Sei sulla pagina 1di 7

Why Printed Books Will Never Die? At Issue: Which is better; printed books or e-books?

Josh
Cantone. Asia: Mashable, Inc, January 16, 2013.

The article Why Printed Books Will Never Die argues that printed books will never be buried
under, despite the thriving success of, electronic versions of books. The author believes that
physical (printed) versions of books will still be alive for many generations to come whilst the
continuous integration of technology in the world of literary pieces. The article is structured in an
unusual and, in my opinion, an effective manner. It first presents the arguments of those
supporting the idea that printed books will never die, and then provides the authors reasons to
agree with the idea.
The first part of the article mainly focuses on the idea that the question of why is that printed
books will never die. He stated that it would be a lot easier to manage the 5000-paged bursting
titles, that he hope to consume at some point in the future, if hed just downloaded them in an
iPad or Kindle. Adding that none of the titles are hard to find editions that would be unavailable
in digital format; and a few are recent hardcover releases, heavy and unwieldy. However, he
mentioned that theres something about print that he cant give up. That theres something about
holding a book in your hand and that the visceral act of physically turning a page, for him in his
own view, that cant be matched with pixels on the screen. Yet the writing appears to be on the
wall: E-books are slowly subsuming the printed format as the preferred vehicle on which people
read books. E-bookstopped print sales for the first time in 2011, a trend that continued into 2012.
Just this month, Bexar County, Texas announced plans for the nation's firstelectronic-only
library. A recent study from Scholastic found that the percentage of children who have read an ebook has nearly doubled since 2010 to almost half of all kids aged 9 to 17, while the number who
say they'll continue to read books in print instead of electronically declined from 66% to 58%.
For those who prefer their books printed in ink on paper, that sounds depressing. But perhaps
there is reason to hope that e-books and print books could have a bright future together, because
for all the great things e-books accomplish convenience, selection, portability, multimedia
there are still some fundamental qualities they will simply never possess.
On the body of his article, he then presented the reasons as to why printed books are still in the
running of choices to read novels. The author stated that printed books have; physical beauty,
that the sight of a book that seats on the shelf between bookends and other books gives a
different pleasure to the eye rather than seeing the digital version of the cover since one cannot
display a book in a shelf within an iPad. But for people who truly love books, print is the only
medium that will satisfy; books have provenance, he said that Pixels are temporary.,
Digital books will never unlikely ever be personal artifacts the way that their physical
counterparts will. Your favorite books define you, and digital versions don't seem to impart
connections that are quite as deep.; printed books are collectible; they possess the quality of
scarcity, which means that your copy is unique on some level. For readers who truly love a
particular book, an electronic facsimile is not an adequate replacement for owning a physical
copy; books are nostalgic, its like books are the future versions of the vinyl record. That it can
be contrasted to watching the movie version of the Les Miserables has quite a lot of difference in
watching the musical live on theater, which I find is a nice contrastive method. However, he also

stated quotes from other people that e-books are also beneficial in terms of privacy, when one in
ashamed of what he/she is reading, e-book versions may come in handy. Like, what book would
you be ashamed to read in public? Example, E.L. James' bestselling50 Shades of Grey trilogy.
This book has reached its peak of popularity when popular demand from readers that they should
produce the printed versions despite its obscene nature and genre.
I believe the topic being discussed is arguable, and just like how people cannot agree on whether
or not that technology is a positive influence on the youth; people are likely to disagree about the
continuous survival of physical books as well. I believe what is important here is to stress that
however important physical books may be, in terms of availability and other aspects that e-books
will never reach to a different height, e-books have also the right to be taken as important. Ebooks are useful, too. No matter how I love physical books, in all honesty, I still think that ebooks are not given that much of a credit since its idea, if not sometimes, is always negated. It
can be beneficial when travelling on a different place other than your local park, especially of
you have a lot to carry. That one bundle of a shelf full of books can be minimized in a one slate
of an iPad or smart phone, minus the weight. And we cant deny that printed books are costly,
like, they make a whole out of your pockets, especially if you really like the book so much that
your heart hurts with the scene of not buying it. So, e-books may come in handy. They cost less
and you can download it for free in the pirated sources, although Im not encouraging anyone to
do it. Its just helpful for those who cant afford the actual books they want to own. Besides, the
content wont change. Its just that the medium of reading would. In an e-book, one can adjust
the brightness, the fonts and the position he/she is comfortable with. I quote, E-books are not
simply a better format replacing an inferior one; they offer a wholly different experience.
I would agree with the author of the article in that I believe that printed books will never die in
the reasons that they possess characteristics that make the reader feel that, in contrast, he/she will
never experience in reading the e-book version. Otherwise, if we keep reading in the digital
versions, especially if you are a binge reader like myself and cant enough of a single chapter in
a book, we might consider an appointment to our eye doctor. The author is right when he said
that there may come a time when we look at electronic books and printed books as similarly
divergent mediums. But the choice between e-books and printed books is not a zero sum game.
Print books do not have to disappear for e-books to flourish, and e-books don't have to be the
only choice. Printed books are for people who love printed books. Digital books are for those
who love digital books," Haberlin told me. Maybe it's just that simple. Both mediums are
beneficial, its in the eyes of the beholder to judge and to weigh out the scales. No matter how
old a printed book may be, alone and lonely in the shelves, it will stay as an artifact, a singular
work of art. Therefore, it will thrive for the next generation.
REFERENCES
Josh Cantone 2013. Why Printed Books Will Never Die?
Submission date: October 15, 2016
Clarissa Orpilla

ORIGINAL ATRICLE
Why Printed Books Will Never Die

BY JOSH CATONE
JAN 16, 2013
Measured en masse, the stack of "books I want to read" that sits precariously on the edge of a
built-in bookshelf in my dining room just about eclipses 5,000 pages. The shelf is full to bursting
with titles I hope to consume at some indeterminate point in the future.
It would be a lot easier to manage if I just downloaded all those books to an iPador Kindle. None
are hard to find editions that would be unavailable in a digital format, and a few are recent
hardcover releases, heavy and unwieldy.
But there's something about print that I can't give up. There's something about holding a book in
your hand and the visceral act of physically turning a page that, for me at least, can't be matched
with pixels on a screen.
Yet the writing appears to be on the wall: E-books are slowly subsuming the printed format as
the preferred vehicle on which people read books. E-bookstopped print sales for the first time in
2011, a trend that continued into 2012. Just this month, Bexar County, Texas announced plans
for the nation's firstelectronic-only library. A recent study from Scholastic found that the
percentage of children who have read an e-book has nearly doubled since 2010 to almost half of
all kids aged 9 to 17, while the number who say they'll continue to read books in print instead of
electronically declined from 66% to 58%.
The hits keep coming.
For those who prefer their books printed in ink on paper, that sounds depressing. But perhaps
there is reason to hope that e-books and print books could have a bright future together, because
for all the great things e-books accomplish convenience, selection, portability, multimedia
there are still some fundamental qualities they will simply never possess.
Books have physical beauty.

That's not to say that electronic books can't be beautiful as a medium, e-books are still new
and designers have yet to fully realize their potential. But for paper books, we're already there.
As Craig Mod points out in his essay "Hacking the Cover," the book cover evolved as a
marketing tool. It had to grab your attention from its place on the shelf. For that reason, the best
designed covers were often beautiful art pieces. Not so in the digital world.

"The cover image may help quickly ground us, but our eyes are drawn by habit to number and
quality of reviews. Were looking for metrics other than images real metrics not artificial
marketing signifiers," he wrote. And though that might eventually free book designers to get
more creative with their designs, you can't display a digital book, even if you wanted to. Any
electronic book that boasts beautiful design, does so only ethereally.
Author Joe Queenan, in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece, argued that e-books are great for
people who care only about the contents, have vision problems or other physical limitations or
who are ashamed of what they're reading.
But for people who truly love books, print is the only medium that will satisfy.
"People who need to possess the physical copy of a book, not merely an electronic version,
believe that the objects themselves are sacred," he wrote.
"Some people may find this attitude baffling, arguing that books are merely objects that take up
space. This is true, but so are Prague and your kids and the Sistine Chapel."
"Some people may find this attitude baffling, arguing that books are merely objects that take up
space. This is true, but so are Prague and your kids and the Sistine Chapel."
Web entrepreneur, designer and novelist Jack Cheng, who recently funded the printing of his
book through Kickstarter, told me that printed books just offer a more robust experience to the
reader. "I feel like with e-books, you often just get a meal on the same white plate as all the other
meals," he mused. "But a nice hardcover is like having a place setting, having dinnerware
selected to suit the food. The story is still the main thing you're there for, but the choices around
it the paper stock, the way the book is typeset, the selection of fonts they add their own
subtle flavors to the experience of that story."
Books have provenance.

Your favorite books define you, and digital versions don't seem to impart connections that are
quite as deep.
Queenan again:
Books as physical objects matter to me, because they evoke the past. A Mtro ticket falls out of a
book I bought 40 years ago, and I am transported back to the Rue Saint-Jacques on Sept. 12,
1972, where I am waiting for someone named Annie LeCombe. A telephone message from a
friend who died too young falls out of a book, and I find myself back in the Chateau Marmont on
a balmy September day in 1995. A note I scribbled to myself in "Homage to Catalonia" in 1973
when I was in Granada reminds me to learn Spanish, which I have not yet done, and to go back
to Granada.

This piece of the experience doesn't translate to the electronic format. Someday in the distant
future, maybe David Eggers' Kindle will be sold by Bauman Rare Books on Madison Avenue,
but it's unlikely that digital books will ever be personal artifacts the way that their physical
counterparts can be.
"I think print and paper has a lasting value that people appreciate. Pixels are too temporary," said
Praveen Madan, an entrepreneur on the Kepler's 2020 team, via email. Madan and his cohorts are
attempting to reinvent the business model for independent bookstores, including ways to sell and
offer services around e-books. "Books have been around for a very long time and people have a
deeper relationship with some books than most digital content," he said.
Printed books are collectible.
They possess the quality of scarcity, which means that your copy is unique on some level. For
readers who truly love a particular book, an electronic facsimile is not an adequate replacement
for owning a physical copy.
"There are books that I need bound and sitting on my shelf. I need a copy ofFahrenheit 451. That
book is important to me," author Rob Hart, the website administrator for digital
imprint Mysterious Press and class director at LitReactor, told me. "Digital technology is funny
you own an e-book, but you don't ... You're paying for the right to access data."
Cheng has also felt the draw of books as collectible objects. "Personally I've gone out and
purchased hardcovers of books I first read on my Kindle because I wanted them in a more
tangible form," he explained.
"Having a hardcover on my shelf is like having a print by one of my favorite artists on the wall."
"Having a hardcover on my shelf is like having a print by one of my favorite artists on the wall."
He predicts that print might have a future similar to vinyl.
"The physical artifacts are beginning to feel more precious, more like gifts. And I can see
publishing going the same way," he said. "Maybe what we'll lose to digital publishing are the
cheaply produced mass market printings on poor quality paper. And what we'll gain is a new
appreciation for well-designed, higher-quality hardbacks, like the ones folks at The Folio
Society are putting out."
In a surprising flip of the traditional publishing cycle, Random House's Doubleday
recently announced plans to print hardcover versions of E.L. James' bestselling50 Shades of
Grey trilogy, even though electronic and mass market paperback editions have already sold 65
million copies. Why? Reader demand. You just can't collect an e-book.

Books are nostalgic.


The PBS website MediaShift recently asked a group of book lovers in Chapel Hill and Durham,
N.C. which they preferred: printed or electronic books? Those who preferred printed books cited
things like the smell, the feel and the weight as reasons.
"Paper books don't get replaced by e-books, because there's just part of the experience you can't
reproduce," said one man. (Of course, nostalgia is generational.)
But if e-books just replace mass market paperbacks, as Cheng predicts, will books become
merely art pieces? Some pundits think so.
Writing last year in Slate, Michael Agresta argued that printed books will only survive as art.
Books are no longer a good "vessel for text," he wrote. "Bookshelves will survive in the homes
of serious digital-age readers, but their contents will be much more judiciously curated. The next
generation of paper books will likely rival the art hanging beside them on the walls for beauty,
expense, and 'aura' for better or for worse."
In some ways, Agresta is correct. It would be smart to bet that print sales will continue to decline,
while e-book sales will continue to rise. Most people will own fewer printed books, and those
they do own may very well be beautiful collector's editions, like the 50 Shades hardcovers,
meant for display.
But it's a mistake to assume that this is a case of the MP3 replacing the CD, or the CD replacing
the cassette.
E-books are not simply a better format replacing an inferior one; they offer a wholly different
experience.
E-books are not simply a better format replacing an inferior one; they offer a wholly different
experience.
Brian Haberlin is one of the co-authors ofAnomaly, an ambitious printed graphic novel,
augmented by a smartphone app that makes animations leap off the page while you read. I asked
why he chose to print the heavy, unwieldy and expensive hardcover edition. His answer was
simple: "Because books are cool! I love print, always will. I love digital, always will. But they
will continue to be different experiences. Its a different texture, a different experience and that
alone warrants their existence."
Yes, Anomaly is one of those beautiful, collectible art pieces. But it also highlights why print is
here to stay. The experience of reading Anomaly on your iPad is vastly different than the
experience of reading the printed version. The story is the same, but the medium affects the way
you read it. It's not totally unlike the difference between watching the movie version of Les
Miserables and watching it performed live on stage.

There may come a time when we look at electronic books and printed books as similarly
divergent mediums.
In a recent Fast Company column titled "The Future of Reading," author and comedian
Baratunde Thurston made a compelling case for why books might just be better in electronic
form. Superior annotation tools, easier discovery, interactive content and shared reading
experiences are just some of the things made possible because digital publishing has allowed us
to, as Thurston put it, network our words "and the ideas they represent." For Thurston, this is an
either-or scenario. Digital books or printed books. And while he lamented our diminished
attention spans the result of distractions embedded in the digital format he concluded that
it's all worth it because of the great things e-books can do.
But the choice between e-books and printed books is not a zero sum game. Print books do not
have to disappear for e-books to flourish, and e-books don't have to be the only choice.
"Printed books are for people who love printed books. Digital books are for those who love
digital books," Haberlin told me.
Maybe it's just that simple.