On Twitter, part whatever

In THE LEFT HAND OF DARKNESS, the late Ursula K. Le Guin said that, “To oppose something is to maintain it… to oppose vulgarity is inevitably to be vulgar. You must go somewhere else; you must have another goal; then you walk a different road.”

Am I opposed to Twitter? Not in the slightest, at least not to the idea(l) of Twitter — to give voice to all through a platform of succinct communication. What I am opposed to is whatever that idea(l) has been bastardized and weaponized into, first by the shareholder-think of post-IPO Twitter and then by the bile of the Orange Malignancy and its cadre of deplorables and bots.

That said, I recognize that it, Twitter, is what I let it be, what I make it, a reflection upon my own expectations and judgements. Perhaps, then, I am opposed not to what it has become, but to what I’ve let it become in my mind, to what I’ve let it do to me.

Or perhaps, as I careen towards the anniversary of my first Twitter-decade (jesushchrist),  I simply lack that something something it takes to make Twitter enjoyable and useful and, as I toil away on this next book and the next phase of my career, my interest in expending the mental energy necessary to get that unnamed something something back (if I ever had it in the first place) is near zilch.

Or perhaps it’s all of the above. Or none of the above.

Regardless, here I am, scribbling in the dirt on the shoulder of this different(ish) road. Now that this thought has been exorcised, I must share it to Twitter.