Comments on: Nicholson Baker on the Kindle http://www.librations.us/2009/07/30/nicholson-baker-on-the-kindle/ Get here fast and then we'll take it slow. Tue, 23 Feb 2010 06:37:32 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: kdt http://www.librations.us/2009/07/30/nicholson-baker-on-the-kindle/comment-page-1/#comment-49 kdt Tue, 04 Aug 2009 12:42:37 +0000 http://www.librations.us/?p=431#comment-49 I realized recently that I'm very sensitive to format, and I've also come to better understand my very deep love of paper as one of our most enduring communication technologies. One of the reasons I don't read a lot of books these days is that I am spoiled by the books I read growing up -- only the good ones, selected by my parents or my schools to teach me something specific. It took me until I was 21 to realize that there are bad books out there, getting published all the time. The medium of bound paper is intensely personal, highly adaptable, can be readily archived (read: shelved within view of your thinking space), and has been perfected by its makers and tradesmen over centuries. Why should we expect that the Kindle, barely a toddler, could compete with that? I was raised with a great respect for books, their contents, and their shelves -- my parents are both bookish, and I grew up at the detroit public library. My dad reads 1969's encyclopaedia brittanica and I read 2009's wikipedia. We both have the same expectations for our encylopedia's content -- it will be fascinating, it will give us a glimpse into human knowledge, but it will not necessarily represent reality. The internet is my bookshelf because I have reasonable expectations for it -- that I will have to filter what I read and find my own truths. I love and admire bookish people for their ability to filter words written on a page and discover their own truths. I am internetish because I can't help but expect perfection on paper. That is the only reason I would want a Kindle -- so I could read trashy books quickly and not care if Amazon takes their bits back. I realized recently that I’m very sensitive to format, and I’ve also come to better understand my very deep love of paper as one of our most enduring communication technologies.

One of the reasons I don’t read a lot of books these days is that I am spoiled by the books I read growing up — only the good ones, selected by my parents or my schools to teach me something specific. It took me until I was 21 to realize that there are bad books out there, getting published all the time. The medium of bound paper is intensely personal, highly adaptable, can be readily archived (read: shelved within view of your thinking space), and has been perfected by its makers and tradesmen over centuries. Why should we expect that the Kindle, barely a toddler, could compete with that?

I was raised with a great respect for books, their contents, and their shelves — my parents are both bookish, and I grew up at the detroit public library. My dad reads 1969’s encyclopaedia brittanica and I read 2009’s wikipedia. We both have the same expectations for our encylopedia’s content — it will be fascinating, it will give us a glimpse into human knowledge, but it will not necessarily represent reality.

The internet is my bookshelf because I have reasonable expectations for it — that I will have to filter what I read and find my own truths. I love and admire bookish people for their ability to filter words written on a page and discover their own truths. I am internetish because I can’t help but expect perfection on paper. That is the only reason I would want a Kindle — so I could read trashy books quickly and not care if Amazon takes their bits back.

]]> By: emily http://www.librations.us/2009/07/30/nicholson-baker-on-the-kindle/comment-page-1/#comment-32 emily Fri, 31 Jul 2009 16:34:15 +0000 http://www.librations.us/?p=431#comment-32 I think you're right: What do we, as libri lovers, want from ebooks? Kindle has thus far missed a HUGE interactivity opportunity with its design: why is it grey on grey? Where are the recorded (zeebra) sounds, or the textures, or the scratch and sniff or amazing illustrations, or pop ups or font changes or all of those interactive things that printed books incorporate into their designs? This doesn't have to be seen as a replacement but an evolution of reading but Kindle and Amazon and XYZ companies aren't quite there yet. The most shocking and poignant point of this article is the sense of ownership (or lack thereof) with (the current generation of) ebooks: "A copy of a Kindle book dies with its possessor.” Wow. Another missed opportunity. The transmigratory lives of printed material is what has spread education, enlightenment and enjoyment across the globe. And a lingering question: can Kindles electrocute you if you drop them into the bathtub while you're reading? I think you’re right: What do we, as libri lovers, want from ebooks? Kindle has thus far missed a HUGE interactivity opportunity with its design: why is it grey on grey? Where are the recorded (zeebra) sounds, or the textures, or the scratch and sniff or amazing illustrations, or pop ups or font changes or all of those interactive things that printed books incorporate into their designs? This doesn’t have to be seen as a replacement but an evolution of reading but Kindle and Amazon and XYZ companies aren’t quite there yet. The most shocking and poignant point of this article is the sense of ownership (or lack thereof) with (the current generation of) ebooks: “A copy of a Kindle book dies with its possessor.” Wow. Another missed opportunity. The transmigratory lives of printed material is what has spread education, enlightenment and enjoyment across the globe.

And a lingering question: can Kindles electrocute you if you drop them into the bathtub while you’re reading?

]]> By: ben http://www.librations.us/2009/07/30/nicholson-baker-on-the-kindle/comment-page-1/#comment-31 ben Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:06:25 +0000 http://www.librations.us/?p=431#comment-31 I think these e-book readers are pretty useless in general. I can see a small market for them maybe for people who are both voracious readers and constant travellers. It seems they figured they had the technology to make them, therefore it was a good idea. I think they were trying to base their business model on the iPod, which is a flawed analogy. Lots of people like to have various music at their fingertips at a given moment, but most people don't read that way. Most read one book at a time then move to the next, rather than rotating reading single chapters of several books or something. It's also disturbing that after spending a lot of money on the device and then more on the book, you don't really own the book. Really, you own the right to access it (until Amazon decides to revoke that right, see a previous post about that). I think your point about design is very interesting, and applies to more than just books. Good design is something people really don't notice until it's missing, isn't it? I think these e-book readers are pretty useless in general. I can see a small market for them maybe for people who are both voracious readers and constant travellers. It seems they figured they had the technology to make them, therefore it was a good idea. I think they were trying to base their business model on the iPod, which is a flawed analogy. Lots of people like to have various music at their fingertips at a given moment, but most people don’t read that way. Most read one book at a time then move to the next, rather than rotating reading single chapters of several books or something. It’s also disturbing that after spending a lot of money on the device and then more on the book, you don’t really own the book. Really, you own the right to access it (until Amazon decides to revoke that right, see a previous post about that).

I think your point about design is very interesting, and applies to more than just books. Good design is something people really don’t notice until it’s missing, isn’t it?

]]>