E-books are Damaging Society

[Vasilisa]

Jonathan Franzen: e-books are damaging society
Jonathan Franzen has launched a passionate defence of the printed book, warning that our desire for the instant gratification of e-books is damaging for society.
By Anita Singh
29 Jan 2012
The Telegraph

Excerpt:
The author of Freedom and The Corrections, regarded as one of America’s greatest living novelists, said consumers had been conned into thinking that they need the latest technology.

“The technology I like is the American paperback edition of Freedom. I can spill water on it and it would still work! So it's pretty good technology. And what’s more, it will work great 10 years from now. So no wonder the capitalists hate it. It’s a bad business model,” said Franzen, who famously cuts off all connection to the internet when he is writing.

“I think, for serious readers, a sense of permanence has always been part of the experience. Everything else in your life is fluid, but here is this text that doesn’t change.

“Will there still be readers 50 years from now who feel that way? Who have that hunger for something permanent and unalterable? I don’t have a crystal ball.

“But I do fear that it’s going to be very hard to make the world work if there’s no permanence like that. That kind of radical contingency is not compatible with a system of justice or responsible self-government.”

Speaking at the Hay Festival in Cartagena, Colombia, Franzen argued that e-books, such as Amazon’s Kindle, can never have the magic of the printed page.

He said: “The Great Gatsby was last updated in 1924. You don’t need it to be refreshed, do you?

“Maybe nobody will care about printed books 50 years from now, but I do. When I read a book, I’m handling a specific object in a specific time and place. The fact that when I take the book off the shelf it still says the same thing - that’s reassuring.

“Someone worked really hard to make the language just right, just the way they wanted it. They were so sure of it that they printed it in ink, on paper. A screen always feels like we could delete that, change that, move it around. So for a literature-crazed person like me, it’s just not permanent enough.”

Franzen said he took comfort from knowing he will not be here in 50 years’ time to find out if books have become obsolete.

“I’m amused by how intent people are on making human beings immortal or at least extremely long-lived,” he joked.

“One of the consolations of dying is that [you think], ‘Well, that won’t have to be my problem’. Seriously, the world is changing so quickly that if you had any more than 80 years of change I don’t see how you could stand it psychologically.”

< click to read the article >

 

[Sniffles]

I still prefer physical books. Trying to read long texts electronically hurts my eyes, and whenever I see an interesting text online I often print it out.

Just last night I watched this video of cultural historian Peter Burke give his take on the issue, and parallels my thoughts closely:
[youtube="F7EsomTPmfw"]Burke on media[/youtube]
He starts talking about it @2:25.

 

[iwakar]

No, but plagiarism is a legit issue with the self-publication facilitated by e-books: http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53660&p=1779914#post1779914

 

[lauranna]

[MENTION=9273]Vasilisa[/MENTION] I can't decide. I mean i much prefer paperback books the old fashioned way. But for practicality and stuff, carrying around a kindle at work is far easier.

 

[Salomé]

Luddites are (miraculously) failing to damage society.

EDIT. "My definition of good technology is that I can spill water on it and it would still work!"

That's my definition of an umbrella. Or my big toe.

 

[Aquarelle]

I like physical books too, but I also own a Kindle and really like it, as well. I hardly think e-books are ruining society. I understand his comment about businesses conning people into thinking they "need" the most recent technology, and I also get that it does feed into the problematic expectation of instant gratification that is so prevalent in US society. But e-books are hardly the first example of people thinking they "need" the latest technology, nor the first symptom of the instant gratification craze. Both of those things were off and rolling before e-books ever came around.

My own feeling is that I like the Kindle for several reasons:
1. When traveling it is a GODSEND, as it seems like I'm always about to finish one book right before I leave, so I have to take at least 2 books with me. It today's world of baggage restrictions, that space is at a premium, plus, books are heavy. With the Kindle, I can bring 10 books with me if I want to, and it fits easily in my purse.
2. Reading in bed. It's much easier to hold a Kindle up than a heavy, hardback book.
3. Saving money. E-books are less expensive, and you can get most of the classics for free. I realize you can do that at the library, too, but it's so much more convenient not to have to physically go to the library. I still enjoy doing it from time to time, but this way it can stay something I do when I have time to go there and browse and relax, not just run in and run out in a hurry.

That said, I do still like physical books. What I think I will probably do now, is buy/borrow most books for Kindle, but if there is one that I really like, I can buy a "real" copy to keep in my library.

 

[INTP]

I hate reading books or articles from computer screen. Actually i hate it so much that even tho i got many books i would want to read, im not reading them..

Some articles are ok, but if they are more than few pages long it gets frustrating to read them. For some reason i cant concentrate well and even tho the text im reading is interesting, i usually stop reading after a while and move to doing something else, like hoping that there has been some useless new posts on some forums. I think most i have been able to read from pdf is around 10 pages..

 

[Stanton Moore]

I don't think ebooks are ruining anything. People's attention spans is shorter for other reasons that are only tangentially related.

 

[Aquarelle]

Trying to read long texts electronically hurts my eyes, and whenever I see an interesting text online I often print it out.

Reading long things on the computer screen hurts my eyes, too. But Kindle>>>>computer screen!

 

[ceecee]

I love physical books but I have a Nook, a Kindle Fire and an iPad. I bought the Nook first and it all hinged on if it was comfortable to use in bed. If not, I would have stopped using it. I read every night before I go to sleep. The e readers are definitely easier to use than most books. The iPad is much too big for reading, imo and I didn't get it for reading books anyway. I like the Kindle Fire a lot and find myself using it more than either of the other devices. I still buy physical books, cookbooks and things like that. E books are cheaper (usually) and since I already had an Amazon Prime account, it makes much more sense for me to buy for and use the Kindle. And it fits in my bag, I can use it anywhere, especially kids activities and traveling.

 

[So It Goes]

My brother gave me a Nook for Christmas. I've added and read so many different types of books, highlighted passages, bookmarked chapters, and converted word documents into pdf files to read. I'm reading more books than ever before, without any strain to my eyes -- but I'm reading more books at one time than I did before. I still buy and rent physical books, which I prefer much more than digital ones. There's something special about cracking open the spine of a book, peeling back the yellow pages, gripping the hard cover and sniffing the dusty old insides. Digital books are more efficient; you can re-download and erase books and build up an entire library on one reader. But I still cannot turn away from the high rows of red and yellow and blue books, piled sloppily on shelves. There's so much exploration inside a library or bookstore. I encounter authors I never knew, who died thousands of years before I was born. I stumble upon their ideas and become fixated. And the atmosphere of a bookstore is something I love; the aroma of coffee and the many people scanning the aisles and the noises of people chattering.

 

[Metamorphosis]

I think a lot of people are afraid to lose their physical books and/or don't like e-books and the change involved, so they find some way to justify why e-books are bad.

I think that the author of that article is really overreaching with the lack of permanence idea. I mean, many of the "classics" have been altered simply through translation. Plus, it's not like you can't save it in one form and not alter it. If you lose a physical book, it's gone. If you lose an e-book you have much less of a problem and greater distribution is possible.

IMO, the real problem isn't e-book vs. book...it's any kind of book vs. faster access to information. To me, reading books has the ability to change the way I think about things because I'm more heavily invested in the ideas they present and I have time to digest it and stop and think while I'm going through it. Now, though, it seems like people are more prone to just read an article or headline than an actual book on a subject because it's so much faster. Much less thinking about the concepts behind the subject and much more regurgitating summaries and ideas made by other people. Even that, however, isn't a good enough justification against the increase in technology use.

Also, I have yet to read a single e-book or by a reader but I'm sure I will eventually. I love having lots of physical books and book shelves but there is something to be said for convenience and safe keeping.

 

[Qlip]

I do love books, they are artifacts, little microcosms of the time and place they were created. But times change, and their artifacts change with them. When you buck the trend, you have pastiche.

 

[figsfiggyfigs]

I prefer the real thing. E readers are definitely handy, and really useful storage wise as well.
I had the Sony reader. piece of crap. I'm considering getting a kindle fire now.

 

[Orangey]

Oh, I hate these luddite arguments.

 

[FDG]

Completely stupid. The guy doesn't even consider some very basic pratical issues. Example: I live in Italy and I can't even find books in english, french or german in most bookshops. Ebooks (via kindle) enable me to enlarge to the n-th degree the amount of books I can read. Such reasoning can be extended to any country where 3G networks are readily available but physical books are usually translated.

 

[iwakar]

I agree with many of the previous comments. What a hysterical, this-or-that headline.

Let's just hand this author a much-needed cookie and concede that change is scary.

 

[So It Goes]

I agree with many of the previous comments. What a hysterical, this-or-that headline.

Let's just hand this author a much-needed cookie and concede that change is scary.

I'll order him a cookie off eBay.

 

[EffEmDoubleyou]

My personal preference is for physical books. I spend enough time looking at a screen without using one to read books as well. For me, the book is part of the physical experience. It's why I buy CDs. I like the tangible thing. Books never need to be charged, never break, and if you lose a book you only lose one and it's inexpensive to replace. Cookbooks especially are ill-suited to e-readers.

All that said, I'm not so sure that e-readers are damaging society. I sympathize with Franzen in that I could be described as a luddite and I think technology generally causes more problems than it solves. But I think he's reaching to find a cause to justify his unease.

 

[kelric]

My personal preference is for physical books. I spend enough time looking at a screen without using one to read books as well. For me, the book is part of the physical experience. It's why I buy CDs. I like the tangible thing. Books never need to be charged, never break, and if you lose a book you only lose one and it's inexpensive to replace.

I agree with FMW. I prefer physical books too, for all of these reasons and the reason that the book's *mine* -- to do with as I wish. I can give it to a friend, lend it, etc. without any special procedures or limitations. I'm not tied to the continual presence of a particular publisher (Amazon). If Amazon goes out of business and my device breaks, I haven't lost simple access to the last 20 years' worth of books I've bought. No worries about e-book file formats, etc. (just try to find a machine that can read a 1990-era electronic file with any formatting whatsoever -- you'd be lucky to find a system capable of handling the physical media, much less the file format -- you can pay to have information retrieved... for now, and for $$$, but that won't be the case for as long as a properly-kept paper book will last).

E-books do have their advantages -- they're easy to carry around in almost any quantity, you can download them instead of going to a bookstore (although I love bookstores), it's easier to get niche-topic or other-language books, and particularly that people who have eyesight-related issues can easily make any old e-book into a "large print" book simply by changing the font.

The author in question though, seems to be in rant-mode, though. Most of his criticisms are simply his subjective preferences, which hardly comes to the level of "damaging society".