the toilet, but my writing's kind of been buoyed by all the bizarre shit that's been going down

JK: perhaps a shift in pressure on the words themselves leviated by the interest others have in the story they tell? this all being supposition of course, i'm attempting to find ways of considering the difference between styles - journal entries and the blogging phenomenom, so that we may all gain greater understanding into the area

MT: well, your writing as-is is entertaining enough to attract readers, and new readers

JK: i'm aware i just used a word that doesn't exist though, so that may throw the entire debate into a farce

MT: so if you're unsatisfied with what you're writing, it could probably be remedied by a slight lifestyle change. moving to a larger city, working in an unusual industry (or one where you come in contact with a large number of people, since your odds are good of meeting really odd ones then), having a really specific hobby and writing about it in a certain way. like I have this guy on my friends list who pretends that he's Kevin Costner, and almost every day he writes about how much he loves bison meat, and how he makes it on the Costner Ranch, and it's just bison meat, but the earnestness with which he describes the joy that he gets out of the meat and the benefits thereof is just so hilarious

JK: it's certainly proved you can gain an immense amount of interest from specialising in a particular area, but for more general interest i see what you mean in terms of lifestyle being an important aspect. certainly a lot of interesting insights here, and on that note, we shall drawn tonight's discussion to a close

MT: all right, i hope i was of some use

JK: of course, we have just co-written my next update, assuming you have no objections

MT: not at all, honored to do so