Hi Mary-Anne,

Thanks, as always (you've written before, yes? My apologies, if I'm mixing you up with someone else). "Thick skin" is essential, yes. Although, I'm not sure I'd call myself someone who is "thick skinned" - I suppose that depends on your definition of the term. I simply have an emotional detachment to it, helped, I suppose, that this is only one small portion of my life. My mistake, in originally thinking about this (which I did, mind you) was that I tied this in with the well-known element of cyberspace being that anoniminity of the interaction. It's this anonyminity that is at the core of so much of the viciousness of it. These people would never speak to each other, this way, if they were to meet in a bar, of course. So, I once thought, "Well, Aaron, perhaps, you have that in a strange sort of reversal - it doesn't really affect you, partly because it's not really "you", it's the sub-world of cyberspace." I didn't even give my real name, no image of myself, nothing, in the original site - which is actually the opposite of most, who are so, let's be honest, fuelled by the psuedo-fame of it - so I was especially anonymous. But I think that falls a little short to put it down to just that. I'm partly protected, perhaps, by the simple fact that this is not something I am completely emotionally invested in. In particular, Eye On Big Brother was a kind of experiment, I didn't choose that topic because it's so close to my heart (far from it). It's hard not to sound condescending, I know (I wish I could put it forward in some other way), but I'm not going to be razzled by a handful of Big Brother fans, spouting off from their bedrooms, if you know what I mean. In all fairness, there would be other elements of my life where I would be more affected, but Big Brother is most certainly not one of them!

 

And you are obviously referring to Big Brother, after all, and it's important to remember that, in particular, the nature of this beast is indeed a vicious one. It's almost impossible to meet it at any other level, becauase that IS Big Brother. That's what function it serves for most of its fans. I don't want everyone to take that personally, but I think that even the fans of the show who come here would know what I mean by that. So, I've always said (and did in that post, if memory serves me) that I acknowledge this, and it's not my place to be shocked in any way! Admittedly, when I first did the big original site, I kind of was (just the sheer volume of it does take you back, a little - even if you know it's coming), but that's long gone! Luckily, this is not in any way a site that is trying to be what that site is - this is a more personal, smaller site, and I like it that way (it's not really aimed at the BB crowd I aim EOBB at - it does have a very different tone, for those who can note it). I could never do EOBB, all year round, and is why I partly had to let it go (at that kind of large-scale level) this year. It requires your all, and I just don't have it. Others out there in BB cyberworld, LIVE it, 24/7, even when the show is not on. That must be draining, but I suppose it gives them a reason to be.

 

But yes, I always tell people who are thinking of arriving in cyberspace in any "public" sort of way, to make sure they're up for that part of it. The politics, the cruelty, the two bob of every dominant personality who can seriously usurp the tone of your work - you do have to be ready for that, and I worry about the affect it would have on some people who cannot handle it. I think, aside from all, I'm someone who is way beyond being in any way affected, to that extent, by any sort of external opinion, and as long as you are going to, yourself, put forward a strong opinion, you have to expect it. In a way, it signals your "success". If you say "nothing", nobody will be engaged as much, anyway, positively or negatively, by your work. I quite consciously aim to stir - whether it stirs people because they relate to it, learn something from it, or just downright hate it - and so I'm a big enough boy to know what that entails. And I can also dish it back, of course - though, I prefer to give such discourse more depth than the usual slagging you'll find online (such as commenting on typos, etc, or resorting to shallow insults). There's a difference between being critical and provocative, and externalising (or actively generating) negativity for the sake of it, as some kind of crass entertainment.

 

But hey, if it's one thing you can count on in the modern world, it's that it's all forgotten in about five minutes, anyway.

 

Thanks again, Mary-Anne,

Aaron