Rodney O. Lain - 2000.06.12
Magneto stumbled over to a place in front of [Senator] Kelly
[after having turned him into a mutant like himself] and weakly
smiled. "Welcome to the future, brother."
- X-Men: The Movie, a novelization by Kristine Kathryn
Rusch and Dean Wesley Smith
During ancient Roman times, criticism was considered a
respectable form of inquiry.
A critic wasn't seen as a hateful, negativity-prone
rabble-rouser, but rather, he was seen as the ultimate patriot. A
lover, not a fighter. Not a demagogue, but a cheerleader: "Two,
four, six, eight! Who do we excoriate? Society! Culture!
Establishment! Yaaaay!"
Several of us Mac writers view ourselves as this kind of critic
vis-à-vis the Macintosh platform. I think I can speak for
all of us "negative" types when I say that whenever we said
anything "bad" about the Macintosh, about Apple, about the Mac
community, it was in a spirit of concern, out of a desire to see
and to spur improvement.
In this spirit, I want to address an aspect of the
cyber-conglomeration we call the "Mac Web," that loose association
of websites created and maintained by individuals and groups of
individuals bound by their love of the Macintosh computing platform
and all things related to it.
God knows how many websites are out there dedicated to things
Macintosh. There are many, and that is good, methinks. What I have
mixed feelings about, however, is sporadic merging and gobbling up
of smaller Mac websites.
I have been witness to the personalities behind such
merger-mania and have pondered the good that it does.
This may not mean much to the average Mac user out there, since
this delves into what John H. Farr calls "navel gazing."
But, navel gaze, I must.
One of my favorite people is Canadian John Byrne, novelist,
comic book artist/writer. One of his claims to fame, besides being
a legend in the comics industry, is his direct involvement in
creating the popular culture icon call the X-Men. The reason he's
one of my favorite people is his one-man crusade to save the comics
industry from itself.
In the spirit of the ancient Roman critic, he often
editorializes in his books and in trade publications about the lack
of originality in and the "sell out" mentality of his
contemporaries. He reserves his most heated ire for the upstart
kids who have taken over the industry with a USA Today
approach.
I'm not saying this happens in the Mac Web community, but I am
saying that combining websites sometimes dilutes the effect that
some sites had in promoting the Cause.
The three stages of a Macintosh website
1 >Stage One: Many of us have done
it: we loved the Mac, so much so that we posted a response or two to a
forum in defense or support of the Mac. Some of us created Mac sites
that were well received. Some of us went on to write for such
burgeoning Mac websites - often gratis. Money was never our
intention.
2 Stage Two: Some of us
realized, "Hey, I can make a buck at this." We asked for money in
exchange for our written musings (or if we were webmasters, we asked
for advertising), and we got it. Some of us were more managerial than
literati, so we grouped together a few writers and a couple of editors,
and then made a name for ourselves and our websites. Fame followed -
within the Mac Web community, anyway.
3 Stage Three: The ultimate goal
of the average business is to make more money this year than it did
last year. This I know. For Mac websites, that involves increasing
scope and influence. Some believe that involves the big fish swallowing
up the little fish. I've seen it attempted. It creates arrogance,
attitudes of superiority....
I tested this a while back. I wrote an editor at one particular
site, offering a submission. The response I received was, "I loathe
you. You disgust me." Well, maybe I asked for that, looking back
over my past writings, but I had to wonder if that particular
editor would have said such things if their little site wasn't part
of one of those cliques of Mac snobs - you know who you are.
I began to wonder if this consolidation of power and resources
created any good in ways other than those Machiavellian.
After all, wasn't all of this stuff started out as for-fun - not
for-profit - and out of a desire to spread the word?
Affiliation or Assimilation?
Now, there is nothing wrong with making a buck off this Mac Web
thing (after all, I don't work for free - I don't get rich, but I
don't write in indentured servitude, either). But it pains me to
wonder if we are becoming some of the things that we loathe.
For me, the Macintosh Way - to borrow Guy Kawasaki's term -
represents a break with the run of the mill. The PC press, to me,
consists of sterile writing that covers a sterile computing
platform.
Run of the mill.
Are we fated to be no different? Look around us. Most of the
websites that used to be "fun" (I'm overusing the word, I know) are
becoming bland. Yes, I know that the Mac community is "growing up,"
but must we?
I often hear of people trying to (re)discover their "inner
child." For me, the Macintosh was a catalyst in that discovery
process.
This is a minor digression from the things I usually write
about, but I felt it needs to be said. Heck, it may even be
stepping on the toes of sites that I write for. But I think they
will respect this opinion.
Sure, make money, guys. In the words of Austin Powers: "Yay,
capitalism!" But we shouldn't forget why we are doing this. Once we
become focused on the money, it stops being fun. (Once more, I am
never against making money.) When it stops being fun, the writing
gets dull, listless, uninspiring.
Then where are the readers? Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't
they one of our reasons for being?
It's just a thought for us when we find ourselves patting
ourselves on the back on the number of hits that we are getting,
how much ad revenue we're getting, and how our "competitor" just
bought another great little website.
