[Leslie]

I swear, I think one of the stupidest arguments as to why e-readers and ebooks will never catch on is the whole, "I love the smell of books! The feel of ink on the pages..." Give me a break. Most books don't smell and they are not printed with ink. I was just reading an article from the Frankfurt Book Fair (bunch of luddites at that event, it sounds like) and this was the conclusion:

But many readers and writers say that the practicality and novelty of e-books will never replace what books offer to the senses.

"When I look at the standard of today's technology, then I can't imagine using an e-reader, no," said Nobel-Prize winning author Orhan Pamuk, who has collected 70,000 tomes in his Istanbul library.

"But one day ... when technology manages to create the perfume of books, of old books, then yes, maybe."

I am not familiar with Nobel-Prize winning author Orhan Pamuk, but I have to say, his dopey opinion is not making me want to go out and read his books! Jeeesh!

Others?

L

 

[Cuechick]

I agree somewhat, there is a sensory reaction to some books, for me it is mostly older books. Ones with engraved covers or amazing illustrations. I especially love old children's books.

I will still collect these and just like before, I will rarely read them! I may still come across a book in book form, I want to read, that maybe is not available in Kindle form. I do not think any one device can replace all books. That is not why I got it, it is just an addition to my reading activities. I am a photographer and have been for over 20 years. I went to digital about 3 years ago and resisted it like many old schoolers. I have to admit now, I love it and I am prepared to shoot film again, if a client should require it but the truth is, I have not really shot any in the past 3 years. I love digital and if I never shot film again, I am okay with that. I do collect old cameras and like most of the old books I collect, they sit on a shelf and look pretty!

 

[Teninx]

The 'purfume of old books' is generally mold.

 

[Khabita]

Sad that Pahmuk would say that. He is a fabulous writer, by the way. His book "The Black Book" is just amazing! I have been reading his stuff for years.

But don't take it too much to heart. It's not unlike the car enthusiast who would never drive an electric car because it doesn't have that great exhaust smell and that rumble under the hood.

Also -- a tidbit. I remember a few years ago, when I read Perez-Reverte's "The Club Dumas" I learned a lot about old manuscripts. One thing I learned is that, while old manuscripts were made to last for hundreds of years, modern books are only made to last between 10 and 50 years. I have some paperbacks that are only 5 or so years old that are already falling apart. So I think that, yes, if you love high-quality art books or books with lovely illustrations, then you aren't going to want to read those on the Kindle. But for most reading, the Kindle digital version probably will last longer than the paperback.

 

[pidgeon92]

It always takes some time to see the value of new technology. I thought the same thing when the iPod came out: I had my CDs, they were portable, what was the big deal? Between my husband and I, we have now owned at least 8 of them, including my new iPhone. 

I do actually like the odor of older books, and sometimes the tactile feel of the pages is very nice. The first few Harry Potter books were printed on really nice stock, but I noticed right away that the 5th or 6th book was printed on cheaper stock.

 

[wagedomain]

People probably loved the feel/smell of rolls of parchment once upon a time too.

 

[Sandpiper]

Just thought . . . you can't get an autographed Kindle book!  I could shoot myself.  A few years ago when Harry Potter book series was newer, my local Borders had a J.K. Rowling autographed HP book for sale at a price I could have afforded.  I'm not into HP, so I didn't buy it.  Now I sure wish I would have.

 

[wagedomain]

Just thought . . . you can't get an autographed Kindle book! I could shoot myself. A few years ago when Harry Potter book series was newer, my local Borders had a J.K. Rowling autographed HP book for sale at a price I could have afforded. I'm not into HP, so I didn't buy it. Now I sure wish I would have.

They could just sign the kindle instead?

 

[jah]

To me it not the feel or the smell of the books it what is the words inside, a great book can take me to places I have never been, can make me laugh or cry and so on. It not the book it the words in the book that the most important thing to me.

 

[Teninx]

Just thought . . . you can't get an autographed Kindle book! I could shoot myself. A few years ago when Harry Potter book series was newer, my local Borders had a J.K. Rowling autographed HP book for sale at a price I could have afforded. I'm not into HP, so I didn't buy it. Now I sure wish I would have.

They could just sign the kindle instead?

Yeah, with a Sharpie right across the screen!

 

[Leslie]

To me it not the feel or the smell of the books it what is the words inside, a great book can take me to places I have never been, can make me laugh or cry and so on. It not the book it the words in the book that the most important thing to me.

Exactly. It's all about the story.

L

 

[Linda Cannon-Mott]

Couldn't have said it better myself JAH. The reason I have been an avid reader for as long as I can remember, Kindle take me awaayyyyy!

Linda

 

[Bes5Ae0TW75r2b]

I tend to need the feel of real paper from time to time. And, I would die before I gave up my signed and personalized 1st edition of "Servant of the Bones". I waited in line for nearly 2 hrs. after working a 12 hr. shift just to meet Anne Rice in person.

Also, as long as J.K. holds out, my paper Harry Potters will continue to be read and greatly loved.

 

[wagedomain]

I'm a collector AND a reader, so that means I'll always buy traditional copies. However, for convenience sake, I'll get ebooks too. Especially for extended vacations. I am taking a month off to go to England soon. Can you imagine how many books that would be?!

 

[Teninx]

Funny, I don't miss the tactile experiance of print volumes at all, but I really dislike reading a newspaper on the Kindle--even though Kindle is so much more convienent than shuffling through newsprint. If I were still commuting to work, I'd most certainly have the Wall St. Journal on Kindle instead of trying to fold, bend, spindle and mutilate the newsprint while crammed into a train seat.

 

[Leslie]

Funny, I don't miss the tactile experiance of print volumes at all, but I really dislike reading a newspaper on the Kindle--even though Kindle is so much more convienent than shuffling through newsprint. If I were still commuting to work, I'd most certainly have the Wall St. Journal on Kindle instead of trying to fold, bend, spindle and mutilate the newsprint while crammed into a train seat.

And this is a point on which dear Teninx and I disagree. I LOVE reading the New York Times on the Kindle. I hate the newspaper ink getting my hands all dirty and I find the size of the paper awkward to hold. On my Kindle I find myself reading articles I probably would never have looked at before.

Comment on size: over on the board, a journalist was talking about how papers are reducing the size of the page to save money. They did that with our paper here in Portland and boy were there complaints! But I like the smaller size better, it's easier to hold.

Unfortunately, our local paper is going down the tubes, fast. I have very little hope that I'll ever see a Kindle version.

L

 

[Betsy the Quilter]

But don't take it too much to heart. It's not unlike the car enthusiast who would never drive an electric car because it doesn't have that great exhaust smell and that rumble under the hood.

As a car collector (with my husband), I would love to have an electric car, as would hubby if and when the logistics are ironed out. We would keep our other cars, each different, but a good electric car would be a fantastic addition to our stable!

As for Kindle vs books and/or newspapers; I already read my newspapers more online than on paper; at least the Kindle will be portable compared to my laptop, but I don't really see it as an either or situation--can't I have both? (Rhetorical question).

 

[oddsoxx]

I love the perfume of my Kindle's red leather m-edge cover that makes me feel as though I'm reading a beautiful old leather bound volume as opposed to the paperbacks that were my book of choice (less expensive doncha know) pre-Kindle.

 

[5t1jKg3l50iES2]

I like the fact that my Kindle looks just as good after I read a book as it did before. The spine isn't broken and all wrinkled up, pages aren't folded over and the cover stays shut when I close it.

 

[Ann in Arlington]

I have to admit that, if there is a drawback to the Kindle, it's not being able to sort of 'absorb' a new book before first cracking the cover as well.  I really enjoy the feeling and look of a 'fresh' book and work hard while reading to keep it looking new.  If it's a paperback I usually put it down face down so the cover doesn't curl up, or put something on top of it to weight it down.  Silly, I know.  Anyway, I don't have to do any of that with the Kindle.  I guess it's better. . . but I sorta miss it.  Which is why I still keep a lot of paper books around!

Ann