Amazon.com is crowing that for the first time, its e-book sales volume has surpassed hardcovers. Am I the only one who sees this as an apocalyptic sign for the great pleasure of book reading? Amazon's basing its assertion on sales figures for the last three months, when buyers were lining their Amazon Kindles with summer beach reading. Amazon chief Jeffrey Bezos marvels that the milestone is more remarkable given that Amazon has only been selling e-books 33 months, as opposed to the 15 years it has been moving hardcovers. A report on the milestone in The New York Times indicates that within the next decade, less than 25% of books sold will be in print.
The lure of e-books is easy to understand: with no trees killed, books come cheaper to consumers, who no longer have to lug around hardcovers when an entire library can be loaded into a single lightweight device. On the cost front, I wonder what will happen when the makers of Kindle and other devices corner the publishing market and are no longer interested in selling its software at loss leader prices so that it can move hardware. That confrontation is inevitable, when more brick and mortar stores vanish. 
My biggest problem--and the reason I'll always stick to print books--is that I think the entire experience of reading a books is cheapened by technology, same as it was in music. Young people don't become invested in musical artists the way I did when I bought vinyl albums, savored the cover art and gave every song a chance (my kids pay a buck to download hits only and don't care about an artist's progression). Future generations of readers won't value the ritual experience of buying a book, appreciating its distinctive smell and formative heft, earning the way to the end, page by page, and then displaying the best ones like trophies on a shelf.
Now, the whole business of publishing is changing. More and more authors like James Patterson are co-writing novels. That's made them more prolific and wealthy, but it doesn't mean their books are better. Tom Clancy is taking this a step further this fall with the fall publication of Dead or Alive, a Jack Ryan thriller. All of the big authors write their signature franchise character books solo--Patterson works alone on his Alex Cross mysteries--Clancy wrote the Jack Ryan book with frequent collaborator Grant Blackwood. While other authors continued Ian Fleming's James Bond series, Robert Ludlum's Bourne series and even Mario Puzo's The Godfather characters, it's only because those authors are dead. What's Clancy's excuse? I see it as another step in the wrong direction.
As for e-books, I'll give the last word to Elmore Leonard, who's still cranking out his customary 3 to 4 pages each day from 10-6, even as he prepares to turn 85. "To me, a book is a book, an electronic device is not, and love of books was the reason I started writing," Leonard told me recently. "I don’t have a word processor, e-mail, any of that stuff. I write in longhand mostly, then put it on my typewriter as I go along. I don’t have any interest in any of that electronic stuff, but I’m going on 85, and won’t have to worry about it too much longer.”
What about the rest of us, Elmore?


Good article.
“I think the entire experience of reading a books is cheapened by technology, same as it was in music.” I totally agree.
But the great thing is that vinyl record sales keep nearly doubling every year into the millions. It may only be a fraction of the total of music sales but it’s not going away because people savor the vinyl experience.
Hey Tony I totally agree. Back in the 90’s I pressed Vinyl for one artist I signed to my Indie label and was amazed at the demand for his music on vinyl of late forcing me to dig up about 50 pieces I had tucked away. The songs are rare but had a cult following in Europe, Japan and Australia. So strong was the demand for the vinyl I received upwards of $100 for select releases.
For those of us who travel a lot or are ex-pats, the Kindle has been the greatest invention since sliced bread. I have no desire to return to reading DTBs (Dead Tree Books). I collected books and signed firsts for many years, but from the moment my Kindle arrived, I haven’t willingly touched a paper book. I dropped my Kindle and broke it, Amazon relaced it, but because I’m overseas, it took a few days.
I realized how little I missed having to balance a heavy book, how my hands cramped while reading and how I had to balance a hardback on pillows in order to support it.
Do I think that paper books should be abolished? No, no more than I think that Vinyl records should disappear.
Try to keep in mind that ereaders have opened the world of books up to many who never read and those who could no longer read. At some point, as with all technology, the prices will drop, of that I am certain.
So I disagree that ebook pricing will always be outrageous as it is now.
Think of all the authors missed before ereaders were around. Thousands and thousands of authors have finally found an audience because they could self-publish and readers, in turn, have discovered amazing authors.
If you average out the cost of ebooks, taking into account the free and very-low-priced ebooks, as well as all the books written before 1923..the cost for an ebook is extremely low.
I know that I’m saving 100’s a year by having an ereader because I used to pay for the classics.
There are pros and cons on both sides of any debate…take my two pesos with a grano de sal
Personally I love my Kindle, but I can see why people would want to hold on to physical books. I’ve definitely been reading more/faster since I purchased mine, though.
That said, they mentioned that e-books are outselling hardcovers, but I would imagine paperback sales still far outpace those from e-books. Will be interesting to see how that changes over the near future.
Elmore Leonard, great as he is, is 85 and cranky.
Having moved back to the UK I’ve started buying real books again (its still possible to use my US Kindle, just a bit harder) and after 6 months of that I’ll be going back to my Kindle with my next buying tranch.
While I loved having the tactile feel back, the smell and the cover, they are just too annoying to cart about and use. After the kindle it was not unlike going back to using a typewriter in the early days of computers, which I also used to do for almost the same reasons.
E-books are the future, and an iPad/web future will eventually spell the end for my beloved art photobooks within 5-10 years.
The Kindle is a terrific product, and I can’t wait for someone with a serious design aesthetic to redesign it.
Clancy, sadly has gone blind, that is the reason for collaborating on the Ryan series. If you’ve noticed he hasn’t released a stand alone book in years.
AS it stands now 15% of a rleases is sold as an e-book, pulishers expect that to go to 25% in 3 to 5 years but it will proabbly be much sooner. The younger generation is more comfortable with the e-book so its only going to explode in volume as the years go on.
That’s too bad, I didn’t know that about Clancy and had too wondered why his output dropped off like it did.
I have mixed feelings though about him starting back up the main series with a co-author/ghost-writer. ‘The Sum of All Fears’ was written just under two decades ago and it was the ultimate Clancy experience. After that, it was just a slow slide downward in terms of characterization and reusing old plot ideas. Clancy in his later books couldn’t seem to help but to slide in his own politics more and more as well (not just personal philosophies for the characters, but out and out speechifying).
Hopefully this new book will be some kind of overall denouement for Jack Ryan and John Clark and that can be that.
Clancy went over to the dark side (outsourcing his work) long ago (over 10 yrs ago). And his work has gone steadily downhill. Heck, it’s dropped like a stone.
I remember one of his books that had a lengthy descriptive paragraph that was duplicated virtually verbatum a hundred pages later. Terrible writing and/or editing, and probably a byproduct of collaboration.
People are collectors. If the success of eBay showed us anything, it’s that. And one of the items they will always collect is hardcover books. E-books serve their purpose. There are always reads you don’t need to keep. But for those special volumes that mean something, we’re going to want something more than a file on a Kindle.
Love the photo!
Exactly! Not every book is worthy of a leather-bound hardcover with gilded pages. Most books people read are not good enough to revisit let alone put up on their shelves as trophies. I read a lot. Once I got my Nook, I now read upwards of 3 novels a week. Most of them are good reads…once. Before the e-readers, I yearly dumped hoards of paperbacks to the internet or used books stores. But the used book stores around here have just turned into warehouses selling direct to the internet anyway.
I don’t see the e-readers replacing paper books anytime soon. But the Luddites need to understand that the genie is out of the bottle. Even folks who still buy vinyl records own MP3 players. It’s just another way to consume your media.
I love the Nook. I love Audible. I love my books! And when I occasionally find a gem that I want to keep, there’s nothing stopping me from picking it up in an awesome leather-bound hardcover as a trophy.
great article. i loved the photo too. its that twilight zone episode with burgess meredith right?
The kindle is not a terrific product. The kindle will go the way of the Edsel. If it was heavier it would make a useful boat anchor. The ipad for a few hundred dollars more is infinitely more useful. I do like sending myself scripts on kindle, but the native pdf format is only recently configured, and the resolution is akin to 4th generation zerox copies from 1988. You cannot check out library books like Sony ebook. Kindle is great for people who like tactile feel/smell of new book because they will still be paying full price for some many unavailable titles that you can’t download. “Click here and request from publisher” no! you click here and give me my money back. Obvious silver lining is to be able to load up single device for travel. Bezos made bad bet and then Apple iPad went “all in.”
A bunch of old people complaining the world is changing. *yawn*
AMEN SIR.
And Mike, one other thought for you, don’t you think the fact that no trees get killed for an e-book is pretty important for reasons other than just the cost difference?
Seriously! As a nation we’re so schizo about “green.” Bottled water is a thoughtless and evil purchase, but hardback books are holy! Too bad. Fewer books and newspapers = more trees, suck it up.
A hardcover book is the ideal green item. Printed once and reusable thousands of times.
As to your statement RE paper and more trees. Please educate yourself on how most paper in the US is made. 90% or so of the trees used for paper are grown on tree farms. If the farmers can’t make money selling the trees for paper, they will farm something else. So we would have less trees.
Now had you said fewer books and newspapers = less pollution you would have had a point.
Agreed. While I enjoy holding a book more than I do an e-book reader, that’s a pleasure I’m willing to forego if it benefits the environment.
I’m always amazed at how people are unwilling to make even the smallest sacrifice to help the environment.
Though I didn’t mark it as apocalyptic, I felt unease over the celebration I heard in Amazon’s announcement.
There may be a perspective to apply, though. On the first day Apple’s iTunes Music Store sold books, it sold more e-books than hardcovers. Hardcovers sell in smaller numbers than paperbacks.
Customers who prefer the digital format are going to use internet retailers. The real question is does the electronic format bring in new readers?
>>>Amazon.com is crowing that for the first time, its e-book sales volume has surpassed hardcovers. Am I the only one who sees this as an apocalyptic sign for the great pleasure of book reading?
Sorry, but this is so freaking hilarious coming from someone who PUBLISHES ONLINE. Do you go out and buy either Variety or Hollywood Reporter in print (are either even still IN print?)?
Stop trotting out old men like Leonard. He didn’t love BOOKS. He loved the WORDS IN THEM. Next you’ll trot out Ray Bradbury and his old man anti-Internet rant or the brain-damaged Prince who sees his pedestal melting away — and tries to prop it up by bundling his CD for free with the next day’s fishwrap.
Did you weep for the record store? For the video store? No. No one did. You buy your music online, you watch Hulu and YouTube. Puhleeze.
The only sad bit about any of this is that *Amazon* is now the standard for eBooks, with its proprietary format.
This Settles It: Kindle eBooks Are The Standard Now
http://ipadtest.wordpress.com/2010/07/19/this-settles-it-kindle-ebooks-are-the-standard-now/
I should have expected that to happen. One man vs. a committee these days — the one man wins. The committee for ePub vs Bezos — the committee lost. Just as Steve Jobs vs the committee for music — that committee lost.
Go ahead and stick with print. Amazon will be happy to ship them to you at ever-higher prices as print runs dwindle and they’re shucked and jived as Taschen-like “collector’s items” — things to be gazed at from a distance, under a bulletproof shield, but not to be actually *read*. Not really there to *change lives* and inspire people like — cough — the Leonards and Bradburys of the future.
Man up and join the 21st century already.
I own a small bookstore (yes, a rarity and growing more rare). There are many issues that I think are far more pressing in concerns to e-books that aren’t being discussed.
First, there is a great amount of arrogance in the line of thought that everyone can afford any of those devices. You and I sit here and use the computer as part of our daily lives, but for millions, a computer, much less a e-book reader, is so far down on the quality of life food chain that they don’t even register. So, the underclass will become even more under served because publishers will cut back and pull all together titles. The success of any democracy depends on a literate and educated populace.
Second, yes, there are now color monitors for kids books but study after study has shown that kids reading from monitors have a dramatic decline in reading comprehension and a loss in the ability to read for any length of time and a rise in eye sight issues – more far sightedness and children having migraines.
Do we really want the next generation – who we are already conditioning to have the attention span of a chipmunk on a double latte- being removed from books is just one more link in a chain that leads to further degradation of the education of the general public.
I could be wrong, so don’t take this the wrong way. But I don’t really think the underclass is doing a whole lot of book-buying or reading anyway. And when they do, I’m pretty sure they’re going to libraries, not bookstores.
Gut feeling, no data to support.
Yeah, not in Los Angeles, buddy. If the City had it’s way they’d close the entire library system to pay for more coruption. If publishers stop printing on paper, and cities close their libraries, what libraries are “the underclass” supposed to go to? And it’s slightly offensive to assume, in the first place, that “the underclass” doesn’t really read.
You ever been to county jail? Lotta readers in there. And if that isn’t the underclass, I don’t know what is.
Bravo to Charles Kaine for his points! If you define “underclass” as people who don’t have the budget for books or Kindle (and other ebook readers)then I feel the intent of his points is viewed differently. When I was growing up and on a tight budget, used bookstores were fantastic, because I could buy books and have them with me at home to read when I wanted. Yes, in cities, libraries are readily available, but for the population that live in rural areas and and want access to books, used books are great.
I too treasure nice books and the artwork. While I also do reading online and appreciate it for accessing current information quickly, I also feel books have their place.
I can now afford to buy new books and do, plus I still buy used. My hope is that there is room for both, rather than assuming one will replace the other. Everyone has an opinion, I will continue to vote with my wallet and buy books.
The Kindle is now down to $139 and will continue to drop in price. Ereaders make reading the classics possible for everyone because there are hundreds of thousands of free books available.
Also, Amazon has an app for everything, so if the ‘underclasses’ have a computer, they can read a book.
I live in Mexico and believe me, a computer is only second to having a television. Most of my friends live in public-interest housing and they all have computers, even with incomes of 500 dollars or less per month. A paperback book here costs upwards of $20.00, even for the classics. There are more and more books being made available every day, even in Spanish and with my young nieces devouring every book they can get their hands on, the Kindle App was a godsend.
If you only buy the latest bestsellers, then maybe ebooks aren’t for you, but don’t say that they’re elitist when Dante is free to anyone with a computer.
In most countries, there are no thrift stores or libraries (here the local library doesn’t LEND books, you have to sit there and read them), so books are an unattainable luxury.
People aren’t reading on sheafs of paper any more? Certainly the Beast will blow his horn and the world will end. In fact, I think we should go back to reading books printed on rolled-up bits of cured sheepskin that are sold in leather cannisters. The smell, the texture – man, those were the days. And don’t even get me started on paperbacks.
Thank Christ somebody said this. I salute you, R. S. Buckett.
Wow – I feel like a man on an island here, but I *love* e-book readers! I have a Kindle now but I’m enviously eying an iPad. For me, the electronic devices are soooooooo much easier to hold. They’re also easier to carry around, and most importantly, store.
I don’t think mp3s made your kids not invest in musicians and their progress – I think that’s just called being normal. I laboriously study musicians catalogs and their progress, but I always have – the medium doesn’t change that.
Borrow an iPad and read a book on it before you decide to drop all that money. It’s not getting great reviews as a reader. And forget taking it outside on a sunny day.
ebooks and mags are not going away nor are ereaders. You’re correct to lament their passing but there’s really not much we can do about it because technology always outpaces society and we often adopt technology without really considering it.
The real question is, and always will be: will these ereaders bring us new readers, or are current readers just trading “up”? Amazon’s not saying, so I think we know the answer.
“I think the entire experience of reading a books is cheapened by technology…”
They said the same thing when sound was introduced to moving pictures. The silent film had evolved into an artistic medium without equal (check out the new DVD release of “Sunrise”). Many, many people in the industry thought sound was a cheap gimmick and would be a setback to the art of cinema. Well, sound was what audiences wanted, and it’s what the studios gave them, and of course it was a major turning point in the history of cinema. Readers want eBooks, the market response could not be more clear on that point. Print has had its day, just the way silent movies had theirs. Reading is still reading, the pleasure of becoming immersed in a written narrative is the same no matter what the medium. A good story well told reads the same on an electronic page as it does on a printed one.
“I’ll always stick to print books…”
You’ll get over it. Even Chaplin eventually succumbed to the talkies.
Okay, I need to say this too. Mike, although I do not agree with your argument regarding music being cheapened by it being easier to download individual tracks, it is a valid point. But I fail to see how one can argue that technology could “cheapen” books in the same way. There is no equivalent to downloading a single track of a book. How will people not “[earn] the way to the end, page by page,” as you put it? Do you think people will start downloading individual pages?
It comes down to consumption. The digital era is about getting right down to the meat and ignoring all the little inconveniences surrounding it. Album covers, liner notes, book covers, dust jackets… at the end of the day, all you want to hear is the music made by the band, all you want to read are the pages written by the author. It’s like downing a buffalo and just taking the part meant to be eaten; whereas people once used every last bit of the animal to some purpose or another, or perhaps it was understood that things like bones, while not fit for consumption, added to the flavor of the meal.
So it is here. The digital age gets rid of all those extra bits, like removing all the sweat and dirt from Indiana Jones or turning big, stunning 12″ album covers into little thumbnails, and perhaps we’re losing a bit of that flavor along with it. Digitization gives us bits and bytes ready for consumption, but nothing to savor.
I agree with you, but e-books are the future. I travel a lot and love books. So many times if have to donate my books to goodwill stores because I can’t take them with me. With ebooks I don’t have to worry about it.
All the the reasons to read an ebook on a Kindle or iPad is the same reason I go to the library.
What I don’t get is that people are still paying to read a book-both paper and electronic.
GO TO THE LIBRARY!
Your taxes are already paying to sustain the library system and you forget to go. In this day and age we can all use a little $$$ break.
Even better than actually going to your local library is that now you can order up books online and get an email when they are in the building and reserved under your name. It’s a miracle–everyone should try it!
I love the library, though I haven’t been there in a year.
I check out library books on my computer and load them on my ereader. Saves me loads of time (and gas).
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention:
When you check out ebooks, they auto return to the library on the due date. No more lost, stolen, or destroyed books. No late fees either.
I am Shomer Shabbas and won’t buy ebooks as they won’t be read on the one day that I can pick up a good book. Any PDF more than 3 pages gets printed out.
The factor that people are ignoring here is that with this technology, people are not only becoming readers they are becoming writers and publishers.
I’m all for anything that gets people into a creative state and working. The royalty splits for Kindle are great (70/30 in favor of the author)
I’ve become a publisher – one of my many media hats – primarily because the books I wanted to read were out of print and therefore very expensive to acquire. I called the author and licensed the books to publish them for various e-formats and print, and I’ve just added some out of print comics to our roster and will be announcing those for a 2011 release.
I have no intention of stopping nor even slowing down.
Ebooks are the future – that also give us a clearer window into our past.
Technology has killed the album and appreciation for more than just the “the hits” with today’s young generation of non-contributing zeroes.
Any true music enthusiast, will often tell you that they find the deeper cuts on albums – much better than the hits, but of course those songs may have had to grow on the listener after repeated listens of a full album. Sadly, the ADD kids of today don’t have that kind of time and would rather create playlists of greatest hits by various artists – completely avoiding any of the killer deep cuts that a lot of artists have.
It is no surprise that this decade has produced some of the worst music in history – simply to appeal to the kids today who only care about radio hits, regardless if the artist has any actual musical ability or not.
While actual book sales may go down, I don’t think what has happened with music will happen with books. The appreciation and love for printed books worldwide by numerous generations is just too great for an e-book to ultimately replace it.
You sound like a voice from the 50’s railing against rock and roll and “race music”. There are amazing indie bands today – if you take the time to listen. There is more digital music readily available today that spans the last century than could ever be found on vinyl. A 16 year old who is into music knows and has probably listened to more multi generational music than those who grew up in the 60’s and 70’s. Open your heart to what is being created now – before you open your mouth about the ageism you perceive to be directed at you in your life and career.
I have to agree with chicka. You sound like a moron. There are sooooo many artists today producing such great, *great* music. A lot of kids are listening to the full albums to find the stuff they like. If anything, mp3s make it easier to discover a full album because you can easily listen to the more challenging pieces over and over again. Not to mention all the blogs that explore the music of any genre you can imagine.
I don’t know how to explain it either. I published my first novel, “RICHARD – My Life as a Penis,” last year in paperback and on Kindle. I routinely sell more books on Kindle than I do in paperback.
Personally, I don’t own an e-reader, but I’m intrigued by the storage capability as well as the immediate gratification in being able to download a book and start reading.
Still, there was nothing like the feeling of holding my book in my hands and opening the cover for the first time.
Tony makes a great point about vinyl record sales coming back and growing. This is true. But fans of vinyl had to endure close to 25 years of their preferred format being almost impossible to find in many locations, and it’s still more expensive to buy a vinyl record than a CD. I don’t want to see this happen with printed works. My objection to e-books is from several different directions. First, the fiasco last year when Amazon deleted “unauthorized” copies of “1984″ from Kindles remotely destroyed forever and irrevocably my trust in the medium. When I purchase knowledge (and books, whether a history book or a pulp novel, are knowledge), that knowledge should be beholden to no one. That also includes the potential for losing access to these works with the next OS update, or if Kindle gets replaced by the e-book reader equivalent of Windows XP (people have forgotten how many pieces of software were rendered forever obsolete and unusable when XP came along). I also am concerned from an archival point of view. I do not believe these computer files will still be available to view 50, 75, 100 years from now. And if you don’t care about that, you’re a short-sighted moron as far as I’m concerned. Lastly, I have never yet known a printed work to fail due to dead batteries, system corruption, or whatever. A book’s only true achilles heel is a lit match. Compare with the dozens of vulnerabilities (current and potential) of e-books.
So, no, I don’t celebrate the milestone. Because I am convinced that this is going to come back and bite our society in the rear end in a huge way.
Regarding the comment about people using a library instead of buying books. That’s all well and good – but if the publishers don’t make any money from purchases, how long before the libraries are no longer able to stock new material? Or, if the libraries end up having to start paying more for the books, you tell me what that will do to your library card fee. Heck, in my opinion, it would probably result in libraries instituting pay-per-book, in which case you may as well buy the thing.
So, if I don’t keep a book for at least 50 years, I’m a short-sighted moron? The argument that your license rights to a copy of a book must be permanent that the only acceptable method of delivery is print is not very persuasive. I like having books in print, but I don’t have to have EVERY book in print for the rest of eternity.
Also, on the upside for e-readers, the availability of out-of-print books unlocks a huge opportunity for back-list authors to find long-tail audiences for older titles and for readers to have easy access to those older titles.
I wonder if Bezos has reason to crow? I am a Kindle early adopter. I bought some books with it, but gradually returned to paper. You cannot get into a story as deeply on a Kindle. It’s not as much fun.
You sound old.
Seriously, I think I’ll continue to buy print editions of books I want on my shelf — Robert Caro, Taylor Branch, John Updike, etc. — and electronic versions of things I want to read on the fly and don’t care about keeping.
I’m a screenwriter, but enjoy writing short stories and novellas in my spare time. It will never be a full-time job or anything I’d pursue professionally, but after throwing a bunch up onto the Amazon Kindle, this resulted in hundreds of downloads in the first couple of months alone. The fact that more people have read, say, a story I wrote about a German shepherd accidentally preventing the Apocalypse than any number of my screenplays that are gathering dust here and there keeps me cheering for the Kindle. As a Kindle user, I find myself reading more than ever for the simple fact that it’s easier to fit on the elliptical’s magazine holder than a hardback, so now it’s my drug of choice. I still buy books, but I almost always check to see if there’s a Kindle edition first.
In regards to music- someone mentioned that music in this day and age is generally worse than those of previous decades. However, I would strongly disagree. In fact, the digital age has exposed listeners to hundreds of great artists they would never have the chance to experience without the internet and the mp3. This is why the indie music scene has flourished in recent years, as people can now broaden their musical horizons outside of the hits played on the radio due to music blogs and other forms of electronic media. I won’t deny that many young people only download the “hits” of certain artists, but I would almost blame this more on the advent of the radio than the mp3. The radio is almost by definition a place to listen to the “hits”, and the mp3 just makes them more accessible. Also, although vinyls may be more expensive than normal CDs, most of them also come with a password to download the album electronically. In effect, you are getting an LP and the chance to burn the mp3s onto a cd, the best of both worlds.
I made that comment about music now being the worst in decades – which is absolutely true when you consider who are the top artists of today compared to past decades when the top musicians of the time were actually talented musicians/songwriters and didn’t require studio trickery and a whole team of songwriters to make them look good.
I don’t disagree with you that the internet and MP3’s have afforded us the opportunity to discover a lot of great bands/artists – but even still, but the majority of people are not listening to whole albums from these artists, but just the hits or songs that they have to instantly like over songs that may take repeated listens to really appreciate or grow to love.
I don’t know about you, but I usually hate most greatest hits albums that labels release with or without the artists involvement, because while ther “hits” are represented ala it’s a greatest hits package – the band’s actual best songs are not.
Most of the time when true fans of a band or artist make a compilation for a friend for example, they will include the more known hits that the friend is looking for, but will also include some gems that hopefully the friend will dig as well. Most of the time they do prefer those songs from my experience.
Let me see if I have this right – a writer for a blog is mourning the demise of print. Hmmmmmmm
Change always seems apocalyptic to those with no vision. The availability of the content seems more important to me, than the ability to stare at a page while riding around in your girlfriend’s gas guzzler, all the while mourning the loss of another tree.
As a book reader fanatic and huge fan of this blog I do agree with your considerations, a further proof of Deadlines’”intellectual scoops” on top of the show biz ones.
Nevertheless, aren’t you actually writing about the e-reading negative aspects via a similar digital channel, allowing you to actually reach more readers, even though without the actual pleasure of flipping the pages of the physical newspaper or magazine?
Daniele
E books are great for authors as the royalty split to them can be negotiated to be far, far higher than for a print book. It is the advantage of a new business model.
Why can’t we have both? TV didn’t kill movies. Why should e-books kill physical books? A lot of people love the feel of a real book but sometimes need the convenience of a kindle.
No one here talks about the idea of sharing a good read. I buy a book, I like it, I give to someone else. Can’t do that with an e-reader. Why not?
I’ve read a book on Kindle and thought enough of it to buy a hardcopy and give it to a friend.
I’ve been an avid reader (and writer) for more than 60 years and have probably read more than most anyone commenting. I made a reluctant switch to the KIndle and after 8 months and love it. Writing, my friends, is about the words, not the vehicle in which they are delivered to you. Moaning about e-reading is like complaining about the change of a label on a good bottle of wine. Read the words. People went crazy when the paperback book arrived. Horrors! It was only for sleazy crap. So don’t get all carried away by the delivery system. Book are great. But if you like books, read them and shut up about the rest of us who are happy (and privileged) to read the way we like to.
What e-books allow is individual writers to create their own books, and sell them, without a publisher. Just the way Itunes allows musicians to do that without a label.
Now, a lot of really bad stuff comes out of that. But the gatekeepers change. From A&R smarmy guys to music aggregators and search engines and social media and the like. The same will happen with e-books. No longer bored, twenty something female assistant publishers/readers, ditching anything that irritates them or bores them, for good or ill.
That can be one thing to change the female-gay ghetto that mainstream publishing is to more male-oriented stuff. Other than Clancy and Leonard and a few others, its pretty thin for those wanting something other than hunky shirtless werewolves and glittery gay vampires.
What publishing needs is a pulp-energy, and e-books can help create an end-around the current gatekeepers (the publishing house manuscript readers).
Yeah right, kids aren’t obsessed with music today because it’s not on VINYL.
It has nothing to do with the shitty, overpriced product the music industry has been serving up for the past few decades. And it certainly has nothing to do with the multitude of other entertainment options that didn’t exist back when kids spent their money on LPs.
But let me clue you in on a little secret that everyone under the age of twenty already knows: Most album tracks suck. Your kid only downloads the hits because your kid isn’t a sentimental sucker like you. Why pay for tracks that you don’t want and will never listen to? That game ended a long time ago – and has nothing to do with an artist’s progression. The only progression the audience is interested in is the progression toward the next amazing, must-hear song. If you cannot deliver that, you are irrelevant to everyone but your hardcore fan club. The only ones crying over this new paradigm are the greedy record labels and the talentless, mainstream hacks who can no longer build a career on good looks and hype. Good riddance!
Newsflash for you Ron – there are countless great and classic albums from many bands and artists over the last 50 years that those under 20 will never hear, because they need to have an orgasm instantly in what you deem to be a must hear song.
Is it really such an insane idea that if you like a song from a band that maybe you never heard before, you at least buy the CD (used) or download the album which contains the song you liked instead of deciding if the album is good or not based on 30 second snippets you listened to on Amazon?
I am 35 years old and have 3000 CD’s. Why? Because I love and appreciate music – not what radio tells me to like. Listening to an album should be like watching a movie or reading a book – it’s a journey that you take and while you may not love it all, it was the way the artist indended for it to be listened to. Why do we give such respect to directors and their “artistic vision”, but not the same to bands?
Do you remember that pet peeve that men used to have about women when it came to music – most guys could give you a slew of bands that they worshipped and name every song the band ever recorded – while some women would say that they liked whatever was on the radio, having no real connection to any band or artist. Unfortunately that is now the majority of the music buying public – no real connection to any band or artist, but a playlist of must have songs.
“My biggest problem–and the reason I’ll always stick to print books–is that I think the entire experience of reading a books is cheapened by technology, same as it was in music.”
Man, for someone running a website you sound like a total Luddite. Some would say the same thing about news websites such as this one.
No sympathy from me. As for Elmore Leonard, he’s 85!! Of course e-books wouldn’t appeal to him. Personlly, I’m reading more since I purchase an e-book reader. Do I still enjoy the actual book? Sure. In fact, there are some books I will still purchase in paper form simply because I want to complete a series of novels I’ve been reading for a long time.
People need to get over this whole e-book fright. It’s happening. Every major bookstore chain is getting in on the e-book bandwagon which will only increase sales. Moreover, why kill trees if you don’t have to?
I don’t see it as e-books vs. real books. I buy both. I have four bookcases at home crammed full. I use my Kindle now because I can buy even more books without having to sell or donate my old “friends.”
I am just pickier when it comes to what I buy in real book form.
Plus, I *THOUGHT* I’d be like you and hate e-readers. I actually am buying new-to-me-authors that I would never have read before on the Kindle because of kindleboards and chattle about who is out there that I HAVEN’T discovered in a brick and mortar.
I don’t read books because I like the smell. While I don’t find the smell offensive, I don’t find it necessary to read.
I read books because I’m interested in the story.
E-books / ereaders have some kinks to work out, but ditching paper isn’t one of them, imo.
They also said that computers would save trees by eliminating the need for paper.
Admittedly, the home computer and printer initially led to an increase in paper use. But speaking from personal experience and that of most people I know, people are starting to read more and more directly from their computer screens. I think this is because of the great improvement in the quality of screen images over the last two decades.
I’m only speculating, but if computers aren’t already saving paper, I think they will within the next 10 years.
I gotta say, I love my Kindle and iPad. I love being able to take a library of books I’m currently reading everywhere I go. And when I’m cruising the Web and read about a book I’m interesting in, I can have it in my hands within minutes.
I have a genuine library, with about 12 bookcases distributed throughout my house. (English major). But I tell you…going to Italy for a month last year and being able to carrt a library in one hand…it’s very very powerful.
All the news articles about this – including yours – should emphasize that Amazon is referring to HARDCOVER books, which presumably does not include paperbacks. No news story I’ve read or heard makes that distinction, giving the impression that eBooks are outselling ALL printed books.
Yes, trees aren’t harvested for the paper. But let’s get serious — Kindles and other e-reading devices are hardly green, either. All that plastic and metals used in the devices — that stuff is not recyclable and the making/harvesting of them is most definitely not green.
This is like people who buy Priuses to “go green.” They’re just adding to the overall problem of resources thanks to those batteries and the rare metals needed to make them.
Great point. In fact, many argue that ebooks and ereaders are less green than print books. The argument that one reads ebooks to be more green is invalid.
I think for the foreseeable future, we will live in a world with both ebooks and print being readily available. The e-publishing world will continue to increase its share of the market, but only to a point. The paper book world may morph more into the print-on-demand style, but print will remain with us.
Glad I read all the comments. One word comes to mind: Beta. While I truly value the research possibilities of my computer, I do not wish to read a book in that format. Is it possible that the Kindle is the first generation of something more friendly,but as fast or faster? Like VHS became. Public libraries, when first opened, were also castigated as lowering the sale of books. Instead authors found that books still sold, and readers at libraries fell into several categories. Readers who could not afford to buy the books (now read Kindle), readers who tried out books at the library and then bought them, and people who valued their tax $$$ and so used the lbrary, like myself. And I spend my money elsewhere; not a lower class here. One of the saddest things I remember reading was that author Ernest Gaines had not been ALLOWED in a library until he was 16 because of his color.
As an avid reader, I love books, but I love my bank account more. The money I save by buying books on a kindle far outweigh my need to hold a $25 hardcover in my hands.
Book companies, like music companies, just don’t get it.
I’m an older reader – 60. My Kindle lets me change font size when my eyes get tired and I can read a 700 page book without killing my hands. I have a small collection of hard back first editions, but I much prefer being able to order a book and have it to read within 60 seconds. I have five kindles on my account and one $10 book gets read by all of us. You try and take my Kindle or my iPod and I’ll fight ya.
It saves resources if you don’t add another device. I downloaded the free Kindle app to my PHONE, so you can stick your anti-green argument up your wazoo. There are very few books I’m willing to buy in any other format now. I love that I can get a book instantly, that the price is more reasonable, that I can still share books with family members. (You can have six devices linked to your Kindle account, and they don’t all have to belong to you.) I love that I don’t have to hold the damn thing, which tires my hands, and that it doesn’t take up space in my house. The only time I buy a book in paper form is if it’s a reference book I have to have soon. Also, the free app’s bookmarking system doesn’t have search capability or the ability to write a little note on the bookmark, both helpful for referencing important info. That’ll change. Right now, if a novel doesn’t exist on Kindle, I don’t buy it.
As for whither the cost of e-readers, my guess is that they will soon be sold at cost or given away when you commit to a plan with a particular provider (like cell phones with rebates). I’ve bought more books in the four months I’ve had the Kindle app than I have in the last three years put together. And consider the following: There are five forms of entertainment that can be accessed on the typical smartphone: surfing the Net, playing games, watching video, listening to music, and reading. Of those, only ONE is enhanced rather than diminished by the technology — reading. It’s easier on your hands, your eyes, and you can get new material instantly. Without ebooks, reading as entertainment might have lost entire generations. As an author, I clap my little hands and say, “Godspeed, ebooks!” Death of bookstores, yes — just like you don’t see record stores around anymore. Death of books? Quite the opposite. I know which scenario I prefer.
I love the smell, the feel, the look of a new book. I love seeing the cover every time I pick it up. I love the sense of progress as I look at the number of pages under my left thumb compared to my right. But the simple fact is that, as much as I love to read, I’m not going to carry books around with me. Heck, I’m not even going to carry a Kindle around with me. It just isn’t going to happen. There’s too much else on my mind. But what I will carry with me is my Droid, with its Kindle app. And when it crosses my mind, when I get the chance, that is what allows me to get some reading done — wherever I may be.
Is it the same experience? No, but I still get the story, I still savor the prose, and I still feel enriched by the best authors. So it is still a rewarding experience.
I do miss the days when I carried paperback books with me, but those days are simply gone. To lament that fact is to be overly nostalgic and perhaps even bitter. But people still read! It isn’t as if they’ve stopped. Some people even read more now because it’s become more convenient. But somehow we’re going to fault them because they aren’t holding a stack of paper in their hands? Seriously?