For better or worse, I’ve always preferred multi-tasking over choosing one thing to focus on. I like reading and walking at the same time. I don’t like to exercise at the gym unless I’m also listening to music. I’m currently in the middle of reading not one, but four classic film biographies. So when I decided I wanted to be a blogger, I didn’t just pick one focus, I picked two. In my mind, old Hollywood and genealogy go together in a delightful, though not always obvious way (like sushi and ice cream!), not just because they are two things I love, but because they both involve pioneers, fascinating characters, learning from the past to improve the future, and fantastic stories and people on the verge of being forgotten.

However, after joining Twitter last year with an account for this blog, I noticed that after posting too many times about old Hollywood, I would lose the occasional genealogy follower (and vice versa). I can’t fault people for this. If they only wanted to see posts about specific topics, the white noise I was creating in their feeds may have been plain obnoxious. But that wasn’t all. I soon came to the disappointing realization that I would probably never be featured on any Genealogy Blogs list or be accepted as a member of the Classic Movie Blog Association because my content wasn’t enough of either, being split down the middle. Making a list or group was never my initial goal when starting this blog, but I’d be lying if I said it wouldn’t be nice. At times I wondered if I set myself back a step and that my combined blog would be better off as two.

But, after 13 months of blogging, 105 posts I’ve enjoyed writing, and the people I’ve connected with an learned from because of starting this blog, I have come to realize that I don’t need two blogs. Just as I like me for me, I like this blog for what it has become, for what it has done for me personally, and what I hope to express with it: the idea that we should write about what we like to write about.ย I don’t think I’m alone on that island. There are more people like me than I may have originally assumed after that first un-follow. Whether they are truly interested in both genealogy and old Hollywood, whether they are in love with one and have a passing interest in the other, or whether they are just humoring me and filtering out 50% of my โ€œnoiseโ€ out of sheer kindness, I donโ€™t know, but I am thankful for the members of both online communities (as well as folks from other blogger/Twitter communities) who have been so supportive of me and my blog this past year.

But, this post is not only about me coming to terms with my blog’s identity (I told you, I like multi-tasking), so let’s getย down to brass tacks:ย I have been kicking around the idea for an interview series for a while (inspired by Becks Kobelโ€™s series) and I figured now that Iโ€™ve accepted and embraced my own particular brand, why not go with it?!

This crossover interview series will feature genealogy and Hollywood related questions tailored to each group (one set of questions for members of the genealogy community and one set for the Hollywood). Letโ€™s see how much we have in common!

If you blog or Tweet primarily about either Hollywood OR genealogy and would like to be interviewed for this series, please reply in the comments that you would like to participate or private message me on Twitter @HollywoodGenes.

Please find the list of those who have been interviewed for this series below:

Paul Chiddicks

Allen Rizzi

Abbie Allen

Stephen Sherry

Nell Minow

Joi Sigers

Ernie Fink

451432058_8cf463207f_b
Celebrating! With candy, of course.