I am something of a bibliophile as well (every surface in the room I’m currently in is stacked with books, and I’m not in a library). There’s just something about fingering the edge of a page while you read, scraping your fingernail over the surface, smoothing out the page, all the little tactile tics that go into reading that you can’t replicate with an e-reader. That being said, in a recent spate of research for a school paper, the one reference I wanted to use was unavailable to me, because it was in paper form only, and not in a readily accessible library. An electronic version of it does exist, but only in universities in Germany. For pleasure reading, nothing beats ink on paper. For paper-writing and research, nothing would beat a completely electronic academic library.

Yes, electronic + paper is ideal. Electronic has the advantage of searchability plus multiple copies available; paper has the advantage that you can let people read it outside of the library without bringing up the dilemma of harm to the copyright holder or DRM.

@anonymous #20:

There’s something to be said for simple technologies, easily understood by humans, for their own sake.

This, a hundred times. Multiple media of storage provide redundancy and electronic reading requires a significant amount of technological infrastructure– more places where things can go wrong.

At any rate, I think the publishing industry certainly would do well to look at the Radiohead/NIN model; give a download code with the physical item, price the eBook understanding that it’s less ‘ownable’, and maybe even offer a basic trade paperback version -or- a hardcover collectors edition.

As an artist, writer, reader and person who owns a few rare books from finds in used book stores when I was in school I appreciate both sides of the story.

While the article focuses on collectors and readers, writers may have another version of the value of the e book, Kindle and CD.

I have recently faced the dilemma over how to publish my own first book, The Art of Seeing the Divine, Book 1- What Do You See?

Originally I thought I would go the traditional route of finding an agent and then a publisher. My book is a visual self help book with groundbreaking information. It includes a series of illustrated visual Exercise/Experiences that can actually help a person transform his or her life by changing how they see the world. That makes it notable and something to talk about for the media. I have a platform and the idea of printed books delighted me.

However, I am a recycler, and every time I take my bags and bundles of paper to the recycling station I see many discarded books.

The idea of waiting for almost two years before my book could be used by others was also problematical, as that is about the average time it takes to find an agent, then a publisher and to have the book published.

In the troubled times we are living in, I wanted to offer the book sooner since it actually can help people.

Since I know graphics and HTML I decided to go the e book route. So, About a month ago, I created a special web site for the book and published it as an e book in PDF format.

Soon I will finish the coding for Amazon’s Kindle and it will be available there also. Then I will publish a CD or of the book.

While I was researching my options I discovered that publishers expect that new authors will basically handle the publicity. While tours are set up for major authors, the average writer does this and even pays for PR themselves. This is a whole lot of the work!

That is a lot of work that the writer is not actually compensated for, except through royalties. A self published author, whether in print, CD or e book makes more of the profits on each and every sale.

A CD or e book reader can easily print out a section of pages to take along or read in the bathtub. Kindle readers travel easily and are less cumbersome than books, especially on a trip.

Since major book publisher become very interested in authors who sell many books or e books and offer better financial deals, I could find no down side to just going ahead and publishing an e bookm, a kindle edition and even a CD before I seriously think about agents or traditional publishers.

Books are nice, but being read is better!

Finally, as a recycler and person who is concerned about global warming I seriously think that we need to address the amount of trees we cut down for paper. While I need paper to draw and paint water colors, do I really need to have my books printed? This is a legitimate question as my book includes art and calibration can differ from monitor to monitor. A printed book gives one more quality control over color and contrast.

I have bought and downloaded a number of booklets and books over the web, am used to reading and writing through my computers.

Although mega bookstores seem to be overtaking book stores’ sales, Amazon and online niche retailers have also takes a chunk of the market.

I think that whether one likes it or not not only will more books be created as e books, Kindle editions, on CDs or for other electronic distribution, more writers will move away from traditional publishing also.

Certainly the world of publishing and book selling as we know it is radically changing.

Although I cherish many of my books, and always will, I know that I “own” them more in my heart and mind than I ever can otherwise, even when they are on my shelf.

Judy Rey Wasserman

I suspect what I like most about physical books is the sense that they have their own identity, that the text is linked to a physical object. I suspect that my daughter — who at less than ten years old is as much of a bookie as I am — will not grow up to consider this important.

I still own thousands of paper books, but I haven’t read a dead-tree book for several years now, once PDA screens got high-res and black-text-on-white-background enough.

I can read in the dark and, with the backlight turned right down, it’s a lot more relaxing than having a bedlamp bright enough for text, the PDA (a Palm TX) is lighter than a thin paperback, let alone a Harry Potter-sized tome, and I only have to have one hand outside the covers on cold nights!

It has a serious dictionary built-in, one touch of the screen away, not on the shelf in the next room, so I actually use it more often.

And I have an entire library that fits in my shirt pocket, for immediate access wherever and whenever I like.

Oh, and if you want to read in the bath (or in a kayak, etc.) you can put it in a sealed bag and still press the button to ‘turn the page.’ Try doing that with a dead-tree book!

Yes, there will always be people who cherish books as objects, just as there are still people who drive horse-drawn buggies for recreation, but the mainstream books-are-words crowds will use whatever technology makes the transfer of ideas from author to reader work best.

If you want to directly compare the lots-of-text reading experience I suspect this isn’t the moment. A half-decent book will be printed at upwards of 800ppi so screen resolutions do not compare.

Glad to see you here at Boing Boing, Clay. Two great tastes that taste great together!

E-books are tailor-made for Orwellian societies which like to “update” their history. OTOH, to make words on paper vanish, Big Brother will have to come to your house and tear it from your grip.

The media companies seem intent on redesigning the audio/video distribution system so that we can only borrow or rent content, not own it. Selling a CD or DVD once isn’t enough for them; ideally, what they really want is a payment every time you listen or view that stuff. If they can also take words off of paper and put them in ephemeral media, they’re one step closer to accomplishing that goal in print, too.

DEAD TREES RULE FTW

that I
a young punk
at twenty-five
Love Books

and which
wrinkled and worn
you dismiss
so easily

Forgive me
they are
beautiful
in themselves.

Minuscule size also matters a lot, as I live in a small place and am likely to have to live in an even smaller one. Most of my books will probably have to go soon (no, not Here Comes Everybody, I will keep that).

Digital is the way to go, as far as I am concerned – except for special books that I went to a lot of trouble to get and would never let go. These are mostly art books (comics to fine art). I can’t see that market disappearing in a hurry.

Primalchaos, thanks for that link – I feel so vindicated, yet at the same time I see that I need to raise my game. Mind you, there are ways to mark digital text and I use those as much as I use pencils and highlighters in hardcopy books.

I’m a big vinyl-phile myself, partly for the usual fetishization of physical objecrs reasons, but also because I understand all of the physical principles by which they operate. I understand in a very rough sense how CDs and computers work, but only through metaphors and analogy. But I could build a record player if I had to. I even built my own electric motor once.

The newspaper comparison is interesting, but it doesn’t quite work: publishers and newspapers face different competition on the internet. You’re right that newspapers had to choose between news and paper, but by choosing news, they go online in a field where there isn’t much real competition – sure there are bloggers, but they don’t have the reporting infrastructure that newspapers have so they can’t provide the same experience for readers. But publishers are in a different situation: the internet is FULL of great (and terrible) stories and essays so people who just want to read something interesting can fulfill that desire in a heartbeat. They don’t need publishing houses making stories and essays available because they already are.

So publishers probably can’t survive by taking their business online. That means that short of turning their printing presses into pants presses (sorry, couldn’t think of a better metaphor for total business retooling), their only means of survival is to make really good books.

Finally, you’re dead wrong that young people don’t love books. Maybe we hang out with different crowds, but I know many, many young people (hip young people, too – not just fuddy duddies!) who absolutely cherish books – the ideas they contain, but also the physical objects.

Personally I think there is room for both views, as in the type of model Trent Reznor went after with cheap/free mp3 downloads OR expensive, lush collector’s-item boxsets. It lets you choose your own level of ease-vs-object.

Personally I love the notion of digital content and ebooks, but I also love large format coffee-table books with beautiful pictures and high quality paper/print.

There are definitely two roads, not just an either-or.

In other words, the book is a sort of social institution that transcends the mere information it contains, and those of us who love and buy books are doing so for a very complex set of reasons.

(I’d point out that there are plenty of books I’d much rather own in hardcover, and nice editions at that.)

While people trump the advantages of e-books and online text, they ignore the disadvantages. You can use a book to relax, but using an e-book on a conventional display actually affects your ability to fall asleep. Something to do with the illumination. Purchasable E-books have nearly all of the cost of paperbacks, but none of the resale, regifting, or trading value.

When they drop the cost (both of books and portable readers) and make them able to fit in a pocket like a medium sized paperback and a pair of cargopants, then we’ll talk.

Interestingly (for an author), he doesn’t really talk about how authors survive and make money. Presumably they give their stuff away on the internet, unless they can get a publisher to make Ye Olde Codice out of it. Part of the problem is that words get cheap (like music has). Maybe an author can only survive by going on tour and selling t-shirts. But there never have been that many people who survive by book royalties alone.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north228.html

Circa 2003, so a bit outdated as far as Internet Time goes—but nonetheless interesting to contrast to the Op-Ed this post is about. The piece talks about the “Picard Syndrome,” which states that people would much rather buy print books than e-books because they perceive an added value in the physical nature of the print book.

The way for publishers to survive is to snap into the 21st century and see books as pure technology. Sell each book like it’s an ipod, and see how its design evolves.

We ought to be getting ready, at least philosophically, for mirror-quality videopaper books…it’s only a matter of time. Then, perhaps the fragrant lushness of paper books can give way to nanotech…

In the meantime, paper-based publishers need to do TWO THINGS: 1) Advance print-on-demand technology, and 2) Make it spectacularly GREEN. If they don’t, good riddance. Trees are needed elsewhere!

You have nothing to say about these works. You have nothing to make yours about them.

Some books need to be marked in, noted, self-indexed, underlined, highlighted, reflected upon, flipped through, reread, highlighted and populated with little post-it bookmarks. They need to be an eternal reference work that you had the most poignant part of creating.

These are the books worth owning as a thing, the scarred back-broken wretches of the book shelf with their lovingly cracked and weathered covers, the highlighting fluid bleeding through the pages like combat wounds. Thoreau’s Walden, Machiavelli’s the Prince, A People’s History of the United States. Owning a book like that is not just buying an object, it is creating something all your own, page by page, like knitting a intellectual sweater.

Buy these books, use them, mark in them, make sure they do not leave your hands pristine and make sure that your thoughts, as well as the authors, permeates them.

I encourage everyone to read “How To Mark Your Books”, by Mortimer J. Adler from 1940, the greatest essay you’ve never read about reading. Link