With my last
post, I returned to the world of blogging after a three month absence. I promised to explain in this post how I came
to step away, although I suspect long-time readers sensed my impending hiatus.
After many
years of hitting my goal of a new post every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, I
began struggling during the month of August.
Sometimes my posts weren’t published until the late evening or early
morning hours. Sometimes they were a day or two late. I found it increasingly difficult to set
aside the time and concentration to finish a post.
Eventually,
near the end of August, I missed a deadline, couldn’t get back to complete the
post, and abruptly found myself an ex-blogger.
It’d be easy
to point at the obvious reasons for my absence from this space. Continually increasing obligations in my
personal life. An overwillingness to say
“yes” to opportunities to be involved in civic life, resulting in too many
obligations. A need to recharge whatever
batteries I have that allowed me to blog as long as I did.
But, as I
see it, the real reason is more subtle. It
pertains to local politics and my role in a recent race.
I’ve written
before (here and here) about my involvement in the early stages of
a political campaign. As recounted in
those posts, I helped found a committee tasked with finding a candidate to
contest a now-completed City Council race.
Since I last
wrote on the subject, we found a candidate.
He was the best possible candidate.
Indeed, he was the candidate for whom I had hoped when I first suggested
the committee. I was thrilled with our initial
prospects.
As the
campaign got underway, the candidate asked me to serve as his campaign
treasurer. I also slipped into a role as
a campaign strategist, helping to craft positions, editing materials written by
the candidate and others, and contributing some of my own words.
But it wasn’t the time I spent on the dollars
of campaign finance or the words of campaign rhetoric that broke the camel’s
back. It was the challenge of keeping
the voices straight.
I’ve known
the candidate for more than a decade. In
that time, we’ve had many opportunities to converse about land use
theories. I’ve educated him and he’s
educated me to the point where our beliefs are largely aligned. But they’re not completely aligned. We differ on some points of emphasis, on some
social issues, and on our perceptions of the positions taken by others in the community. We’re fine allies, but we’re not the same
person.
And that
near, but not complete, alignment creates a challenge, especially with the written
word. It was important that I get the
candidate’s voice right when I when I was working on his campaign. It was equally important to find my own voice
when I returned to this soapbox. And I
found it increasingly difficult to find both voices with their subtle
differences and to keep them distinct.
If this blog
had been about something completely divorced from local politics and land-use
theory, perhaps the reduced role of the screwball in baseball or the myriad uses
of earthworm castings, I could probably have continued with the blog. But that wasn’t my reality and the challenge
of keeping two nearly-aligned voices well-defined became more than I could accommodate
in my schedule. So I took a hiatus.
But the
campaign is now over. I’ve taken another
month to catch my breath and to rediscover my own voice. And I’m ready to resume this blog.
But things
will be different than they were before.
Even with the campaign complete, my plate of civic involvement remains well-filled. My goal will remain three posts per week, but
Monday, Wednesday, and Friday will now only guidelines. I’ll still count Tuesday, Saturday, and
Sunday as a win. (Indeed, this post is
two days later than I hoped.) And I’ll
try, once again, to write some posts with fewer words, a promise I’ve often made
to myself only to fail equally often.
Before I
close, I suspect there is one other question about which many are
wondering. Did the candidate win? To my chagrin, no, he didn’t. We mounted a solid effort, raised more funds
than any other candidate, made many new friends and supporters, and ran a
campaign of respect and quiet good sense.
But we ultimately failed to overcome the power of incumbency and the
status quo, falling short by about two percent.
Despite the
failure, lessons were learned, many of which will be shared here in the coming weeks
and months, and enthusiasm was created for a long-term commitment. Planning for the 2018 election has already
begun. The same candidate may or may not
run, but the group we founded will put at least one candidate into the
field. And next time, we won’t lose.
So, I’m back
to blogging. I’ve missed chatting with
you, apologize for my absence, and look forward to rebuilding our connection.
When I next
write, it will be about the recent tragic fire in Oakland.
As always,
your questions or comments will be appreciated.
Please comment below or email me.
And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)
Thanks for your words and enthusiasm. I am fairly new to your blog-o-sphere and your view gives me hope for a better place for us all to share.
ReplyDeleteI have been wondering just recently who pulls the strings we all dance to in the larger picture. I don't want to beleive that a man like Barak Obama would participate in or condone by silence some of the atrocities that go on under his watch without a huge conflict of conscience.
It makes me feel somewhat less empowered when our efforts to bring someone like Bill to the council only to be beaten by a thin margin. Seeing the futility of one's vote in the national election pushes the message of disenfranchisement. I will buck up in the end and your message helps to give me hope.
Thanks for sharing your vision.
Michael Yares
Every post is a win. Every step is a win. Even a lost election can be a win.
ReplyDelete