Wednesday, June 14, 2006
a tall skinny book shelf
This is the 50 books on Andrew Jones emerging church bookshelf. He rates the Out of Bounds Church no 3 in his “Top Ten Books considered essential reading on the emerging church.”
Andrew then wonders aloud about whether books are the best place to capture the emerging church story. “Very few of these books are from the “other” half – the emerging church of the margins, the poor, and the churches that no longer look like church. Emerging church leaders in the latter are less likely to publish a book as a means of communication.”
Random thoughts
-I both blog and write books. They are both different media that serve different purposes. Blogging is fast and instant. Books are thoughtful. You have more rope to hang yourself. The more words, the easier it is to fall into potholes and inconsistencies. They have had the tires kicked by editors. Both are valid medium. Both have different purposes.
– We need mechanisms to “capture” all types of stories. We need podcasters and researchers who can audio capture existing stories and form internet repositories of “storied” wisdom.
– Books give no more “validation” to a movement than “non-books.” 1 Corinthians reminds us of diverse gifts and one Spirit. Can the variety of current publishing forms be an opportunity for celebration of diversity?
Post repeated from my book blog.
)
The problem with blogs, is that it’s just an ordinary mans opinion. Which in some regards is very good, you get a feel for the normal man.
Problem is, a lot of people are stupid and closed minded.
You really have to take blogs with a grain of salt, because a lot of people write rubbish, they really do.
Someone once said, everyones opinion is just as valid as anothers. Well imo that’s simply not true. If discussing chemistry, who’s opinion is valid, a chem phd holder, or a redneck hick from Alabama? Clearly the phd holder’s opinion is a million times more valid.
People act as if their opinion on the internet (opinion on the internet!) is actually valid. Some people do have valid points. I respect your opinion Steve. A lot of people’s I don’t. A lot of people talk from the heart with not head backing, or have no decent understanding of what they are talking about. It’s easy to read what those people have said as a decent opinion, which just flaws your own.
Books tend to be written more by people who know what they’re talking about, so while you can’t just believe everything you read, you can apply greater weight to what is inside. It’s often more thought out and less hurried.
Comment by Andrew Brown — June 14, 2006 @ 12:01 pm
The problem with blogs, is that it’s just an ordinary mans opinion. Which in some regards is very good, you get a feel for the normal man.
Problem is, a lot of people are stupid and closed minded.
You really have to take blogs with a grain of salt, because a lot of people write rubbish, they really do.
Someone once said, everyones opinion is just as valid as anothers. Well imo that’s simply not true. If discussing chemistry, who’s opinion is valid, a chem phd holder, or a redneck hick from Alabama? Clearly the phd holder’s opinion is a million times more valid.
People act as if their opinion on the internet (opinion on the internet!) is actually valid. Some people do have valid points. I respect your opinion Steve. A lot of people’s I don’t. A lot of people talk from the heart with not head backing, or have no decent understanding of what they are talking about. It’s easy to read what those people have said as a decent opinion, which just flaws your own.
Books tend to be written more by people who know what they’re talking about, so while you can’t just believe everything you read, you can apply greater weight to what is inside. It’s often more thought out and less hurried.
Comment by Andrew Brown — June 14, 2006 @ 12:01 pm
interesting comments – I can think of many books written by people who have no clue what they are talking about…. as for blogging, well it least you’re not charged to read the opinion of people who do not know that they are talking about..
Comment by michael — June 14, 2006 @ 12:48 pm
(actually some women blog too)
Not all “ordinary mans”
🙂
Comment by lynne — June 14, 2006 @ 1:14 pm
the problem with books is that have the appearance of objectivity, but in fact are still one person’s opinion
blogs are more accountable – they can be edited when error is discovered and the comments feature is a way of allowing two or three witnesses to confirm the factuality of the post.
there are plenty of books written by people who dont know what they are talking about and new web 2.0 apps can publish anyones book in a few minutes.
books and blogs for different audiences – yes – well done steve on your great book and great blog.
Comment by andrew jones — June 15, 2006 @ 12:33 am
thanks andrew. (kiwi) birds of a feather stick together and all that jazz.
the presence of an author name on a book has always suggested to me that book are only “one person’s opinion.”
and I think that books are accountable – they are edited for error – they are commented on by 2 or 3 witnesses – it just occurs pre-production rather than post-production. so every chapter of my book i past for comment to people in 3 continents (UK, NZ, US). then the editor comments. the editor also checks for error, as does the proof reader. different type of accountability.
i think the difference is more that blogs are instant – great for processing aloud, great for shaping ideas. but instant is not necessarily deep. (not that all books are).
peace you far flying kiwi. kia kaha to you and your family.
Comment by steve — June 16, 2006 @ 6:09 pm