Full Version: What is the Role of Books?
One of my early mentors, Larry McMurtry, has long run a bookstore called “Booked Up.” Although McMurtry once owned branches of Booked Up in Houston and Dallas, Archer City has for some years been the only home to the operation. Apparently McMurtry had planned to close the Archer City operation, but has changed his mind.
I found the following quotation from a Fort Worth Star Telegram article interesting, though not necessarily something I would have expected McMurtry to say.
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/state/12310107.htm
Requires free regisration.
Questions for Debate:
1. Is McMurtry’s statement that book selling is becoming more a “collector’s” and less a “reader’s” business accurate?
2. What role do books play in the age of the internet?
Note: I have some thoughts on this subject, but I think I’ll hold them for now.
I found the following quotation from a Fort Worth Star Telegram article interesting, though not necessarily something I would have expected McMurtry to say.
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/state/12310107.htm
Requires free regisration.
QUOTE
McMurtry said. ‘Services like Google are taking the need of having books for information. If you want to know something about Robert E. Lee, you can just look it up on the Internet instead of buying a biography. It's becoming more of a collector's business and less of a reader's business. But that's OK. We'll see how it shakes out.’
Questions for Debate:
1. Is McMurtry’s statement that book selling is becoming more a “collector’s” and less a “reader’s” business accurate?
2. What role do books play in the age of the internet?
Note: I have some thoughts on this subject, but I think I’ll hold them for now.
1. Is McMurtry’s statement that book selling is becoming more a “collector’s” and less a “reader’s” business accurate?
I don't know anything about the bookselling business, so I have nothing to offer here.
2. What role do books play in the age of the internet?
Depends on the subject. For news and politics, the Internet beats books hands down. For recent scientific research results, the Internet again wins big.
But for understanding complicated scientific or technical issues, it's another story. I can look up a number or a protocol on the Internet, but if I need to understand what that number really means, or how that protocol is actually used, a book is better. Indeed, most programmers that I know maintain large print libraries. They look up quick programming details on the Internet ("What kinds of arguments are required for JComboBox constructors?") but if they need to get a grip on how you actually use a JComboBox, they turn to their books.
The same thing goes for science. It's fine to grab the latest research report on global warming from the Internet, but if you want the big picture, you need to read a book.
If you move away from scientific and technical information, then the value of the Internet relative to books falls quickly. History? The stuff I find on the Internet is pretty simple-minded; if I need to get in-depth information, I can find it only in books. Same story for anthropology, linguistics, paleontology, and foreign policy. In particular, I'll mention one topic on which I can say that I've pretty much covered the ground: Erasmus of Rotterdam. The stuff you can find on Erasmus on the Internet remains far below the quantity of information you can get in almost any biography of the man.
The real value of the Internet in terms of finding information is that it has made it much easier to find and purchase the books that have the information I need.
I don't know anything about the bookselling business, so I have nothing to offer here.
2. What role do books play in the age of the internet?
Depends on the subject. For news and politics, the Internet beats books hands down. For recent scientific research results, the Internet again wins big.
But for understanding complicated scientific or technical issues, it's another story. I can look up a number or a protocol on the Internet, but if I need to understand what that number really means, or how that protocol is actually used, a book is better. Indeed, most programmers that I know maintain large print libraries. They look up quick programming details on the Internet ("What kinds of arguments are required for JComboBox constructors?") but if they need to get a grip on how you actually use a JComboBox, they turn to their books.
The same thing goes for science. It's fine to grab the latest research report on global warming from the Internet, but if you want the big picture, you need to read a book.
If you move away from scientific and technical information, then the value of the Internet relative to books falls quickly. History? The stuff I find on the Internet is pretty simple-minded; if I need to get in-depth information, I can find it only in books. Same story for anthropology, linguistics, paleontology, and foreign policy. In particular, I'll mention one topic on which I can say that I've pretty much covered the ground: Erasmus of Rotterdam. The stuff you can find on Erasmus on the Internet remains far below the quantity of information you can get in almost any biography of the man.
The real value of the Internet in terms of finding information is that it has made it much easier to find and purchase the books that have the information I need.
1.Is McMurtry’s statement that book selling is becoming more a “collector’s” and less a “reader’s” business accurate?
1. ) For me personally, I prefer reading books than looking stuff up on the internet. Books always have something special: opening a new book, smelling the scent of the fresh paper, the expectations one would have by reading the first lines...
. But I can imagine that the accessiblity of information on the internet is changing the way people regard books. Even though people look up everything on the internet, they still want to have some sort of book collection. Books show other people that you are well-educated, even though maybe you didn't read half of them. It is all about image with those people. In that sense book are more a collector's item than a reading experience. 2.What role do books play in the age of the internet?
I have to agree with Erasmussimo that some detailed indept information is rather hard to find on the internet. Especially in regard with my own field of study (ancient history) it is an enormous task to find some indept, interesting information within the thousands of websites on the internet. A lot of times different website about a certain topic repeat eachother. (plagiarism abundant on the internet.
)If one want to have some specific information it is best to search for a good book regarding your subject of interest. Apart from the experience opening a new book (sort of like a treasure chest yet to be opened), processing large amounts of information is easier and more comfortable when you read a book, than reading the same text on internet. (I always get square eyes from staring to long at my computer
)Note: I have some thoughts on this subject, but I think I’ll hold them for now.
[/quote]
1. Is McMurtry’s statement that book selling is becoming more a “collector’s” and less a “reader’s” business accurate?
So far I think the traditional bookselling business is more immediately threatened by the encroachment of non-specialist retailers, such as supermarkets, stocking the best-sellers (and removing one of the biggest traffic builders for traditional bookstores); city centre bookstores are threatened by large out-of-town chains with economies of scale and the market muscle to drive up their won margins; and all types of bookstore are threatened by online booksellers taking away their trade altogether.
2.What role do books play in the age of the internet?
Well, after porno, games and news, they form one of the largest traffic drivers on the internet - Amazon.com and their ilk.
However, I think Mc Murty's case only really holds up in the narrow segment of academic or reference texts, and even here it's the kind of casual, "I want to find out specific fact X" that people are more likely to nowadays replace with a Google search. Just this morning I looked up "haemochromatosis" because my mother has just been diagnosed with a mild form.
Now, I would never have bought a specialist medical encyclopaedia just to find out what this was, nor would I likely have bought a learned treatise on the condition. Chances are I would have gone to a bookstore and browsed, or (maybe more likely) gone to my local reference library and looked it up there.
And beyond specialisms, book sales in volume terms are and have always been primarily driven by fiction, which is an area where electronic content is still in it's infancy. There is fiction on the net, but not much of it is very high quality, and has none of the portability or dip-in-and-out-ness of a tangible book.
And it's next to impossible to read some of any literary work online before you decide to buy it, the way almost everyone does in a real world bookstore by simply browsing. Even online bookstores like Amazon cannot give you this - if they could do so without risking copyright breaches they be onto a winner, I think. (Especially if they could provide hot lattes online too!)
Until such time as online content delivery methods can become as portable and accessible as books themselves (and magazines) are, I don't see that books are in any danger of obsolescence.
Even in these days of iPOD, CD sales are still reasonably healthy (though down on their heyday), because you cannot yet download music directly to your iPOD while you're out and about very easily. And you certainly can't try a track for free before you buy an album, the way you can in a record store. As yet, nobody has invented the book equivalent of an iPOD, so we're nowhere near even that stage.
The science is there - flexible single page LCD you can fold and bend - but the economics of mass production are not there yet.
I think books are going to be a readers' business for at least another ten or fifteen years. After that they may certainly become a collectors' business - Mc Murty has got the right answer but the wrong timeline, in my view.
So far I think the traditional bookselling business is more immediately threatened by the encroachment of non-specialist retailers, such as supermarkets, stocking the best-sellers (and removing one of the biggest traffic builders for traditional bookstores); city centre bookstores are threatened by large out-of-town chains with economies of scale and the market muscle to drive up their won margins; and all types of bookstore are threatened by online booksellers taking away their trade altogether.
2.What role do books play in the age of the internet?
Well, after porno, games and news, they form one of the largest traffic drivers on the internet - Amazon.com and their ilk.
However, I think Mc Murty's case only really holds up in the narrow segment of academic or reference texts, and even here it's the kind of casual, "I want to find out specific fact X" that people are more likely to nowadays replace with a Google search. Just this morning I looked up "haemochromatosis" because my mother has just been diagnosed with a mild form.
Now, I would never have bought a specialist medical encyclopaedia just to find out what this was, nor would I likely have bought a learned treatise on the condition. Chances are I would have gone to a bookstore and browsed, or (maybe more likely) gone to my local reference library and looked it up there.
And beyond specialisms, book sales in volume terms are and have always been primarily driven by fiction, which is an area where electronic content is still in it's infancy. There is fiction on the net, but not much of it is very high quality, and has none of the portability or dip-in-and-out-ness of a tangible book.
And it's next to impossible to read some of any literary work online before you decide to buy it, the way almost everyone does in a real world bookstore by simply browsing. Even online bookstores like Amazon cannot give you this - if they could do so without risking copyright breaches they be onto a winner, I think. (Especially if they could provide hot lattes online too!)
Until such time as online content delivery methods can become as portable and accessible as books themselves (and magazines) are, I don't see that books are in any danger of obsolescence.
Even in these days of iPOD, CD sales are still reasonably healthy (though down on their heyday), because you cannot yet download music directly to your iPOD while you're out and about very easily. And you certainly can't try a track for free before you buy an album, the way you can in a record store. As yet, nobody has invented the book equivalent of an iPOD, so we're nowhere near even that stage.
The science is there - flexible single page LCD you can fold and bend - but the economics of mass production are not there yet.
I think books are going to be a readers' business for at least another ten or fifteen years. After that they may certainly become a collectors' business - Mc Murty has got the right answer but the wrong timeline, in my view.
I s McMurtry’s statement that book selling is becoming more a “collector’s”
and less a “reader’s” business accurate?
The biggest change I see is the amount of information that has become available
by way of the internet. It used to be, a person would check out a book from
a library, or buy a book from a bookstore, and read it in its entirety before
going on to the next one. Nowadays, it seems that the internet has dispersed
people's attention to some degree. I'm not sure people have the discipline or
desire to commit to the time and focus of reading just one book at a time when
they can zoom around and gather bits of information.
What role do books play in the age of the internet?
The internet is harmful to books, in a way. Young internet users will not
develop the enjoyment and skill of reading (as in, sitting down and reading
an actual book) because they have grown accustomed to the visually
stimulating and mentally dispersing value of the internet. It's akin to a
video game. There's so much going on at once, that it becomes difficult
for a person to enjoy the slow pace of sitting and quietly reading a book.
The internet is good for purchasing books. For college students it is
a wonderful resource.
All in all, the internet seems to be more harmful in terms of the time
a person can waste on it. I cringe to think about all the guys who spend
hours upon hours at porn-websites
when they could be reading a good
book, instead.
and less a “reader’s” business accurate?
The biggest change I see is the amount of information that has become available
by way of the internet. It used to be, a person would check out a book from
a library, or buy a book from a bookstore, and read it in its entirety before
going on to the next one. Nowadays, it seems that the internet has dispersed
people's attention to some degree. I'm not sure people have the discipline or
desire to commit to the time and focus of reading just one book at a time when
they can zoom around and gather bits of information.
What role do books play in the age of the internet?
The internet is harmful to books, in a way. Young internet users will not
develop the enjoyment and skill of reading (as in, sitting down and reading
an actual book) because they have grown accustomed to the visually
stimulating and mentally dispersing value of the internet. It's akin to a
video game. There's so much going on at once, that it becomes difficult
for a person to enjoy the slow pace of sitting and quietly reading a book.
The internet is good for purchasing books. For college students it is
a wonderful resource.
All in all, the internet seems to be more harmful in terms of the time
a person can waste on it. I cringe to think about all the guys who spend
hours upon hours at porn-websites
when they could be reading a goodbook, instead.
Great topic BoF!
1. Is McMurtry’s statement that book selling is becoming more a “collector’s” and less a “reader’s” business accurate?
This one is a tough call. In the biography space, McMurtry may be correct. Books serving as a means of research about people may in fact be fading. The digital revolution is bittersweet in this regard but the ability to render books in electronic form will hopefully keep this as a viable medium, albeit lacking the tactile benefits of actually holding the book.
2. What role do books play in the age of the internet?
I think books still have a large role to play, but it is certainly evolving. For example, by books being coverted to electronic format you have an opportunity for unprecedented access to knowledge. Especially in rural America.
The challenge you get into is the limitation of the eletronic medium as far as your ability to "curl up" with an eBook. I've seen some reports of the availability of eletronic reading devices being far more flexible in the near future, perhaps that will help. I think this area in particular is exciting.
Books, for me at least, still hold a degree of ethos of a slightly higher caliber than that which usually gets published on the internet. Admittedly sometimes that credibility can be mitigated quickly. But books seem to have a discipline to them that writing on the net seems to lack. For me, at first glance, a book author is immediately granted greater respect/credibility for the effort (though it can be lost just as quickly if its a horrible or complely slanted work) than someone publishing a 3 page article on a reputable web site.
I think books have a far greater challenge from the interactive media realm than from the internet, though obviously both pose issues. The sensory overload that we experience on the big or little screen seems to have numbed many to the wonderful world that the unfettered imagination can create by opening a good book. Parents in particular I think are challenged to keep their children interested in reading when being competed against by the "Nintendo/Cartoon Network/MTV" generation of media. I saw an example of that this weekend in experiencing my eldest niece's aversion to reading. It made me sad to experience that, though I know people even of my generation have similar aversions so its hard to say if this is representative.
I'm not sure if the Internet is to blame for this, but I do sense that a lot of contemporary fiction has evolved into what I can only describe as "screenplay" writing. While I enjoyed the DaVinci Code, I couldn't help but note that reading it very much flowed like a screenplay. Is this issue pervasive? Its hard for me to say as I don't likely read enough fiction to be an accurate judge, but I'm hopefull it will be the exception. Maybe writing in general is due for a renaissance of sorts in response to this challenge and may inspire the generations to come to still get "lost" in a good book once in awhile. I know its something I still very much enjoy.
In the end, I don't think the internet has hurt the fictional world, but non-fiction, especially biographies, likely are being challenged by the digital revolution. I continue to buy books of both genres, however, and hopefully others do so as well. I'm not sure what the statistics look like, but the seeming continued success of the large bookstore's hopefully means people are still picking those books up to read, and not just "collect".
Doc
1. Is McMurtry’s statement that book selling is becoming more a “collector’s” and less a “reader’s” business accurate?
This one is a tough call. In the biography space, McMurtry may be correct. Books serving as a means of research about people may in fact be fading. The digital revolution is bittersweet in this regard but the ability to render books in electronic form will hopefully keep this as a viable medium, albeit lacking the tactile benefits of actually holding the book.
2. What role do books play in the age of the internet?
I think books still have a large role to play, but it is certainly evolving. For example, by books being coverted to electronic format you have an opportunity for unprecedented access to knowledge. Especially in rural America.
The challenge you get into is the limitation of the eletronic medium as far as your ability to "curl up" with an eBook. I've seen some reports of the availability of eletronic reading devices being far more flexible in the near future, perhaps that will help. I think this area in particular is exciting.
Books, for me at least, still hold a degree of ethos of a slightly higher caliber than that which usually gets published on the internet. Admittedly sometimes that credibility can be mitigated quickly. But books seem to have a discipline to them that writing on the net seems to lack. For me, at first glance, a book author is immediately granted greater respect/credibility for the effort (though it can be lost just as quickly if its a horrible or complely slanted work) than someone publishing a 3 page article on a reputable web site.
I think books have a far greater challenge from the interactive media realm than from the internet, though obviously both pose issues. The sensory overload that we experience on the big or little screen seems to have numbed many to the wonderful world that the unfettered imagination can create by opening a good book. Parents in particular I think are challenged to keep their children interested in reading when being competed against by the "Nintendo/Cartoon Network/MTV" generation of media. I saw an example of that this weekend in experiencing my eldest niece's aversion to reading. It made me sad to experience that, though I know people even of my generation have similar aversions so its hard to say if this is representative.
I'm not sure if the Internet is to blame for this, but I do sense that a lot of contemporary fiction has evolved into what I can only describe as "screenplay" writing. While I enjoyed the DaVinci Code, I couldn't help but note that reading it very much flowed like a screenplay. Is this issue pervasive? Its hard for me to say as I don't likely read enough fiction to be an accurate judge, but I'm hopefull it will be the exception. Maybe writing in general is due for a renaissance of sorts in response to this challenge and may inspire the generations to come to still get "lost" in a good book once in awhile. I know its something I still very much enjoy.
In the end, I don't think the internet has hurt the fictional world, but non-fiction, especially biographies, likely are being challenged by the digital revolution. I continue to buy books of both genres, however, and hopefully others do so as well. I'm not sure what the statistics look like, but the seeming continued success of the large bookstore's hopefully means people are still picking those books up to read, and not just "collect".
Doc
Is McMurtry’s statement that book selling is becoming more a “collector’s” and less a “reader’s” business accurate?
What role do books play in the age of the internet?
I found an interesting site that has Statistics on Books & Publishing
As I would have suspected, the largest percentage of books being purchased is in the category of fiction, and while non-fictional information is certainly more readily accessible on the internet, quality fiction is not. Additionally, as Erasmussimo pointed out, online sources often can't provide the amount of depth that a non-fiction book can provide.
According to a 2001 study by the Book Industry Study Group, the genres of books that people most frequently purchase are:
Popular Fiction 55%
Religious NonFiction 10%
Cooking/Crafts 9%
I don't see this changing anytime in the near future, because even with the presence of companies like Fictionwise and eReader, most people haven't warmed up to the idea of electronic books which is one of the primary ways that people can obtain good fiction on the web.
There are also sites like Project Gutenberg that offer public domain works without cost (Yes, I'm pimping Gutenberg...again)
I think that culturally, we have a fondness for books...the way that they smell...the tactile sensation of holding one in our hands, and I don't think that it will be an easy idea to change.
What role do books play in the age of the internet?
I found an interesting site that has Statistics on Books & Publishing
As I would have suspected, the largest percentage of books being purchased is in the category of fiction, and while non-fictional information is certainly more readily accessible on the internet, quality fiction is not. Additionally, as Erasmussimo pointed out, online sources often can't provide the amount of depth that a non-fiction book can provide.
According to a 2001 study by the Book Industry Study Group, the genres of books that people most frequently purchase are:
Popular Fiction 55%
Religious NonFiction 10%
Cooking/Crafts 9%
I don't see this changing anytime in the near future, because even with the presence of companies like Fictionwise and eReader, most people haven't warmed up to the idea of electronic books which is one of the primary ways that people can obtain good fiction on the web.
There are also sites like Project Gutenberg that offer public domain works without cost (Yes, I'm pimping Gutenberg...again)
I think that culturally, we have a fondness for books...the way that they smell...the tactile sensation of holding one in our hands, and I don't think that it will be an easy idea to change.
I think in the case of actual printed on paper books it will indded become a collectors business. For the actual test itself it will simple become digital--especially as technology allows for compact, and sturdy--most importantly ergonomically comfortable-- readers.
Just like the music industry once the publishing world gets a good look at the saving by going digital they will begin to offer good choices at fair prices--anything over a dollar is a bad deal for a digital copy.
I think this will lead to a boom of published authors--and while many if not most will be forgettable--we will see an increase in the number of really good authors and material become availible.
i would also expect to see a new form of media become the popular choice as the technology permits the creation of digitally animated or enhanced media, as well as a mix of audio--i think storytelling will become more physically engaging to the senses, incorporating all of them. this will lead I think to eventual demise of the written word as a mainstay for entertainment and information.
Just like the music industry once the publishing world gets a good look at the saving by going digital they will begin to offer good choices at fair prices--anything over a dollar is a bad deal for a digital copy.
I think this will lead to a boom of published authors--and while many if not most will be forgettable--we will see an increase in the number of really good authors and material become availible.
i would also expect to see a new form of media become the popular choice as the technology permits the creation of digitally animated or enhanced media, as well as a mix of audio--i think storytelling will become more physically engaging to the senses, incorporating all of them. this will lead I think to eventual demise of the written word as a mainstay for entertainment and information.
Let someone who was much wiser than I could ever hope to be deal with this question:
Books are not going anywhere, at least for many centuries to come. Fewer will be purchased, as there seems to be no end to the constantly skyrocketing price of paper; fewer and fewer monster best-sellers will dominate the market. But there will always be those of us who love books, in the way we can never hope to love an electronic screen.
1. The worlds of book "collectors" and book "readers" are wildly different, from my experience. I don't need a first edition, signed by the author, bound in sealskin; I'll take a tattered paperback and treasure it. Ironically, the rise of the Internet has made me more of a reader of used books than I was before. If I hear about a fairly obscure book published some years ago, my chances of finding it in a used bookstore are slim; but I am almost always able to locate a copy, usually very cheap, on the Internet. Because of this, used book stores may be going more for the "collector" market rather than the "reader" market. As far as new books go, independent bookstores are being hurt by the gigantic chain stores, not the Internet.
2. In the age of the computer, books will play the same role they have always played:
-- Emily Dickinson
QUOTE
In a 1989 address to the American Booksellers Association, Isaac Asimov described the ultimate storage device, something that "can go anywhere, is totally portable. … Something that can be started and stopped at will [and] requires no electric energy to operate." The device? The book, of course. Asimov claimed that the book "will never be surpassed because it represents the minimum technology with the maximum interactivity you can have."
Books are not going anywhere, at least for many centuries to come. Fewer will be purchased, as there seems to be no end to the constantly skyrocketing price of paper; fewer and fewer monster best-sellers will dominate the market. But there will always be those of us who love books, in the way we can never hope to love an electronic screen.
1. The worlds of book "collectors" and book "readers" are wildly different, from my experience. I don't need a first edition, signed by the author, bound in sealskin; I'll take a tattered paperback and treasure it. Ironically, the rise of the Internet has made me more of a reader of used books than I was before. If I hear about a fairly obscure book published some years ago, my chances of finding it in a used bookstore are slim; but I am almost always able to locate a copy, usually very cheap, on the Internet. Because of this, used book stores may be going more for the "collector" market rather than the "reader" market. As far as new books go, independent bookstores are being hurt by the gigantic chain stores, not the Internet.
2. In the age of the computer, books will play the same role they have always played:
QUOTE
There is no frigate like a book
To take us lands away,
Nor any coursers like a page
Of prancing poetry.
This traverse may the poorest take
Without oppress of toll;
How frugal is the chariot
That bears a human soul!
To take us lands away,
Nor any coursers like a page
Of prancing poetry.
This traverse may the poorest take
Without oppress of toll;
How frugal is the chariot
That bears a human soul!
-- Emily Dickinson
QUOTE
Doomed planet said, "The internet is harmful to books, in a way. Young internet users will not develop the enjoyment and skill of reading (as in, sitting down and reading an actual book) because they have grown accustomed to the visually stimulating and mentally dispersing value of the internet. It's akin to a
video game. There's so much going on at once, that it becomes difficult
for a person to enjoy the slow pace of sitting and quietly reading a book
.video game. There's so much going on at once, that it becomes difficult
for a person to enjoy the slow pace of sitting and quietly reading a book
Boy do I agree with this comment!
It is sad that the youth of today does not find reading books enjoyable, valuable. Reading has become a lost art. I am not saying the internet does not have value, because I believe it does. I am not saying that ALL kids don’t read. I do however find it unfortunate that television and the internet has taken over. Kids would rather watch some horrendously stupid reality T.V show or sit for hours on the internet playing games instead of reading.
I happen to be a book lover. If my husband and I argue about anything, its how much money I spend on books.
If my house caught on fire I think I'd run for my books first. 
Well maybe my family pictures..... QUOTE(christopher)
I think in the case of actual printed on paper books it will indded become a collectors business. For the actual test itself it will simple become digital--especially as technology allows for compact, and sturdy--most importantly ergonomically comfortable-- readers.
Just like the music industry once the publishing world gets a good look at the saving by going digital they will begin to offer good choices at fair prices--anything over a dollar is a bad deal for a digital copy.
Just like the music industry once the publishing world gets a good look at the saving by going digital they will begin to offer good choices at fair prices--anything over a dollar is a bad deal for a digital copy.
I agree that offering digital copies at a lesser price than printed copies is reasonable, but less than a dollar? From the Para Publishing site.
QUOTE
A successful fiction book sells 5,000 copies.
A successful nonfiction book sells 7,500 copies.
A successful nonfiction book sells 7,500 copies.
A dollar per book is just not realistic when you consider the fact that the author deserves to be paid for his/her work, and the publishing company expects to make a profit as well. They have to cover the costs of running a business...marketing a product. Books don't sell themselves without proper exposure.
QUOTE(Christopher)
i would also expect to see a new form of media become the popular choice as the technology permits the creation of digitally animated or enhanced media, as well as a mix of audio--i think storytelling will become more physically engaging to the senses, incorporating all of them. this will lead I think to eventual demise of the written word as a mainstay for entertainment and information.
Sometimes imagination is far more compelling.
I'm not saying that there's not a place for this type of media, but I don't believe that it will replace the value of the written word. Enjoying a good piece of writing has as much to do with the writer's voice as it does with the content of the book, and it also has to do with the freedom to imagine the story in your own mind's eye. I can't think of anything that could be more engaging than that, but I'm biased. I love books, and I don't mind working for a story.
In text books, the multimedia approach seems to be more plausible. The combination of visual and audio stimulation could certainly help cater to different styles of learning.
QUOTE(BoF @ Aug 6 2005, 05:07 PM)
2. What role do books play in the age of the internet?[/b]
I think they still play a pivotal role. Forgive me for not siding with the eBook trend, but I cannot bring myself to sit down at the computer for hours on end and read a book that I could comfortably rest against my knees while sitting at a more desirable location.
Books give people windows into another world, the appeal is still there to a large number of people whom, I do personally believe, love to read and simply do not collect them. Books are the real thing, flesh and blood if you will, while the eBook craze is just a manifestation of the real book. Books still provide a window into ideas that cannot be captured while sitting in front of a glowing monitor.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.