The physicality of reading. Do you pay attention to it? Does it matter to you? Is how a book feels in your hand, how it looks, smells, sounds, are these things important? Author Andrew Piper thinks they are. He thinks they are so important he wrote a book about it, Book Was There: Reading in Electronic Times. I have not read the book, my library has it on order and I have a request in for it so I will get it soonish, I hope. But while I have not read the book, I have read an essay excerpt of it.
I have mixed feelings about Piper’s argument. He argues that the physicality of the book is so tied up with the experience of reading that it cannot be separated from it. What this suggests is that reading an e-book doesn’t count as reading. Really? So what I am doing on my Kindle nearly everyday is not reading? What is it then?
Piper uses St. Augustine as an example of how the physicality of the book helped lead to his conversion. This argument I don’t buy. Piper writes as if Augustine sat under that fig tree reading from his TBR pile. Augustine’s conversion did not happen because of books in general but because of one particular book, the Bible. The fact that Augustine could own his own copy of the Bible is important, but to generalize Bible into all books is bad reasoning.
I do agree with Piper that digital texts can feel distant and insubstantial. This feeling arises from being able to turn the book off and even delete it, neither of which one can do with a paper book. But Piper takes it even further and provides examples of how digital texts are so much more fragile and ungraspable. Unfortunately, his examples are bad ones because he chooses digital texts that are not really books at all but more in the line of art.
Piper has an e-reader so he isn’t one of those people slamming e-books without even having read any. Obviously he does not like his e-reader. Pushing a button to turn a page or swiping a finger across the screen is a physical action but it is not the same as turning a page of a paper book. He talks about the resistance of buttons and declares that swiping makes “everything on the page cognitively lighter.” I have a plain e-ink Kindle so I push a button. I can’t say the slight resistance involved in button pushing affects my reading.
I am whole-heartedly with Piper in loving the physicality of the book. Heck, I own a lot of paper books and have not stopped buying them. I do like how they feel and smell, and look. I like turning the pages and the sound the paper makes when I do it. I love the thump when I drop a book on the floor or not so gently set down a pile of books. I like looking at my marker sticking out of the pages of a closed book and measuring how much I have read and how much more there is to go. I could go on and on about the things I love about paper books. But I love e-books too. I love how I can carry lots of books on my Kindle without my bag being any heavier for it. I like that I can make the font larger so I can read on the train and bus without my glasses. I like that my e-reader is so compact I can read it comfortably in crowded places. I like that I have an easel-style cover for it that allows me to prop it up on a table and read hands-free while I eat my lunch.
Both paper and e-books have their advantages, their pleasures, pains and drawbacks. I’m not sure that the physicality of a paper book automatically makes it better than an e-book. It appears I disagree with Piper’s argument, but I find it interesting enough that I want to read his book to see what he says in full. I did have to laugh though because the article is in an online magazine and Book Was There is available as an e-book. I hope Piper at least appreciates the irony in that.
The problem with approaching it as and “either, or” situation is that these things are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Does the physicality of a book matter? To me it does, A GREAT DEAL. But that is because of my own individual experience. The book as physical object is very much a part of the experience. I take great care in finding the very best copies of new books that I buy. I purchase books as much for the cover art as the book itself. I search all over when I’m thinking of buying old classic sci fi to find covers by artists I like even if the book is in a less pristine condition and I have to pay a bit more. I love the smell of books, new and old. I love the feel in my hand. I enjoy font on paper and all the little incidental data in a book that has nothing to do with the actual story. You don’t generally get that in an ebook.
That being said, reading an ebook is still every bit as much “reading” as is reading a physical book. It is just not the same “reading experience”, to my mind. Other people who don’t have that same relationship with books would not feel the same way I do and that doesn’t make them any less or any more a “real” reader than me nor does it make one way “better” than the other.
I have a basic Kindle. I’ve read one book on it. It was okay. But I’m a bells and whistles guy. I want color. I want more functionality. I don’t want a Pong version of an ereader. So I ordered a Kindle Fire HD, which coincidentally arrives tomorrow. I don’t want it to read “books”. I want it to read the various SFF magazines that are only published online. I want to see the art in these in color. I want to read regardless of light conditions. I want to be able to listen to audio books on it, access Pandora and Netfllix, etc. If I never read a “book” on it, I’d be cool with that. But my reading on it will still be “reading”. If I could get print versions of all this stuff I wouldn’t be buying a Kindle. I’d rather have the physical object. But I refuse to not have good access to all the things I want to have access to because of my own love of the book, or magazine, as physical object. Both may be slightly different reading experiences, but in the end they are still “experiences” and will leave me with lasting memories of immersion in great stories.
I agree with you that Piper seems to be on rather dodgy ground in some of what he says. I’m sure there were those who thought that the first printed books weren’t a patch on parchment- what’s a paperback in physicality compared to a superb codex? I remember reading an article where the editor of Everyman’s Library praised the look and design of the Kindle and blasted book publishers for their neglect of the beautiful physical presence a book could/should have (UK hardbacks are often very shoddy).
But I suppose my love of printed books goes back to childhood and the thrill of these beautiful and incredibly varied objects- books always just seemed to be inevitably interesting. E Books are great but I worry that they may destroy bookshops and libraries.
Ian, heh, I imagine it is an old argument recycled for every change in book technology – scrolls to codex, manuscript to print, print to digital, digital to direct brain brain hook-up? I agree with the Everyman editor, publishers get sloppy in book design in order to save on costs. Who would want to read a paper book printed on bad paper with a spine that cracks no matter how careful you are and a horrible font and overall design that looks like I designed it at home on my computer when one might have instead a digital copy and not have to deal with the ugliness? You are right about the magic of books in childhood, all the colors, the different shapes and sizes, the pictures, the way they look on a shelf and imagining what is in each of them – can’t get that with an e-book!
I remember reading a book about the Italian Renaissance in which it mentioned that some book buyers would not buy printed books because they considered them inferior to manuscripts.
Ed, oh that is priceless! Yet another example of how bookish worries get recycled when technologies change.
Carl, Thanks for your thoughtful comment! You are right, the biggest problem is the either or approach. It seems to be a frequent fault in published articles/ books about paper and digital but I suppose it serves to get people talking! I do love a well made book and you are right, the book’s construction is all part of the pleasure of a reading experience and we do select books, sometimes more than we care to admit, based on what they look like. But as you also note, it is not the only kind of reading experience. I’ve not jumped into the world of tablets yet. I hope you will talk about your experience with your Kindle Fire sometime, I will be interested to know what it is like
Yes, it is unfortunate that people take the one way or the other stance. Reading one way isn’t entirely the same as it is the other. That is a legitimate discussion to have. Even giving one’s OPINION on which one prefers can be fun. But claiming that reading on an e-reader is not reading is just plain silly.
Carl, discussing preferences and the reasons for them are always fun especially these days when there are so many options available that provide different experiences. But it is all still reading no matter what the experience.
I’m tired and I gotta go to bed BUT just wanted to pop in to say that the physicality of books is important to me too. It’s one reason why I like the kindle with the cover I have – I can hold it just like a book (unlike an iPad .. can you easily read an iPad while you are curled up on your side in bed? You can a book and a kindle pretty well.
I agree with Carl (and you I believe) that it’s not an either-or situation …
whisperinggums, my kindle feels book-like to me too even if the cover flips open at the top and not the side, it’s the size and weight of it, it feels substantial in my hand. Bookman likes to read on his kindle in bed at night because when he dozes off while reading the pages don’t turn on their own and leave him wondering where he was when he fell asleep
Yes, I do agree with Carl and you, that it is not an either/or situation. I hope you got a good night’s sleep!
I did … That’s interesting re your kindle cover. I haven’t seen one that opens like that. Mine does open to the left like a print book. Love the Bookman’s reason for liking his kindle for night-time reading!
whisperinggums, I got my cover at Amazon, it’s by M-edge and I really love it. Bookman cracks me up, sometimes he is “resting his eyes” so long his Kindle goes to sleep too!
Ah, a simpatico kindle! I like it!
Interesting comments. The problem is that the media and, to be fair, a large proportion of tecchies ARE putting this across as an either/or issue. Ebooks are supposed to be what will ultimately replace paper altogether, and I’m pretty sure the prospect of that makes some book lovers frantic and prone to exaggeration. Very similar conversations took place when the paperback was introduced – worse in some ways because they were snobby conversations about the ‘wrong’ kind of people being able to have access to literature. But we’ve been able to keep both hardbacks and paperbacks, and I know I would be sorry not to have both. So my own feeling is that while we can have both paper and ebooks, fine, they are different reading experiences. But if I were faced with the prospect of the paper book becoming obsolete because of ereaders, I’m not sure I’d take it well either!
You bring up a good point, litlove. I’ve seen conversations online over the past year where it appears that the writer is gleefully welcoming the demise of the printed book and the physical bookstore/library because this new technology is “where its at!”. That kind of attitude, coupled with legitimate excitement from those who love the convenience of ebooks and are big on the latest technology, does tend to raise the hackles from those of us who are happy to be dinosaurs, holding on to our dedication to the printed word with bloody fingers (and our toes too).
Carl, those tech evangelists like to stir up trouble and make our bookish hearts skip a beat or two! Then when we protest they call us Luddites and all kinds of other things. Well so be it. From my cold dead hands so to speak!
Litlove, yes, you are right, tech evangelists are really annoying. I am certain that they are not avid readers themselves, if they were they wouldn’t be trumpeting the end of the paper book. I didn’t know that bit about paperbacks, very interesting. Now of course we have bloggers who dare to write about the books they read and have a public opinion! When computers were introduced into the workplace weren’t we supposed to have a paperless office by now? I doubt we will have to really worry about not having paper books anymore either and should we reach a time when we do, I am going on a huge book buying spree!
I haven’t read his stuff, but I probably disagree with him too, though I am firmly in the physical book camp. I don’t read on e-devices, though for someone who has a long train/bus commute or flies a lot I can see the appeal. I love the spines, the pages, the print, and I love the feeling of holding a book in my hands while I read. BUT, in saying that e-book reading isn’t reading sounds to me too likely to slide into suggesting that audiobooks are also not books, and that therefore blind people, for example, aren’t really accessing the books in a “legitimate” way. That thought makes me shudder. I pine for a society that is so attached to reading that we are happy to admit of all types of reading – hardback, paperback, audio, e-device, and whatever comes next. (But at the same time, sometimes when I look at my physical bookshelves I get all Fahrenheit 451 style scared of people taking away my books).
Sarah, since I have an albeit short commute by bus and train I can attest that e-readers are indeed wonderful in that respect but I am not giving up my paper books! Don’t you just hate it when people take it upon themselves to tell us what “counts” as reading? You make a good point about audiobooks and the blind. it would be ridiculous to suggest that isn’t reading. I’d like very much to live in the society you pine for. It would be pretty darn near paradise I think
If there’s a question about whether ebooks are really ‘reading,’ then what about audio books? I have a hard time even saying, ‘I read….’ if I listened to the book on audio. If some of the intimacy of time with the author is missed with an ebook, I think the intimacy of the story on audio book is even greater than reading in many cases.
I personally consider listening to audio books to be ‘reading’. At least in the sense that I say I’ve ‘read’ the book whether I read it myself or listened to the narrator read it to me.
Carl, yes exactly!
Kathleen, I know what you mean about audiobooks. I don’t listen to them often but when they first came on the scene I had a hard time saying I had read the book. But I think listening is legitimate reading. When Bookman and I were newly married we used to read a book together, taking turns each night on who read aloud to the other. I had no problem saying that was reading. Audio is not different really except that it is pre-recorded. and I agree, the intimacy of an audiobook is sometimes greater than a paper book.
I have a plain e-ink Kindle too, and although I sort of wish there were an optional backlight (so I could read in the dark, although a clip-on booklight takes care of that problem), I like it a lot. I made a cover for it out of an old hardcover book, so it feels like I’m holding a book. I don’t read on it all that much — mostly I bring it when I travel (so I don’t have to lug around my big books), and sometimes if I know I’m going to have long periods of downtime during a day out I’ll stick it in my purse. I don’t prefer it to regular books; I GREATLY prefer a regular book. I like the pages, I like the cover illustrations, I like everything about regular books… but the Kindle is an acceptable fill-in when it’s just not convenient to have my big chunky hardcover with me. I do think I’d like reading magazines on a touchscreen device, but I don’t care enough to buy one.
I also agree: e-books fall in the same general category as audiobooks — you are still ‘ingesting’ the book, even if the format is not paper. It all counts. Reading is reading. If you love it, you love it no matter what.
wherethereisjoy, you are so clever to have made your own Kindle cover! I’ve tried reading the Times Literary Supplement on my kindle and I hated it because navigation was terrible and the format was bad too. Perhaps it would be better on an iPad but as you say, I don’t care enough to buy one. “Reading is reading” pretty much sums it up! Can’t get simpler than that!
I’m with you–each format has good and bad points. Why not take advantage of both? While I do prefer my paper books and like a nice sized paperback that fits nicely in the hand, the thought of dragging a hefty book like Camilla every day on the bus is sort of off-putting. Using some of the machines at the gym is also much easier when reading from my Nook. So why not have the best of both worlds. I do hate it when people stir things up and do the scare tactic thing to readers. For the short term in any case I don’t think paper books are going away.
Danielle, to every book its reader, to every format its usefulness. Dragging Camilla around with you everywhere would be a pain in more ways than one. I like how you say you have the best of both worlds. I completely agree!
I haven’t got an e-book yet. I am still debating it. I’m fascinated by what it can do and the fact it hardly weighs anything, and so many books can be stored on it. On the down side, is battery life, and I have enough problems keeping my cell phone charged. And, that I like the physicality of books. I can’t decide if I want one yet, though I do see many people reading them now on the bus, and my sister has one and loves it. I simply don’t know.
It’s an interesting discussion you have started, too. Or rather, Andrew Pyper started! Thanks for posting about it, it’s good to see all these different view points about it.
Susan, thanks for you comment! E-book battery life is greatly improved. As long as you keep the wifi turned off most of the time the battery will last you at least two weeks probably longer on the newer models. If you spend time on the bus or traveling, I can say they are really useful to have. for me, my Kindle doesn’t replace paper books but gives me an opportunity to read more and read more comfortably in places where paper books can sometimes be difficult.
I’ll probably end up both agreeing and disagreeing with Piper, I suspect. I do think the physicality of books is rather essential to my pleasure in reading (I have a Kindle, but take considerably less pleasure in reading it than I do a hardback or a good paperback . . . I’d go so far as to say I only use it when it’s most practical to do so and practical is a far cry from pleasure), but I think reading is reading whether a book or an e-book. And reading is such a privilege and a joy, the means by which we read seems less important in the end.
Inkslinger, I do love holding a book in my lap and reading and agree, it is all part of the pleasure of the experience. I like my Kindle very much, but what I enjoy about it is the convenience of it for reading on the go, reading on the device itself is not a pleasure like it is with a paper book. But as you say, reading is such a joy that in the end the means by which we read aren’t so terribly important.
Pingback: A Book Teaser « So Many Books