Contemplation: The Kindle and the Future of Print Text

This past weekend my friend Paivi asked me about my opinions on the Kindle, Amazon.com’s wireless reading device which, this past Friday, received significant praise from Oprah (I will withhold my opinions on Oprah and her book club from this post but it may be an eligible topic in the future).  Paivi, knowing that I am an avid book lover and work at a library, wanted to know what impact I thought the Kindle might have on print books and possible libraries.  My immediate answer to this inquiry is that, at least at the present time, the device will have little impact on either the print publishing industry or libraries.  I come to this conclusion almost exclusively based on the $359 price tag on Kindles.  For the time being I think the up front cost of Kindles will make them an item popular to those with disposable incomes and a significant interest in gadgets.  In regards to libraries I cannot really see the Kindle being a significant threat because the fact is that you still have to pay for the downloaded books on the device whereas libraries offer books to be checked out for free (well more or less, the actually cost is included in taxes).

Still, considering my conclusion at the present, I think the Kindle brings up some worthwhile thinking about the digitization of text.  The computer age in general and the Internet revolution in specific have allowed for text of all sorts to be accessed through a new source that was previously not possible.  Entire novels and other books have been placed online on websites like Project Gutenberg and Wikisource.  Most newspapers are now available electronically on their own sites and can be accessed in different ways.  Blogs number in the millions.  Oh, and let us not forget the big deal that Google announced today.  All that being said it is worth considering what the future of print text is and through which outlet books will most commonly be read in the future. 

Personally I do not think that we will see physical books disappearing anytime soon.  The publishing industry is huge and successful and likely will continue to be for a very long time.  Part of why I think this is has to do with the nature of books themselves.  The book format has been around for a very long time and it represents a very important part of human history. While computers and the Internet have definitely become a ubiquitous part of many people’s lives it is probably arguable that books are still more far reaching.  Perhaps someday most texts will be accessed via some electronic device (note I don’t say the Kindle, primarily because I think the Kindle represents just one way in which text will be accessed electronically) but this is likely still quite a long ways off.  I’d say for the time being physical print books are still pretty safe.

What about libraries?  If books do disappear in the physical form does that mean that libraries do too?  No, it just means that libraries change.  Being a library employee I am sometimes saddened that people think of libraries as only holding places for a bunch of books that can be checked out.  Yes this is obviously a big part of libraries but really they offer a lot more than that.  I think that libraries should be considered more as physical archives to information access.  Libraries are places where people are able to find information through a vast number of outlets, whether it be through a book, periodicals, or using publicly available Internet.  Computers and the Internet are already shaping important changes in libraries (online reference services, digital databases, public computer stations with whole slews of software) and will likely continue to do so.  Saying that I think it is naive to think that computers or the Internet or the digitization of texts will see the end of libraries.  Likely things may eventually change and the need of having a physical building that houses print books might not be as necessary but I assume there will be something still called a library, or at least something analogous to, that still exists to provide people with reliable information without a purchase fee.

Things do change, and there is no doubt that we are witnessing some rather impressive ones with what computers and the Internet allow us to do.  Yes texts are being digitized and this is a practice that will continue as long as computers and the Internet are relatively easy to use and access.  Still I think that we cannot forget the degree of respect that has come to surround physical books.  Many people, myself included, have a notorious habit of hording books, reluctant to toss them out or sell them.  I foresee that even if digital text becomes the dominant form in which material is read books will continue to hold a captivating quality and will still be made.  There is something philosophical about how the physical nature of paper and page seems to transcend the cold letters shining out from a screen.

But let us not forget the most important thing of all.  Whether it is lying in bed with a favorite hardcover book or sipping a latte while you browse on your Kindle, we are reading, and that, more than anything, is what needs to be encouraged, no matter how it is accomplished.

“The Stand” is 30 years old, so Mr. King gives an Interview.

“Earlier in my career, I was just excoriated by the critics. I was just drubbed unmercifully, and I think I got more of it because the books were successful, and they were just horrified because they sensed it was something that was working in the popular context. It was different than what had gone before.” ~ Stephen King

How appropriate, I am currently reading a Stephen King novel (Duma Key), I have written a couple other posts about the prolific author on this blog, and today I find this wonderful interview with him on Salon.com.

I cannot remember exactly when I read The Stand but I do remember that it was one of the longest books I had ever picked up at the time.  I devoured it.  I recall spending ling hours lost in the story.  To date I would still consider it one of my favorite King books (which, considering I like almost everything of his I’ve read might not really be saying that much).  I would really like to pick up The Stand again because, while I can remember most of the essential plot and characters, it has been quite a long time and some of the story has become hazy.  Interestingly, I just found an old copy of The Shining while I was cleaning my room this past weekend, this is another book that I really want to reread.  Especially because my view of the story has been distorted recently by watching Kubrick’s film version many times since getting it for Christmas (Kubrick’s “The Shining” is a great film but it is not credited as being very true to the novel).

I love reading interviews with authors talking about their works.

Urban Fiction

I read a really interesting article earlier today about the emergence of a relatively new genre of fiction and how it is impacting readers and libraries, especially in urban areas.  The article, titled “Urban Fiction Goes From Streets to Public Libraries” by Anne Bernard appeared in today’s issue of The New York Times and focuses on the rising popularity of a genre that is called, as you may guess from the title, Urban Fiction.  What I find most interesting about the article is the degree of controversy that can arise over a certain genre or literary style.  Urban fiction has been criticized for being overly violent and/or sexual and for romanticizing “gangster” lifestyles.  In fact many of the criticisms of urban fiction parallel those made on Rap music which is closely associate incidentally in both location and within the writing itself.

What I really find interesting is that this isn’t the first genre or literary form to be criticized in similar fashion.  Romance novels have long been looked down upon.  Until rather recently comics were not generally considered of much literary value (a topic I hope to write about in further detail at a later time).  At the same time other styles of writing, which once dominated what was literary have fallen out of popular favor.  Poetry was once the way to write, and it made up much of what people read.  The case is not quite the same today (not that people do not still read poetry, I personally love it myself, it is just not as popular as it was in the past).  

As I have written before I’m sure, I will state again that there is a certain degree and mindset of literary elitism.  It is the stance that people take saying that “this” is a work of literary worth, while “that” is quite base and low, solely intended to entertain the masses. I admit a guilt to this kind of thinking occasionally myself.  I personally have great dislike for some very successful novels such as “The Da Vinci Code” and “The Kite Runner” and have made arguments about them being of low literary worth.  At the same time I am currently in the midst of Stephen King’s “Duma Key” and considering authors who have received significant criticism for not creating works worth literary praise King is high up there.

I have tried to relax my bouts of overpowering literary elitism by taking a proactive stance of “if it is getting people to read more than it cannot really be all that bad.”  I suppose in the long run time will tell, as the scholars of literature in the years to come determine which works are worthy of continual inspection and which others disappear into the metaphorical cracks of literary history.

“Duma Key”

I started reading Stephen King’s Duma Key yesterday.  I think that is has been about two years since I last read a Stephen King novel, the last one being, if I remember correctly, Cell.  So far I am only about fifty pages into Duma Key but it seems pretty good so far and I look forward to reading some more of it during lunch today.  

I am going to go out on a limb here and say that Stephen King is probably my favorite author of all times.  I believe that i need some explanation to this though.  I will call Stephen King my favorite author because I have read and enjoyed more of his books than works by any other author.  I cannot think of a single Stephen King novel that I have read and failed to enjoy.  That being said I would not say that a Stephen King book lands as my favorite book, I still put The Brothers Karamazov at that place. What I like about Mr. King and his novels is that they are that “always enjoyable” for me.  Sure I have liked some better than others (I am a big fan of the whole Dark Tower Series, also really love Salem’s Lot and The Stand), but, as I said above, I cannot think of a story by King that I have disliked.

I think I first read Stephen King in eighth grade.  One of the assistant teachers in my class was a big Stephen King fan and she let me borrow a couple of her books (I think one of my first reads was Needful Things), from then on I myself had been converted to the ranks of a King fan.  I am not sure off the top of my head how many of King’s books I have read since eighth grade but I am sure it is a pretty good percentage of them.  

With “Duma Key” it is nice to pick up the author who I know I can just sit back and enjoy, even if the book is almost 600 pages long.  I’ll post later updates as I get further along.

Of Literary Value; Continental Consideration

While primarily I would like to use this blog to discuss specific books that I am either reading, have read, or plan to read, I feel that this is also an appropriate space for me to discuss some things of interest in the greater realm of literature as a whole.  Ideally I would like to someday go back to school for some more degrees and for a couple years now I have thought that it would be pretty great to get a PhD in some study of literature.  Any advanced degree is likely still several years away, but that is no reason for me to sacrifice thinking about literature and the studies that surround it.

That being said I point you to this AP article that appeared on CNN.com earlier today.  I encorage those who ahve interest to read the article themselves, but will sum it up by saying that it is about how Nobel Prize permanent secretary Horace Engdahl thinks that literature from the U.S. is overall lacking and that that is why most Nobel Prize winners are European (and note that I am summarizing nicely, Mr. Engdahl more specifically referred to U.S. writing as “ignorant”). 

With bold statements such as those said by Mr. Engdahl it should be no surprise that there has been some raised debate about the merit of literature on both sides of the Atlantic.  Of course there always exists debate about the merit of literature as there has to be by the very nature of the art.  How is it determined whether or not a piece of writing is one of literary worth?  Of course there are many criteria to consider and disagreement on the value of the criteria is part of the whole discussion.  If a book achieves great popularity does that automatically make it of value in the study of literature?  Does it all rely on the critics who either praise a work of writing, or scoff at it and call it dirt?  What about when the piece is read?  Just because something is considered of value today will it be tomorrow?

The thing is that the study of literature cannot truly posses an objective degree of value.  There is no universal rating that marks some writing on the level of mere amateur garbage while it lists other pieces as near divine writ.  Yet it can be agreed that some writing has had an impact of great significance and thus must indeed be of “literary value.” Consider Shakespeare, or Crevantes‘ Don Quixote, there is not much argument that these are people or stories that are considered to have quite a bit of “literary value.”

So what does it mean that a European very intimately involved in the Nobel Prize thinks poorly of American writing?  I would say it really depends on where you stand, not just in the Continental sense, but ideologically in regards to what constitutes literary worth.  Personally I think there is a good deal of writing coming out of the States, as well as out of Europe, that is worth literary priase and recogntion.  A comment that suggest that one geographic region continually creates better works of writing than another region should be regarded as exactly what it is; a completely subjective statement.  As such the offense that Mr. Engdahl may have caused some may not be due so much because he does not appreciate American literature but more so because he would so confidently assert that somehow the writings of European origin are superior without considering the absolute impossibility of there existing any objective proof of this idea.

This article made me really excited when I read it earlier today because it allows the kind of discussion that I so love in regards to literature.  I hope other people have thoughts on this.  If you do please share them with me, I’d love to hear what you think.

Fiction Goodness Graph

Having read my fair share of fantasy and science fiction I find today’s xkcd to be both very funny and also somewhat accurate.  Imagination and creativity is great but sometimes an over abundance of it can be tiring.