However you want; I’m not the boss of you.
But if you do want suggestions, here: Posts up until March 5, 2021 largely contain a potpourri of reading summaries and discussion, irrelevant tangents about music, and personal reflections / lamentations. Up until that point I’m afraid that you’ll have to sift through the posts to find what you’re actually interested in. Sorry.
Following March 5, I made the decision to more strictly separate things into categories via tags. All material from the beginning is tagged, but there’s a lot of overlap. As March 8, 2021, there will be three primary and discrete categories (with more to potentially follow): “personal,” “reading summaries” and “book planning.” That way you can read the ones you want and skip the ones you’re not interested in. Unfortunately, at this moment (March 8, 2021) I can’t, for the life of me, figure out how to display tags under the post blurbs on the main page, so it’s not obvious what category each post falls in. I also haven’t yet (also March 8, 2021) developed the site to the point where you can easily filter based on tags. So again, I apologize if you end up having to endure material you’re not interested in while you try to get to what you actually want to read.
Occasionally, in my personal reflections I offer criticisms of real people and institutions I know personally, namely my graduate school program and classmates/faculty. These criticisms are meant to be constructive and gentle, not damning, and in every case the criticism is at least partially directed at myself as well. If anything I’ve written comes off as unfair, ad hominem or otherwise uncalled for, it’s my error and I’m happy to correct it.
Speaking of which, none of the opinions contained in this blog are absolute. I take the Kierkegaardian approach that I’m essentially a different person writing from one day to another. And this is, for the moment, a blog and not a series of opinion essays, so some inconsistency is to be expected. Where appropriate, I’ve tried to qualify my opinions by making it clear what parts of them are coming from emotional and/or irrational places. I’m not saying that emotions and irrationality are necessarily illegitimate as source of knowledge; I am definitely saying that my emotions and irrationality should be taken with a huge grain of salt. I’ve tried to supply the salt up front, but if I’ve neglected to do so, you’re welcome to bring your own.
In that spirit, I welcome pushback or invitations to look at something from a different angle. If you disagree with something I’ve said, I’d love to hear why. If you think I’m being an asshole, I’m probably way ahead of you, but you can go ahead and let me know anyway.