I’ll go out on a limb here: Twitter “tweets” are the Schrödinger’s cats of Internet phenomena. In general, they exist or do not exist as long as you ignore Twitter altogether; when you actively pay attention, though, each tweet instantly crystallizes into a state of aliveness (Whoa, How about that, Ha!, or Hmm…) or death — forgotten at once. (My own experience indicates that tweets, on average, have a half-life of about two-thirds of a second before the inevitable decay into memes, interstitials, youtubes, and other elementary particles.)
So I haven’t enthusiastically leapt aboard the USS Twitter yet. Life’s too ephemeral as it is, y’know? That said, I do like seeing what others get out of (and sometimes put into) it.
For example, there’s Jon, of the newly (to me) discovered Ransom Note Typography blog (subtitle: “Discontinue Use If Rash Develops”). In a late-December post, Jon exhaustively documents his favorite tweets from 2008. After a brief introduction describing his criteria for selection, he lays out his month-by-month catalog of several tweets per month.
Here’s a small sample:
ckwinny Just for fun: wear a ski cap around your house, catch a glimpse of yourself in the mirror & have a heart attack thinking it’s a stranger. 11:44 AM Jan 28th ftrain “EXCELLENT PowerPoint. Fetch me fresh trousers.” 10:26 AM Feb 12th [Ed. note: all of Paul Ford’s ftrain tweets are six words long. No more. No less.] scottsimpson “Am I being a J-E-R-K, Dad?” OH SHIT THEY LEARN TO SPELL. 4:03 PM Apr 29th AuntMarvel Dear spider on the wall: The only reason you are still alive is because I’m holding a sleeping baby. Get any closer and HOLYCRAPWHEREDYOUGO? 10:20 PM Aug 15th fireland I don’t care what the DSM-IV says, you CAN go crazy from eating too many tequila worms. Take it from EEEEEE CHUPACABRA IN MY HAIR YOU GUYS 8:55 PM Nov 6th secretsquirrel Company XMas party last night. Awoke with ‘Liver Transplant’ written on hand. I didn’t get one so I can only assumed I performed one. Again. 2:36 AM Dec 19th
The entire list nearly lures me into full-blooded participation. (Nearly.)
Lauri Shaw says
Hey, this is off topic, but that was a great comment on Nathan Bransfords “When Does One Become a Writer” post. :-) It made me laugh enough to come on over here and check out your blog.
marta says
I want to participate like that too–then worry that great cleverness escapes me.
Those tweets (there–I’ve done it–I’ve used the word tweet–egad!) are funny though.
John says
Lauri: Hi, and thanks for stopping by! …In retrospect, that comment probably came across more snarkily/snobbishly than it should have. But as with most snark (and snobbery, for that matter), its author had fun saying it at the time. :)
marta: It’s a little scary how many people apparently rely heavily on Twitter for professional purposes.
I really got the jitters the other day when a complete stranger who actually seems to be “somebody” began following me. At first I kept thinking I need to tweet better and/or more often than I do, else how will I sustain their interest? how will they really come to know me, to promote my work among people of influence, to change my life, to fly The Missus and me abroad for two weeks at their villa in Tuscany? (I don’t know if they really do have such a villa, but wouldn’t be surprised.)
And then I thought, “Y’know, you didn’t really do anything to earn their interest in the first place, did you?”
So they’ll just have to read between the lines, like anybody else there.
Querulous Squirrel says
Thank you for explaining Twitter with such clarity. However, Wikipedia on Schrodinger’s Cat is even more convoluted. I think that part of my brain is missing. Does that make me a Schrodinger’s Cat. I won’t be insulted. Reallly.
Tessa says
I got sucked into Twitter last year and I have to say I’m enjoying it quite a lot. The trick is not to follow everybody who claims to be following you, otherwise you will spend all day combing through them. You can also restrict your tweets to a select group, if you don’t feel like being part of the great cosmos of tweeters. The only problem is that it does get in the way of blogging …
Love the title of your post, John!
John says
Squirrel: Hmm, speaking of convolutions… Actually, I think it means that the missing part of your brain — not you in general — is a Schrodinger’s cat. But only when you look at it!
Tessa: On a couple of occasions I looked at that Great Cosmos. Heady stuff; I can see it must be addictive, in the same way I can understand addiction to, say, nicotine. That little insidious perfectly sized and innocently packaged shot of adrenalin. Before you know it you’ve gone through 20 of the things and your friends are shooing you out of their houses.
With a little less stubbornness, I would have been sorely tempted to (a) tweet about this post and/or (b) include the words “Twitter” and/or “tweet” in the title, making it more easily Googled. Luckily for my peace of mind in this case, stubbornness — as The Missus would (wincing) attest — is a strong suit.