E-books will make authors soulless, just like their product

[snopes]

They may be cheaper and more convenient, writes Andrew Keen, but ebooks do not represent meaningful cultural progress.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolog...r-product.html

[Tarquin Farquart]

I wonder if Andrew Keen thinks recorded music is soulless compared to the live version.

[Jahungo]

But what the e-reader will do is replace the physical warmth of the paper book with the coldness of the digital version.

Books are generally not physically warm, unless they're being burned.

[Tarquin Farquart]

Originally Posted by Jahungo

Books are generally not physically warm, unless they're being burned.

But they smell nice. Only old books.

[Jahungo]

Originally Posted by Tarquin Farquart

But they smell nice. Only old books.

Yeah, there's a lot to like about physical books. For that reason, and because at this point they're cheaper than ebooks (except perhaps for the most avid of readers), I don't think the demise of the paper book is imminent.

[Tarquin Farquart]

Originally Posted by Jahungo

I don't think the demise of the paper book is imminent.

Exactly, which is why I think the original article is a bit stupid.

[PallasAthena]

I wonder if the something similar was said when movable type was invented.

[dungeondragon18]

While I understand the nostalgia for physical books, and recognize that there are both advantages and disavantages to e-books, saying that e-books will make both the authors and thier works soulless is ridiculous hyperbole. The soul of the book is it's content, it's characters and stories and themes, not the physical medium the content is recorded on.

[Silas Sparkhammer]

Originally Posted by dungeondragon18

While I understand the nostalgia for physical books, and recognize that there are both advantages and disavantages to e-books, saying that e-books will make both the authors and thier works soulless is ridiculous hyperbole. The soul of the book is it's content, it's characters and stories and themes, not the physical medium the content is recorded on.

In one particular way, e-books will be *more* directly engaging: we'll have a greater ability to search for a particular passage or phrase, in order to quote it, such as in posts like this one! We'll have the ability to "bookmark" favorite scenes. We'll even be able to scribble notes in the margin -- sure, we can do that with old-fashioned paper books also -- and then search for words in those notes -- not quite as easy with a bound book!

I buy a lot of used books, and am often irritated when the previous owner has gone over the text with a highlighter. Very rarely do I find that they have highlighted passages which I consider particularly relevant! With e-books, the highlighting and other forms of gloss and rubric can be individualized. When Jack logs in and reads, he can scribble, "Bull!" in the very same places where Jill might write, "Brilliant!" Neither has to be irritated by the opinions of the other.

(My copy of Atlas Shrugged is heavily scribbled over; I would be hesitant to lend it to anyone, as it is no longer Ayn Rand's book alone, but hers and mine.)

Silas (shrugged, hell: I spat and cussed and called names!)

[JoeBentley]

From the Article:

But what the e-reader will do is replace the physical warmth of the paper book with the coldness of the digital version. And remarkably vibrant popular events like the Rio Bienal will lose their sensuousness when everything is being marketed and sold on electronic devices like the Kindle or the Sony Reader.

Right because social networking has proven unpopular on the internet

Lillian waited patiently in line for hours to get the author to sign a copy of her Azincourt. But would she have waited with such loving dedication for Cornwall to sign a copy of her digital version?

Why difference does this make? A digital book might be less of a collectible or keepsake perhaps, but its no less a book. Readers and Book Collectors aren't the same thing.

I’m not convinced the ebook represents really meaningful cultural progress for either writers or readers.

A person can publish a book on Amazon, the largest book seller on the planet, and any person in the industrialized world can buy it.

I want young women like Lillian to wait in line for me to sign copies of my work.

I think you're more worried about E-Books hurting your ego then the book industry or book culture.

[Tarquin Farquart]

Originally Posted by Silas Sparkhammer

I buy a lot of used books, and am often irritated when the previous owner has gone over the text with a highlighter. Very rarely do I find that they have highlighted passages which I consider particularly relevant!

That is the greatest thing! One of my favourite things is the dedications, which are often heart-rendering, and make you wonder why the person gave the book away.

For example:-

[ARubberChickenWithAPulley]

I think the article is stupid in general. I've had my Sony Reader for three years now (I got the first version of the Reader when it came out) and I love it. Contrary to what the OP states, I don't find any "coldness" in my reader. In fact, it's the exact opposite: the reader is a personal object of mine that I carry with me all over the place. It's been overseas with me, I took it on training missions in the Army, I carry it on airplanes -- it's as "warm" as any actual book I've owned, if not more so, because unlike a book that I read once and put down, I always have the same Reader.

All in all, it's simply another method of conveying the same information. Some people will like it, others may not. The author notes that e-books aren't "really meaningful cultural progress for either writers or readers," but I don't think anyone has ever claimed that they are supposed to be. They're just books that happen to be in a different format. It's no more "soulless" than a regular book.

So he doesn't like them. Great. There are still people who prefer vinyl to CDs or MP3s too. Nothing wrong with that either, but there's no reason to be self-righteous about it.

[mags]

Originally Posted by Silas Sparkhammer

I buy a lot of used books, and am often irritated when the previous owner has gone over the text with a highlighter.

Heh, I've been reading a mystery series from my local library. Someone who read the books prior to me is a bit of a pedant. Every time a character says "[someone] and me," there is a cross through the "me", and an "I" written above. I want to tell that person "hey, it was in a quote, people really do talk like that even if it isn't correct!"

He or she did catch a factual error in one of the books though, pointed out that the author (or possibly the editor) referred to the main character's paternal family using the last name of the main character's late husband, rather than with her maiden name.

I do think it would be a little sad to lose the "history of other readers" aspect that comes from reading a book others have also read, but I don't think it's so important to refer to e-books as soulless. Nor do I think ebooks are going to replace physical books in most cases, for a really long time.

[Steve Eisenberg]

Originally Posted by mags

Heh, I've been reading a mystery series from my local library. Someone who read the books prior to me is a bit of a pedant. Every time a character says "[someone] and me," there is a cross through the "me", and an "I" written above. . . .

I do think it would be a little sad to lose the "history of other readers" aspect that comes from reading a book others have also read, but I don't think it's so important to refer to e-books as soulless.

Maybe it's just me, but reading a library book that has been vandalized detracts from my experience.

Nor do I think ebooks are going to replace physical books in most cases, for a really long time.

If it takes ten years for 51 percent of books to be read electronically to be of eBooks, would you say that your prediction had come true, or been falsified?

Here's my prediction. We'll reach that 51 percent, excluding picture books read to children, between 2015 and 2021.

Re soulless authors, no E-book is required. See My Brother Eli.

[geminilee]

Originally Posted by Steve Eisenberg

Maybe it's just me, but reading a library book that has been vandalized detracts from my experience.

It depends. The grammar nazi would bug me, and having stuff highlighted or underlined screws with my ability to read (I sort of visually trip over it, or something), but I have seen a few interesting comments in margins that I quite liked.

[Silas Sparkhammer]

Originally Posted by Tarquin Farquart

. . . One of my favourite things is the dedications, which are often heart-rendering, and make you wonder why the person gave the book away. . . .

"To Angus: will you ever forget the bloaters?"

Silas (Angus? Bloaters?)

[Ana Ng]

Having a Kindle app means that books, which had previously been a pain in the ass for me to come by, are again part of my day. If I finish one, even at 2am, I can download something new and have it in like, three seconds.

I used to read three books a day as a kid, and I never got to read anything after my life got busier. This guy sucks.

[ARubberChickenWithAPulley]

Originally Posted by Ana Ng

Having a Kindle app means that books, which had previously been a pain in the ass for me to come by, are again part of my day. If I finish one, even at 2am, I can download something new and have it in like, three seconds.

I used to read three books a day as a kid, and I never got to read anything after my life got busier. This guy sucks.

Exactly. I buy way more books now than I did prior to owning a Reader. Probably harder on my bank account, but definitely better for me and for the authors and publishing industry. It was also a godsend when I was in the military and had to be away for months at a time with limited space to haul around books.

But you know, it's soulless and whatnot. I felt my soul being sucked away every time I turned on my Reader.

[Ana Ng]

Originally Posted by ARubberChickenWithAPulley

Exactly. I buy way more books now than I did prior to owning a Reader. Probably harder on my bank account, but definitely better for me and for the authors and publishing industry. It was also a godsend when I was in the military and had to be away for months at a time with limited space to haul around books.

You've seen the free books on Amazon, haven't you?

I buy some, but at 6.39 apiece they ain't bad. Another thing I like about the Kindle app is that I can read it in the dark so if I start passing out, I just have to lock it instead of jarring myself out of sleepiness to turn off a light. It holds my spot. I can bookmark all my favorite love scenes and reread them all without losing them of having to carry heavy stuff. No paper cuts. It's something I am really happy to have every day.

However, if I was gonna drop a couple of hundred bucks on a reader, I'd just buy a high capacity iPod touch instead of a Kindle. Is a Kindle itself $300 better at reading than the app? I can play Air Hockey on my iPhone, too. My friend just bought a Kindle but she has an iPhone already. I don't understand why she spent the extra cash when she could have spent it on prostitutes and cocaine.

I got the iPhone for work, but it's paid for itself time and time again as far as amusement goes. I only wish I shelled out the extra 8GB of space even though I don't need it now.

[Viliphied]

Re: Iphone vs. kindle. I'd imagine that it has to do with the Kindle using soft-lit electronic ink vs. the bright(er) backlighting of the IPhone. The Kindle will be much easier on the eyes, especially at night.