Similar but different

We have heard so many of pros and cons for both sides, people compare the Kindle to physical books. But we have to remind ourselves of the debate we had (and are possibly still having) between writing an e-mail and (hand)writing a letter. There are similarities between the two, but they are different, and they serve very different purposes. There are times when I’d want to write a letter, just as I’d still want to hold a book and flip its pages.

This is key to discussing the pros and cons of the Kindle, and as bookmakers, we shouldn’t just trash it based on our knowledge, experience and the values we attach to physical books. Physical books evolved from the early gilded illuminated manuscript for the few literate of the time, to printed pocket paperbacks for the many. By putting it into context we can see that the “containers” for content continue to evolve with new technological advances. Just like advances in technology freed painting and photography to more exploratory and artistic expressions, books have also evolved from a practical medium for reading into an art form.

I don’t think the Kindle will ever replace the physical book. They are different, one is not necessarily a better form than the other. There are always the physical books that I’d prefer to read from and on which I can pencil down my thoughts. But for the time being, when I am commuting or away from home, I carry my Kindle around and enjoy the convenience that technology has brought to the joy of reading. The Kindle hasn’t taken away my enjoyment of the book form as it, as well as my chances of getting paper cuts.

Challenges books

The Kindle reminds us of our conceived definition of a book. It questions our concepts of books and challenges printed books as a form for text containers. Kindle uses “location” instead of “pages” —what does the word “page” mean? Why do we print on both sides of a page? A Kindle book doesn’t have a physical form—what does the thickness of a book denotes? Where do the head and tail go?

The Kindle brings out the uniqueness of books, a form that we come to cherish and appreciate, even become fanatic about. A physical book has bindings, paper, pages and signatures that a Kindle does not have. These are the characteristics of a book that the Kindle will not replace. They are what we, as bookmakers, as passionate about. We continue to question our forms, and we seek answers in our work.

In the meantime, I continue to enjoy the book form as it, as well as the paper cuts. The Kindle allows me to enjoy reading books in a different way.



P.S. Last time when I wrote about the Kindle, I said that the design of the digital reader matters because the physicality of an e-book is still manifested through the reading device. This still holds true for someone who values the physicality of books. I still don't find its design appealing, but somehow, its practicability is greater than the product design factor.