This blog is lucky to be alive. Why do I say that? Because three days ago, in a fit of rage, I very nearly deleted the damn thing. Sometimes I just can't stand the pointlessness of creating posts that amount to a publicly aired journal. Why not nix the 'public' part entirely and write in a little notebook for my own perusal instead? I suppose the answer lies somewhere within an assumption that someone might actually find something interesting amongst the flotsam and fuckall that comprises my blog. I think the dead end lately has been my continuing insistence on trying to create interesting posts about rock climbing. More often than not, there isn't anything interesting about climbing blogs, including my own. This is my opinion, of course, but I've formed it by slogging far too often through blog rolls, slowly developing a distaste for climbing related content on the internet. This includes my own blog, for which I have already stated my distaste and near readiness to shitcan the whole damn thing. Now, before I let this wave of cynicism crash ashore unhindered, I will say that there are exceptions. Occasionally, even climbing blogs have insightful writing unhindered by either terrible prose or third-grade caliber grammatical errors. I'm not referring to my own blog in this case although I do try to stay away from grammatical faux pas. I'm merely stating that some blogs are better than others because they add a level of insight to an otherwise stale and boring medium, that of incessant reporting on climbing progress and other such malarkey. I'll say it again: at times I'm guilty as charged when it comes to said reporting. That's one reason I'm revamping my goals for even having this blog in the first place.
Now obviously, blogs have numerous uses and target audiences. Many people in the sports world and elsewhere maintain so-called professional blogs, not to be confused with the less restricted blogs of the general public. These more 'targeted' blogs are by no means any more cogent, relevant or even coherent than others, they simply masquerade as important by way of constraining their topics. If I were to create the DuncanIdahoProfessionalRockClimbingAthlete blog, I wouldn't be able to simply cast off on strange tangential rants or to ravel my narratives into perplexing non sequitur. I would have to stay on a targeted course so that my sponsors, whose page links would be part of my blog's sidebar template, wouldn't start to doubt my veracity as a representative of their companies' good names. I would detail which climbing projects I was 'psyched' on and, in turn, report on fresh 'sends' of said 'epic' projects; if I were really savvy about it, I would include enough @'s and #'s so that those too impatient to read even a short a blog post could learn about my important accomplishments via either Twitter or whatever other continuous feed gadgetry they employ.
I don't actually have any sponsors in climbing unless you count frequent debilitating finger injuries as a 'sponsor'. I was being rhetorical, of course. It's not that I think being sponsored is bad. I've gone through the logic of that opinion before as well. It's more that I can't take 'professional athlete' blogs seriously unless they say something important and interesting about the person writing them or about said person's experiences. Important and interesting only include accomplishments, in my book, if they are apropos of some sort of insight. The vast majority of these blogs, in my estimation, fall flat and relegate themselves to mere masturbatory braggadocio masquerading as something with more integrity. Not everything has to be gold; in fact, often much of the work to be done with writing seems to be spinning shit in a way that it resembles gold. None of us is entirely above this pursuit, but some seem far more fluent in their shittiness. Or something.
Anyway, I will reveal the real and original reason for beginning this post in the first place, aside from the fact that there was a day where I wanted to delete my blog and take a hammer to everything within reach. The real reason is that I'm fucking sick and tired of apostrophes being used in improper contexts! Yes! It's true! Apostrophes are not used with possessive pronouns: who's is a conjunction for who is; whose is the possessive pronoun. Apostrophes are not used to indicate that something is plural: dog's and dogs' indicate that one dog or multiple dogs, respectively, are in possession of something; the plural of dog is dogs. No apostrophe. Also, alot is not a word. Period.
Finally, I pledge that in lieu of deleting this conflagration of bullshit I've heaped onto the interwebs, I will endeavor to create more interesting and insightful content, such as rants about grammar and other such wastes of time.
Oh and fuck valentines day: it's nothing but a heinous commercial exploitation of the basis for everything that makes us valuable as humans. So FUCK IT with a ten foot pole. Cheerio.