Adieu (Comments)

When I posted my last commentary entitled "Adieu" on June 21, I truly expected not to post another commentary, at least for a long time to come.

However, after the very disappointing five person response to my request for an indication of who had read the post preceding "The Inscrutable Center Keeps Moving Rightward (Continued III)" I received a surprising and heart warming response to my "Adieu" from 25 readers who are geographically diverse.

The one from Irving Lesnick Esq. of Boca Ratan, Florida and Waltham, Massachusetts went a long way in explaining the meager response to my request for an indication of who had read my previous post. 

He wrote:

I am afraid that I am one of your public who read your posts as they came in, and generally agreed (writing to you when I did not). I confess, however, that I did not read the stuff at the bottom of the post, probably, without thinking about it, that it was boiler plate. Be all that as it may, if you really are retired this time, I will miss your analysis.

And from Pearl Duncan of Manhattan, New York came this:

I hate to see you go. Please do not silence your voice. Your articles were so insightful; I hope you continue to write. Writing is like tossing a pebble in the ocean; you do not always see the ripples but there are ripples on the water, and readers, and the best you can do is try to reach as many readers as you can, even readers you do not know and readers who read, digest and appreciate your insight and analysis but do not respond. Using the social media such as Facebook and Twitter is one way of reaching more readers who are fascinated by political analysis. I write cultural history and I hear from busy readers who save the articles and read them when they can. It’s okay to build your readership, one reader at a time. 

Janet Cooke of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania sent this note:

I look forward to reading the next post, but I am sorry that you're discontinuing the commentaries. Maybe I do understand a little how you are feeling. As much as anyone can know what another person is really feeling. What is clear to me is that you've really contributed to a lot of people's thinking about the current state of things. And I sincerely believe that your commentaries have made a difference for people in a very meaningful way. And I want you to know that.

Roger Berkeley of Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey wrote:

I am surprised and saddened by your decision. I'm not as diligent as you have been, but I write for myself. I post a link on my Facebook page so my Facebook friends can read what I've written if they're so inclined. I enjoy the writing process and that's enough. Are you so busy? I'm not.

To which I responded:

I enjoy both the research and the writing process, but it isn't enough. My posts can sometimes take 10 to 20 hours counting research, which keeps me from doing a lot of other things. I am surprised that you say that you are not so busy. Don't you have a business to run?

As for me, since I decided to stop blogging I have redone my Will and my Trust. Done an irrevocable Power of Attorney. Learned how to use iTunes and started loading my extensive collection of CDs into my computer. Have taken computer lessons. Continue to discuss issues with a select group of friends. Started catching up on my magazine reading - finished reading some classics, and watch all the wonderful documentaries, operas, etc on PBS etc. and in many cases record them to DVD for permanent retention. Of course as I always did, my wife and I spend much time in New York at the theater, concerts, and the museums.

Yes, I keep busy.

Roger Streit of West Orange, New Jersey expressed this sentiment:

I hate to see you go. Maybe you can offer your ideas as a column in a well-established forum, such as Huffington Post, Salon, Politico.

To which my reply was "I would love to, but they aren't interested."

Mike Cerrato Esq. of Westville, New Jersey chimed in with:

Your insight and always thoughtful analysis will be sorely missed. 

Ernst Hauser of the Bronx, NY simply indicated “Read” belatedly, as did Jeanne Swartelé-Wood of Baltimore, Maryland.

Bruno Lederer of Stamford, Connecticut made this observation on June 27, 2012:

I am disappointed that you have decided to discontinue your blog, at a crucial time like this. Tomorrow there will be a decision by the Supreme Court on the Healthcare bill, and yesterday the Court ruled on the Immigration issues in Arizona. In November we will have a Presidential election as well as Congressional elections. I for one think that your input at this time is important. I read most of your blog writings and find them very enlightening. 

Albert Nekimken PhD of Vienna, Virginia made this observation:

I was sorry to read this posting, though not surprised and I could certainly understand your disappointment. Personally, I have carefully kept a file of all of your blog entries and I look forward to reading them over time, sending comments along the way. Unfortunately, they may not be as topical as they were when first written, but I suspect most of them will have enduring value beyond the news of the day. I hope you find a more rewarding and responsive audience for your writing. I urge you to shift from a production mode to a marketing mode, at least temporarily, to explore the possibilities.

My response was:

That is exactly what I will do after taking time off. I need to go into a marketing mode.

Pat Burns of Edgewater, NJ offered this generous appraisal. After explaining that she has problems with her eyesight she explains:

That my work has been “much appreciated… (as is the) “hard work and the scholarship that goes into every word you write. Only a difficulty like this, would ever stop me from keeping up with your valuable analysis of this maddening political disaster we are experiencing. I do send some of your articles to my family, and I was very touched by your comments on my Times letter re: Nuns. I still try to follow this travesty, but today, hearing that the Vatican has hired a Fox correspondent in Rome to do PR for them, is the worst yet. The Vatican is NOT my church at this time. But I hold to all it has been in the past in my long life, as exemplified by the Nuns and their work of social activism in their care for the poor and unfortunates in our society.  

In the meantime, fact check, Politico, will be happy to have you aboard and you will find the readership you deserve - AND get paid. Make them an offer they can't refuse with one of your current articles. You are a friend.

Charles Dryfoos of Boca Ratan, Florida had these good wishes:

 Good luck on what ever you do next.

Benjamin Feinberg had these kind words:

Your research articles are always interesting and enlightening, and sometimes a bit scary.

George Garver simply wrote: 

Thanks – I’ll miss your commentary!

Stephen Baird M.D. of Solana, California simply indicated, “Read.”

And Paul Neustadt expressed these kind thoughts: 

Sorry to see you go. Your thoughts and comments are most welcome.

Eric Offner of Manhasset Hills, NY wrote concisely: 

I have read every article. I enjoyed reading them.

Joel Wiener Esq. of Boca Ratan, Florida wrote: 

With the election looming, how can you resist?

Paula Billiard wrote:

You will be missed.

Professor Louise Mayo PhD of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania wrote: 

I have read but not commented and I must confess I must have missed that last request. I have been very busy with a multitude of volunteer work and teaching.

Sonya Leopold of San Augustine, Texas commented with: 

Sorry to see you go. I found your comments always interesting and intelligent. Good luck. 

Sally Share of Fort Lee, NJ expressed her thoughts with:

I’m one of those who don't always read your emails in a timely manner. I tucked them away until I had time to read them, sometimes a few weeks would go by until I had time to sit down and give them proper attention. I enjoyed your commentary. It filled a gap that I felt after Harold passed. His views usually coincided with yours to such a great extent and so your Emails were always stimulating food for thought that I did not find among conversations with my friends. I understand your feeling neglected, but I wanted you to know your efforts and views were appreciated, whether in your Emails or your Letters to the Editors. Thank you for your efforts. Sorry to lose access to your thoughts. I hope you find a more satisfying venue for them.

Elaine Krigsman of Montclair, NJ expressed her feeling in this way:

I will miss your postings. Perhaps the reason I haven't commented is that politics these days is DEPRESSING. I am finding it difficult to read the newspaper without muttering. Your writing has been welcome reading, but you're preaching to the choir in my case. 

To which I responded:

I assume that all my readers belonged to the choir. Unfortunately, we are living in an age when a thought that does not concur with ones predilections quickly gets tuned off. It is sad!

Nancy Vieira, of Bethesda Md. made it all worthwhile with:

I am so sorry that you are saying "Adieu!” I have been an avid reader of your column for at least 4 (or more) years and I apologize for never having sent you a response thanking you for your efforts. I send your posts (I receive your columns within an email text) to friends and have shared with a fellow colleague who has been on your email list for the past 2 years. As it turns out, your previous post on which you had asked for the reader to, at least, respond with a "Read" in the subject field of an email was one that I had not yet opened. I was disappointed the first time you had bid "Adieu!” but was so happy when I started to receive our posts again! I now am again disappointed since your posts give me the foundation of knowledge that I, working full time (and overtime), do not have the time to research for myself. I look forward to the day that you decide to pick up your pen again! 

Thank-you again for all your efforts in enlightening me of the facts of our everyday political and historical news.

And last, but not least, Herb Reiner of Cedar Grove, NJ wrote:

You shouldn’t feel disillusioned, even if only a few of your readers expressed appreciation for your commentaries (and I’m sure there were many). Remember the Internet gives all of us access to hundreds of the world’s best political commentators and writers, many of whom spend all of every working day researching their columns. Many on-line publications now give readers the space to critique the columnists and they can interact with each other, if not directly with the columnists. In addition, anyone who so desires can publish his or her own blog and there are probably thousands (if not tens of thousands) of bloggers with a wide range of talents and persuasions, whom we can follow. Unless you can continually produce commentaries with exceptional wit, style, new insight, and clarity of expression, don’t expect much of a readership to follow and interact with you for very long. There’s just too much competition. But just attempting to write commentaries with the aforementioned qualities might still be worth the effort as an exercise in keeping your mind and critical faculties sharp and focused.

To which I responded with:

Thank you for your encouraging words, but as is so often the case, I don't agree with you. But as far as I am concerned disagreement is good.

It wasn't the lack of appreciation. Over time I received many words of appreciation. I never had that large an audience. Only about 80 opted in.

But the problem was not having a base from which to solicit. All I ever had was taking the distribution lists of my friends and acquaintances and that did not net that many people, even as potential readers. But it did at one time net over 800, but they were random and not at all a group that would be interested in reading analysis. I tried to reduce that by getting rid of the chaff by asking them to opt out. Some did, but not that many, because most wouldn't even go to that effort.

Even among some of the ones I knew, I asked again and again for them to opt in or out. I couldn't get them to respond. Finally on my last go around I made it a strictly opt in list. That netted 80.

But the advantage of blogging is that one gets not only the subscribers, but people who find your posts by Googling. Using that I had 734 page views last month.

Those might be more important than my subscribers, but I get no satisfaction from that.

Disillusioned is the wrong word. I need to get paid in proportion to the work I do and the many hours I invest. Feedback is my pay. And when I get only five who indicate they read the last blog that becomes the final downer. But it was misleading. Upon announcing my retirement 20 expressed disappointment and regret.

You say, "Unless you can continually produce commentaries with exceptional wit, style, new insight and clarity of expression,” but in all modesty I believe that is exactly what I did. Well, I rarely attempted wit. But the other three I believe I did in abundance. I don't believe that my problem was ever content. I had too few people to begin with, some were half hearted to begin with, and most were, and are, very busy.

What you say about the many blogs I am competing with is true, but not really a factor, because few if any of my subscribers read other blogs, and unlike you few research the web.

As for "exercise in keeping your mind and critical faculties sharp and focused" that is a major reward to be sure, but not enough when it becomes so time consuming as not to allow many other activities.

If I return, and sooner or later I will want to return, because I believe that I have insights not shared by others, it will only be because I have found a way to vastly increase my readership. I have some idea along this line that I need to explore. We shall see.

As for the professionals, writing columns for the major newspapers, it is their shallowness that prompts me to write. If I thought the media was doing their job I would not feel the need to write.

But above all, what gets distributed widely is the sensational, which most of the time has not a scintilla of truth to it, but a gullible public that aught to know better hits the forward button without checking the veracity of what they are forwarding. I have often urged use of Snopes, but people are too lazy to check. Hitting the forward button is easier.