Low Shelf Esteem: Reading 2.0
As part of this year’s Frankfurt Book Fair, I was asked by a couple of UK publications to write pieces on the future of reading and the future of book fairs. The first of the two pieces, one about reading for The Publishing News, has appeared online (and is also part of a special publication they’re handing out at the fair). The piece is called “Left on the Shelf.” Here’s an excerpt:
Everything you can see happening in the reading process is not what’s important. Because the flipping of pages, or even the back-and-forth typewriter carriage-like movement of the eyes, doesn’t necessarily mean that words are being absorbed (much less understood). Anyone can pick up a book and repeatedly pantomime these movements.
In fact, scanning machines have been invented – in order to not have to destroy the books being scanned – that cradle a book and gently turn its pages while a camera takes pictures of the words and translates them into digital sentences. But no one would say that these computers are reading.
You can read the entire story here.
4 Comments so far
Leave a reply
The future of reading was written prior to the advent of our species. The neurology, interpretation and response are embedded the hominid series. If you don’t believe me read any good book on typographic design. Try While You’re Reading by Gerard Unger, for example. Its all bionics and not given to change for another million years.
As for hard linking print and screen based reading, whatever the agenda, it not worth the effort. Both are too self referential and differently self reflexive. It would be just as senseless to try to hard link reading of clouds with reading of street signs (two specific screen and print formats).
There have been occasions when some were persuaded that the end of the world was at hand. The event proved a difficult to date. Eclipse of print, like eclipse of screen will be difficult to date as well. Neither are likely soon.
Obviously I don’t agree, but you make very good points as usual.
This new-fangled paper will never replace clay tablets as the perfect reading/writing device. Unlike paper, clay can be infinitely re-used until the author gets things right. Make a mistake–a simple stroke of the thumb and it’s erased and ready to be written anew. And consider fire–one good fire, like at the Library of Alexandria, and all of your paper/papyrus is history (in this case, literally). With clay–a fire just makes the tablet harder. Then there’s re-usability. What do you do with old paper books? You fill your house with bookcases. With clay, you can build your house out of them.
My point–each technology has its advantages and disadvantages. The cheaper, easier to use technology is likely, ultimately, to win. In the case of reading/writing, that technology is electrons, not cellulose.
Rob Preece
Publisher, www.BooksForABuck.com
Gary Frost: I think the end of the timber book may be sooner than you think. Sherman Young’s excellent book (The Book Is Dead; Long Live the Book) quotes figures for the greenhouse impact of the average book, whether it’s read or not (and we know a huge proportion of them aren’t even sold, much less read). One of a multitude of reasons Australians don’t read books any more is that status anxiety is assuaged in other ways - through possession of smart cars, art works and plasma tvs - rather than through having a quality library.
Rob Preece: I couldn’t agree more, and nicely expressed.