This review of What Might Be Read is brought to you by The Weblog Review blog and website reviews. Get your site reviewed within 4 days by using the 'For Faster Service' link on the left menu.
What Might Be Read
When I first loaded WMBR in my browser, I took one look and then closed the tab, running away to sit in a corner muttering to myself. I was going to lambast this site, and perhaps I still will (yes, I will, I've decided).
Not since the latest Microsoft redesign have I seen a site less happy to operate in Netscape Navigator than this one. Flashing text, a tiny font, whole passages that suddenly underline when the mouse passes over them. Ugh.
Fortunately for the writer of this peculiar little site, I'm willing to cross the border every now and then; loading the site in IE I was suddenly presented with an entirely different picture: a well-designed, attractively minimalist site that doesn't hate me.
I started with the "About" section - surely the best jumping-off point for any new reader - where I discovered many little things about the writer that I can truly relate to. This material reads like a bullet-pointed Seinfeld summary; "I never write the word 'I' with a lower case letter" (ironic when you visit the contact page), and "I broke up with a girlfriend once because she didn't care to differentiate between 'they're' and 'their'" are two shining examples of the writer's great sense of written presentation.
In the most recent entry (August 29th when I wrote this review), the writer laments his recent lack of interest in the site, with language much more colourful and involving than a simple, "I've been busy lately - sorry." WMBR is a personal weblog, full of snappy, short entries, cross-postings, neatly laid out with lots of white space and a thin column structure that draws the eye down the length of the page. When you start reading you will find yourself strangely compelled to continue.
There's too much content here to get through in one go. Instead I recommend dipping in and out; follow some of the supremely well measured external links, though always be sure to return. The posts here are bitesize, never too long and rarely too short, so you'll never fall foul of the infamous blog fatigue, from which I have personally suffered on one or two other sites (my own included, shamefully).
Now, if only he could somehow transpose this delicate design into something that Netscape and its band of Mozilla brothers could digest...
This site was reviewed on 2003-09-02 by chrisw.
They felt this site belonged in the Personal category.
chrisw felt that What Might Be Read deserved a rating of 4.
“what might be read”, or wmbr from this point on, definitely goes for the less is more appeal with the layout and design aspect of the site. When the site loads, readers are greeted with a Photoshopped image of a man; one can assume it’s the author and may or may not be correct. There’s a white background, with black test in the weblog portion of the site. The internal links around the site are to the right side of the mystery man image, along with the archives, a “search the site” area, and a way for readers to instant message the author’s cell phone. Hyperlinks are in a dark gray color that can be distinguished from the text in the weblog entries, but can sometimes be confused with the titles for each post. However, his justification of using blacks, whites, and grays, according to this particular entry, is actually quite fitting.
As always when reviewing a site, I opted to read the “about” page first, do find out what the author was all about. This is where I found out that wmbr is a third go at the weblog from this author, who in time, has had to increase his level of anonymity when writing in his weblog. A somewhat obscure description of the author is also included on this page. The bio-type portion gives readers information about the author in a sentence by sentence manner. The author remains in his state of being anonymous, but yet manages to give us information that is quite specific to him.
Aside from the weblog, the author also willingly shares different songs, verses, and muses with the readers. Also handy for first time readers is a glossary section that, like with any glossary, gives definitions to words that may just be ones that only be found at wmbr. The author has these sections linked to the side for easy access.
The archives of wmbr begin in November 2001 and run somewhat regularly up until March 1, 2003, with the entries coming fewer and farther between nearing that date. The latest entry, made at the end of August, was the first for five months. Throughout these archives, readers get a chance to learn some personal information about the author. Every once in a great while, the author will participate in the classic weblogger memes like the Friday Five, which again, gives readers more insight into the casual persona of the author.
The poetic fashion that the author writes in primarily, however, is what causes this weblog to stand out from others. Words flow together in an almost effortless manner in so many of the entries. Descriptions of every day things bring out a different feeling in this weblog because the author’s descriptions are so precise. They’re based more on feelings and memories, than of sights and sounds. Visiting an unknown city isn’t like reading about all the kitschy tourist stories that most people right about. Instead, it’s like reading some type of free verse poetry full of original metaphors and similes and the rest of the terms you learn in high school English Literature classes.
wmbr is not a typical weblog that will strike the fancy of the average random reader. But from what I can tell, it’s not exactly meant to. The word choice by the author gives the entries a very strong feel. Perhaps as the author gets back into the routine of posting more often, things will begin to flow more consistently and wmbr might eventually become a site more people are familiar with. Until then, though, the archives are worth a one time perusal. This site will hit a chord with some people, but more than likely not the biggest portion of every day readers.
This site was reviewed on 2003-09-02 by Wendy.
They felt this site belonged in the Personal category.
Wendy felt that What Might Be Read deserved a rating of 3.5.
2 reviewers gave What Might Be Read an average rating of 3.7500
Site Stats
Site Category: Personal
Reader Rating: 0.0000 based on votes
Report URL
Cast your vote
Sorry you need to log in to vote.