A Time For Change? I Ask My Readers

I have been thinking about a few things related to this blog and my social media/internet presence in general. And as you probably gathered from my last post, I have not always been happy with what I see.

Not that I never am. I have met some people, and far more of them have turned out to be nice, than have turned out to be asses. I have gotten some advice from some of the good ones as well. And some of the good ones have written comments here.

Just today I met someone over on Brazen Careerist who complimented me on this blog, and the things I say in it. That is always good to hear.

That being said, it is probably what I say, far more than where I say it that is most important. Being able to easily share my ideas as well as my  talent to as many people as possible as fast as possible is the primary concern of my online activity. And to that end, I have been kicking around the idea of changing the nature of my online presence. This blog doesn't seem to be accomplishing all of the goals I had for it when I created it, and I have pondered if trying things a bit differently would increase my chances of accomplishing more of my personal online goals.

To me, I see five several options.

1) Tighten the focus of this blog even further.

I could make the content even more specific to some aspect of myself, what I do, or what I want. Examples include converting this to a strictly introvert oriented blog. (Which in a sense it is now.) Or perhaps to a blog that is only about my writing adventures, much like Always Off Book is dedicated to my theatre adventures. Or, instead of "Too XYZ" being a general beacon of content, I could revamp every post from now on to very specifically mention the concept. Make every post an exact exploration of a particular way in which I am in fact Too XYZ.

2) Fold this, as well as Always Off Book and other endeavors into a new Ty Unglebower supersite.

This is the more complicated and more expensive approach, but one I have given more consideration to in the last two months than I have previously over the years. Everything I do would be consolidated into one central location. The archives for both of my blogs would survive and be accessible from the supersite, but future posts on a blog would then be posted to the site itself, possibly with tags or separate pages pertaining to each category. (All acting posts together in one place, all Too XYZ type posts in a another.)

I have talked this over with a few people online, and the basic idea seems possible, and as with many things there are about a dozen ways in which the same goal could be accomplished. None of which I totally understand yet. But I have a vision in my head as to how it would work. With one go-to online identity that included pictures, writing samples, a resume, and of course the always evolving blog content, I would feel more free to promote me and all that comes with me as opposed to trying to niche down everything that comes to mind. Pointing to "me" would be easier than directing different people to different places.

I have my online business card for this purpose in theory. But the company has been slow to correct some major bugs in their software, and it has never quite done what it was supposed to do. And even if it did, a supersite may still be in order.

The downside is, I feel that if I combine all aspects of my personal media into one place, each component loses a bit of something. (And in the case of Always Off Book, a project I have been working on for almost six years.) Plus I run the risk of being seen as some kind of Jack of all trades/master of none.

3) Terminate Too XYZ.

Not an easy thing to consider. But I sometimes wonder based on my numbers lately if I am continuing to reach an audience at all. I know I reach specific individuals, because they tell me so. But given how much time I put into writing a post, storing ideas for posts, publishing them, marketing them via BC and Twitter over and over, and getting in most cases little to no feedback on the ideas or posts, I am beginning to wander how much of an impact this blog is really having.

Always Off Book has been my blogging labor of love for as I said six years. I have known for a while few people read that, and it too did not accomplish what I set out for it to accomplish. (Seeing a pattern?) But That is a part of my theatre life now. I won't be getting rid of that totally anytime soon. (Except in a way, with Number 2 above.) So I know how to persist and write for a blog because it is important to me. I just don't know if it is worth the time to do that for two blogs that are not having the impact I had hoped for.

I have to wonder if the overall mission for Too XYZ has been accomplished.

4) Move Too XYZ to WordPress

Despite the fact that I have considered it, this still seems like one of the sillier options. I do not understand the hype about WordPress. I don't understand why people take a blog more seriously by default of it is WordPress than they do if it is Blogger. I find what experimentation I have done with the WordPress template to be quite confusing and counter intuitive. I am a WYSIWYG sort of publisher, and WordPress is far from that.

Yet for some as yet unexplained reason, people seem to think that a WordPress blog, as much of a pain in the ass as it is, is a better blog. Such people make style more important than substance in my view, and I have always choked on the very idea of making my content less important than the box it is in. Yet if there is any chance to beef up my readership somewhat by migrating, it may be worth it.

5) Change Nothing. Continue to promote and build an audience for a while longer.


 Conclusion

The whole point of this recent brainstorming is to correct what I have perceived to be some of the weaknesses with my online presence as of late. There are a huge number of suggested hoops out there through which I will never be able to jump. The vast majority of the promotion and image advice I find out there, even from my decent, well meaning allies is simply not for me. That is not going to change. Yet if there are some smaller hoops out there that I can simply step through slowly which will be of assistance to my online reputation, without forcing me to alter my precepts, I am willing to take a few such steps.

The point of being online afterall is to share ideas. My ideas. The ideas will not change. The direction will not change. But the ideas have to be visible if they are to impact anyone for the better. And lately I am not sure they are getting out there. That is the impetus for these considerations.

So what does everyone think? Which of the five make most sense to you? Or would you advice something totally different? Please let me know, if we have not already talked about it privately. You can leave comments here, or email me if you prefer that.

Charlie Sheen in Detroit: Did He Bomb, or Did We?

Charlie Sheen's opening stop for his "Torpedo of Truth" tour in Detroit on Saturday has been almost universally declared a disaster. Late start time, terrible opening act. Incoherent meanderings, pointless video clips. Booing, walk-outs, demands for refunds.

He even reminded the increasingly hostile audience at one point that they had agreed to pay money for tickets to a show before they knew anything about it. Indeed they had. I'll get into that point in a moment.

In response, during the the second stop on the tour in Chicago the following night, the "show" was revamped completely. The entire show was now Sheen being interviewed by a DJ. And so, it would seem, the audience, (some of whom showed up with the hopes of seeing a Detroit style train wreck) was far more accepting. Though it seems Sheen himself was a bit unhappy with the change of format at times.

I don't know what Sheen's deal is. Drugs. Mental illness. Or a genius for marketing by use of a grand hoax ala Joaquin Phoenix. I think there is ample evidence for any of the above options, frankly. But based on the nature of the Detroit show at least, I don't consider the evidence for lunacy to be overwhelming yet. Frankly, I don't even think, as many seem to, that Detroit proves he has no idea how to put on a show. We can easily read about what happened and throw what we consider some truth right back at the "Torpedo of Truth", assured in our knowledge that what he did was bound to fail. But was it?

I think the whole thing really is an excellent field study on the entertainment consumption habits of our society.

To begin with, I think Sheen, in whatever state of mental health he is in, honestly had every right to assume that people who paid all that money to see "Torpedo" would love what he was doing. Even if it was half-assed and thrown together at last minute. It was after all basically the same sort of thing he has been doing since this alleged meltdown began. Weird rambling monologues. Women making out. YouTube videos. It seems that the stage show was in fact a visual, live reproduction of the frantic stream of consciousness of Sheen's mind that caused so many people to watch his internet streams, and follow him on Twitter. The very same sort of thing that led people to buy a ticket to "Torpedo" in the first place. Why shouldn't people have loved it? If Sheen is asking this question now, I can't say as I blame him much.

Let's face it; people enjoy paying money for some weird and lame, and even hostile garbage. Andy Kaufman made a career of pulling antagonistic, at times rambling and certainly nonsensical stunts on stage and people booed and yet loved him for it. Snooki's book is a best seller. There are the inexplicable cult followings of trash like The Adventures of Buckaroo Bonzai Across the 8th Dimension, a movie so obviously inept, unprofessional and void of story, purpose, theme, structure, coherence, and at times even proper lighting, that it does not in the strictest definition even qualify as a movie.

So I think the line between Charlie Sheen's opening of "Torpedo" in Detroit, which was vilified, and the examples I give above which are lauded by considerable numbers of people, is a very thin one. Obviously "Torpedo" was torpedoed. Yet I have to think that in an alternate universe not too far from our own, (as in perhaps just one universe over) Sheen's opening in Detroit would have been a smash hit. If he hadn't been late, they might have loved it. If he had opened in say, Austin instead of Detroit, they may have loved it. If any one single random thing had been different, the entire affair may have caught the very same invisible wave of mass audience adoration that carries people like Dane Cook into inexplicable stardom.

In other words, it is easy to say the show was absurd, now that it has failed. But we, the American public have foisted similar or even worse fare into our collective greatest hits album. And just when we think we can define what is and is not likely to be a blockbuster, something comes along and changes the game again. Either because it failed, or because it succeeded.

The truth is, we really have no idea why the media/arts/entertainment consuming masses propel one book, act, scandal, celebrity or stage show into oblivion, and another into immortality. We haven't the slightest clue what we want. At times I think the best anyone can do is watch what people follow, and then either follow the pack, or run fast enough to get to the head of same. And even once there, you may get trampled.

I am no fan of the crap Charlie Sheen has been doing the last few months, whatever its cause. I wouldn't have paid money for his live show. I wouldn't have enjoyed it. However I am withholding the tiniest amount of judgment about the show's flopping, because society has proven over and over again that there was every reason to believe the show could have worked without the slightest alteration.

Sheen is reported to have yelled back at a heckler in Detroit,

"I've already got your money, dude!"

That may be the most significant and telling observation of the entire thing.