Whachya readin' for?
Time for your Friday-morning digital book fix. I really think this struggle for control is one of the fundamental issues surrounding e-books, since this is probably where a lot of people will start getting their books from, once e-readers get their iPod equivalent. Issues of privacy & content control are huge, and because of the role books play in distributing ideas and information, they affect book publishing in ways other industries - including music - don't have to deal with as much. These issues are too important to be left to the control of private companies, much less one private company (Google).
Maybe an alternative model would be just the digital equivalent of the way libraries work now - Google, Amazon, etc, 'publish' e-books and do what it is they want to do, but then individual libraries or library systems can purchase access to, or subscribe to, whichever books or whichever database they want. There are endless possibilities as to how it could be done. This way, as a 'reader' I can download my books from Toronto Public Library, in the same way I physically pick them up now, but it's TPL who will have the record of what books I, the individual, the consumer, the patron (however you choose to classify the person) have been reading. They have this information now, but are pretty responsible with destroying it, so it's nothing new that a library would be able to keep track of what its patrons are reading. Judging by the ALA's passionate response to the US PATRIOT Act, librarians take privacy issues pretty seriously, and I'd certainly trust a public library with my reading records more than a private company.
Regardless, it's interesting to see what the Open Content Alliance has to say about the issue.
Anyway, here's the article that got this all started:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8200624.stm
More on books
I've just started reading Umberto Eco's On literature. I managed to get through about 5 pages last night before it was time to make dinner, but so far it's pretty compelling stuff. He's talking about the importance of literature and language, not just as hobbies but as serious cultural elements, and Eco has been pretty interested in technology and its role in literature for a while, so I'm curious to see what he'll have to say about that later on. I guess I'll have to wait until I've read a little more until I can comment further
Oh, and in case anyone's thinking it I'm aware of the irony of using a google-owned blog to criticize it for its monopolistic control on the spread of information, so please don't bother pointing it out.
4 comments:
just a musing that is in the same vein as this post...I was looking over my book collection the other day, and thinking about how different things would be with an all-digital book collection. The issues you bring up notwithstanding (although they are relatively serious ones), what I found to be the most grievous affront to my booky-sensibilities was the fact that there is something inherently cold in the digital representation. A digital book is just the content; just the literature. Is that insignificant? Of course not, but a physical book is so much more. I have so many books that were given as gifts, replete with penned notes from the person regaling me. To me, these books have a history. They conjure memories of people, places, feelings...all the things we garner from memories. Would I have the same feelings when I open up a digital file of a book that I bought with an Amazon.com gift card? I think not. Will I enjoy the prose, learn from it, remember it, and love it? Probably (or at least possibly), but the significance of the book itself -- the tangible, physical thing that one can hold and write an inscription in and wrap in paper and give as a gift that says as much about the person giving the gift as it does the person receiving it -- will be lost. That is not an insignificant observation, I think.
I really agree with you on this. As a person who reads for pleasure, my books aren't just content - they remind me of who gave them to me, where I bought them, where I finished them or what currency I used to buy them. If I were a scholar I could probably handle just the content (unless you're talking about book history). But I'm not, and I don’t read as a scholar. If given the choice, I'll choose which edition of a book to read depending which one smells better, or which one's pages have a better feel. Reading is about the experience, not just taking in the content.
I'm curious how much the sentimental argument will help maintain the creation of paper books. I once read (in a book!) that in the future books will be like horses – horses are no longer the most efficient way to get around, and yet they still exist, people still ride them, but for pleasure, not to get from point A to point B. I think reading will be similar - maybe practical things like textbooks will become all digital, but I don't see that happening with literature.
I’ve mentioned before that I feel like, information-wise, I’m living at the best possible moment in history – I get the conveniences of the internet and digital books should I want them, but paper books are still plentiful and regularly produced, to say nothing of used books. As excited as I do get about new technologies, when it comes to books & publishing I sometimes wish we could just freeze this moment.
Of course, being a librarian I kind of have to stay on top of issues of digital publishing, e-books, etc. But in reality I’m just a sentimental luddite at heart when it comes to books, and I picture myself shopping in used bookstores for the rest of my life, no matter what digital products are out there.
as long as they don't end up costing as much as a horse.
"dad, can I have a book for christmas?"
we'll see, honey. we'll see...
Well, you never know. I heard that Dan Brown's latest horse is selling like hotcakes! Apparently he's putting his older ones out to stud.
Post a Comment