Loomings
I caught part of a story today on NPR about the Amazon Kindle and the effects the device is having on the publishing industry. The main thrust of the story was on a different topic related to the Kindle, but what I found especially interesting was the discussion about how the most dyed-in-the-wool lovers of the printed page are increasingly turning to the Kindle as their preferred choice of reading medium.
I don’t yet own a Kindle, but I’m certainly intrigued by it both as a consumer and as someone who is trying to bring a library into the “21st century.” In fact, I’m intrigued in the same way I’m interested in MP3 technology. These technologies allow for a portability of information never before possible, and their potential to mash up content breathes new life into books and music that I previously thought I would never return to again in my life.
Part of the apparent magic of the Kindle is its so-called “electronic paper.” One interviewee on the NPR story claimed that the Kindle perfectly mimics printed paper. That combined with the book-like size and heft of the Kindle so emulates the experience of traditional reading that the same interviewee said she keeps reaching up to the right-hand corner of the device to turn the page.
Much of the rest of the story was about the Kindle’s obvious effects on the publishing industry. The “will people still be reading printed books in 50 years”-type of discussion was a central theme.
I love technology and I would like to see the Kindle truly revolutionize the book industry. I have to admit that some of that enthusiasm stems from my being a bit of a tree hugger, and I hate contemplating the natural resources that are destroyed every year to create traditional books, newspapers, magazines, and other types of printed material.
But I also love books and I always will. I like that you can mark them up, and well-used copies sometimes give me a sense of companionship that I find missing in other inanimate objects. After all, I found books compelling enough to spend a lot of money on for a library degree and a lot of headache to change careers for.
And that’s where I found the slant of the story to be just a bit of a turn-off. I would like to hear more about how the publishing industry is seeking to increase the popularity and marketability of both the Kindle AND the printed book. In this particular case, squashing one technology to pump up another seems less dynamic and interesting than does leveraging the strengths of both to create a better-than-ever world of reading and of readers. But perhaps that slant doesn’t really exist, in which case I’m disappointed.
I see the Kindle and the traditional book as tools with distinct aims of purpose. I, for one, prefer having more tools at my disposal without being forced to choose one piece of gear over another. That became clear to me again the other day when I had to use a screwdriver handle for a hammer. It kind of worked, but not really.
August 5, 2009 at 3:07 pm
I have followed the Kindle story with interest and I’m not convinced about it. I do not like reading things on a screen. The convenience is intriguing but it just isn’t the same as a physical book. I think the issues with replication are interesting as well. Because of the fact that they have special coding on these e-books, they can only be downloaded once. This means you cannot move the copy you bought to your desktop or another Kindle. Fan fiction is a big subculture as well and this coding prevents fans from pursuing this sort of hobby which often drives the popularity of books series. And what about being able to share your favorite books with other people? Can’t do that with Kindle. I’m not convinced.
August 5, 2009 at 4:14 pm
Thanks, Amy. You brought up some things I hadn’t considered or didn’t know about (one-time downloading and fan fiction). I’ve never liked reading large amounts of content on a screen, either, so it makes me wonder what it’s like to try to read a whole book.
I haven’t actually looked at a Kindle yet, and I’m curious about the electronic paper technology and if it’s really that much different than reading on a regular screen. Like you, it’s hard for me to imagine using anything other than a traditional book for my pleasure reading.
I’ve also heard that advertisers can put ads in your “books” on Kindle, which can’t be anything other than obnoxious.
I can see myself eventually using a Kindle for work-related stuff, but like you, I don’t see it as a complete replacement for traditional books. I hope market demand never creates that kind of lopsided situation.
August 10, 2009 at 11:53 am
It’s also difficult to review a book on the Kindle, or to read it mindfully, as you’ll have to scroll back and forth through the pages, rather than leaving lovely bits of paper tucked inside to note references as I often do. That’s part of the tactile satisfaction I find in books that can’t be replicated by a digitally-enhanced paper screen. And how horrified would you be on vacation to find that you couldn’t read at the beach because you’d forgotten to charge up your book? Grrr.
I also love the trees and rain curses upon some of the terrible books that waste them. I’m wondering if we could eliminate the paper suck by publishing terrible books only to the Kindle. Just kidding. . . . sort of.
August 11, 2009 at 4:32 am
Christine, you bring up even more good points. Using those scraps of paper is another way in which to truly “own” a book, indeed. You made me laugh about forgetting to charge up the Kindle before hitting the beach. Pretty much as bad as forgetting to bring your real books, huh?
Yes, it would be great to be chosen as one of the select few to send the junk to the “Kindle-only” format. But who gets to decide who gets to be among the select few? I guess we would also have to find a way to be in charge of selecting the selectors.