Paper books still have an advantage

[gmw]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

You keep saying things like this as if I (or others) don't already know it. Or as if being perfectly capable of being able to distinguish between intended insult and miscommunication somehow implies "being primed to receive insult". A does not equal B. I'm not primed to receive insult. I'm perfectly capable of letting communication breakdowns slide. However... [...]

The part of my post that you snipped was reminding you that the context was my reply to another's comment that: "That's insulting, no matter the context." So while you may be able to make the distinction, apparently others cannot, or if they can will insist on taking it as an insult anyway. (As we agreed, context is everything.)

...

The conversation here is getting far too convoluted, with bits and pieces lying all over the place. I had found it quite incredible that a phrase like "real books", which seems so innocuous and inconsequential to me, worth perhaps a small scoff or cynical comment at most, can stir up such passion in others - that it might be interpreted some sort of insult no less - and trying to understand that has been the main reason for my continued participation. But it seems no more progress is likely to be made on that front.

[John F]

Originally Posted by ownedbycats

You do realize that vision loss is a spectrum and that legally blind people can sometimes still see a bit? They may be able to handle large print on an eReader but not small text of a paper book.

I'm guessing my mom (going on 90) is legaly blind, or at least she is close, and yet she still enjoys reading books. She is an avid reader now and greatly alpreciates an ereader. Hand her a pbook, and she says she'll Have to read it on her reader.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

...ebooks generally seem to be vastly more popular in the US than in Europe. In my country there is a real snobbish attitude toward ebooks, that possibly no longer exists in the US.

In the US, we are just glad to discover a person reads at all

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

I've never met a single person in my life who has been apologetic about preferring paper books. I've met more than one person who has made me feel like I should be apologetic for preferring ebooks. "Book racism" is very alive and well where I live. That's probably why I'm so vehement about the "real book" definition. I'm sick and tired of it. Book=paper is long outdated and its place is in the trash can of history.

I do have one acquaintance who is apologetic about preferring paper books since he feels, with some justification, that they are harder on the environment. OTOH, that does not stop him from purchasing and enjoying paper books.

To paraphrase ZodWallop, I'm just happy that he reads books.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

There is a well liked and popular author here who only allows his books to released on paper, no digital edition, and has said so in public.

Tolkien was like that with hardback vs. paperback and he was a fool (in that area anyway). Your author should learn from the past.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by arjaybe

Just wondering if the bible qualified as a book when it was all parchments and scrolls.

The word bible actually originated from the Greek word byblos, "Egyptian papyrus." From which the biblion, "paper, scroll" was derived. "This is perhaps from Byblos, the Phoenician port from which Egyptian papyrus was exported to Greece." I would imagine the meaning of biblios remained "paper, scrolls" until they were bound into books.

https://www.etymonline.com/word/bible

The bible, itself, wasn't compiled (and canonized) until the fourth or fifth century. The Greek word for the scriptures pre-canonization of the Bible was graphe, "scriptures." These were originally separate documents, not one book.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by gmw

The part of my post that you snipped was reminding you that the context was my reply to another's comment that:"

Because it wasn't relevant to what you were saying about MY comments.

...

Originally Posted by gmw

The conversation here is getting far too convoluted, with bits and pieces lying all over the place.

Not in my opinion. You quoted me, I addressed your assessment of my statements and quoted you in return. Easy-peasy.

Originally Posted by gmw

I had found it quite incredible that a phrase like "real books", which seems so innocuous and inconsequential to me, worth perhaps a small scoff or cynical comment at most, can stir up such passion in others - that it might be interpreted some sort of insult no less - and trying to understand that has been the main reason for my continued participation. But it seems no more progress is likely to be made on that front.

And again, you can't help yourself. "that it might be interpreted some sort of insult no less" completely dismisses 1) the possibility that it WAS an intended insult (no interpretation necessary), and 2) that I'm capable of knowing when it IS an insult.

Your entire argument seems to hinge on everyone else excepting your opinion that "real books" can't possibly be used in an intentionally insulting way.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by gmw

Being primed to receive insult means raising argument where there may not be any need. It means possibly misconstruing perfectly innocent sentences and derailing entire conversations all because of some need to exert one particular view of the world, some particular way of phrasing oneself.

Whereas failing to recognise an intended insult (if it was truly intended) typically just annoys the one sending the insult, the person on the receiving end continues in the bliss of ignorance. I don't see anything wrong with offering the benefit-of-the-doubt and interpreting "real book" in the sense that I might use it myself, it does me no harm.

Well said. We seem to live in a world where people actively try to find reasons to be offended. I don't understand why we "need" this constant strife.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

[...] And again, you can't help yourself. "that it might be interpreted some sort of insult no less" completely dismisses 1) the possibility that it WAS an intended insult (no interpretation necessary), and 2) that I'm capable of knowing when it IS an insult.

Your entire argument seems to hinge on everyone else excepting your opinion that "real books" can't possibly be used in an intentionally insulting way.

As I said: "I had found it quite incredible". I still find it so. Despite the lengthy back and forth, no explanation offered really let me understand, and until I do, of course my bewilderment is going to continue leaking out. Your 1 and 2 don't really cover WHY it is an insult for 1, and why you feel it as an insult in 2.

There's been lots of stuff you and I have disagreed about on here over the years. We've both said stuff that the other does not agree with, but I'd be appalled if you thought I was insulting you every time we disagreed. Certainly, for my part, none of it was intended as insult. So why is "real books" any different? Even if the person using the phase is suggesting ebooks are in some way fake things, such a patently false statement seems to hold no weight or impact (for me) as an insult. I am at a loss to see why it should be different for other people.

[CleanYourNibs]

Ereaders and physical books have many different advantages; I wish citing ebooks were more common so people would be less shocked by it (and so there'd be better rules for it), as one example.

That said, nobody's ever really had an issue with it, and not having to mark down page numbers is nice (just hit "find in book" if you really care where my citation comes from!), so I think my real downside is the lack of interaction with other senses. You can't feel the pages, you can't have weird folded pages (which is something that some books do—I'm reminded of VAS and House of Leaves) and honestly, I like how different books have unique smells. You can smell the age, where it came from, sometimes the leather, how it's been handled, etc.

My ereaders do not have that benefit of smelling like 100 year old paper. But in any case, I've never understood this weird "it's my way or the highway!" that so many people have in so many different fields.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by gmw

There's been lots of stuff you and I have disagreed about on here over the years. We've both said stuff that the other does not agree with, but I'd be appalled if you thought I was insulting you every time we disagreed. Certainly, for my part, none of it was intended as insult.

I've never thought you were insulting me over the years. If I had, I'd have let you know. That's another perfect example of why I prefer to let people know when I feel they've intentionally insulted me: there's no wondering.

Originally Posted by gmw

So why is "real books" any different? Even if the person using the phase is suggesting ebooks are in some way fake things, such a patently false statement seems to hold no weight or impact (for me) as an insult. I am at a loss to see why it should be different for other people.

You're making the mistake of assuming that those two words alone are capable of offending me. My conversations with people are rarely two words long. It would take a very special person to come up to me and offend me by saying "I prefer real books. Goodbye." It's through continued conversation, and multiple--and quite haughty--uses of the phrase, coupled with some sort of explicit statement that I can't be a "real reader" if I don't read "real books." Or that my penchant for ebooks is actually detrimental to the rest of the literary world. Or that enlightened people only read "real books" and would never settle for reading on a **shudder** device **shudder**.

I'm glad that you've never had the displeasure of having to deal with any of these dicks, but I have. Several times. They exist, and they intend to insult with their use of "real books". So I take offense, and let them know I feel insulted. Saves me the trouble of having to pretend they didn't insult me. Also lets friends know they should probably not invite me and those particular people to the same events. It's a win/win for all involved.

[ownedbycats]

Originally Posted by CleanYourNibs

That said, nobody's ever really had an issue with it, and not having to mark down page numbers is nice (just hit "find in book" if you really care where my citation comes from!), so I think my real downside is the lack of interaction with other senses.

I've actually borrowed from Overdrive books I already own in paper just to ctrl+f something.

[gmw]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

[...] It's through continued conversation, and multiple--and quite haughty--uses of the phrase, coupled with some sort of explicit statement that I can't be a "real reader" if I don't read "real books." Or that my penchant for ebooks is actually detrimental to the rest of the literary world. Or that enlightened people only read "real books" and would never settle for reading on a **shudder** device **shudder**. [...]

Thanks for the explanation. Sounds more schoolyard than I was expecting. I'm guessing I don't hit it because I'd probably have walked away long before it got to that.

[DiapDealer]

Fair enough. But I've had it happen in my own home before. No way I'm walking silently away from someone like that in that situation. Can't pick your friends' friends, but I can pick the ones they're allowed to bring back.

[kandwo]

It's interesting to see how different the views are based on geography alone.

Whenever I'm in Scandinavia the few people who actually do "read" (/listen) seem to mostly do so using audio book subscription services (of which there are several). If they still read text versions it's mostly in pbook form. Borrowing from the library is very popular and I think few people are aware that they also offer e-books. Either that or they just don't understand how to read them (ADE is needed and Kindle doesn't support that; Kobo and Pocketbook are available, but few people have heard of them).

Having lived in some other European countries, most people I've met think that e-reader=iPad and can't fathom how someone could read books on "a screen". The cognoscenti have heard of the Kindle - but hardly anyone I've ever met has even tried one.

I sometimes show people my phone - a Hisense A9 (with an e-ink screen) - when the topic of reading comes up. It seems to break their brains a bit, but 90% of them seem fascinated and positive to the idea of reading on such a screen