May Print Never Die
by Motte Brown on 06/11/2009 at 2:25 PM
I really enjoyed Tim Challies' article today comparing reading books on the Kindle with reading books on, well, bound pages with a spine and everything. Here is Challies on why he prefers ink on paper:
Its book-like qualities were its best qualities; its non-book-like qualities were the ones that got to me. All of the things that annoyed me were the things that made the experience more like operating a computer and less like reading a book. Pages took too long to turn; I could not splash yellow highlighter on the pages; I could not skim through the book looking quickly for a word or phrase or note; I could not scrawl notes in the margins.
Not that there aren't benefits that come with a Kindle like being able to transfer notes to a computer through a USB port or free access to classics. But for all its benefits, Challies explains that, "Everything I wanted the Kindle to do, a book could do better."
Books are the perfect technology. I'm convinced of it. This is why the Kindle experience failed me -- it was an attempt to make the book better. And this is impossible to do. There is no technology more perfectly suited to its purpose than this one. In comparison to the book, any e-reader falters and fails.
I sort of feel the same way about reading my Wall Street Journal. I love the experience of it. I love the look, feel, smell and sound of it. (Yes, the WSJ has a sound.) I love sending my boy to fetch it in the morning. I love reading it in my favorite chair with cup of coffee on the side table.
I hope all the print-is-dead talk is wrong. There are so many ink-on-paper experiences that would be missed if we go the way of the e-reader.
1. Rabenstrange said the following at 2:48 PM on Jun 11:
I think the main benefit that both you and Mr. Challies overlooked is the ability to carry thousands of books with you at a time.
Still, I don't think you have to worry about print dying in your lifetime. There are too many people above the age of 30 that still enjoy the tactile aspects of their newspapers. It's people like me, who grew up on RSS readers, not printed pages, and therefore have no sentimental connection to newsprint that will kill the printed paper. As time progresses there will be more of us and less of you.
2. Adam said the following at 2:50 PM on Jun 11:
I am caught in the middle. I love the feel of books. The ability to highlight, and the ability to loan out are very nice. Then there is the fact that you can take them pretty much anywhere. You don't have to worry about batteries.
There are some things that I love about electronic books. A search function is huge. The lower prices and instant gratification of electronic books are great! Finally, the ability to carry around bookshelves worth of books in one device that is just a few ounces is incredible.
At church I'm able to pull out my phone and follow along with the Scripture. Then I can look at 10 different translations of the same verse. I can interact with the sermon more and be more like a Berean with an increased ability to search the Scriptures.
3. Publishing & Library Professional said the following at 2:51 PM on Jun 11:
In my "industries" this is a Big Deal, and a CONSTANT debate.
And at its heart is an ideological conflict over what information is, and how it's used and stored.
It also gets attached to concepts of Fair Use and intellectual freedom.
Most people don't *really* believe books will go away. And as much as I want eBooks to go away, they won't, either (kidding!).
So I see a change happening in how, and why, books get published and distributed. And my personal opinion is that the shift will probably mostly happen along the fiction/non-fiction line.
As an example, the use of electronic "books" makes a lot of sense in the academic world. Subscriptions to print journals are REALLY expensive, and hard to search. Whereas, if an institution purchases access to a database run by a professional company, they get access to thousands upon thousands of searchable journal aricles. This meshes well with what scholarly researchers need; a ton of peer-reviewed, easily searched information right at hand.
Whereas, I don't know if people are as excited about schlepping their Kindles to the beach or pool for vacation. That seems to lend itself more to print books.
4. Publishing & Library Professional said the following at 2:56 PM on Jun 11:
Oh yeah... I can't cite the sources, but our eyes are more fit to reading ink-on-paper than they are words-on-screen. So physically, the print medium really *is* better suited to the human body.
And I say this as someone who spends a good chunk of her day on the computer!
5. KJ said the following at 3:04 PM on Jun 11:
What scares me about ebooks is the fact that anyone in a position of power can change that book to say anything they want it to say, and how will you know the difference if you can't go back to the original (printed) version?
6. Publishing & Library Professional said the following at 3:29 PM on Jun 11:
(Excuse me while I take over this conversation)
KJ wrote: "how will you know the difference if you can't go back to the original (printed) version?"
You're right; it is somewhat scary. There are *some* ways of securing the files, but none of them are perfect. PDFs are more ideal than Word docs, but -- in the case of records and archives management -- sometimes you're preserving those easily alterable "originals".
FYI, if people are merely worried about alterations and errors to novels and such (as opposed to intentional distortion) -- that's been going on ever since the origin of print material :)
And it's part of why Hebrew scribes were SO SO careful to get EVERYTHING perfect when they were copying Scripture. In that language, a dot can change meaning!
7. Rebekah in SoCal said the following at 3:38 PM on Jun 11:
I love the physicality of books. I actually enjoy marvelling at the font and layout of different books . . . the thrill of progress as a read from one end to the next.
But I also enjoy the expense. Too much junk and nonsense is published online. B/c books are expensive, I feel better about the reliability of the information and quality of the thought processes. (This logic mostly applies to authors w/ whom I am unfamilier.)
No4. also raises a good point about the effect on our eyes. Until Kindle-esque technology becomes the ONLY option, I will never use it for my main reading. From experience, I know that my eyes are sore from a long day on the computer.
It's easier to replace trees than my eyes.
Rebekah In Socal
8. brx said the following at 4:11 PM on Jun 11:
I'm with you, Motte! And, I'm still waiting for the quarterly print edition of Boundless! :)
I've got in mind to casually distribute it around the local churches and coffeeshops in conspicuous locations... :)
How's the progress on that project; stalled with the economy?
9. Kellie said the following at 5:20 PM on Jun 11:
I need my newspaper and coffee in the morning. Internet news doesn't cut it!!
10. Jaime Xan said the following at 6:01 PM on Jun 11:
I am a confirmed bibliophile. (Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery, right? ;-)
I love gathering books on whatever subject interests me at that time. I love the process of researching and perusing physical books. I am always reading, and carry a book with me.
I'm betwixt and between being excited about the Kindle or any e-reader. I read a lot on my computer, but it's hard to huddle under a blanket on the couch with it. Perhaps something smaller than my laptop would be more conducive to that. But I end up in some pretty random positions as I read on the couch with a physical book. However, the idea that I could quickly and easily gather "books" on that aforementioned random topic of interest is intriguing...
11. J. Tucker said the following at 6:11 PM on Jun 11:
I've noticed that the ways people consume media is often dependent on where they live and what kind of basic lifestyle they lead.
For example, when I lived in more rural areas, I would use the CD player in my car for music. Now that I live in the city and take public transportation, I use an iPod.
I think this concept contributes to the development of electronic media formats, such as the Kindle. When I lived in my parents' house, I had shelves and shelves of books. Now that I live in an apartment, I have one bookshelf. Since I am a junkie for the printed word, I find myself having to sell, donate, and give away books I've read of which I do not have the capacity to store.
In that vein, I see a LOT of people on the commuter train with Kindles these days. I myself will never give up the feel, smell, and downright rapturous experience of the combination of ink, paper, and binding. But now that I've experienced a good dose of urban living, I'm starting to understand why people will shell out $300 for one of those electronic doohickies.
12. Justin T. said the following at 6:45 PM on Jun 11:
I think that as technology progresses, Tim's objections to ebook devices will become less relevant. At the moment, I share his objections. Print books are more versatile and just flat more fun. But in 5 or 10 years?
As technology stands now, we could create a device that would allow you to flip pages quickly by touch, highlight by touch, and take notes with a pen (stylus or touch). The technology exists; the end device would probably just cost several thousand dollars.
So give the current tech some time to mature. Or put a Kindle, your favorite blank notebook, a pen, and an iPhone in a blender and hope they mix well :D
13. BDB said the following at 6:48 PM on Jun 11:
Honestly, I switched to the electronic version of The Wall Street Journal soon after it became available. The main reason is that unread copies were stacking up, and I got tired of throwing them out. Once I realized that with the electronic version, I could just search by subject and/or go back and find articles on the subject I cared about from earlier days, I couldn't see any reason to keep getting the paper version.
If I'm traveling, and it's an option at a hotel or airline, I do choose the paper version. Something to read on the plane.
But now that everyone's comments are published on articles (SIGH), the fact that I've had several letters to the editor published in the actual paper version doesn't impress anyone anymore.
Had to get a new hobby for my writing.
14. Christopher from Albuquerque said the following at 6:50 PM on Jun 11:
I agree with Rebekah in SoCal (#7). It is wonderful to simply hold a book in one's hands and read it. Computers are fine for reading blogs and, at times, short articles. For writing of any great length though, whenever possible, I go with paper and print.
For one thing, my eyes don't enjoy the strain of long hours reading in front of the computer. For another, from what I have experienced, reading physical books tends to lengthen my attention span (which is a good thing!), and reading on-line shortens that attention span.
15. T.Smith said the following at 7:41 PM on Jun 11:
What scares me about ebooks is the fact that anyone in a position of power can change that book to say anything they want it to say, and how will you know the difference if you can't go back to the original (printed) version?
Not to sound like Orwell, but this is my beef with ebooks. Burning books, any books, is a common activity of people in power and ebooks would make it much simpler.
16. Scott said the following at 7:41 PM on Jun 11:
Yeah, the electronic versions are nice (newspapers for example rock!) for some things, but for the Bible, a print version really feels just right. I lost my Bible (well, lost as in my friends had it and were gone for a week) for a week, and it really didn't feel right reading it online!
Books just have that "feel to it" that electronics don't sometimes.
17. Chris said the following at 8:38 PM on Jun 11:
The biggest problem with any electronic reader is that, unless it's completely DRM free, your rights of ownership and fair use don't really exist. The distributor of the book retains control. Sure, Amazon says they'll back up all your books that you purchase, but they can change their minds.
With a physical copy of a book, it's yours. You can read it, give it away, lend it to a friend, or even make your own copies. You can even photocopy parts and use it elsewhere as long as it complies with fair use.
This is not to say that electronic readers are bad or will kill print*. If I traveled a lot, a Kindle would be great since I wouldn't have to lug around a bunch of books. And being able to read certain newspapers would be fantastic on the road.
However, when I buy something, I want ownership of it. I don't want a license or some ethereal copy that can only be read on one item. With a book, I could (if I wanted) make paper copies, scan it to PDF, and have copies on my computer and phone.
In short, I could do physical things with a physical object. Try that with a Kindle.
* Rabenstrange writes
It's people like me, who grew up on RSS readers, not printed pages, and therefore have no sentimental connection to newsprint that will kill the printed paper.
I hate to put on my old man pants, but I've probably been on the net much longer than you. I lived through all those wonderous claims that computers would result in paperless offices, and you can see how that turned out. TV was supposed to kill print, and so was radio. It'll survive.
18. Kelly said the following at 10:15 PM on Jun 11:
I used to read a print-book per week. Since, oh, 1998, when I switched to reading online novels, it's changed to about 1 physical book every 2 months.
I LOVE READING ONLINE.
To have an entire text in 1 HTML file is wonderful. You only have to click 'scroll' every so often: you can fit a LOT of text on one screen (probably more than 2 pages of your average book). And yes, I've mastered the art of "curled up on the couch with a notebook/laptop computer". I get sore hands these days if I have to hold an actual book. ;)
I DON'T like Kindle, or anything that has a proprietary format. There's much less ability to customise the reading experience; why would I want an electronic device that pretends to have pages?! In my opinion, that defeats the purpose!
As for going back to specific parts of the story, that's where the "Find" or "Search" function is your best friend.
This week I was reading a physical paper book, and when I reached the end, I was intrigued by a minor character and wanted to go back and find all references to him. DO YOU KNOW HOW HARD AND TIME CONSUMING THAT WAS? ;)
In other words, I am an E-Format convert here. Just remembear, it's not a book, it's a TEXT FILE. You still get the story!
19. Publishing & Library Professional said the following at 11:08 PM on Jun 11:
Chris (17) wrote, "I lived through all those wonderous claims that computers would result in paperless offices, and you can see how that turned out."
Use of paper has gone ***UP!***
20. Publishing & Library Professional said the following at 11:19 PM on Jun 11:
Oh yeah, regarding Digital Rights Management (DRM)...
Anyone producing stuff for the Kindle is going to be sure it's protected.
PDFs are not as safe. And anyone can scan something in and throw it up on the Internet. (This is NOT legal, of course, by the way...)
There are definitely folks in certain sectors of society who think *everything* should be freely accessible -- that is, not simply readily available, like from the library, but openly available, without charge, via the Internet or other electronic delivery services.
Think of what Google was initially hoping to accomplish via its Book Search: EVERYTHING ever published available, digitally, within its platform. (Right now it's free, but I can't see "completely free" as a perpetually sustainable business model. Plus, if there's advertising alongside it... is it *really* free and uninfluenced??)
21. Chloe said the following at 12:14 AM on Jun 12:
this "print is dead" issue is alarming, think of all the nolstalgic things society has lost because of technology:? ...
letters to email, actually spending physical time with people to "myspace & facebook", phone calls to texting, yaarghhh!
people wonder why they lack serious and meaningful relationships and why certain cultures are rapidly fading!!
Nothing compares with reading my first Bible; which is tattered &well loved with my childhood scrawly notes,& the thin crinkly pages, swishing as i turn the page!sigh...
this trend to be 'removed from others and physical things' i believe is a turn for the worst, & when people say you can have thousands of books with you at the same time, i mean come on, we only reaaally need one (i.e. the Bible), and how much time do people actually set aside for that, than what they do for others?
yes its convenient & probably useful but who is ever going to forget the first really good totally mind-blowing book they read and set aside with a satisfied sigh?
Nobody.
its the principal of having the book physically in our hands, that we own it completely & no ebook can replace.
22. Jesse said the following at 1:08 AM on Jun 12:
If books and print ever go away in my lifetime then I'm in big trouble. The internet is fine for short articles and lunch-break stuff, but I do all of my heavy reading in print, be it Bible, books, magazines, whatever. And I'm "that guy" at work who always hits the print button for any and every important item he wants to read, even if it takes 5 times as long to go get it off the printer, just so he can read it off a sheet of paper instead of staring at the computer. (When environmentalists get upset about people using too much paper, I'm the one they're talking about.) Physical copies of things are just easier for me to organize and keep track of, though that seems counter-intuitive. And, yeah, how to you write notes on a Kindle screen?
Plus, I'd read books just to support the libraries. Getting to make the hour drive into the city on weekends to go to the library was the high point of many childhood years, and I'd feel a real sense of loss if libraries ever started going too digital or closing down or something. I never got into newspapers really, so I don't notice that loss as much, but libraries were a big part of my early life and I'd hate to see future generations be deprived of the joy of poring over shelves of books and spending all day reading.
I was one of the last people I knew to get a cell phone and I'm still holding strong against the iPod craze, so I have a proven track record of resisting fads in technology. I don't imagine getting an ebook gizmo anytime soon.
23. BAC said the following at 7:20 AM on Jun 12:
I'm in my mid-twenties and I use my computer to read a lot of articles and such, but when I comes to reading an actual book, I still love ink on paper.
I never thought I would get into ebooks, but I read them on my computer at work during downtime (which there is a lot of during the spring and summer since I work at a university) because it makes going from reading to work easier. I even started listening to audio books on my MP3 player when the radio in my car went out.
While the technology has its conveniences, I do not think that it will completely replace printed books. For one, not everyone has $300 to shell out for a gadget to read books on. Second, depending on what kind of books you read, many people don't need to store 11,000 books. I like being able to give my books away if I'm not going to re-read them and I LOVE going to used-book sales! Lastly, when it all comes down to it, the library is still free and you can't beat that with a stick!
As a sidenote, don't forget that technology can often fail and I would hate to drop my Kindle in water or have it fried by some electromagnetic pulse or any other random accident and lose all 11,000 ebooks. You don't really have to worry about that with printed books!
24. P&P said the following at 7:32 AM on Jun 12:
Two things:
1. The advent of exclusively electronic access concerns me more as a class issue than one of preference. One not only needs the money to purchase the electronic reader or computer, there are also the fees for downloading books and subscribing to journals and newspapers. Reading truly "good" material will become a privelige of the elite, not the masses.
2. It pains me to think that today elementary school children no longer get the riddle: "what's black and white and read all over?"
25. Chris said the following at 9:26 AM on Jun 12:
Publishing and Library Professional wrote:
Chris (17) wrote, "I lived through all those wonderous claims that computers would result in paperless offices, and you can see how that turned out."
Use of paper has gone ***UP!***
That was my sarcastically implied point.
And I misspelled wondrous.
26. Mike Theemling said the following at 10:12 AM on Jun 12:
"Books are the perfect technology. I'm convinced of it."
I wonder if people made the same fuss when we moved from scrolls to books.
27. Dave said the following at 10:26 AM on Jun 12:
The Future of reading: a play in six acts seems rather relevant to the discussion at hand.
I spend a lot of time in front of the computer, but I'm not ready to give up on dead trees.
28. Publishing and Library Professional said the following at 10:38 AM on Jun 12:
Chris -- I got that you were being sarcastic there; just echoing your point.
There are MORE books, MORE printouts, and MORE uses of paper (even counting Post-It notes!) than there were before the rise of the Internet.
What *has* gone down -- use of envelopes. Guess why!
I wish I could find that research but it's out there :)
29. Reads old books said the following at 2:58 PM on Jun 12:
I've wondered myself recently what the Kindle is going to do to books. I also prefer reading a real book -- I think there's something more spiritually uplifting about it. The topic caught my eye because I'm encouraged to see that others feel similarly.
Responding to #20:
Publishing and Library Professional: It sounds like you have an understanding of the legal issues with using books. Can you point me to a place where I can begin to learn what rights and restrictions I have under the law in using books (i.e. to make copies for personal use, quoting, etc.).
I'm specifically interested in the above as it relates to re-published old texts (often edited and re-set, sometimes even with translations), the originals of which have long since passed into public domain (but obviously such originals are very hard to come by!).
If you have any pointers to where I can begin I'd appreciate it a lot. Thanks!
30. Ted Slater said the following at 3:46 PM on Jun 12:
Speaking of online reading, has anyone logged onto http://www.boundless.org from their mobile device lately (iPod, iPhone, iPAQ, Blackberry)?
I've been skunkworking on a very early prototype thingy....
31. Publishing and Library Professional said the following at 4:40 PM on Jun 12:
Hey Reads:
Stanford offers some helpful info here:
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/
I also found this site from the University of Texas System that has some information that might help you:
http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/copypol2.htm
I don't think I've ever seen a nice, neat summation of all this, unfortunately :( It's a complicated issue and I don't think there's an easy rule of thumb.
Regarding re-set and translated editions: if those were published recently, they actually might be under copyright. For example: I am pretty sure that at this point the original King James Version is in the public domain. But New King James is still under copyright by its publisher, Thomas Nelson. The Bible Gateway site actually tells you how much Thomas Nelson will let you quote of that without entering copyright violation.
(BTW -- recorded works can get even screwier. There is no international copyright law, so some things might be in copyright one place, and not in another.)
As far as quoting of other text goes, you might have to check the particular style guide you're using -- APA, Chicago, etc -- to see what it considers to be a "quote" versus "a significant chunk of the original".
32. BDB said the following at 5:01 PM on Jun 12:
Wow Ted (#30) loads MUCH faster on BB than before.
33. Lisa said the following at 10:57 PM on Jun 12:
Nobody else finds it ironic that this whole conversation is happening via a digital medium?? Haha.
34. Mary said the following at 7:50 PM on Jun 13:
I have a love-hate relationship with the Kindle. I do not own one, as I do not have the money for it these days! ( and likely won't for quite some time!) I love the portability aspect of it, as you could carry SO many books with you at all times. As a student this could be invaluable, to have all textbooks available in an instant!
However, I love the physical book. I have shelves and shelves of them, and cannot resist buying more. I love to lend a book to a friend (after warning them that they must not turn down the corners of the pages or return it with a coffee ring on it etc, ...i know, i know..i'm particular about my books) I love to have a friend give back the book and know that it was enjoyed not just by me, but by someone else. After a day of staring at computer screens, tv screens, transit monitors, cell phones, ipods..it's nice to be able to look at a page, and not another electronic device.