Or, How to Get My Dander Up

“Of course, you don’t have to buy a book to read it, but the act of giving someone a book of his or her own has an undeniable, totemic power. As much as we love libraries, there is something in possessing a book that’s significantly different from borrowing it, especially for a child. You can write your name in it and keep it always. It transforms you into the kind of person who owns books, a member of the club, as well as part of a family that has them around the house. You’re no longer just a visitor to the realm of the written word: You’ve got a passport.” –Laura Miller in her Salon essay, “Book owners have smarter kids.”

I love it that I saw this quote on Beattie’s Book Blog right next to a reproduced article about e-books (written by Bachelor of Communications student Perlina Lau) which contained this:

When asked about the fears of losing the paperback, Taylor says that there are emotional attachments to paper books, but this desire to hang on is “hope rather than reality”.

“Once you get into digital, you don’t go back.”

The quote is from Martin Taylor, forum director of the Digital Publishing Forum. To me it illustrates one of the major, fundamental problems with current thinking about digital publishing and e-books – that the technology is not an addition, it is a replacement. That technology enthusiasts and reading lovers are just waiting for the magic key which will give them license to throw away their paper books and never hold another again.

I really don’t want to go on another rant (oh yeah? okay, I am) about the many misconceptions about reading and the many pronouncements about how dead paper is, but why are proponents of digital publishing still holding on to this idea that it’s one or the other? Why is this a replacement paradigm only? Why are we as readers being told that we have to choose between paper and digital – both have really obvious benefits and both have strengths over the other. I do have very strong emotional attachments to books, though this isn’t overriding my logic (or my sense of reality). If it was, I would have far more books in my house and I would have real trouble selling them – but books are still things, just incredibly efficient things that allow me to read in very pleasurable manner and often look damn good.

At the same time, please don’t underestimate this attachment, however. The very essence of what we’re talking about here is retailing. Why would retailers ignore the power of emotional drivers? As the Laura Miller quote above illustrates, the feeling of possession of a book is quite unique. It is at once intensely personal and intensely communal.  Books can be strongly coveted by those that don’t have them but at the same time they don’t represent unattainable luxury like a lot of technology, especially to those in countries with far less access (and possiblity of access) to any of this kind of technology. I have this book – I have the power to lend it, to recommend it, to sell it and to show it off to you. I have the power to give it to you freely. That power disappears in digital.

Ebooks will do other things that paper doesn’t – that’s why I will never dismiss them or suggest we don’t need/want them. An ebook reader filled with hundreds of out of copyright classics that I can just pick up and browse through, any time? Brilliant! When I can afford one I’ll be thrilled. I’ve been a longtime browser of the NZETC and the new MeBooks intiative is fantastic. There may be a lot of new releases I’ll be interested in too, particularly those I see myself reading once only. And for subscription content, for rental content – I totally agree with the possiblities of a rental system – imagine a university library where every single student can rent readings for course content at the same time, instead of the limited access of paper copies. Imagine the possibilities for education.

However, if we’re going to talk about hope and reality, the current reality for ebooks is this: as pointed out in the comments to the article, this same talk about the effect of digital over print has been going on for years – and the process is ongoing and will continue to be. The many pronouncements over the years of “the death of print” have not borne immediate fruit. Digital is far more about “hope”, currently. Hope that consumers will buy their product (and the product is not the book, it is the e-reader, because books are a proven product), hope that a particular e-reader will become dominant (for the makers that is), hope that they can work out the many issues over DRM, pricing, format, designing e-books, publisher contracts, etc.

Beattie, who now judges, reviews and blogs about books, says e-books are good for those who prefer technology to reading.

“It’s in a format that appeals to them.”

I’m going to go a little further than that. I was going to end with a mea culpa about this being a polemical rant and how maybe I’m a minority voice, etc, etc, but no. Let me end with this address to developers of digital publishing. For you it’s about technology. For us, your readers and consumers, it’s about books. Your books may not be printed but they are still books. You need to start thinking about, and understanding, readers. Not technology adopters.

Readers aren’t looking for an excuse to give paper books up.