Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthem
Then we would agree that there exists no distraction-less piece of writing in all of human history, I assume? Operating with this understanding necessitates this view because no piece of literature is unencumbered by a container of some sort, whether physical or digital...
Overall, when you and I are speaking about the smell of a well made item (which can evince certain qualities) it appears (from your comments here and my previous comments) that we may be talking at different walls and a pursuit of mutual understanding may be strenuous, at best.
|
Yes, I'd agree (on an abstract level) that all literature comes in some kind of a package. To me as a reader, the goal is to be so absorbed by the story that the package becomes completely invisible... much like I can watch a movie without thinking about the projector or the size of the screen.
I do understand on a visceral level those who get as much enjoyment from the package as the product. I simply don't get that from paper, which (in every form I am exposed to it) is a highly-preprocessed and environmentally wasteful product, neither of which appeals to me. And as there's nothing particularly pleasurable about the feel and smell of paper in any other form (I never got a kick out of paper in school, when filling out a job form, opening a birthday card, or writing a check), I fail to see what tactile or olfactory pleasure is gained from the same type of paper just because it is used in a book.
In short, it's a fetish that I've never appreciated. So, for myself, I've never seen how it was an important part of any discussion about the practical differences between printed versus digital books. It's such a minor issue, and its discussion usually gets taken way out of proportion (much like in this thread).
So, we'll agree to disagree, and move on to other matters.