“Oh crap, you guys. We forgot New Zealand!”

And, lo, they will now ship the new Kindle to New Zealand (on August 27th). 3G and Wifi. Remember when this news might have been exciting?

Photo from Engadget.com

“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.

A short but good opinion piece in the New York Times on reading on e-readers – and the communal value of reading (something I’ve been thinking about and will be writing a post about shortly).

And, courtesy of Caustic Cover Critic, these awesome revamped promo book covers for Penguin’s 75th Anniversary from Amy Fleisher. I’m particularly fond of Frankenpenguin. I need that book buddy.

It’s a little disingenuous for e-reader and e-book manufacturers to talk about being environmentally-friendly as if it was a driving force in the e-book industry – just like the book industry, we know it isn’t. But greenwashing is alive and well everywhere, right?

One thought struck me whilst listening:

I’m not ready to give up my bookshelves.

I’m not ready to give up this crazy beauty. The tumble, the different colours, the different sizes – I don’t care how heavy it is carrying lots of books, I don’t care how much space they take up! Yes, I also like to show off my books. I like to be able to grab one whenever I can and lend it to a friend.

I can see the practical usefulness of having all your books in one place. It makes great sense. But I couldn’t give up my shelves and I couldn’t afford to buy two of everything AND the outlay for a Ipad (or similar) as well.

So I’ll be keeping my books and shelves for now – and for ever actually!

And on a reading note, I am currently reading Naming the Bones by Louise Welsh, for review, courtesy of Text Publishing. Review in a few weeks!

On a similar note there is an interesting Financial Times article on DRM and e-books.

And if you’re thoroughly sick of all that palaver, Mr Nobody is back! I’m sure I remember the original Mr Nobody book but who knows where and when I’ve seen it. And The Well Read Kitty reports on the impending release of New Zealand titles in the Popular Penguins series (yay!).

On my personal reading note I finished Wolf Hall. No more will be said until review is posted.

And I started reading The Graveyard Book by Neil Gaiman!

The Thousand Autumns of Jacob de Zoet

I rather enjoy reading opinions on e-books and e-readers from other people, mainly because a) they’re often much cleverer than I, and b) they’re in countries where these devices are actually available (on that note see Lance Wigg’s post this morning about the continuing lack of Kindle availability in NZ).

On that note then this is a great down-to-earth article from Publishing Perspectives about the practical issues of reading e-books. Digital publishing design seems to have a long way to go – at least from the point of view of the big publishing houses. They had better start listening. The potential to make digital books objects of beauty has to be huge and could be the deal-breaker for many readers (yours truly included).

Speaking of objects of beauty the cover for the new David Mitchell title, The Thousand Autumns of Jacob de Zoet, has been released… historical Japanese plot… David Mitchell… oh my….

Wait, I have two bugbears.

Okay, firstly can we please stop comparing e-readers to  CDs/Ipods/whatever and using some old chestnut argument along the lines of “can’t stop progress” for being the reason why we need e-readers? They aren’t the same thing. Here’s a very basic explanation: the model of vinyl record played on record-player, CD played on CD player, MP3 file played on MP3 player has remained a consistent model the whole way through all technological changes around playing and listening to music.

Technology has not changed this basic concept, even if it has improved on it (music becoming digital and portable). You have an object, digital or analogue, that holds the music, then you have another object that plays it to you.

This isn’t the same concept as reading. You have an object with writing, you read it. No intermediary device (digital or not) is required. Digitising books produces some new possibilities but it doesn’t introduce enough improvements on the basic concept of a book for the solo reader, and it is a huge step backward for many features (ownership, resale, lending). At least in the current way of thinking about e-readers and digitised publications.

Secondly, the news that’s coming through is taking on a lot of this form “E-reader X in negotiations with Publisher Y for content”. Disaster ahead. One of the best possibilities for e-readers is in subscription (paid or not) style content – magazines/newspapers, the podcasts of reading, if you will. If certain e-readers are locked in to certain content providers…. well done everyone, you’re basically destroying your own industry. If you want to read these newspapers – well your choice is this device. Want to read many different periodical titles? Tough luck if they’re supplying content exclusively to the device that you don’t own.

As for books – will we get to choose devices based on what publishers they have access to? Buy this device if you like Random House books but you’ll never be able to get Penguin titles on it. It’s bad enough that we currently have devices that allow you to purchase from one retailer only. How many $500PLUS devices do we get to waste money on?

I get that content has to be delivered for these devices and that agreements need to be made – but exclusivity? Doesn’t it sound like we have lots of fun times of “jailbreaking” e-readers and pirating content ahead?

I’m not entirely Luddite, I just would like to be convinced.

So ends the BookieMonster Monday Rant…

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/08/amazon-kindle-licence-orwell

The couple of comments are rather interesting reading also.

My thought? Here’s my book. I bought it, I read it, I lent it to a friend, I put it on my shelf, I read it again, I moved and took it with me, I kept it for years, I donated it to a charity. How are we improving on this experience, again?