Decius wrote:
] inignoct wrote:
] ] [ sounds like we're both of the opinion the e' makes sense
] for
] ] reference, while diminishing the experience for pleasure
] ] reading.
]
] Well, I must say the two of you sound like old geezers waxing
] on about the time before the automobile. Paper kills trees.
] Paper decays. Paper is not dynamic. Paper is not interactive.
] Paper is heavy. Paper is expensive. Rejoice! Paper is dead!

[ Dynamism, interactivity, and cost, not to mention the marginal environmental impact (all the shit you need to make chips and whatnot kill trees, waste water, etc etc), are completely irrelevant to my enjoyment of a work of literature. I can think of no benefit technology can provide that would offset the reduction of experience. I'm not waxing sentimental about some mythical "simpler time"... I'm talking about the emotional aspects of reading... something that non-fiction readers don't and can't understand. It's not about absorbing information... it's about immersing yourself in a story. I concede in the realm of reference works, perhaps even for historical literature, in which you may find unfamiliar words or idioms... interactivity is a blessing there, where absorbing information *is* the goal.

I'll treasure my books... for all their inefficency, the subtle artistry matters to me.

In the long run, it's not like it matters... technology will continue to improve, and things will change. Impermanence is an important lesson to take to heart too... as all my cracking, yellow volumes are testament to. -k]

RE: Latest Ebook venture...