(1) Your assertion that journals are not meant for public consumption, whereas blogs are, is an interesting one, thinking epistemologically. I would argue that many journals are indeed intended for public consumption. My argument is two-part:

[a] The history of journalling as we have understood it has been based upon those journals which did end up “consumed” by the public. How would we know about journalling, the structure of journalling, even the idea of journalling, if no journals had ever been publicly consumed, examined (sometimes in tedious detail; at this time, I give a nod to Samuel Pepys), and disseminated for further consumption and examination? Some interesting examples of this are the aforementioned Pepys, Benjamin Franklin, Anne Frank (arguably, but I still think a good example, if only for the reason that she recognized the value her journal could have if she began to direct it toward an audience, rather than what she perceived as her personal audience of herself and “Kitty,” the journal itself…which is, still, an audience, which brings me to my next point). [b] While it cannot be stated as a categorical imperative (and keep in mind, later, that I did say it is not one), I think it must be stated for the argument that, in general, anything written is written for an audience, even if that audience never reads the work written. Some literary critics even go so far as to suggest that every poem is written to someone, that every short story is written to a certain demographic, that every piece of literature ever written (ever) was written with a certain targeted audience on whom it would have the greatest effect. So, even if I am writing a journal I never consciously intend to show anyone, it is likely that I have written it in, for example, a defensive mode, written to a “you” who would disagree with me, or, as another example, in a formal mode which would lend itself to an academic, educated audience. In a way, it’s an “if a tree falls in a forest” scenario: if the audience doesn’t hear the message, does that mean the message doesn’t exist?

(2) I find it interesting that you seem to question the validity of emotions as a form of experience and truth. I know that you are looking, in your stepwise program, at improving writing, not necessarily the handling or understanding of a situation, but I tend to think the two are inextricably linked: the experience, the impression of said experience, and the expression of said experience. So, while I understand that you are looking for greater clarity and skill in writing, I would encourage you (as the Ever-Present Emotional Devil’s Advocate) to think about the value of an emotionally charged, though perhaps less materially descriptive piece of writing.

All this Monopoly lately has made me think about getting into real estate….

But seriously, who would want to live on the Moon? It’s the harshest environment on the planet.

Did this post increase my chances of getting laid? Yes=good. No=bad.

I noticed a trend, which is why I’m posting so infrequently on my blog.

Eventually it all becomes so cryptic that I can’t remember what my point was for writing it in the first place.

It’s nice to see that my “voice” has matured, though.