Kaufman links e-book trend to bookburning, Nazis

[Ankh]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

So, it is offensive to want the SAME thing in a different form?

That's not it. It is scary to think that you (as a representative of that school of thought) are a minority, and, according to my interpretation of Kaufman's article, destined for extinction, few generations from now.

Mind, my interpretation, what I got as an essence under all that verbal pyrotechnic that he used to gain attention.

[Connallmac]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

First off, I'm flagging Godwin's Law on this.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Ankh

Uhm... I've got impression that his fear was more specific, that he fears the loss of identity of "The Book" during the transformation. That one Project Gutenberg is sentenced to the irrelevance if it is forced to live in the cacophony of... not so good content that defines "The Net" as we know it.

That would suggest that the greatest works of Shakespeare are somehow brought low simply because they are on display in the same bookstore that carries issues of Maxim. He also suggests by that implication that storing multiple books in a reader, together, somehow devalues them, no matter what books they might be... my Works of Shakespeare are diminished because they share electronic space with each other, plus my collected Dickens and Lem novels.

I don't buy that, and I have a hard time believing that Kaufman can honestly believe that if he's thought it through. How many of us honestly believe the Internet is Evil, has no redeeming qualities, or should be struck down, because of some of the content it carries? I daresay not many. Kaufman seems to be one of those people. He attacks, e-books, the web and the Kindle equally as harbingers of Doom. It's an illogical, nigh-hysterical belief, based on a fear and subsequent denigration and dismissal of the unknown.

[badbob001]

He probably imagines a lost future where people use this instead of mp3 players:


So, can anyone dig up similar essays against the murdering of the soul of books by way of microfilm/microfiche?

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by Ankh

That's not it. It is scary to think that you (as a representative of that school of thought) are a minority, and, according to my interpretation of Kaufman's article, destined for extinction, few generations from now.

Mind, my interpretation, what I got as an essence under all that verbal pyrotechnic that he used to gain attention.

To me, it seemed like he cared not about the content, but rather the form, and how it is cared for now. The loss of book stores, and things of that nature. If that was not the case, why would he talk about how the brainwashed carry around kindles full of books? Everything I read, was that he cared so strongly for the form. He referred to classics that had been transfered to digital as now being soulless. The identity of something is more than just the appearance.

Now, I do worry about quality of text dropping. In our times, we've seen more of a push towards the mindless. Fewer people read, and even language skills are dropping compared with those of our parent's and grandparent's generation. So many just switched to watching TV, and look at so much of the content now available there. Not nearly as cerebral, as even that of 10 or 20 years ago. Some of my higher level classes at my university have people in them that can barely spell. When they spell words like "olryt", on things for school, it is scary. With that sort of thing is becoming more and more common, the base number of which good writers can come from is shrinking, for if people are having issues grappling with basic linguistic skills, are they capable of creating intelligent or captivating plots?

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by badbob001

So, can anyone dig up similar essays against the murdering of the soul of books by way of microfilm/microfiche?

Not sure about that (after all, microfiche readers were never a popular public-transit accessory), but there shouldn't be any problem dragging up essays about how recorded music would destroy the music industry, or how cassette tapes would destroy radio.

[Ankh]

What about the "dedicated reader" vs. "generic device" theme which frequently pops up as an subject of discussion right here, on MR?

"If I have to switch to electronic version of the content, let it be on DEDICATED reader, the device which is a proper surrogate for 'the book'"...

It is not easy to attack him, and logical dissection of his writing might be counterproductive... All that pyrotechnic is a fervent sermon, the text is religious dogma, the deity... The Book.

And "the book" is unassailable, isn't it?

[khalleron]

Originally Posted by Ankh

What about the "dedicated reader" vs. "generic device" theme which frequently pops up as an subject of discussion right here, on MR?

"If I have to switch to electronic version of the content, let it be on DEDICATED reader, the device which is a proper surrogate for 'the book'"...

It is not easy to attack him, and logical dissection of his writing might be counterproductive... All that pyrotechnic is a fervent sermon, the text is religious dogma, the deity... The Book.

And "the book" is unassailable, isn't it?

Um. Wrong. The reason people argue for dedicated readers is because, at this point in the technology, dedicated (i.e. e-ink) readers are the easiest to read. Backlit LCDs are tiring on the eyes, e-ink isn't.

If there were a multifunctional device that had the readability of e-ink, we'd all be pretty much all over it.

Nothing 'sacred' here except the content. The 'soul' of a book is the ideas it contains, not the form in which it's presented.

[mrscoach]

Can someone tell me what "book" means? Is it the words, story and content, or the actual pages bound together? To me, a book is the story, complete with words, thoughts and intent. Yes, I know one definition is 'a set of sheets bound into a volume', but I think what is written is more important.
Does it really matter what format the 'book' is delivered in? Someone still authored the story, and someone else is reading it.

[acidzebra]

Originally Posted by khalleron

If there were a multifunctional device that had the readability of e-ink, we'd all be pretty much all over it.

Not this dedicated device proponent. My smart phone (a blackberry) has the form, format, battery life, connectivity & size I prefer for the tasks and uses associated with it, my book reader ( a prs-505) has a different form, format, battery life, connectivity & size I prefer for, well, the reading of books. Ne'er the twain shall meet, unless someone comes up with a magic shape-changing transformer gadget which can take the shape of both with awesome battery life to boot. That would be sweet.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by mrscoach

Can someone tell me what "book" means? Is it the words, story and content, or the actual pages bound together? To me, a book is the story, complete with words, thoughts and intent. Yes, I know one definition is 'a set of sheets bound into a volume', but I think what is written is more important.
Does it really matter what format the 'book' is delivered in? Someone still authored the story, and someone else is reading it.

I also think it means a specific edition. It is an artifact that cannot be changed. And that is a big advantage. One thing I find annoying with Gutenberg based ebooks is that it is often impossible to see what printed edition they are based on. Often they can be based on more than one edition which I think is problematic.

I think there is a big risk that it will be impossible to say that you have read a specific edition of a book soon. Also if the insanity with DRM continues books will begin to disappear.

[Hellmark]

Going back over the article, is it just me or he seem to be a bit clueless. Saying things such as, "..warned that unless E-Book reverses their recent decision..." as if there was a single entity called E-Book that is setting prices or making decisions.

Again, he goes

One wonders why Nourrey cannot simply advise E- Book to go f**k itself and produce high-quality reasonably priced books, even if in smaller numbers.

You can't advise or have a nonentity do anything.

Google, the internet server, has...

OH MY GOD! GOOGLE IS THE INTERNET!

Thus, publishers, like the technologists who slit their throats, are producers not of books but money, while books have become simply another vehicle, along with the Washing Machine and the iPod, for generating capital.

Have book publishers, as a whole, ever cared for more than just being a business and generating money?

I know I am mostly just poking fun at him because I fail to see him really using logic (as others have pointed out), and I just think that logic should be the basis of any argument.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

Have book publishers, as a whole, ever cared for more than just being a business and generating money?

Yes, for most of publishing history they have. The current very bad attitude is rather new.

[Donnageddon]

A paper book is just an information/story delivery device. An electronic reader is in many cases a more efficient delivery device.

All else is just fetish.

[Patricia]

I rather thought that our conversions for our MR library are the direct opposite of book burning.
I'm not reducing the number of paper copies. But I'm adding to the number of ways that a book is available, and making it accessible to people who live far away from libraries, or who have sight problems and need large print etc.

It strikes me that Mr Kaufman has not thought this through.