See, this is why it’s important to carefully plan one’s blogging oeuvre:

Hoping to positively influence the evaluation of his artistic creation, an autobiographer can manage, manipulate, or even correct his own public image through autobiographical writing. How many previously unknown but aspiring writers have managed to draw attention to their own writings by effectively marketing them within the frame of their own autobiographies? (117) (..) The success of Stein’s autobiography guaranteed not simply a steady publication record for her book, but also a more favorable overall reception for her work. (118) (Helga LÈn·rt-Cheng: “Autobiography As Advertisement: Why Do Gertrude Stein’s Sentences Get Under Our Skin?” New Literary History vol 34 issue 1 (2003) page 117. HTML version, Muse subscription required, go ask a library for electronic or print access!)

There’s no need to be a celebrity blogger before you start. Gertrude Stein was sent rejection letter after rejection letter – up until the publication of her autobiography. So put your blog to good use!

Rules suggested for the aspiring self-promoting autobiographer include “Rule #2. A Good Advertisement Is Easy to Understand.” Lenart-Cheng notes, again in relation to Gertrude Stein, that “The fact that her autobiography has often been called ‘the one book by G. S. that an ordinary person can read’ is the best proof of the success of this compromise.” (page 123) One might consider following Stein in writing one’s autobiography in the third person, staging it as the autobiography of a devoted friend and admirer. This allows one to avoid violating the taboo of self-praise. Instead one can have one’s friend write things like “I met Gertrude Stein. . . . I may say that only three times in my life have I met a genius and each time a bell within me rang and I was not mistaken.” If you want to do this in your blog by writing your own comments to your own blog posts, do be careful, it’s important not to lose your balance here.

Now, where blogs may truly rule in this genre is in their constant updating. You see, Rule #4 states that “A Good Advertisement Has to Be Repeated Over and Over.” Keep returning to the same points. Mention your name often – “Gertrude Stein” is repeated on average five times per page in her autobiography. The conventions of blogging make this easy: simply keep the “posted by Your Name” in the footer of every post and people will remember you.

I’ve already broken Rule #1, unfortunately, simply by citing this article. You see, A Good Advertisement Conceals its Strategy.

Unless, of course, I’m triple-bluffing you in a rage of stealthy cunning…


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.