“The technology I like is the American paperback edition of Freedom. I can spill water on it and it would still work! So it’s pretty good technology. And what’s more, it will work great 10 years from now. So no wonder the capitalists hate it. It’s a bad business model,” said Franzen, who famously cuts off all connection to the internet when he is writing.
“I think, for serious readers, a sense of permanence has always been part of the experience. Everything else in your life is fluid, but here is this text that doesn’t change.
“Will there still be readers 50 years from now who feel that way? Who have that hunger for something permanent and unalterable? I don’t have a crystal ball.
“But I do fear that it’s going to be very hard to make the world work if there’s no permanence like that. That kind of radical contingency is not compatible with a system of justice or responsible self-government.”
—
(via)
Dear Jonathan Franzen: I’m not that in to ebooks either. I own neither a Kindle nor an iPad and neither is on my to-buy list). I like to sniff at the glue of a paperback as much as the next person.
But you went wrong when you claimed that physical books were the domain of ‘serious readers’. And because of this, I’ll be among many enthused book glue-sniffers who can’t support your argument. Your rhetoric is that of a gatekeeper who wishes to slam the door on people who might like to explore the kind of literature that you consider “serious” - but who haven’t had the same opportunities that you have to access it. Readers whose opportunities might be expanded by access to ebooks, which are often cheaper than their analogue versions - especially in the case of ‘serious’ classics, which can frequently be downloaded for free.
In short: you’re great at writing. You make a good point about the lovely qualities of physical books. And you’re a snob.
Love, Jean
