By
Jackson Rohrbaugh
May 18, 2009
With the advent of reading gadgets, books may become obsolete. The Amazon Kindle, the application of the same name for the iPhone and other technologies are enabling people to read from devices without ever touching paper.
The obvious benefit is that no more paper is created to manufacture books. Countless trees have been saved since offices, schools and homes became computerized. Since Encyclopedia Brittanica lost market shares to Wikipedia, forests are no longer in threat of becoming an entry about malaria. Instead of opening an old volume to find out about rap music beefs, you can endlessly “wiki” Eminem’s mixtape feuds. You can do it greenly and guilt-free online.
Bibliophiles everywhere are wondering about the impending demise of paper and covers. Google is collecting and scanning out-of-print books en masse, and most periodicals are already online. The vast majority of printed material in English will be digitized in the next two years.
At least the things that average citizens need will be online and accessible. Most classic novels and older books are in the public domain and can be read for cheap or free on your iPhone or Kindle. My brother is paging through The Count of Monte Cristo right now. This may be my incentive to finally dig into War and Peace because I don’t see myself hauling two pounds of book everywhere I go.
Another benefit of paper’s obsolescence is that the Internet can’t be burned. If a totalitarian ruler took over our country, he or she would be hard-pressed to gather every offensive document and throw them into a bonfire.
However, is getting all data through the same channel beneficial to democracy? It’s amazing how much information is available, but if someone were to control the Internet, they’d have immense and unchecked power. In China, the government monitors a great deal of Internet activity and is often able to track down whom they consider wrongdoers — by their own standards, of course.
The value of a book is that a wealth of information is wrapped in a small package; its design is genius. You can underline it, make side notes and pass it on to a friend. Or, you can find it lying in a bus station or park bench. Turning the page is so tactile — an aromatic and storied experience. But having several hundred books in a device the size of a notepad is an advancement that has no other option but to be widely adapted.
I think in 20 years, books will be collector’s items, reminders of a time when we went to the library to research projects or sit for leisure. Now we can read Thoreau’s Walden and admire peace in nature while we listen to music, check our e-mail, text and play with our iPhone’s onboard lightsaber. We’re utterly confused, but at least we’re learning.
Reach columnist Jackson Rohrbaugh at opinion@dailyuw.com.
1 Comments
#1 Gabriel C.
on May 19, 2009 at 11:34 a.m.(Location Unknown | UW Community)
It is amazing how long myths can be perpetuated: the myth of the ‘paperless office,’ which arose in the late seventies and early eighties and has been transformed into the myth of the ‘paperless society’ is completely
inaccurate. Not only do paper documents and books still exist and perform valuable functions even in an increasingly electronic society, but very few people I have encountered are actually willing to read documents on a screen. Almost every e-reserve course reading gets printed out, quite frequently single sided and more than once per person, because now such paper copies are viewed as disposable. A library book can be read by hundreds or thousands of people before physically wearing out, but put an electronic version online and most of those people will print out a separate copy for their use. Many people print multiple drafts of their own papers for editing purposes: the ease of printing out our own documents increases our consumption of paper – not the reverse. Will tools like the Kindle change peoples’ willingness to read documents in electronic form? Perhaps eventually, but I don’t see many of them around yet.
As for the ‘green and guilt-free’ world of online searching, don’t forget that these electronic tools do have a basis and a cost in the physical world – here is an article on the carbon cost of a Google search (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology...). All of the server farms,
personal computers, and cell phones do have environmental impact – during
their manufacture and use as well as at the end of their short lifetime, since
we discard and change technologies so quickly.
As for the person you describe at the end of your editorial, reading Walden while listening to music, checking email, texting and playing with an iPhone – I agree that such people are confused, but I do not agree that they are learning. Contrary to popular opinion, I don’t feel that modern people are somehow capable of doing more activities at once and getting more out of it. Technology can be created to pump more information at us quicker and quicker, but it cannot change our innate capacities. Our attention spans are becoming so stretched and limited by attempting to multitask that all we expect now are more and more superficial interactions – with books, media, and ultimately with
each other. Resist this trend – turn off the cell phone, don’t check your
email, turn off the iPod, and read a book. Don't let the available tools shape you and your actions - select and apply them carefully. Try doing one thing at a time, and see how much more fulfilling it can be – and how much more you learn when you have time to think. If we give up on leisure in our visions for the future, what sort of future are we imagining?
Post a comment