Monday, September 8, 2008

Mere Christianity

Just for the record, this post isn't about the C.S.Lewis classic, "Mere Christianity."
Nor is it is not about any of his books or about Christianity.

It is about finding appropriate titles for posts on my blog.


See, I figure it's a win-win situation.
I can't come up with good titles for my posts. It becomes a painful frustration trying to figure about what to title a post about, say "The Zoo." Or, "New Stories About My Dogs." Or like Scott has written here.
I agree, Scott. It is troublesome and can become quite time consuming. I usually end up banging my head on my keyboard as I struggle to create a clever title.
So I have decided to just use previous titles from books, blogs, magazines, TV shows, receipts and what-have-you. "Completely random" is the key phrase here.

This is clearly a brilliant plan. Here are just a few of it's many obvious benefits:

**This is a great idea in that, it is a GREEN PLAN. I am recycling.

**People will get a pleasant surprise when they Google or click on my post entitled "The Fellowship of the Ring" and get to read about my diet and exercise plans. It will keep people on their toes by offering the unexpected.
This is a thing of beauty, my dear community of imaginary friends.

**I can indulge my overwhelmingly slightly rebellious nature, in a safe and gentle way(that sounds like a laxative advertisement) by not following the "rules" that say your title MUST PERTAIN TO YOUR POST.
I think not.

**There will be no need to bang my head on the keyboard any more. I can simply glance at the bookcase. Or clean out my purse.

Tune in tomorrow for "Brit and K-Fed Back in Court" which will be all about our yard and garden plans for next year. And maybe a great roasted garlic bruchetta recipe.

Embrace your inner rebel! Viva la revolution!

Next I'll be working on a plan for incorrect spelling. Is it really so wrong? Who are THEY to be correcting YOU?
Or is this your way of being unique and creative, showing off your individuality and giving a poke in the eye to the status quo?
I thought so.
Post a Comment