Four years and 2,200 posts ago, we made an assertion and asked a question. The assertion remains unchallenged, and the question is unanswered, although we've certainly devoted much consideration to it:
New Albany is a state of mind – but whose?
Beginning on January 8, I’ll be taking a step into uncharted territory when my first Tribune guest column is published. The plan is to submit 900 words each week. No stipulations have been placed on the content of these columns, and while there is no denying that the blogging experience will come to bear on the finished products, I was an essayist before I was a blogger, and there is a certain style intrinsic to the print format that will take time for me to master.
That said, I’ve already informed my wife, closest friends and confidants that given the task at hand, I’ll need help – not in writing, but with ideas and creative prodding.
On Sunday, I obliquely referenced one possible angle for my approach in the columns of Jeffrey Bernard. Also, most of you know that HL Mencken is a vital and continuing influence. In their respective ways, both of these writers devoted their words to a catharsis of sorts, and I've always felt the same way.
Stated simply, it goes something like this: How does one cope in a place where one's own worldview is devalued in cultural, political and institutional senses?
And, what is theory and practice of New Albany, why does it prod me to catharsis in writing, and how do we (collectively, you and I) cope with it?
Your thoughts are appreciated.