Thursday, April 30, 2009

Kindle me this

Kindle me a fire
I have some electronic books I want burned..

Nay I say NAY on this way of reading.
Having BOOKS of paper and ink is GOOD for the environment
for books require Bookshelves, and bookstores
and bookshelves have begotten craftsmen who make them with pride, right in your hometown.
Bookstores have created small communities of book enjoyers, also known as READERS, who just might turn out to be NEIGHBORS.
Our books carry so much more than the message on the pages.
They also carry the potential of shared experience, a gift to be given,
a novel to be lent out, and then discussed at the bus stop or in the break room.

The makers of Kindle are not out to kill all that, but they could, and what would be gained?
Nothing by my accounting.
what might be lost? The possibilities are too serious for my playful brain.
When books come from machines, and the machines are controlled remotely,
then the controllers do not have to ban, collect and burn 'dangerous' books. They will KNOW who owns them, and an what "Kindles' the anti- Government or anti-war or anti choice writings are currently stored. It's a short next step to erasing or editing what you have, so that you only get to read what is for the good of "the many".

Don't buy me a Kindle for my birthday, buy me a long straight pine board. I am building more sturdy bookshelves for the tree house. where I will sit and read and sway in the breeze, turning pages made of paper that have a copyright date, and the writers full words on them, not some sanitized version approved by a central committee.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

What is there to gain? Fewer trees cut down, for starters. The environmental argument is clearly one in favor of ebooks.

But, almost as important is the fact that people can now search books -- the ability to search (instantaneously across your entire library) will allow readers to learn far more and far better than the current (previous?) method.

PI said...

I'm all for paper books especially paper backs as they are not so heavy to hold up when reading in bed. (I read lying down.)
I'm just reading 'The Shack' which wa recommended to me and wonder if you have read it.

David said...

people are prone to forgetting that cutting down of trees is a part of the natural process. They are a renewable resource. The ( expletive deleted) govt idiots use more paper than I will ever require in many years of reading.

OBTW need to be anonymous here

jel said...

i to am all for paper books! :)

phoenix said...

whoah.... conspiracy theorize much? :)

Anonymous said...

Should I be anonymous, too?
I concur with your statements and it reminds me that I want to go to the library and read the childrens book titled, "If You Give A Mouse A Cookie". It's all about cause and effect.
:)

David said...

(silly me) my last note was supposed to end: Oh by the way, NO need to be anonymous here. All points of view are appreciated. We live in a great world, and I realize my OPINION is just that.

Yes Phoenix, i was on a weirdo rant, something I let myself due instead of eating a whole bag of oatmeal cookies.

I responded to mouse cookie OFF blog

rashbre said...

The structure of the record industry changed dramatically with etunes of various types. Now there's similar moves in books.

In my work world I use eStuff all of the time now and less paper as a result. However, there are certain types of document (like when its being reviewed) which still benefit from a paper copy. Its much easier to flick through, re-arrange and so forth in a non-linear way with paper.

However, my suposition is that eBooks will progressively encroach in two ways, both as electronically readable (batteries not included) and as on demand publishing.

...and then what about magazines??