- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (8/20)
- Next Post »Free Stuff Fridays
Books & E-Books, Media & Messages
- 08/20/10
- 40
On Tuesday I offered you 5 Reasons Books are Better Than E-Books and on Wednesday 5 Reasons E-Books Are Better Than Books. Today I want to tie up those two posts with a few thoughts on why we need to be very, very careful about moving from the book to the e-book.
Media and Messages
Anyone who studies media or technology must run into Marshall McLuhan and Neil Postman. These two men were leaders in the field with McLuhan being the teacher and Postman the disciple. If there is anything we have learned from these men it is summed up in McLuhan’s little phrase, “the medium is the message.” What McLuhan sought to show people is that every medium, whether book or television or computer, carries within it some kind of ideology, some kind of idea. He wanted people to see that this, this ideology, is often as important or perhaps even more important than the message the media conveys. Such ideologies predispose us to see and understand the world in one way rather than another. So the content of a news program may be less important than the subtle messages fed to us by the medium of television (which might be that pictures convey truth better than words or that immediacy is virtuous or that information itself, without context or analysis, is inherently good).
While I do not fully follow either McLuhan or Postman, I do think they were correct in this point. There is more to a book than the words it contains; the medium itself is important since it coveys certain truths, certain messages of its own. There is more to a television, more to a computer than the content it carries; the device itself is important. One device or one technology may not be better than another, but certainly they are different because they convey different messages to us.
So the first thing we need to understand is that we cannot neatly separate the medium and the message. In many ways the medium is the message or, at the very least, it contributes to the message.
Goodbye to the Book
For centuries now people have prophesied about the end of the book but such prophets have always proven wrong. They have seen that one media or another would displace the book and have wrongly assumed that these media would replace it. The television drew society away from the book, but it could never carry content like a book and thus never stood a chance of replacing it. It displaced it so that in many cases people gave up books in order to watch television, but it couldn’t ever replace it. Today, though, we have digital devices that can carry text in a digital format and do so with some degree of excellence. Amazon's Kindle, first released in 2007, very quickly rose to prominence and it has been followed by a host of similar devices, selling in the millions. Though the printed book will remain with us for some time, it seems likely that its days are now, finally, numbered.
I don’t think the printed book will ever fully disappear, but I do think it will more and more be replaced by e-books. Books may be relegated to the place of records today—quaint collector’s items and special editions for the old fashioned. This will not happen immediately, but I do think it will happen eventually. Many of you who are reading this article have e-reading devices and many of you are quickly switching from books to e-books. You may be early adopters, but many others will soon follow.
The impact of this is nicely summarized by Mark Bauerlein when he says “To replace the book with the screen is to remove a 2,500-year-old cornerstone of civilization…” He is not commenting on the morality of such a change and is not saying that it is necessarily bad. He simply wants us to understand that moving from book to screen is moving away from a medium that has been a cornerstone of our civilization. Books have long been the medium that carries our most important ideas. Books carried the teachings of the Reformers, books were absolutely integral to the formation of Protestantism and books have shaped what we believe today. Our faith has not been shaped only by the content of those books, but by the medium of the book as well.
The second thing we need to see, then, is that books are now finally being replaced by something (e-books) and that this is ground-shaking in that for centuries the book has been the carrier of our most important ideas. We are now entrusting our ideas to a new carrier, a new medium.
From the E-Book To…
When a new technology is introduced to the world, it tends to be introduced in reference to an existing one. The automobile was first known as the “horseless carriage” and the train as “the iron horse.” In both cases people saw what the technology would replace or supercede and gave it a name that related it to the old. Of course in both cases the reference soon disappeared as the technology grew into something all its own. Both the automobile and the train shaped society in ways no one could have predicted.
I think it is very likely that a decade from now we will no longer use the term e-book. Not only is it just a silly term, but also, as the medium grows it will distance itself from the book. The book will serve as the starting-point, but whatever it becomes will inevitably be much different in the end.
And here is the third thing we need to see. While we currently see the clear relationship of book to e-book, the pattern of history is that eventually the e-book will resemble the book as much as the horse resembles the train in form, function and importance. In other words, the book is just the smallest starting point for what the future e-book will be.
Think!
What concerns me in all of this is that Christians are being very quick to make the switch from books to e-books and that we are doing so absolutely thoughtlessly. As I looked back to my 5 reasons that e-books are better than books, I was struck by how many of those reasons are reasons of convenience. At least in its current form, the e-book and the accompanying e-reader offer little advantage over the book except in the area of convenience. And when should we ever allow convenience to dictate something as important as the medium that carries our most important ideas? When it comes to the tools of understanding and the tools that allow us to truly absorb information, to turn that information into knowledge and wisdom, the book reigns supreme.
Do you see my concern here? It may well be that the e-book will prove to be a superior medium to the book. I hope that is the case, that the ideas embedded within it will serve us rather than hinder us. What distresses me is not seeing people begin to transition from books to e-books, but to see people do so thoughtlessly, to cast aside that “2,500-year-old cornerstone of civilization” like it is old and defunct and pathetic in order to embrace what is new and untried and untested and, most of all, convenient. I would like to think that Christians would be very careful, very thoughtful in moving from one defining medium to the next. But that just hasn’t been the case.
So Christian, I encourage you to think and to think deeply as you transition from book to e-book. Think about what it means to move from one to the next and think about how great ideas, the ideas that shape our world and shape our faith, may be carried in book or e-book format. The words may be the same, but because the medium is not, the end result may well be very different.
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
This is a guide written
Comments (40)
So well said, Tim. Each time a new technology is so matter-of-factly embraced, I’m reminded of how many times I’ve heard my pastor/husband say, “Just because we can doesn’t mean we should.”
One alarming example of Christians so easily jumping into an e-book format has been the number of people in good churches who no longer bring their Bibles to church. Instead, they just whip out the iPhone and open their e-ESV or whatever. It’s convenient, especially because they are so familiar with the technology. But is it really good, or even better, than having the actual Book form there in their hands?
I don’t have an iPhone, but I do have an iPod with the ESV loaded on it. I find it handy when I am traveling and listening to messages, as it lets me quickly look up a passage that is referenced. But I feel compelled to maintain the traditional book format of the Bible as my primary source. I’ll admit that it’s partially emotion driven; however, much of my choice is pragmatic. It is much easier for me to see the context of the passage when I can see two full pages right in front of me and hold my finger there as I cross reference.
Also, I think there is a certain power of testimony when people of the Word are seen carrying the Word into their place of worship. It makes a statement about the priority of the Word. It’s similar to the pastor actually turning the pages of his Bible to read his sermon text rather than simply reading it from his notes.
I love your question, “And when should we ever allow convenience to dictate something as important as the medium that carries our most important ideas?” I think it’s one we should hold on to and ask often about many things.
Another thought provoking post Tim. Christians, of all people, should be those who “think” about what they do and why they’re doing it.
Thanks for challenging me to “think” again about e-books; a subject I confess I’ve probably not thought beyond references to its apparent convenience.
I’m looking forward to getting your next book in my hands…
The biggest deterrent for me in really embracing ebooks is the lack of sharing aspect. I “book” people all the time and at age 24 already have a library of over 200 books. Often I buy books I’ve already read so that I can be a resource to other people in lending to them.
The market will have to follow B&N’s choice to allow lending on the nook soon or it will become a problem. At least for me!
I think, for me, it’s a very conscious decision. I’m not likely to switch from a print Bible - but for other *reference* works you are going to cite, and cite frequently, it’s insane not to make the switch. For instance - I may buy a print copy of Van Til’s “Christian Apologetics” - but only so I can enjoy reading through it in front of the fireplace one night. However, because I’m going to cite the thing a whole lot - I not only want, but *need* it in electronic form. It’s then a matter of cut and paste. Laboriously writing down citations is a needless waste of time.
Anything you’re going to cite in electronic form, you should have in electronic form, if only to redeem the time. Second, *electronic books are searchable*. It’s insane how time I have wasted in my life poring over a few hundred pages for an elusive comment or citation - or worse - a mis-citation. The search function is a beautiful thing. Third, instead of, let’s say, the works of John Owen, in a gargantuan hardback collection - I can (and have) dropped them on my *phone*. That is… amazing. I have more classic works of literature and scholarship on my *cellphone* than most folks in history have ever possessed in their lives.
It’s not an unthinking choice for me. It’s a conscious, intentional move to redeem my time and make my work in the Kingdom more efficient and productive. I love a good thick hardback as much as anyone - but in some cases, my preferences just aren’t germane to the discussion.
“I think it is very likely that a decade from now we will no longer use the term e-book.” It has been more than a decade and we still call it email.
I love print books, the feel, the smell, libraries, book stores, and the aesthetics of a shelf full. The sound of turning pages vary from whisp to thud. At the same time, I do not believe there is anything sacred or precious about leather, glue, paper, and ink. Nor do I believe that “e” versions are inherently superior. I can drive a 1976 Pinto and get to the store, or I could drive a 2011 Lexus. Either way I get to the store. To me it is not so much by what medium Scripture is proliferated, so much as if it is written in our hearts and minds. The medium has little consequence. Our acceptance of it and letting the Holy spirit use it, regardless of the medium is of eternal consequence.
Wonder if people said similar things when books began to outnumber scrolls?
One of the benefits of the traditional book is the ease of checking someone’s sources. With e-books, you need the proprietary reader that an author used to check his sources. Scholarship has been reluctant to embrace the medium forthis reason. I will accept web referenced (from reputable sources such as EBSCOhost) on my students’ papers as I dont wan’t to spend the money on a device or re-purchase a volume I already own or can access at the library to check citations and guard against plagiarism. Until the publishers cave into a standardized and non-proprietary format that will allow for cross-device usage and free use of an already owned printed volume, scholarship will not embrace the technology. Until that day, the printed volume will live on.
On the issue of the medium, ease of access does away with the discipline involved in research. It results in sometimes shoddy work. This has proven true with the software that does all the work for us in Greek exegesis. I do use computerized searches with locating periodicals, but nothing yields results like leafing through the printed indexes. I have no doubt that the same will hold true for e-books vs. printed books.
I think this (Will Amazon Put Advertisements In eBooks? - http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/08/20/136218/Will-Amazon-Put-Advertise…) would be another drawback to e-books. I don’t know how ads in e-books would be implemented but I’d imagine they’d be very distracting.
Tim, I agree with you and find the term e-book a bit silly but don’t we still have the “e” in front of “mail” to designate that it’s email?
Great post! The rise of the e-book is another chapter in the tale of the technological imperative. I personally prefer a book to an e-book—or I should say I prefer a book to the idea of an e-book (I may be one of the few of your readers who has yet to by an e-reader device). I like the ability to hold a book, dog-ear pages, scrawl my thoughts and questions in margins, rifle through pages in search of a recently recalled quotation, or pass it along to another person (I like the way you put it, Jess… “to book” should be a new verb!). I like the smell of a book (new and old), the sound and feel of turning a page, the look a book grows through years of use. I guess my jury is still out on the e-book, though I plan to join the club at some point. And the only reason is convenience!
My wife and I are headed to mission field, which makes carrying a growing library difficult—especially since we have hopes and prayers of moving from one field to the next should the Lord establish His church where we’re going first. So, for travelability (word?) of a library I have been thoroughly seduced by the e-book. But it does feel like seduction at one level. I’m only 24 and appreciate tech advances, but I just like books. But, as you point out, Tim, this may be a wave one can’t escape in the end. Thanks for the summation post on “the book vs. e-book” debate for this week—an excellent close to the series.
Rob, an interesting question. Books be the “new media” back then, I wonder if people debated their value over the scroll through books themselve (as the blogosphere has debated our new media through itself today!)…
Just a question that came to mind: Tim, you mentioned that eventually we won’t call e-books “e-books…” What does everyone think would be a fitting name for “e-books?”
I think the discipline of checking and finding citations remains the same in either case. If you quote out of context, you’re going to do it whether in printed or electronic form. If you’re going to quote in context, the same applies. If I have a 1000 page reference volume, searching for a citation *I* want to find is interminably slow and tedious work, when I know the phrase I want. Once found, I read the context. It’s the finding that is made easier, as well as the citation itself. I’m not very likely to mis-quote if I copy it right off the page electronically, am I?
I found those functions amazingly helpful when assembling my notes for a church history class I taught fairly recently. I used Schaff’s History as my base text, and having the entire set in electronic form - *and there while I taught the class, searchable* was absolutely amazing.
I don’t know if there’s anything to the idea that searching through a book by Mk. I eyeball builds “discipline”. Study builds discipline, true - and the more time I save in tedium, the more I have to actually study. In most ebooks I have of classic works, they are electronic versions of a particular printed edition, and use the same reference schema. I agree, it would be dumb to use a specific reference schema locked to a platform, but in, say, my Schaff edition, it used the same references as the print edition it was converted from.
A lot of the objections I tend to see seem to be tradition speaking. I could care less about tradition, if I’m trying to redeem my time.
Doug, there were several other articles responding to the slashdot one. Most suggested there is no way that a 200 or even 400 page book would be able to justify enough ad revenue to offset the average $10 charge. I think ebook advertising will never happen.
On a humorous note, since someone mentioned transition from scrolls to books, here is an old but still funny video about providing tech support to early users of books. Just happened to post it on my blog today, but I will link to the original youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFAWR6hzZek
If you are considering the mission field you really do want to consider ebooks. If you have internet access you have the whole of Amazon or B&N or whatever platform you use. Otherwise, you will rely on packages from the US or an airport bookstore (depending on what country you are going to.)
I have purchased kindles for several missionary friends as going away presents. I think it is a great tool for missionaries to stay in contact, do research and retain some cultural activities in a foreign land.
I was so excited about getting a Kindle and switching to ebooks. I read enough that the cost savings is more than worth it, especially when you add in all the older, pre-1923 books you can find for free (and I do love reading older authors). I also like to travel, live in a small apartment, have moved my massive book collection way too many times, and am allergic to dust. So I thought I would eventually transition from books to ebooks without a qualm, excepting a few of my nicer reference books and hardbacks.
But that’s not what’s happening and hopefully never will. For me the ebook/ereader is filling it’s own niche. I love, love, love having all my favorite devotional books and a few different Bible translations always at hand wherever I am. But I’m not getting rid of my copies of those books. I want those physical books on hand at home, too, for reading and I would rather underline/take notes with real books and paper. And I much prefer my regular Bible for church, Bible studies and my personal Bible study/reading at home (I’ve been using the same Bible for almost 30 years now, will probably get it rebound rather than give up the familiarity and all my notes).
But where my ereader really shines is with fiction, which I kind of read like a kid eats candy, and a number of books I either just want to sample (love that Kindle feature) or maybe just read once but not really keep as part of my library or as something to loan out. If it turns out to be a book I want to go back to again and again, it will always be there as an ebook and a few books I will also eventually get a hard copy for my home library. The ereader lets me be both more indiscriminate (in how many ebooks I try/read) and much more selective (in what physical books I invest in, both in terms of money and physical space/upkeep).
I think there will always be real books. That technology is too easy to hold onto and to use in difficult/remote areas. But I also think ebooks do fulfill a real need, not just of increased convenience. And on a slightly different but related topic that you haven’t covered in these discussions, I do think electronic media is vastly superior to print for shorter articles/blog type discussions and general news, and that magazines and newspapers will completely die out, as they already seem to be doing.
So much of this transition depends on economics. What happens when the Visigoths arrive at the gate and suddenly we’re living like people in Eastern Europe? What happens if we cannot afford the devices that feed us the information? If not devices, then battery and energy power, should access to energy be controlled by an outside corporate or governmental entity?
I know it’s hard to imagine, but nothing lasts forever, and powered devices are expensive. Books have endured because they are cheap, portable, and require no power. We may yet be surprised how durable the format is.
I’m not against the technology, just for a standardization of both pagination and format it so I can use iBooks (legally) to check my students’ Kindle sources. Checking sources is far more than about context, it is also about verifying, for example, if what is put forth as a paraphrase is more in tune with a direct quotation. I’ve had student lift entire sections word for word and call it a summary when it should have been credited as that persons’ exact words.
Much benefit does arise out of laboring through the material in a book to get to what you want. Of course, a well written book, electronic or print, will have a thorough table of contents as well as numerous headings so as to help narrow down what is relevant. In scanning through print books for the relevant sections, I have frequently found in my dissertation research significant gems that I would have missed by jumping from keyword to keyword in a search. I would love if e-books would provide the same capability. It would solve my bookshelf problem. And again, the ability to legally get a fee e-copy of a print book I already own would be nice.
I am one to keep my books in mint condition, so I love being able to take my e-books with me without fear of tearing a page or creating creases on them. I am not one to “dog ear” a book, once it is not in mint condition I no longer want to use it.
I love reading my bible on my iPad because I will never be able to crease a page by mistake. I find that current bible pages are so onion skin thin that they rip, tear and crease too easily. Why are we putting up with such easily damaged paper? And publishers do not allow one to order the same book on hardier paper stock. I do not care if the books are thicker, at least they would last and put up with normal use.
So I am one who is grateful for the e-books due to their durability. I even find that I now highlight text, whereas I would not cause such damage to a real book. I cringe when I see people writing in the margins of their bibles I find that it makes the bibles hideous to look at and use, and who can read with all that distraction?
Along those same thought lines, with the disappearance of paper books will come the ability to loan out a book to a poor student or for the cash strapped pastor to build his library through estate sales or used book stores. A copy is tied to the specific purchaser account and is usually not transferrable.. Under an e-book only society,, only those who could pay to play could learn from that which has been published.
Tim,
As expected, your reflection on this shift in media is thought provoking. In trying to think back historically, I wonder if there were people asking the same types of questions when the media of their world shifted on them centuries ago.
One example which I can think of is the use of a scroll to contain the text of a book rather than a codex (books in the format we know today in which multiple pages are bound along a common edge). When the Lord Jesus read the passage from Isaiah (Luke 4:17), He would have been reading from a scroll. Without page numbers, or standardized chapter & verses which were developed many centuries later, a Bible reader of that era would have to know the overall text of the writer to know where to look for a given passage. As the codex became more popular (a trend helped along by early Christians who needed to make the holy text more portable and accessible in times of persecution), I might wonder if someone from that era would look back and ponder what the shift to the codex would do to book reading. Would being able to turn to a given page of a codex divorce us from the overall flow of the text? Would the use of a scroll suggest a more authoritative way to read a text as it was a longer tradition than codex use?
I suspect something similar happened starting in the mid-14th century when Gutenberg’s printing press meant that ink on paper books would now become more accessible. A Bible could be mechanically printed in a fraction of the time than it would take to handcopy the Scriptures. Perhaps questions then were being asked of how a book should be valued if a Bible could be now actually be purchased and done so with a few days or weeks’ wages rather than the price of about eight months worth of work needed to produce a handcopied version of the entire Bible. If the Bible (or other books) were then going to be more available and accessible, what would than do to the authority of the relatively small number of the literate-class? (I think the development of the Protestant Reformation was one answer to that question).
While the shift we are seeing is technologically-unique to our time (i.e. ink on paper use shifting to electronic texts), the questions of those who experienced similar shifts in their times may help us to even better understand the shift we see in ours.
Tim:
You’re making a mountain out of a mole-hill. Whether you’re reading on a Kindle, Logos, or paper book, the text is the text is the text is the text. This is nothing like the difference between motion pictures and books or television and books. I can’t fathom how anyone could possibly construe this to be anything remotely like a moral issue.
Also, be careful when quoting McLuhan…Woody Allen could nearby.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBtXfBdEXEs
tim,
I am a blind individual, so my view is different than many others.
I remember my college days in the early 70’s when I had people read my tet books to me. sometimes they did not show and I would be left behind. I could get books on tape but most likely not the newest version. My bible was in braille and was about six feet in lenght.
Then in the 80’s text-to-speach technology came along and with it the ability to scan a book using OCR and have it read to you. In fact, I still use this technology today for those books I caannot find in digital format.then this year came apple with their IBooks application. this made a world of books which had been unavailable to me very accessible. I have read about six books now using IBooks and will buy more.
I am eagerly awaiting the new Kindle to see if Amazon truly put total acccessibility into the device. That would open the door, or should I say, kick the door open for a huge amount of printed material if the author’s guild will allow.
I remember walking through a library and wishing for access. It is now looming on the horizon.
When I read about the convenience of e-books and wasting time looking for quotes, cites, etc., I am reminded of the simple calculator and the touted freedom of students and others from the grind of simple calculations, to pursue better things. But the real result has been that people don’t know how to do even simple math anymore, have lost a sense of logic which simple calculations bring, no longer even really care about right answers, and do not pursue those better things.
I think in the future pressure will be brought to bear on people to go to e-books by environmental concerns, and by the mantra that they will be “redeeming the time.”
Interesting thoughts, Tim. There is a good article in The Atlantic today on the the transition from manuscript books to print during the Renaissance. You may want to check it out. Here is the link: Before the Kindle, Another Reading Revolution
Plagiarism - Cheaters and liars will cheat and lie regardless of the medium. New tech makes it easier, but that is all the more reason for educators to stay on the cutting edge of tech, because it will continue to advance, like it or not.
Research - I have found an improvement in my writing, meditating, analyzing, and synthesis due to a more efficient means of research.
Laziness Factor - Much like plagiarists, intellectual sluggards are will always take the easy way out. I have never heard anyone say verse notations, page numbers, Dewey Decimal System, Indexes, or alphabetical order result in laziness. More efficient organization is for the benefit of the the thinker, allowing them to spent less time digging and more time dealing with the text or issues at hand.
There is a place for tech if it is used to glorify God. I also have a deep love for the simple. For memorization and meditation, I use a chapterless, verseless version of Scripture.
Robert, I don’t think Tim or anyone else is saying that this shift is a moral issue—simply an intriguing one we ought to think about. And agreed: the text is the text is the text whether you get it from a piece of paper or a screen. But part of what is worth considering is that our mode of accessing a text communicates in and of itself. Our preferred method of accessing information is intrinsically informative of both the person and the culture at large. It may be good, may be bad, or it may be neutral; it is important to consider regardless.
Insightful comments, KateG. Certainly the information overload we have access to through technology has great potential to both make wise but also lead to our inability to think critically or deeply; your citing of the calculator is very helpful and pertinent to the conversation.
Adam, thanks for the advice; my wife and I are planning to buy an iPad down the road (holding out for a front-facing camera to be included in a future model).
You're making a mountain out of a mole-hill. Whether you're reading on a Kindle, Logos, or paper book, the text is the text is the text is the text.
I think Patrick did a great job of responding to this (comment #23). The text is the text is the text but there is more to reading than the text! This is why listening to a sermon and reading a sermon are two very different things. The medium carries a message all its own.
And, as Patrick said, I’m not assigning morality here—just cautioning us to be careful as we consider such a significant transition.
That’s a fair assessment. I see your point.
Suzanne, In principal I concur with your points about carrying a “traditional” Book to church vs an e-book that contains the ESV (along with whatever other content is stored on the device). And, as a Kindle owner, I have struggled with this question for myself, finally choosing to carry the Kindle. And I admit, it is a matter of convenience. Being arthritic throughout my body (to the extent that I have to carry a fairly cumbersome seat cushion any place I expect to sit for any length of time), it is just plain painful as well as awkward to carry my paper-and-ink Bible (large-print; hence, large size) when the Kindle fits so easily into my purse. One less item in my hands as I side-step into the pew with a seat cushion clutched under one arm.
from Walter @ #17 -
(a trend helped along by early Christians who needed to make the holy text more portable and accessible in times of persecution)
As in, more convenient?
And,
A Bible could be mechanically printed in a fraction of the time than it would take to handcopy the Scriptures.
As in, more convenient?
When I look at your article on why books are better than ebooks, none of them involve anything that is essential to the content. As such, I fail to see why the move to ebooks would present a problem for the Christian.
True, the advantages of ebooks are largely a matter of convenience, but so were the advantages of books over scrolls, pens over quills, movable type over handwritten text, etc.
I have a number of physical books that I bought over the past few years and never got around to reading them. Once I got the Kindle, I bought some of these books for the Kindle and read them in short order. The convenience of the Kindle doesn’t just make my life easier, but it actually prompts me to read good books that I would never get around to otherwise.
Another example is the Bible reading program I recently started based on your recommendation. I really like it, and I tried using a physical Bible like you suggested. But flipping back and forth in the large Bible with 10 bookmarks is quite tedious to me. Now, I use the ESV app on the iPad and just go through the history each day. This makes it easier for me to get through the reading without as much effort between each section, making it easier for me to remain immersed in the text from passage to passage.
I’ll admit I’m often too eager to get the latest new technology, but ebooks have really started helping me to read like I haven’t done in years, and I don’t want to lose that.
Thanks for the provoking post Tim.
“…when should we ever allow convenience to dictate something as important as the medium that carries our most important ideas?”
So we should go back to scrolls or clay tablet because printed books are more convenient?
“When it comes to the tools of understanding and the tools that allow us to truly absorb information, to turn that information into knowledge and wisdom, the book reigns supreme.”
Agree, and it doesn’t matter how one accesses that book.
“Do you see my concern here?”
Nope, because an e-book IS a book.
“…to cast aside that ‘2,500-year-old cornerstone of civilization…’”
The book you find on your shelf hasn’t existed for 2,500 years. It was a new medium introduced with the invention of the printing press in 1440.
“I would like to think that Christians would be very careful, very thoughtful in moving from one defining medium to the next. But that just hasn’t been the case.”
Those Christians I know have given careful thought to this new medium for reading books and find it good for many situations.
“The words may be the same, but because the medium is not, the end result may well be very different.”
Only time will tell, but the history of the written word would suggest that the end result will not be different.
There are more pressing concerns about e-books than what you raise; ownership, ability to lent or share, affordable access for the poor, cost to upgrade/replace devices, etc.
Here is another good link from NPR today about a new children’s book on this subject appropriately titled It’s a Book.
On the first page a donkey asks a monkey, “What do you have there?” The monkey replies: “It’s a book.”
“How do you scroll down?” the donkey asks. “Do you blog with it?”
Then he asks: “Where’s your mouse? … Can you make characters fight? … Can it text? … Tweet? … Wi-Fi? … Can it do this? TOOT!”
No, the monkey repeatedly replies. “It’s a book.”
Hello,
I am a frequent reader here but I don’t think I’ve ever commented. I very much enjoy your blog, especially when you talk about books vs. e-books or other technology topics, because although I love my paper books I am intrigued by devices such as the Kindle and iPad and I like to think about the future of books, being an aspiring author (and a science-fiction writer at that).
I was fascinated by the conversation going in the comments here and mentioned what I was reading to my husband. When I told him your prediction on e-books becoming “the” medium for reading, he commented that he didn’t think that was true. Rather than comparing it to the horse vs. the car, he said it was more like bicycles vs. cars. His reasoning was something like this:
People mainly use cars to get places, at least in our Western, American culture. But in other countries (and even here), there are some people who use bicycles as their primary mode of transportation. Then there are the people who just LIKE to ride bicycles, for recreation or exercise. He believes books will eventually become the bicycles of the reading world - maybe not the most convenient or commonly-used medium, but at the same time a common sight and probably more common in less affluent countries.
I just thought I would throw his observation into the mix as I think it is a good one. :)
Thanks for posting!
Tim,First of all love your blog. With that said, I don’t think your comparison of listening and reading a sermon is quite the same as comparing ebook and physical book. Reading and listening to a sermon is more like reading or listening to a audio book. The mode of access is really different, from seeing to hearing. To me, going from physical book to Kindle is more like going from tape to CD to MP3. I am still reading and can do most everything I can do with a physical book and while the medium is different but the way I access that info is still the same.
Denny
Denny:Your comment probably says better what I wanted to say (#18), but I tend to get a little excited and bombastic. Another analogy might be Beta vs VHS (competing videotape formats…for you youngsters).
Well said! I agree with you that, “It’s not an unthinking choice for me. It’s a conscious, intentional move to redeem my time and make my work in the Kingdom more efficient and productive.” I’m really struggling to “think” about the way the medium could influence us negatively in this case. I appreciate this series of posts but I feel like e-books as a medium are as dangerous to books as cars are to horses.
Walter,
Very thoughtful comment. Thanks for sharing your impression of the shift in mediums used to communicate gospel material.
One thing that few think about (other than some of the quite observant that have chosen to post to this blog), is that the power and effect that the material has on someone’s life isn’t so much effective because of the medium used, but by more by the illumination of the Holy Spirit using what is written to penetrate the heart and mind of the person reading the content.
Sometimes I think that we try to think of the medium as the sole influential factor of whether the content will be absorbed and adhered to by the reader. If this were true, should we not just simply “throw in the towel” on attempting to reach the new generation of readers with sound biblical teaching? After all, often we are able to reach many that would never walk into a book store (for anything besides a latte’!), with historical Christian truths via media that is downloaded, tweeted, or shared on Facebook.
Let’s not condemn the younger bretheren because of their medium choice for accessing helpful teaching, as they will be the church of tomorrow.
I’m personally surprised that no one has mentioned the incident last year where Amazon deleted 1984 off of a number of people’s kindles (if it has been mentioned, I completely missed it).
If Amazon can do that and get away with it, how long will it be that we find ourselves being worked against because they deem Christian materials “offensive and unsuitable for distribution” and erase them without our consent?
A physical book, while mayb e not as convenient, has the advantage that until big brother breaks down our door, we get to keep it. And big brother is going to have to pry those books out of my cold, dead hands before they can get them. (Just had to put that in there. ;) )
Jordan,
Ebooks don’t have to be purchased from Amazon, or anything that has DRM or the ability to remove them from your device.
The Amazon situation was that the person selling 1984 did not have the copyright permissions to do so. I’m not really sure how they should have handled it, but they couldn’t leave it be.
(I am a computer sci major, so I can get a bit too wordy on these legal issues that drive me up a wall. Sorry if I ramble a bit.)
True, but my point stands that if we rely on something that we do not fully control, we are simply at the mercy of whoever we purchase our materials from.
Amazon is simply a case in point. Substitute any vendor you like. If they decide that they don’t want Christian materials available on their products, they currently can legally (not specific to Christian items, but any material that doesn’t comply with their standards, check your EULA to be sure, as the kindle used to have it (and i think they still do), and I’m pretty sure the Ipad does too). Unfortunately, for most e-readers, DRM is virtually coded into the firmware (a bit of an exaggeration, but not by much in my estimation).
Am I being paranoid? Yes, but a healthy dose never hurt anyone. I’m mainly concerned that in the increasingly hostile culture in which we live, what we’re going to see is the restriction of dissemination of Christian materials, and unless we physically own the books, we could find ourselves completely deprived of whatever good material that we have, be it Bible material, such as a Greek NT, or simply books that encourage Christians to live godly lives.
While Amazon was right in the sense that they corrected a mistake on their part (as they were essentially selling stolen goods), they handled it in the wrong way. But in doing so, they demonstrated that we cannot trust ourselves to technology.
None of the current ebook systems deny the user the ability to put whatever content they want on them, without having to go through their controlled store.
In other words, even if they don’t like the books you want to read, they have no way of stopping you from putting them on your device. They use fairly open standards like epub and mobipocket that anybody can create and sell through any means they want.
If you’re concerned about vendors having control over your ebooks, then you can get them elsewhere and actually own the files, often with no DRM. True, your selection is more limited, but the option is there.
As a side note: I’ve published some classic theological works on the Kindle store, and now they even let me specify that no DRM be applied to the books.
Great post series Tim!
This post made me think twice about the usage of my iPad. A short post on my journey is available here:http://wp.me/p136Ot-1Q