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?






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?
“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). ”
I’m sorry if this is going to sound mean, but you sound old and really boring. Records? Writing books in longhand (E.L. anyway)? This is 2011 (going on 12) not 1952. And btw, Leonard is successful without a doubt but writing books in longhand is just foolish. If his comment was meant to impress, it didn’t because obviously he spends 70% of his writing time editing and 30% writing, whereas his editing (and re-writing) time could be cut in half by using a computer.
No email either? He is old because he is living in the past. He chooses to be old instead of moving on. If he needed a triple bypass I’m sure he wouldn’t refuse that “technology” if it meant saving his life. Just silly. But to each his own. Anyway, I’m going off-topic here. You know you can adjust the font with ebooks. No more reading glasses making the indentations on your nose (at least not while you’re reading).
There’s no backlight with the Ereaders, just a page that looks the same as 1 in a book (except you can adjust the font). You can travel and take your whole library with you. Airlines charge by the weight of luggage so it makes traveling with hardbacks really impossible (unless you can affor $100 for an extra heavy bag of HB’s). Even paperbacks add up in weight. Have you tried reading an ebook before?