I hate to break the news, but computers and the Internet are not fads. Using one or the other, or both, for reading is not going to go away either, but will likely become only more prevalent throughout society. I say this, with the full knowledge that there was a time in the computer age before Graphical User Interfaces. Once, computers had no pictures or windows at all, and the user had no choice but to read a computer exactly like he or she read a book. Now we can store thousands of books on tablets the size of a folded up newspaper and use touch controls to mimic flipping the pages.
With a push to make even textbooks electronic, why then, are authors some of the most resistant to the change? Writers might be the greatest beneficiaries – after the public, of course – of the easy accessibility to their work. Yet, they are falling over themselves to make bigger and bigger fools of themselves. Recently, Jonathan Franzen, a widely respected novelist and writer for the New Yorker, was quoted by the Telegraph while he spouted absolute absurdities.
Among his assertions, he claimed that paper books were better than e-books because you could spill water on them, and that printed literature was somehow more permanent than electronic literature. As someone who has ruined too many books in the rain and had his favorite, worn copies of books literally fall apart at the seams, I have to shake my head at Mr. Franzen. His comment about The Great Gatsby not needing to be refreshed makes me wonder if he even understands e-ink or the technology options that are out there.
However, I do understand where Mr. Franzen and other authors are coming from. They grew up dreaming about seeing their names in print. I didn’t realize it until I saw my name on the by-line for the first time, but I too had that dream. I imagined my books stacked against each other in a store, and even having a small library of my own. Nothing ostentatious, of course, I wanted a small room, but there would be a ladder that rolled along a rail to reach the highest shelves.
E-books threaten that dream. Making a library full of e-books would be silly – too expensive to buy an e-reader for each individual book, or too unimpressive to fit all the books on a mere handful of e-readers.
However, updating that dream is like updating software – tedious, but in the end you can’t help but be grateful you did it. I updated my dream while I was overseas. My family bought me an e-reader and shipped it to me loaded with ten books. When I could read ten books and keep them forever, I begrudgingly accepted the usefulness of my e-reader. When I finished them and did not have to make room in my luggage for new reading material, I embraced my e-reader like a long-lost love. My dear, and precious books, I will never have to let go of you again!
Well, as long as I don’t get a virus, but then, even printed books have bookworms.
— Photo Flickr/Andrew Mason
As far as breaking/destroying any reading material goes, that’s always heartbreaking as well. I can only imagine how unhappy you were to have your e-reader break in China, Becca. Investing in any of the protective sleeves or cases for readers is great, and helps eliminate the rather silly claim that books are better because they can withstand a little splash, but it is annoying to have to spend money on one more thing. I like how everyone has pretty solidly agreed on the penultimate book being downloaded straight to your brain, ha. Michelle, it is cool that you bring up… Read more »
@John Gottman Dwyer: “paper books were better than e-books because you could spill water on them”
That’s not an absurdity.
Think about a costly e-reader or tablet, ruined by spilling water (or coffee) on it…
Bam! Hundred of bucks out of the window! 😯
OTOH, do it with a book and you just have a yellowed page. It’s even more personal. 🙂
I believe physical books and e-books will coexist for a long while, because they answer different needs.
Until direct-to-brain downoloads will arrive. 8)
By I have memory problems already, so that doesn’t sound good to me… ! 😆
I was incredibly greatful to have my e-reader in china.
Until I dropped it. Then it was far less useful. But I read ~6 books that I wouldn’t have been able to pack otherwise because I had it! And I do believe they’ll make them more durable.
yeah the portability and convenience are advantages. Also I can see students falling in love with e-readers, if textbook material can be downloaded — they would save a ton of money on text books; and it sure beats carrying 5 textbooks in your backpack. E-books have their time and place. I’m not a student, so I’d still prefer my regular books. If you’re reading a small paperback book, you can position your fingers to spread the book open with one hand…i drop books and cell phones ALL the time. I imagine holding an e-reader would be less flexible and you… Read more »
@Michelle, your conclusion made me laugh. You guys bring up a really good point about the “warmth of books.” I do not want to make an argument that books are outdated technology, by any means. While e-ink readers can last for up to a month between charges, there is something to be said for never charging a book. And the tactile sensation of a book is something unique, if sentimental. Yet, I do appreciate the march of progress for literature, in whatever form it takes. Amber sums it up nicely, “I don’t care how I get my story as long… Read more »
I like books, but at the end of the day, it’s sloppy sentimentalism to hold a grudge against e-books when the written/typed word has been evolving for centuries. Books used to be strictly for the upper class, usually written by monks and scribes. Then the printing press came out, and there was a whole kerfuffle about books no longer being exclusive and monks and scribes being out of a job because of it. Plus, there was no longer that gorgeous binding or fancy handwriting. These e-books are no different. Now I do not know if e-books will overtake print. Only… Read more »
Amber you make an interesting point and direct downloads to our brains.
I could see direct brain downloads being the next phase, if it was some form of super accelerated speedreading. That would be so cool
But if it was just a data dump with no narrative flow, then for somethings id still prefer to read, to have the story revealed in a more oldfashioned way
I’d dig some form of direct download.
I like the smell of books, whether it’s a brand spanking new one or even a musty one. We have enough buttons, keyboards and digital screens on electronics…I like the ability to use my dexterity and flip through paperbacks and hardcovers. I like reading and looking at the jacket covers. Plus, display books in on a bookcase. Books are warm; e-books are cold. I’m really a Mac, but right now I’m speaking like a PC.
Michelle I agree with all you wrote, particularly the ability to flick quickly through pages, crossreference. That tactility is missing from ebooks, pads, computers – and find it gives a warmth to the reading experience
When we are able to make books with flexible thin ‘screens’ for pages, upon which the ebook can be downloaded. I believe that those books would be preferred to sterile padlike readers.