Print vs. digital, addendum

[annathepiper]

Two different people have brought up to me in the comments on my last post a point which I wished to call out and separately address. To wit, that part of the question of print vs. digital is a question of privilege.

It absolutely is, I agree. That I am able to own not one, not two, but three different devices capable of reading ebooks (my nook, my iPhone, and my computer, and yes, the computer counts) is absolutely a question of my privilege of having enough income to do so. This is me acknowledging that. Since I grew up in a family environment that had quite limited income, I daresay this went a long way towards books being the one big indulgence I generally allow myself. (I apparently lack the usual girly genes involving clothes, shoes, purses, makeup, etc. All my disposable income goes to books, electronic devices, and music.)

I very, very much respect and acknowledge the fact that even though prices on ereaders are dropping regularly, they are still very much luxury devices. Many will not be able to afford better than secondhand prices for books in general, which counts them out of buying most if not all ebooks, and never mind the expense of a device to actually read them on. This is one of the biggest reasons that people who like to read digitally really, really should never snark on people who prefer to read in print.

At the same time though let me point out that the question of privilege is not entirely one-sided here. There’s also the question of health and age privilege; consider for example the oft-quoted scenario of a nearsighted person who finds that reading on an ereading device, and therefore being able to adjust the font size to something comfortable for them, means they can suddenly read a lot more easily than they can a print book. I’ve seen countless people testify to this on various blogs and on Twitter, and a couple of people have talked about it directly to me.

This though was the point of my original post: i.e., that both print and digital readers have very good reasons for preferring to read in the formats they do, and to express the hope that each side will refrain from snarking about the other. As I said in the comments on that post, publishing is going through massive upheaval over not only the formats of books to be published in, but over its ongoing ability to make money in general. Nobody knows how things are going to shake out in ten, fifteen, or twenty years down on the line, although predictions abound. It’s very scary, all around!

One thing though I’m pretty sure we can all agree on: books will survive, in one form or another, and as long as that is the case, there will be people to read them.

P.S. Sorry about comments being disabled on the LJ and DW mirrored versions of that last post. I’d forgotten I turned those off for a previous poll post, and never turned ‘em back on! You may now comment on the original WP post as well as its LJ and DW mirrors.

Mirrored from angelakorrati.com.

Comments

Print vs. digital, addendum

[ghost-light.livejournal.com]

I'm also mystified by the attraction shoes and bags have to some people. I'd rather buy plays.

Re: Print vs. digital, addendum

[annathepiper]

Seriously! I mean, how many pairs of shoes does one woman NEED, anyway? ;)

(Said the girl whose idea of a decent pair of shoes is REI hiking boots...)

Re: Print vs. digital, addendum

[ghost-light.livejournal.com]

Even doing brr-lesque I only own 3 pairs of heels.

A while ago, I was complaining to (http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=Lonelydumptruck)Lonelydumptruck (http://Lonelydumptruck.livejournal.com/) that I needed some new scripts so I could find good shows for next season and you could just see his thought-bubble of the collection of plays encroaching on a second bookshelf in the office.

Re: Print vs. digital, addendum

[annathepiper]

Hee!

Re: Print vs. digital, addendum

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

Hee. How very Seattleite of you [g].

Not that I don't agree...

[mamishka.livejournal.com]

Good God, IT'S JUST PEANUT BUTTER!

>;)

It'll become a thing. Really. ;)

[annathepiper]

Hee hee hee and of course during the Peanut Butter Flamewars, you'll always have one or two trolls who insist on yelling I LIKE JAM!

[mamishka.livejournal.com]

Ummm. But I DO like jam. Strawberry preserves, to be exact. AND ANYONE WHO LIKES MARMALADE IS JUST A FREAK!!!

;)

[annathepiper]

LOL! We'd do very badly in the Peanut Butter Wars. But we WOULD have tasty sandwiches!

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

Peanut butter flamewars? I must have missed that one.

Of course, since peanut butter gives me an upset stomach, it's all academic from my POV, anyway.

[annathepiper]

Mimi and I were discussing this in person when she came over to hang out with me--that print vs. digital, Mac vs. PC, Coke vs. Pepsi, JIF vs. Skippy, etc., ultimately are all pretty silly discussions since they really eventually boil down to "which one someone prefers". She was all "IT'S JUST PEANUT BUTTER! GET OVER IT!" :)

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

Ah, but that's what makes petty arguments fun! [g]

Until someone gets forcefed Jif and someone else gets hurt...

[janne.livejournal.com]

Must have missed that particular conversation...people have been using their computers to complain that using computers is a thing of privilege or something? I swear, 'privilege' has become such a generic four letter word around the net it's about to loose all meaning.

[annathepiper]

Well, more specifically, using their computers to point out that owning an ereader is a sign of privilege, and not being able to afford one is one reason that someone might have to read in print.

This ties in with another post I think I'll do. I saw via alfreda89 (who's Katharine Eliska Kimbriel, who I last read in the Blood of Ten Chiefs anthologies!) that C.J. Cherryh had done a nice little writeup over on Facebook to clear up a few myths about digital books. One of these was that you have to have an ereader to read them, and you don't; anybody with a computer can read an ebook.

[janne.livejournal.com]

Yes indeed. I think I read my first ebook around the time Cat was born, which is eeee nearly 13 years ago. But that was when keeping them safe required CD's and personal backups so I never really go into it, quite apart from not wanting to lug my then tower pc to bed for the nightly read :D

[annathepiper]

Hee yeah! My first experiences with them were with the Microsoft Reader program and I was less than impressed. I think the first one I ever bought was one of shadowhwk's, actually!

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

You don't have to own a computer -- for all you know, I might be writing this on a library computer [g].

Unfortunately, library computer time is usually limited to less than it would take to read an ebook.

I'm not disagreeing with you that sometimes the word "privilege" gets overused. But as a former reference librarian I worked with way more than enough people who had no computer experience whatsoever that it still bothers me when a book gets published as e-only. It's in my former job description to want all books to be available to everybody.

[annathepiper]

For what it's worth, the general feel I've been getting off the publishing blogs I follow is less "ebooks will replace print entirely" and more "ebooks may become the new mass market paperback". Publishing is still making way, way, way too much money off of print for it to be feasibly considering shifting all operations over to digital any time soon. Hardback bestsellers are still the big publishing moneymakers.

That said--yeah, I agree, books should be available to all. But when it comes down to a question of availability, even ebooks could be made available to all readers. I've read about colleges who issue readers to their students for textbooks; I could eventually see a scenario where libraries could issue trackable readers to people who want to rent them. And as I mentioned, prices on them are continuing to come down. They've come down significantly even since I got mine; the latest models are half the price I paid for my nook. Eventually they're going to be a lot more affordable.

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

Eventually, yes.

In much less time than print originally became available to the masses, too [wry g].

Some libraries already do rent MP3 audiobook players. I suspect there are libraries out there renting ebook readers -- I just haven't run across any personally yet.

[stamps foot whilst waiting for the microwave]

[annathepiper]

Hee, yeah--and print becoming available to the masses I think is another example of how publishing has repeatedly gone through the flailfest of "OHNOEZ THIS NEW THING WILL KILL THE BOOK!" Whether that's the printing press, or mass market paperbacks, or what. ;)

It'll be nice when this particular flailfest settles down. Although by then we'll probably have another one to replace it.

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

Oh, yes. It's almost like a petty version of the onslaught of civil rights legislation. An extremely petty version, mind.

[thunderpigeon.livejournal.com]

I agree with you about wanting all books to be available to everyone, but I think one of the things about e-books is that the relative inexpensiveness of e-publishing makes it possible to publish books that might not otherwise have seen print--might still never see print, but at least get publication.

Of course, there is an argument to be made for keeping the bar high, but a lot of the time that bar isn't about quality but about things such as name recognition or word count.

Personally, I like being able to hold a book in my hand, but between 10,000 and 70,000 words, there's a huge morass of UNPUBLISHABLE. Having written a 45,000-word novel that consistently gets 5-star reviews (so far, Anna's 4-star review is the only one lower than 5), I'm glad to have found an e-book publisher so that people will be able to read it.

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

Oh, yes. Anything above about 110,000 words is out in the cold, too, unless you're an established author with a good track record. Speaking as someone who's sitting on a 165,000 word historical novel manuscript that New York (and the small print presses) won't even look at once they see the word count.

I want all of those books available to anyone who wants to read them, too [wry g].

[thunderpigeon.livejournal.com]

I agree, though I'd heard that the upper limit was closer to 120K-130K. 165K is pretty short, compared with some first novels I've heard of.

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

Well, I did whack it back to 115,000 words, but I haven't seriously tried to market it since then.

[thunderpigeon.livejournal.com]

That should be marketable if you find the right agent. What I've heard since finishing my MS was 80K-120K for mainstream, 90K-130K for SF/fantasy. When I was shopping the MS around, one agent told me she'd take a look if I got it up to 70K, another said 65K.

At the time I felt it would be easier to write a new one than to add 20,000 words without weakening the story, so I got started on the next one and searched Ralan's for small presses that would look at a manuscript under 50K.

But if professional agents were telling me they'd look at 10,000 to 15,000 words under the standard minimum, then,unless I was badly misinformed--which seems unlikely--you shouldn't have trouble with 5,000 under what I've heard was the maximum.

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

if you find the right agent

Yeah. That's been the main issue. That and the fact that the whack-back really did some serious damage to the story that I'm not happy with. After all, I lost over a third of the original manuscript in that cut. It's not my first manuscript -- it's my sixth -- so I like to think it's not just me being unwilling to kill my darlings.

If I can ever reconcile the length issue with the story issue to my satisfaction, then I'll start marketing it in earnest. But until then, well, I'm working on another novel right now [wry g].

[annathepiper]

This sounds like a decent plan, and I totally hear you on the issue of trying to find the right agent. I've gone a few rounds now with different folks telling me "well there's a lot to like here but I just don't LOVE it", and really, how do you quantify that anyway? It's such a subjective reaction.

I'm going to have to do a whole new round of hunting down interesting agents. Maybe we should have an agent-querying party!

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

Maybe we should have an agent-querying party!

Ooh! Moral support! I like that idea.

[annathepiper]

I'll see what I can do after I get over this cold. *^_^*;;

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

It's too early in the season for colds!

Feel better soon.

[annathepiper]

It is! And thank you. :)

[annathepiper]

*snerk* Yeah, I think dr_pretentious knows from Ginormous Novels, for example. :)

[thunderpigeon.livejournal.com]

Was it that obvious who I was talking about?

[annathepiper]

Well, only because I know about the Big Book. ;)

But hers isn't the only one either. lyonesse has a quite long (and quite excellent) werewolf novel that most publishers and agents would probably turn down due to its length, although she's been working on editing it.

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

My three categories of things That Are Not Clutter, By Definition (sorry about the caps, but the emphasis matters [g]) are books, quilt fabric, and plants.

I never did the girly thing, either. Well, unless you count the quilt fabric [g].