On the surface, the changes seem
rapid although they’re not really. We’re just seeing more concrete results of
the impact digital technology has had on the market. These changes have been
developing over the past fours years that I’ve been tracking them. People don’t react well, for the most part,
with change. It pulls them out of their comfort zones. So, what we’re really
seeing is the knee-jerk reaction to that change.
Like everyone
else, I’ve been watching the debate over traditional publishing versus
self-publishing, paper books versus e-books on blogs, industry rags, and forum
chatter. I’ve seen authors devote a blog post on why their dear readers must help them out by buying their latest books as paperbacks or
hardcover as opposed to e-books so they can reach the bestsellers list. I’ve
heard the wailing over e-books taking away revenue of authors not smart enough
to have their agents negotiate better profits on digital.
I’ve read about
publishers decrying Amazon, and like online bookstores, for allowing low prices
for e-books. How readers are shying away from buying the book at full price
(Winged brow. Well, Duh) Then I came across another argument by
a literary publisher against e-books, which had my brows climbing into my
hair, followed by an unladylike snort (sorry, Mom), and laughter.
“This has always been my
problem with e-books: they emphasize immediate entertainment — and
gratification — over real 'reading,' which takes more commitment, patience,
attention and time.”
Say what?
C’mon, reading is
reading, whether you choose to read on an e-reader, paperback, or hardcover. I
have news for him; reading is entertainment as well as a pleasure.
Reading is also a learning experience. What difference does it make if I get my
entertainment, or research, immediately via my kindle, or I-pad? How does this
devalue a book, author or publisher? How is this not real reading?
So, we who use e-readers are basically lowbrow
plebeians? Apparently we can’t read something of import on an e-reader and take
the time to soak in the ambiance and beauty of the words and meaning unless
there is an actual paper book in our hands? How screwed up is that reasoning?
Shall I send him a catalog of “classic” literature now available as digital
files?
Are we seeing a
comparison to a certain little Dutch boy putting his finger in a levee thinking
it will save life, as we’ve known it?
Don’t get me wrong.
I love books and always have. I love the smell of a library, of opening
a book, of holding it in my hand because it’s special. Reality is, it’s not the
book itself, but what it represents to me, a portal to learning, adventures, new
worlds and people. I have colIected books all my life. I have favorites I have
read many times over. I don’t go anywhere without a book. I’ve crippled moving
company workers who have carried 15 large metal (think 5 ft long x 5 ft wide,
and 3 ft deep with locks and padding) trunks of books from one house to the van
and unloaded them in another duty station. My husband and I got into one of our
first major fights over not only the money I spent on books but also the space
my books took up. He’s since learned to grumble under his breath and has
accepted the fact that whither I goest so goest my books.
While we’re at it, let’s
add my opinion to the heated discussion over the pricing of e-books.
I’m eclectic in my
reading choices and always have been. My choices on Kindle are no different
than what I buy in a bookstore, except I’m more inclined to try out ‘new
to me’ authors. I like how many
publishers offer specials—free to $4.99. Publishers and authors recognize this
is a perfect way to build a readerbase. I’ve found some wonderful books and
authors that way. I’ve also gone back and bought other titles from those
authors that weren’t discounted.
The most I’ve paid for an e-book is $12.99 and I
cringed. I collect hardback copies of several authors and will buy those on
Amazon. Frankly, shelling out $17-30
for an e-book is not something I will be doing anytime in the future, unless
it’s a research book I need and even then, I’m analyzing whether I really
need it. If I can’t get it any other way, I’ll buy it.
My thoughts on this:
I can understand the price of paper books being high. I don’t like it, but I
understand it. You have to factor in all involved between the time the authors
submit a completed manuscript (electronically as a digital file), buying the
paper, ink, and running thousands of copies on a printing press for mass
paperbacks (or even hardcover), the high cost of transporting to the market and
exorbitant cost of returns. There is a lot of money built into that book I hold
in my hand.
E-book. Transmitted electronically from author to
publisher. Design is done by computer and attached to the digital file, format
setup by computers to a digital file, electronically submitted to the market
place, via digital file,where it is bought electronically, delivered electronically, as a digital file, from online
to your electronic reading device.
Hello?
Digital doesn’t have the same built in costs to
produce. So why should I pay the same price for an e-book as I do
for a hardcover paper book? Especially when it's first released as a hardcover and the price is
the same for the e-book. As Spock would
say, it’s highly illogical.
So, the debate over digital publishing and e-books
will rage on until an effective compromise is reached. Pricing will have to
factor in the cost of staff to produce a finished product and if we want paper
books to hold in our hands or put on our shelf we’ll have to pay the higher
price for the privilege.
I can work with that.
Your thoughts?
Trust me, you're not going to hurt my feelings if you don't agree.
Although this article is somewhat of a rant and a bit sarcastic, this whole issue is a serious one.
Your thoughts?
Trust me, you're not going to hurt my feelings if you don't agree.
.
